Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 06:37:47


Post by: Kid_Kyoto


So you (yes YOU) have been invited to pitch 3 (no more!) changes to the Imperial Guard for the next codex. What would they be?

1. Without number for conscripts and infantry - Infantry and conscript units recycle when they die.
2. Larger units - Platoons 10-30, conscripts 20-50, heavy weapon teams 3-6 teams, command squads 5-10 models. Characters too, Commissars, Enginseers, Priests are all 1-3 when you buy them and/or upgrades to command squads.
3. Vets to troops - Unlike other infantry they do not recycle however.

Obviously there's a lot more I would like but if I had to suggest a simple 3, those are what I would go with. What about you?


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 07:21:17


Post by: Pyroalchi


1. I would also pitch recycling troops
2. To make us something special and give another angle to be useful: better fortification rules (including bunkers, turret emplacements and pill boxes) and a "dig fox holes/trenches" mechanic. Infantry can get entrenched instead of firing and get a defensive boost (+1 to save or -1 to hit, I don't know)
3. While I have no idea how to do this in game mechanic terms: some kind of bonus for including... lets call it a "sensible" platoon in your detachment. Like commander + Command Squad + some Infantry squads + heavy weapons/special weapons/veteran Squad for Infantry or Tank Commander + 2+ tanks + optional a unit of sentinels (as spotters/flankers) + optional Hellhounds etc. for tankforces, Master of Ordnance + 3+ Artillery + some spotters (Snipers, Sentinels) for Ordnance forces etc.
Could be they all take up less spots in the detachment, they make orders more efficient... something like that.


More of a bonus, because while I would like this it is not really a fix: We have 5 tanks (Carnodon, Leman Russ, Malcador, Macharius, Baneblade) and soon a 6th one. Take one or two of them out of the "Firepower/points costs" arms race and give it some special rule. Bodyguard for other vehicles or tanks maybe... a Void shield bubble... something.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 11:09:55


Post by: The_Real_Chris


1) Have it be the 'military' faction - To whit, zero faction specific stratagems, rules are on the datafax's, rewards combined arms play with some sort of cunning mechanic but otherwise auras go.

2) Should be less dice rolls not more using their abilities. Make their orders speed play up - e.g. FRFSRF becomes auto hit. Bring it down becomes auto wound on a 6 to hit, etc.

3) Bake equipment and heavy weapons into squads to stop the whole 'naked' squad phenomena - leave that to conscripts.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 11:14:35


Post by: Not Online!!!


Reimplement a doctrine system, part of the reason guard feels so aenemic, is the fact that you have virtually no tools to represent differing regiment types which make guard so versatile.

Customizable ruleset, tied into above, but there should be quality to represent units, specific tied to doctrines equipment etc.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 11:20:47


Post by: JakeSiren


Are we making things better or worse for IG? For me IG would herald a new era of codex:

1) Halve the number of shoots and attacks - too many dice in todays game.
2) No re-rolls - it slows down gameplay finding the missed die and re-rolling them.
3) Less AP - too many weapons have AP-1 or -2 which significantly devalues good armour saves.

Of course, I would apply this to *every* codex, not just IG.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 11:54:15


Post by: tneva82


Problem is that would mean IG is underpowered as hell for couple years...for those we would need reset like 8e had. Alas I don't think we get that until ed 11 or 12 earliest which is how long it will take minimum for me to invest in models in 40k.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 12:17:20


Post by: Kanluwen


1. Break Infantry Squads into 3 distinctive entities. Veteran status is conferred when building your army, not by a unit choice.
1A. "Raider"/"Skirmisher" archetype, with a 5+ save and a bonus in terrain. No Heavy Weapon Teams, Lascarbines as standard. Special Weapons are able to be doubled up if no Heavy Weapon taken.
2A. "Line Infantry" archetype, the "Cadian look". 4+ save, no bonus in terrain. Heavy Weapon Teams as an option. Lasguns or Lascarbines as options. Single special weapon and single Heavy Weapon if no HWT.
3A. "Heavy Infantry" archetype, the "Grenadier" or "Kasrkin" look. 3+ save or a 4+ with an additional wound or something. Hellguns as standard. No HWT, doubling up Special Weapons or Heavy Weapons.

2. Heavy Weapon and Special Weapon list is revised, as are Heavy Weapon Teams themselves. HWTs are able to be deployed separately to the unit drawn from. HWTs get a bonus save while stationary in cover. Mortars are their own independent team, restricted to a Heavy Support option but gaining a "variable fire mode". Smoke rounds, incendiary/airburst rounds, HE rounds, etc. Fire mode is decided immediately after you fire the preceding round so thought is necessary for how you want to use them.
HWTs get a rule that effectively gives them their own version of autocannons, heavy bolters, lascannons, and twin heavy-stubbers by doubling their ROF at the expense of becoming fire OR move. Missile Launchers become a Heavy Weapon option alongside of a Heavy Stubber, Hellshot Rifle(lorewise they're cutdown lascannons intended to be used similar to an AT rifle), single operator capable AC/HB .
Plasma Guns become a separate choice in and of themselves.

3. Sergeants and Officers gain a pseudo-special weapon list. Plasma Guns, Lasguns, Hellguns, Boltguns, Shotguns. Things like this go into the "Officer/Veteran" armory pool.

I could go on, but y'all said 3.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 12:32:04


Post by: Kid_Kyoto


The_Real_Chris wrote:1) Have it be the 'military' faction - To whit, zero faction specific stratagems, rules are on the datafax's, rewards combined arms play with some sort of cunning mechanic but otherwise auras go.


Not Online!!! wrote:Reimplement a doctrine system, part of the reason guard feels so aenemic, is the fact that you have virtually no tools to represent differing regiment types which make guard so versatile.

Customizable ruleset, tied into above, but there should be quality to represent units, specific tied to doctrines equipment etc.


It's funny to see these 2 requests. I think that the whole warlord trait and army trait and stratagem system is supposed to be a replacement for the old doctrine system as a way to customize your army but it doesn't feel that way. it feels more like gimmicky special rules, maybe because they aren't baked into the army list or modelling the way some options were. Just one more thing to keep track of during the game.



Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 12:39:50


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Kid_Kyoto wrote:


Not Online!!! wrote:Reimplement a doctrine system, part of the reason guard feels so aenemic, is the fact that you have virtually no tools to represent differing regiment types which make guard so versatile.

Customizable ruleset, tied into above, but there should be quality to represent units, specific tied to doctrines equipment etc.


It's funny to see these 2 requests. I think that the whole warlord trait and army trait and stratagem system is supposed to be a replacement for the old doctrine system as a way to customize your army but it doesn't feel that way. it feels more like gimmicky special rules, maybe because they aren't baked into the army list or modelling the way some options were. Just one more thing to keep track of during the game.



It is gimmicky and doesn't help at all, when you are mobile infantry and have no doctrine available to actually play mobile infantry. NVM actual equipment for that.
The traits and warlord traits don't help in that regard at all.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 12:48:28


Post by: Lord Clinto


1. I'd like a basic/bare, Astra Militarum set of rules. No specific homeworld.

2. Using the bare regiment, make them THE allied faction. Similar to how Brood Brothers work, make some rules that let any Imperial, GSC, Tau or Chaos faction take a detachment of AsM (totaling no more than 25% of the armies points) without breaking doctrines of the parent army.

3. Definitely bring back "Platoons" and/or some benefit to taking "Platoons".


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 13:27:47


Post by: Kanluwen


 Lord Clinto wrote:
1. I'd like a basic/bare, Astra Militarum set of rules. No specific homeworld.

The homeworld should play more of a role, not less. Restrict the types or quantities of Abhumans, restrict the presence of certain HQ types, etc.

2. Using the bare regiment, make them THE allied faction. Similar to how Brood Brothers work, make some rules that let any Imperial, GSC, Tau or Chaos faction take a detachment of AsM (totaling no more than 25% of the armies points) without breaking doctrines of the parent army.

No. Absobloodylutely not.



3. Definitely bring back "Platoons" and/or some benefit to taking "Platoons".

And what benefit would that be? "Take more units to fulfill the mandatory minimums"?


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 14:11:47


Post by: Backspacehacker


1. Russ platform ignores AP of weapons not S8 or greater
2. Guard get a better blast rule, where whenever you roll a die to determine the total number of hits, you double the results of 1 and 2.
3. idk more orders or something.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 15:34:08


Post by: kurhanik


 Kanluwen wrote:
 Lord Clinto wrote:
1. I'd like a basic/bare, Astra Militarum set of rules. No specific homeworld.

The homeworld should play more of a role, not less. Restrict the types or quantities of Abhumans, restrict the presence of certain HQ types, etc.



I could be wrong but to me that reads more like make the homeworlds more generic - ie: Hive World or Fortress World homeworld, vs say Cadia or Armageddon.



Me personally the big thing would be to bring back regimental customization like the old doctrines book. It doesn't have to be a copy paste of that by any means, but just bring a bunch of fun mix/match abilities that can be applied to your units, some of which mutually exclusive (ie: no 4+ save on your lightly armored skirmishers). Even today its fun to glance through that book and think up a type of regiment to build towards - the primary flaws with the system was there were too few choices and some ranged from autotake to "why would I ever take this?". Flatten the power curve a bit, give a handful more options, and make you *want* to take the units you lose for making a custom regiment and it could be really interesting.

I suppose I wouldn't mind the Command Squad actually being a Command Squad, over a suicide special weapons unit. I doubt it would be overly broken if they were rolled back into a single entry with Company/Platoon Commanders, given character protection, and then have their special weapons reduced while increasing the impact of banners and voxes and medics etc. I also wouldn't mind officers/sergeants getting expanded weapons options. I mean its kind of silly that you can throw power fists and power swords onto them and take warlord traits and relics that buff the squishy model in melee...for reasons, but my god, no sane officer would ever carry a meltagun, or a plasmagun. Pistols only here. I mean, why not, the weapons are even directly in that kit.

And I suppose for a 3rd thing, make tanks better? I'd prefer boosted defenses to glass cannons. Let vehicles actually have a chance of surviving for awhile. Not really sure how to do it what with GW insistence on capping toughness at 8, only giving Russes a 2+ save a few months ago, and with an arbitrary wound count limit to determine whether you can hide behind cover as opposed to model size. Invulns are just kind of tedious in general and don't feel very guard. Maybe a modest wound increase on all vehicles, less harmful damage charts (maybe ballistic skill drops slower), better saves where applicable (more 2+ saves, maybe even give Baneblade and possibly Russ a 1+), or the classic gw band aid of giving a unique special rule that reduces the impact of incoming damage on just one unit.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 16:43:40


Post by: CommunistNapkin


1. Combine Company/Platoon Commanders and Command Squads again, and add Regimental Advisors (Astropaths, Officers of the Fleet, Masters of Ordinance, Commissars) back into those squads to alleviate some pressure on the Elite section of the book. Make the upgrades for the squad (Regimental/Platoon Standard, Medi-pack, etc) actually decent enough that the squad isn't just 4 special weapons guys.

2. Make Vox Casters have a massive or infinite range for issuing/receiving orders. Give all vehicles built in Vox Casters so that tank orders can be used at long range.

3. Redesign almost all Guard vehicles. Increase Toughness/Wounds/Armor on nearly all Guard vehicles. Leman Russes, for example, should probably be something like T9, W15, Sv2+. Do not add invulnerable saves to Guard vehicles! Then fix nearly all the weapons on vehicles. No more d6 shots, d3/6 damage. Use either fixed number of shots or at least significantly less random. A battlecannon could be d3+3 shots, 3 damage, for example.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 17:36:22


Post by: Gert


 kurhanik wrote:
Me personally the big thing would be to bring back regimental customization like the old doctrines book. It doesn't have to be a copy paste of that by any means, but just bring a bunch of fun mix/match abilities that can be applied to your units, some of which mutually exclusive (ie: no 4+ save on your lightly armored skirmishers). Even today its fun to glance through that book and think up a type of regiment to build towards - the primary flaws with the system was there were too few choices and some ranged from autotake to "why would I ever take this?". Flatten the power curve a bit, give a handful more options, and make you *want* to take the units you lose for making a custom regiment and it could be really interesting.

Considering every Codex in 9th has it's own "Build Your Own Dudes" faction rules, there is going to be something similar in the next Guard Codex. The Codexes go about this in different ways, for example, Space Marines can select two traits (with some exceptions) to make their Chapter Tactic, T'au have an interesting flow chart sort of thing and GSC have a value limit of 4 on their traits with each individual trait costing between 1 and 4 value points. There are also often combinations of traits that are disallowed, such as Duellists and Whirlwind of Rage for Space Marines, or Martial and Agile Guerillas for GSC.
That being said, I am a firm believer in letting people take what they want, and IMO army rules shouldn't prevent you from taking units. If you want to run an all Blood Angels tank army even though you get none of the benefits of the Chapter Tactic (+1 to Advance and Charge, +1 to Wound on charges, the first turn of defence, or Heroic Intervention) then you should be able to do that. Restricting unit choice based on what Regiment you choose shouldn't be a thing because with the hundreds of thousands of Guard Regiments in the Galaxy, there will always be one that breaks from the norm of its origin, like that merged Catachan-Elysian unit that became experts at drop jungle warfare (whatever that means).
amage on just one unit.


 CommunistNapkin wrote:
1. Combine Company/Platoon Commanders and Command Squads again, and add Regimental Advisors (Astropaths, Officers of the Fleet, Masters of Ordinance, Commissars) back into those squads to alleviate some pressure on the Elite section of the book. Make the upgrades for the squad (Regimental/Platoon Standard, Medi-pack, etc) actually decent enough that the squad isn't just 4 special weapons guys.

Or you could just do what most other entourage units have done and make them not take up force org slots if you take unit X. There is no Marine Command Squad because the parts were all split to allow for more freedom in list building, i.e. if you wanted a Champion you can now just take a Champion. However, Company Veterans don't take up a force org slot if you have a Captain and for every unit of Company Veterans you get a Champion, Ancient, and Apothecary also not taking up a force org slot. I believe the Archon's Court is the same and Commissars already don't take up force org slots. So for Guard, if you take a Command Squad, having an Officer means it doesn't use a slot, then for every Command Squad each Regimental Advisor also doesn't use a slot. That way if you don't want a Command Squad and just want a Master of Ordnance to go alongside your battery of Basilisks and Manticores you can.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 17:41:47


Post by: valdier


What I would do is make

- Russ/Blades reduce all AP of weapons by 1-2.
- Count enemies as double their actual unit size for blast weapons.
- Reduce strat cost for units greater than 10 models

What GW will probably do:
- Army wide 5+ invuln save
- -1 to be hit by any weapon farther than 1d6+6" away, checked for each model that fires.
- Increase the cost of baneblades by 100 points.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 18:32:44


Post by: The_Real_Chris


valdier wrote:

What GW will probably do:
- Army wide 5+ invuln save
- -1 to be hit by any weapon farther than 1d6+6" away, checked for each model that fires.
- Increase the cost of baneblades by 100 points.


Who told you! These NDAs are rubbish...


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 20:46:35


Post by: waefre_1


 Lord Clinto wrote:
...2. Using the bare regiment, make them THE allied faction...

When you say "the bare regiment", do you mean that you would include other regiments/specializations as well and only the generic one would benefit from the "Allied faction" rules? I'm not against a little more freedom in Guard allying in other forces, but no faction should exist solely to pad another faction's stats.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 21:30:14


Post by: Lord Clinto


 waefre_1 wrote:
 Lord Clinto wrote:
...2. Using the bare regiment, make them THE allied faction...

When you say "the bare regiment", do you mean that you would include other regiments/specializations as well and only the generic one would benefit from the "Allied faction" rules? I'm not against a little more freedom in Guard allying in other forces, but no faction should exist solely to pad another faction's stats.


Yes. I would have the standard regiments (Cadia, Catachan, etc...) in the codex too and then have the no frills, bog standard, basic Astra Militarum "Regiment" be the only one that could actively ally with others. That way you avoid min/maxing; for example allying in a (insert imagination here) Cadia Kasrkin 10-man plasma-gunner squad with your Custodes.

In so much of fluff you nearly always see unnamed PDF, Guard, Militia, etc allying with Space Marines, SoB, Custodes, etc...

And what is the point of GSC Brood Brothers if not to "pad" the main cult's forces?


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 21:49:52


Post by: Kanluwen


 Lord Clinto wrote:

In so much of fluff you nearly always see unnamed PDF, Guard, Militia, etc allying with Space Marines, SoB, Custodes, etc...

You really don't though. You see the named PDF, Guard, Militia, etc suddenly having those others in their sphere of influence. And when it happens?

It's usually stuff like a lone Marine/Custodes suddenly finding themselves accompanying PDF or "Militia"(which aren't a common thing mentioned as planetary assets FYI, because that's the role of the PDF on a Large Scale. Militias are tied more to Rogue Traders, Inquisitors, or noble houses) or a squad of Sisters holding a shrine that these other forces are headed to.

And what is the point of GSC Brood Brothers if not to "pad" the main cult's forces?

To represent the subversion of the planetary government?

Frankly, it signifies the necessity for further caveats as to what exactly Brood Brothers can take. They shouldn't be getting Deathstrikes, Basilisks, yadda yadda yadda. They should be getting Conscripts, and other "local" forces.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 22:07:45


Post by: Gert


 Lord Clinto wrote:
Yes. I would have the standard regiments (Cadia, Catachan, etc...) in the codex too and then have the no frills, bog standard, basic Astra Militarum "Regiment" be the only one that could actively ally with others. That way you avoid min/maxing; for example allying in a (insert imagination here) Cadia Kasrkin 10-man plasma-gunner squad with your Custodes.

Except allied detachments aren't a thing anymore and all Imperial armies can be taken together anyway and gain their Chapter Tactic equivalent in a pure detachment. You can run a Battalion of Cadians with a Vanguard of Sisters of Battle, a Spearhead of Iron Hands and a Supreme Command detachment with Guilliman and each detachment would get their traits without problems. The only thing you lose is all your CP and super doctrines (not that I even know what they are).

In so much of fluff you nearly always see unnamed PDF, Guard, Militia, etc allying with Space Marines, SoB, Custodes, etc...

Yeah, and they are independent forces not under the actual command of those others, especially Space Marines.

And what is the point of GSC Brood Brothers if not to "pad" the main cult's forces?

Brood Brothers are specifically tied to GSC in their own way though. They represent local PDF or Guard forces infiltrated by the Cult and turned to its service. You still have to pay the detachment cost to use them alongside GSC and Brood Brothers are restricted to <Regiment> units only, which means no Ogryns, Commissars, aircraft, or Psykers i.e. what you would find in the ranks of a PDF.
Guard also aren't supplementary forces to Space Marines or SoB, it's the other way around. If one was to accurately portray the way the Imperium fights, you'd have a couple of squads of SM or SoB allied into a Guard army because the Guard forms the backbone of the Imperial forces.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 22:58:34


Post by: Blndmage


 Kanluwen wrote:


And what is the point of GSC Brood Brothers if not to "pad" the main cult's forces?

To represent the subversion of the planetary government?

Frankly, it signifies the necessity for further caveats as to what exactly Brood Brothers can take. They shouldn't be getting Deathstrikes, Basilisks, yadda yadda yadda. They should be getting Conscripts, and other "local" forces.


I totally understand your point, but what's stopping GSC from infiltrating a guard contingent that has Deathstrikes et all?

Honestly, that's a force I'd love to run! A GSC force built around protecting 3 Deathstrikes until they all launch, very freaking cool for a small army.

My local meta is sub 1k games almost exclusively, maybe the odd 1k, but usually were using PL.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 23:15:33


Post by: Kanluwen


 Blndmage wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:


And what is the point of GSC Brood Brothers if not to "pad" the main cult's forces?

To represent the subversion of the planetary government?

Frankly, it signifies the necessity for further caveats as to what exactly Brood Brothers can take. They shouldn't be getting Deathstrikes, Basilisks, yadda yadda yadda. They should be getting Conscripts, and other "local" forces.


I totally understand your point, but what's stopping GSC from infiltrating a guard contingent that has Deathstrikes et all?

Commissars.
Officers.
Psykers.

I mean, the list could go on. In order for a Guard regiment to get off-world or so utterly subverted, it would require so many of the checks on heresy to go untouched that it's basically nonexistent.

Honestly, that's a force I'd love to run! A GSC force built around protecting 3 Deathstrikes until they all launch, very freaking cool for a small army.

One of the big issues is that we're currently in a weird setting where Brood Brothers are supposed to be representing planetary forces, not Guard forces.

For some ridiculous reason "Guard" is constantly used as interchangeable with "PDF". It was true in very few instances; notably Cadia whose Interior Guard was full-fledged Guard Regiments that got rotated planetside.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/06 23:26:52


Post by: Gert


 Kanluwen wrote:

Frankly, it signifies the necessity for further caveats as to what exactly Brood Brothers can take. They shouldn't be getting Deathstrikes, Basilisks, yadda yadda yadda. They should be getting Conscripts, and other "local" forces.

If only GSC used other methods to gain control of Guard forces like hypnosis or by having the authority of a Planetary Governor or by using propaganda or by having their own cult members who pass as human within the Regiments. Yeah that could never happen despite it being in 40k novels and it being a thing that can happen to Skitarii, you know those mechanically altered soldiers that are literally coded to be loyal to the Mechanicus.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Kanluwen wrote:

Commissars.
Officers.
Psykers.

I mean, the list could go on. In order for a Guard regiment to get off-world or so utterly subverted, it would require so many of the checks on heresy to go untouched that it's basically nonexistent.

Its not Heresy if its just a part of the local Ecclesiarchy cult and the testing for "human" genetics is not nearly stringent enough in the Guard for a medic to catch a significant sign of Genestealer DNA in a late stage hybrid.
Also again, hypnosis and the subversion of Imperial authority.

One of the big issues is that we're currently in a weird setting where Brood Brothers are supposed to be representing planetary forces, not Guard forces.

Actually thats not true and there is even a specific Cult that actively makes more of an effort to infiltrate and subvert Guard Regiments into its embrace.
Have you read any GSC material because it's all pretty explicit how it happens Kan and its not outlandish or stupid, it's your generic cult stuff with some alien mind powers thrown in for good measure.

For some ridiculous reason "Guard" is constantly used as interchangeable with "PDF". It was true in very few instances; notably Cadia whose Interior Guard was full-fledged Guard Regiments that got rotated planetside.

Because not all Regiments leave home and in many cases there will be no difference. Also PDF forces often consist of "retired" Guard forces so the line is very blurred. On a militant world or one with strategic importance then the role of PDF is filled by Guard Regiments. The Ultramar Auxilia are technically PDF forces but are just as good as the Guard because they're trained and led by officers taught by the Ultramarines.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/07 00:36:30


Post by: waefre_1


 Lord Clinto wrote:
 waefre_1 wrote:
 Lord Clinto wrote:
...2. Using the bare regiment, make them THE allied faction...

When you say "the bare regiment", do you mean that you would include other regiments/specializations as well and only the generic one would benefit from the "Allied faction" rules? I'm not against a little more freedom in Guard allying in other forces, but no faction should exist solely to pad another faction's stats.


Yes. I would have the standard regiments (Cadia, Catachan, etc...) in the codex too and then have the no frills, bog standard, basic Astra Militarum "Regiment" be the only one that could actively ally with others. That way you avoid min/maxing; for example allying in a (insert imagination here) Cadia Kasrkin 10-man plasma-gunner squad with your Custodes.

In so much of fluff you nearly always see unnamed PDF, Guard, Militia, etc allying with Space Marines, SoB, Custodes, etc...

And what is the point of GSC Brood Brothers if not to "pad" the main cult's forces?

Well, I wouldn't count Brood Brothers as a "Faction", so IMO they don't fall afoul of that any more than Scions would. I can see how your proposal would limit minmaxing, though I'd wonder how much minmaxing is due to the <Regiment> and how much is due to the base rules (IIRC the Loyal 32 were pretty regiment-agnostic, since neither Kurov's nor Grand Strategist were regiment-locked and none of the regiments got cheaper Infantry Squads or anything). Also, if we're going by fluff, you're just as likely to see the named regiments buddying up with SM/Sisters/etc as you are any other Guard force.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/07 01:47:02


Post by: Jarms48


If we’re simply fixing Guard now.

1) I’d change our Regiment Trait selection to:

- Custom Regiments may select 3 custom regiment traits.
- Named Regiments may select 1 custom trait in addition to their own.
- Commissars taken in <Militarum Tempest> detachments gain the <Militarum Tempestus> keyword.

2) I’d change the Balance Dataslate Aircraft Matched Play rule to 2 Aircraft units not models. The only 2 factions with aircraft units is us and Tau, which Tau’s only one is the Remora Drone.

3) This is harder, cause there’s a ton of rules or point costs that need to be changed. Some could be very easily done by GW but just changing some numbers in the current FAQ or Balance Dataslate. Such as changing Tank Orders range from 6” to 18”, the same as a vox-caster. Cause a vehicle should have a basic radio.

Probably the 3rd quick change I’d like to see is vehicle heavy weapon costs going to the same as the infantries. For example: A Leman Russ pays 15 points for a heavy bolter whereas an Infantry Squad pays 10 points. This would affect a ton of our vehicles. So, it’s probably the other simple fix we can quickly apply.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/07 01:58:15


Post by: cuda1179


1. Make Basic infantry squads 1-3 per troops slot, while also making Command Squads take up no elites slot if infantry platoon is taken.

2. Make lesser Commissars a unit upgrade again. Basically a guard infantry squad that can have 2 sergeants, but one might execute a squad member for insubordination.

3. Ogryn. These guys have been MASSIVELY over-costed for 17 years now. Massive points break for them, and possibly rolling them into a single unit entry with Bullgryn, allowing them to take a wide variety of weapons. Want a ripper gun, and Maul? Why not? Flak armor, grenadier gauntlet, and Slab shield? Okay. I mean, all that can be built from the same stock box.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/07 02:01:24


Post by: brainpsyk


Assuming the output & points costs of current AM units are fixed...

1 - Bring back platoons and fix orders. Each platoon should have a leader (Lt. for Infantry platoons and HW squads, the lead tank in LRBTs/Sentinel/hellhound squadrons) that can give orders. Each Infantry platoon should require 2-3 squads of regs, vets or conscripts, and each squad allows either 1 HWT (treated as a separate non-obsec squad) or 1 Special Weapons squad. Taking a veteran squad allows the associated HWT or SWS to be veteran as well. Hydra platoons can take 1 Officer of the fleet, Arty platoons can take 1 Master of Ordinance in the platoon to give orders. The models giving orders should be OFFICERS and not CHARACTERS and also provide re-rolls of 1 to wound in a 6" aura. Take Aim! is +1 to hit, BID is +1 to Wound, usable by both tanks and infantry, and should affect the entire platoon. Drop FRFSRF entirely. Drop Vox Casters as Guard tanks and infantry come standard with radios (except for bullgryns).


2 - Tanks and infantry should work in a combined arms manner. Tanks should provide Look Our Sir! to HWTs, and cover to infantry models within 3", and infantry weapons like lasguns and heavy bolters (not flamers!) should be able to shoot at models within engagement range of a tank. And Tanks should be able to move out of engagement range of INFANTRY units without penalty and have AP in melee. A 60-ton LRBT running over a powered-armor heretic is the same as my truck running over a beer can, and should have the same effect. There should also be an option to overwatch with nearby units. Chimera's should be open-topped and be ObSec(5) if they have an ObSec unit in them. Valkyries should be exempt from the "max 2 flyer rule", and grant cover if in hover mode. The AM warlord should not have a re-roll to hit aura because they don't lead an army with their fists. They should pick an objective marker, and the entier AM army re-rolls hit rolls of 1 against any unit within 3" of that objective marker.


3 - Custom rules breakage: Guard Blast weapons should should count double the number of models in a unit. Our BS should still suck rocks because the guard philosophy is that we'll bring enough guns to kill you and everybody within a Kilometer radius of you. We should have an AP bonus depending on the range to the target "defense in depth". Arty gets +1AP at 18+", heavy weapons from 9-24", RF and assault weapons from 1-12". We pound opponents are range with Arty, open up with heavy weapons once they're out from under the Arty umbrella, then finish them off with infantry guns. "Fire on My Position!" should be when either the last model is picked up, or if the unit is prevented from falling back. Demo Cannons & Earthshakers should be at least D3+3 damage each (allocated normally), but Battlecannons and Manticores should do 2D each, allocated 1 point at a time (providing more play into 1W models).


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/07 10:39:23


Post by: The_Real_Chris


I do like the idea of tanks being able to look out sir for infantry and take the hit meant for them if within x inches/closer to the shooter, etc. Then have the wound and save rolls. Akin in some ways to Epic where infantry are -1 to hit if in contact with a friendly vehicle.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/11 18:18:21


Post by: G00fySmiley


mine is partially specific to my army

1) Valkries are exempt from limit of 2 flyers and available as a dedicated transport to guard armies

2) points drops on most units and GW to take away thier 5 point per model floor, make cheap conscripts again and while we are at it add combat drugs to conscripts like they pump them up in the fluff.

3) In theory guardsmen would be deployed with some kind of camo or uniform changes to blend in with their environment to an extent, some kind of army wide rule to always have infantry counting as in light cover


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/11 18:20:49


Post by: kirotheavenger


I don't like "always counts as in light cover" rules, because it removes a large part of the positioning of the game. Suddenly it doesn't matter where your models are, because they're getting cover regardless. Also, it doesn't matter where your opponent moves their models because they can't deny you your cover regardless.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/11 19:40:26


Post by: G00fySmiley


 kirotheavenger wrote:
I don't like "always counts as in light cover" rules, because it removes a large part of the positioning of the game. Suddenly it doesn't matter where your models are, because they're getting cover regardless. Also, it doesn't matter where your opponent moves their models because they can't deny you your cover regardless.


yea, its a bit of a lazy mechanic, and i would probably add treat light cover as heavy cover, but with the game being more and more lethal its hard out there for a guardsman or tempestus scion. if you gave them better armor like a 4+ i think people would complain even more as suddenly "power armor should be a 2+ and terminator armor a 1+" would be an even louder call than it already is.

Practically with so many guns now -1AP they would basically just be retaining their current 5+ as a level of usefulness.

open to other ideas, but much like ork boyz the guardsman profile is not working. orders are nice and cheap bodies are nice but they get leaf blowered off the table too easy for the points in my opinion


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/11 19:53:09


Post by: Some_Call_Me_Tim


Have guardsmen be integral to the rest of the army functioning, like spotters for artillery, suppressing fire guys and screens. They’re a resource.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/11 20:22:58


Post by: Insectum7


1. More infantry kits with more options at a cheaper price point.

2. Bring back Regimental Doctrines a la 3.5 edition.

3. Bring back the Platoons!


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/11 20:25:19


Post by: Kanluwen


 Kanluwen wrote:
1. Break Infantry Squads into 3 distinctive entities. Veteran status is conferred when building your army, not by a unit choice.
1A. "Raider"/"Skirmisher" archetype, with a 5+ save and a bonus in terrain. No Heavy Weapon Teams, Lascarbines as standard. Special Weapons are able to be doubled up if no Heavy Weapon taken.
2A. "Line Infantry" archetype, the "Cadian look". 4+ save, no bonus in terrain. Heavy Weapon Teams as an option. Lasguns or Lascarbines as options. Single special weapon and single Heavy Weapon if no HWT.
3A. "Heavy Infantry" archetype, the "Grenadier" or "Kasrkin" look. 3+ save or a 4+ with an additional wound or something. Hellguns as standard. No HWT, doubling up Special Weapons or Heavy Weapons.

2. Heavy Weapon and Special Weapon list is revised, as are Heavy Weapon Teams themselves. HWTs are able to be deployed separately to the unit drawn from. HWTs get a bonus save while stationary in cover. Mortars are their own independent team, restricted to a Heavy Support option but gaining a "variable fire mode". Smoke rounds, incendiary/airburst rounds, HE rounds, etc. Fire mode is decided immediately after you fire the preceding round so thought is necessary for how you want to use them.
HWTs get a rule that effectively gives them their own version of autocannons, heavy bolters, lascannons, and twin heavy-stubbers by doubling their ROF at the expense of becoming fire OR move. Missile Launchers become a Heavy Weapon option alongside of a Heavy Stubber, Hellshot Rifle(lorewise they're cutdown lascannons intended to be used similar to an AT rifle), single operator capable AC/HB .
Plasma Guns become a separate choice in and of themselves.

3. Sergeants and Officers gain a pseudo-special weapon list. Plasma Guns, Lasguns, Hellguns, Boltguns, Shotguns. Things like this go into the "Officer/Veteran" armory pool.

I could go on, but y'all said 3.


Just gonna repeat this. Because platoons are trash.

Oh yeah, and because there's so much room for making different styles of Guard into not just a visual thing but a playstyle thing. Having just finished "Catachan Devil", some of the Guardsmen in there swap their Laspistols out for Hand Flamers. All of them barring a remnant from another Regiment are toting Lascarbines as well.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/11 21:21:18


Post by: BlackoCatto


1. Better Regimental Rules: Half of the named ones suck, especially the Mordian one, which is utterly useless.

2. Plastics: Third party companies are utterly killing them when it comes to this. Hell, I'm looking to get rid of all my Cadians once WGA comes out with the Space British Box that is coming out.

3. Price: Price cuts, price cuts, price cuts. I want my Guard cheaper. 5pts for Guardsman is too high.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/12 06:54:34


Post by: Kid_Kyoto


 BlackoCatto wrote:

3. Price: Price cuts, price cuts, price cuts. I want my Guard cheaper. 5pts for Guardsman is too high.


Not the price cut I was thinking of.

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Astra-Militarum-Cadian-Shock-Troops-2021

$5 for a 20 year old Cadian model is too high!


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/12 07:30:55


Post by: Insectum7


 Kanluwen wrote:

Just gonna repeat this. Because platoons are trash.
That's not how you spell awesome.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/12 16:21:23


Post by: waefre_1


 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
 BlackoCatto wrote:

3. Price: Price cuts, price cuts, price cuts. I want my Guard cheaper. 5pts for Guardsman is too high.


Not the price cut I was thinking of.

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Astra-Militarum-Cadian-Shock-Troops-2021

$5 for a 20 year old Cadian model is too high!

But Mr. Kid! It's a 20-year-old sculpt with a 1-year-old upgrade sprue! That you can't purchase separately! Surely that makes it worth $1 per point!


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/12 18:02:59


Post by: Kanluwen


 Insectum7 wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:

Just gonna repeat this. Because platoons are trash.
That's not how you spell awesome.

Because you can only spell platoons one way:
t
r
a
s
h

All it does is further push the army into one direction.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/12 18:09:28


Post by: CommunistNapkin


In all seriousness, why exactly do so many folks want to bring back platoons? I remember in 5-7th editions, I loved using platoons and thought they were great in the context of those editions. But in 9th, I don't really understand what problem would be fixed by recreating platoons. We can take lots of every force organization slot very easily with the current detachment system.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/12 18:15:24


Post by: kirotheavenger


The point is the same reason they were ever a thing in the first place - cheap squads on infantry means you fill up your slots very quickly.
Platoons give you the ability to take lots of infantry. Granted you can do that with multiple detachments, but then you're paying CP through the nose to bring Guardsmen of all things.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/12 18:26:04


Post by: Arcanis161


Idea, akin to platoons: what if detachments consisting of specific units got a cp discount?

For instance, if you had a Spearhead Detachment of only units with the Leman Russ keyword (Leman Russes and Tank Commanders), it only costs, like, 1 or 2 CP. Same if you have a Patrol or Battalion Detachment with all units having the Tempestus Scion keyword, or any Detachment consisting only of any of the following: Company/Platoon Commanders, Command Squads, Infantry Squads, Veterans, Special Weapons Squads, or Heavy Weapons Squads.

Not having to spend as much CP to bring other detachments, so long as those detachments follow specific guidelines, sounds like a good small boost to me, and it's similar enough to Platoons without breaking the conventions of 9th ed.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/12 18:39:22


Post by: Insectum7


 CommunistNapkin wrote:
In all seriousness, why exactly do so many folks want to bring back platoons?
It's a great point of flavor about the Guard about how they're a huge HUUUGE organization that deals with conflicts at a different scale than other armies. The platoon organization makes the Guard feel big, even if they're still showing up for this skirmish-level engagement. Guard are the largest organized armed force in the galaxy, and platoons invoke that scale.

There were also side aspects to it that, for the cost of some level of forced organization, allowed Guard to break normal FOC restrictions in other ways. It's a nice high-level faction design paradigm. Flavorful cost/benefit balance. Kanluwens spellchecker is broken


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/12 19:00:05


Post by: Kanluwen


 Insectum7 wrote:
 CommunistNapkin wrote:
In all seriousness, why exactly do so many folks want to bring back platoons?
It's a great point of flavor about the Guard about how they're a huge HUUUGE organization that deals with conflicts at a different scale than other armies. The platoon organization makes the Guard feel big, even if they're still showing up for this skirmish-level engagement. Guard are the largest organized armed force in the galaxy, and platoons invoke that scale.

No, they really don't. The simple size of the armies do.

There were also side aspects to it that, for the cost of some level of forced organization, allowed Guard to break normal FOC restrictions in other ways.

Literally unnecessary, seeing as how if you wanted to you can squeeze in a larger Detachment of choice than anyone else if you so choose.
It's a nice high-level faction design paradigm.

Nah, it's just rose-tinted glasses making you think it is.
Flavorful cost/benefit balance.

Except when it's not, and you're stuck taking what are effectively 3 units as a single Troops choice in small games.
Kanluwens spellchecker is broken

Nah, it just tells the truth.

Literally the only reason to bring them back is to game the Rule of 3, which is a dumb reason to do it when you could actively design to compensate for it.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/12 21:06:50


Post by: necrontyrOG


I dunno, I run 12 infantry squads in my pure infantry list. I have no infantry based fast attack options to make a brigade. If platoons came back, it would fill a battalion with room for two more troop options. I'd like platoons back.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/12 21:24:22


Post by: Kanluwen


 necrontyrOG wrote:
I dunno, I run 12 infantry squads in my pure infantry list. I have no infantry based fast attack options to make a brigade.
If platoons came back, it would fill a battalion with room for two more troop options. I'd like platoons back.

And this kind of silliness is the perfect example of why they should never come back.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/12 21:26:54


Post by: Some_Call_Me_Tim


It’s a reason why old force org was nice, you weren’t forced to take fething fast attacks.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/12 21:27:58


Post by: necrontyrOG


 Kanluwen wrote:
 necrontyrOG wrote:
I dunno, I run 12 infantry squads in my pure infantry list. I have no infantry based fast attack options to make a brigade.
If platoons came back, it would fill a battalion with room for two more troop options. I'd like platoons back.

And this kind of silliness is the perfect example of why they should never come back.


Why is this silly? It's four platoons. Been the same since 3rd edition at least.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/12 21:34:49


Post by: Kanluwen


 necrontyrOG wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
 necrontyrOG wrote:
I dunno, I run 12 infantry squads in my pure infantry list. I have no infantry based fast attack options to make a brigade.
If platoons came back, it would fill a battalion with room for two more troop options. I'd like platoons back.

And this kind of silliness is the perfect example of why they should never come back.


Why is this silly? It's four platoons. Been the same since 3rd edition at least.

Because you're using an example of you artificially restricting your army list.

So why wasn't the lack of an infantry FA a problem for you before? What do Platoons solve for you that actually fleshing out the Guard roster would not solve better?


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/12 21:36:17


Post by: necrontyrOG


I play a fluffy Tanith army. All light infantry. Platoons would allow me to fit into one force org, and not cost me command points for playing a fluffy list that's been legal for 20 years. What do you suggest I do to play a Tanith army with no vehicles?


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/12 21:38:03


Post by: Kanluwen


 Some_Call_Me_Tim wrote:
It’s a reason why old force org was nice, you weren’t forced to take fething fast attacks.

It's a better reason why Cyclops as Fast Attack options was a Great Idea.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 necrontyrOG wrote:
I play a fluffy Tanith army. All light infantry. Platoons would allow me to fit into one force org, and not cost me command points for playing a fluffy list that's been legal for 20 years. What do you suggest I do to play a Tanith army with no vehicles?

Get used to spending command points on your skew list?

It's not like you having Platoons would seriously change that.





Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/13 07:19:52


Post by: Pyroalchi


 necrontyrOG wrote:
I dunno, I run 12 infantry squads in my pure infantry list. I have no infantry based fast attack options to make a brigade. If platoons came back, it would fill a battalion with room for two more troop options. I'd like platoons back.


I agree with that, it would be nice to have this option if you want to play infantry centric Imperial guard. It's possible in the lore, it should be possible without too much difficulty on the tabletop.
You can easily fill 5000+ points just with vehicles in a Spearhead [HQ: 2 tank commanders (200+ each), FA: 2 x 3 Hellhounds (6x 110), HS: 6 x 3 Leman Russ (18 x ~ 175), Flyer: 2 x 3 Valkyries (6 x ~ 150) = 5110+]. It should be possible to cram 1500 points of baseline infantry in one single detachment too (that's my opinion, not a fact, claim or demand)


Edit: I realized I broke the rule of 3 in my example with the Leman Russ. So fair enough 3 x 3 Leman Russ + 3 x 3 Basilisks. Should still be something around 5000 points


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/13 11:24:50


Post by: Tittliewinks22


If they don't return platoons, then they should at minimum remove the rule of 3 on the platoon commanders, command squads, special and heavy weapon squads, and give them objective secured.

Company/Platoon Commanders and Command squads need to be recombined into a command squad that includes the commander.

Anyone who didn't want to play a platoon/infantry heavy guard list in 5th still had the option to run veteran squads as their obligatory troops option. With the flexibility of the 9th detachment structure, if you want an infantry light list, the inclusion of Platoons in the book does not inhibit your ability to be a Tread Head.

The return of platoons just opens up options for those that want to play that style of force.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/13 11:37:37


Post by: Not Online!!!


Platoons should be flexible if they return and all of its contents should count as a troop option.

eg, platoon command squad.

1-5 infantry squads.
per 2 infantry squads 0-1 HWT squad
per 2 infantry squads 0-1 Special weapons squads.
Can designate 1 infantry squad as vets.

That would at the same time avoid the "30 + models per singular troop choice" issue whilest still allowing for the typical setup.

Still i 'd say vets should go back to Troopslot and further still if platoons come back doctrines that modify availability for squad composition and ability need to make a return aswell.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/13 13:54:05


Post by: MorglumNecksnapper


1 - ultra cheap infantry, free merging of troops not at full strength
2 - orders table wide, better orders only available with (table wide) vox
3 - all 'doesn't require line of sight' shots do mortal wounds with a certain range around the target unit (and influence leadership of target unit)

Some way to fix survivability of tanks, though I don't know if it's better save, more wounds or cheaper (so you can have more).


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/13 17:11:50


Post by: BlackoCatto


I would then like price cuts and to better phrase it, point cuts.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/13 17:27:54


Post by: Some_Call_Me_Tim


I’d also let infantry squads go to 20 mans, and conscripts go to 50.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/13 17:33:57


Post by: Brickfix


Something with the Vox never sat right with me, the way it works is how the Ciaphas Cain novels describe the PDF to work. Some changes to it's interaction with orders, and orders in general, would be more interesting. Also a way to deal with the fact that guard seems to bleed secondaries way to easy.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/13 17:50:30


Post by: The_Real_Chris


Brickfix wrote:
Also a way to deal with the fact that guard seems to bleed secondaries way to easy.


Yeah part one of my answer on a different thread was for that.

Part 1 - mission interaction
Basic Guardsmen squad becomes 'disposable'. That is for missions that require kills, killing them gets you nowt. Otherwise the 10 man squad will never be resilient enough.
OR Vehicles can take hits for guardsmen. If a guardsmen model is within 3" of a leman russ, chimera or lord of war (no support weapons or dangerous hellhounds), if the infantry squad passes a successful leadership test successful hits are applied to the vehicle (the infantry and armour are supporting each other).

(You take this further but I wouldn't, probably. Where Infantry could take hits for armour in the same way, maybe if they pass a LD test with a LD modifier related to the strength of the weapon - -1 if higher, -2 if double or more). Trying to represent combined arms warfare...

Part 2 - composition
Conscripts are the bare bones in blobs of 20-30, basic gear with flamers/grenade launchers (1 per 10). Would have their stats the same as regular guard.

Infantry squads are geared up but points don't change. 10 man squad includes vox, sarge has choice of pistol and chainsword or lasgun, and one guy has a flamer/grenade launcher.
Can give another squad member a special weapon, can also replace the basic special weapon with a different one.
In my dream world the special weapon list includes Heavy stubber. And in my fantasy world the missile launcher becomes a rocket launcher and again is a 1 man weapon.

A heavy weapon team can be added (taking the squad to 12 men for transport purposes), for the cost of the heavy weapon (crew are free).

Then if we really got into fantasy land I would scrap every stratagem (beyond the basic everyone gets), roll the strats into the datafaxes, make the orders speed up play (e.g. FRFSRF becomes lasguns auto hit) and remove the ranges for aura abilities if the model and recipient is near a vox.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/13 21:29:04


Post by: pelicaniforce


The_Real_Chris wrote:
Brickfix wrote:
m

Infantry squads are geared up but points don't change. 10 man squad includes vox, sarge has choice of pistol and chainsword or lasgun, and one guy has a flamer/grenade launcher.
Can give another squad member a special weapon, can also replace the basic special weapon with a different one.
In my dream world the special weapon list includes Heavy stubber. And in my fantasy world the missile launcher becomes a rocket launcher and again is a 1 man weapon.

A heavy weapon team can be added (taking the squad to 12 men for transport purposes), for the cost of the heavy weapon (crew are free).


I’ve seen other people ask for this too and I have the same thoughts. kanluwen said that

HWTs… double their ROF at the expense of becoming fire OR move. Missile Launchers become a separate option alongside of a Heavy Stubber, Hellshot Rifle(cutdown lascannons similar to an AT rifle)”

modeling and in game it makes sense to have differences between the tripod mounted crewed weapons and smaller ones





Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/13 21:46:29


Post by: CKO


1. Useful Command Abilities (Astropaths, Officer of the Fleet, Orders)
2. Bring Back Platoons and give special rules to each platoon. For example, a veteran platoon +3 BS, infiltrating platoon, heavy weapon squad platoon.
3. Weapon Profile changes to the following weapons: Multi-laser, Battle Cannon, Eradicator Cannon, Exterminator Autocannon, especially Vanquisher battle cannon, Hot-Shot Volley Gun, literally all of the hellhound weapons, sentinel chainsaw, remove entire model dies with plasma on sentinels, remove -1 to hit quad cannon.

Please make the new tank good enough where it is really good, but not mandatory.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/13 22:58:37


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Why are guard squads so terrible at shooting? Does anyone really care if they are as good at shooting their las as DE are? Oh no! Your squad scored 3 more hits of S3 AP0 D1! That's 5 total. Now that's all for naught, as they all failed their wound rolls.

Either give guard better BS, or give them S4 las.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 11:47:11


Post by: G00fySmiley


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Why are guard squads so terrible at shooting? Does anyone really care if they are as good at shooting their las as DE are? Oh no! Your squad scored 3 more hits of S3 AP0 D1! That's 5 total. Now that's all for naught, as they all failed their wound rolls.

Either give guard better BS, or give them S4 las.


careful what you wish for there, the termigaunts everybody freaked out about str5 ap-1 until they saw how much a gaunt now costs. for that upgrade you would probably see guardsman at 65 points per 10. might be a worthwhile tradeoff but in the tyranids case i don't thin we will be seeing many termagants as its too delicate a frame for the cost.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 11:49:57


Post by: Kid_Kyoto


FWIW the balance sheet just made some big changes including free wargear upgrades.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/804579.page


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 11:52:57


Post by: Kanluwen


 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
FWIW the balance sheet just made some big changes including free wargear upgrades.

It really didn't.

There's a ton of upgrades that nobody bothers to take in the first place. This just means that the most popular ones are going to be free until the new codex.

Additionally, it basically confirmed that they have no intentions of actually addressing issues with the army.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 11:55:53


Post by: kirotheavenger


6s autowounding is a big change, whether you like the change or not.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 12:24:41


Post by: Kid_Kyoto


 Kanluwen wrote:
 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
FWIW the balance sheet just made some big changes including free wargear upgrades.

It really didn't.

There's a ton of upgrades that nobody bothers to take in the first place. This just means that the most popular ones are going to be free until the new codex.

Additionally, it basically confirmed that they have no intentions of actually addressing issues with the army.


LOL I just put in a big order of plasma guns with Mad Robot. I'd been planning to anyway as part of the HUGE change that allows Scions to take 4 special weapons, but I figured I'd better do it now before there is a run on them


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 15:06:08


Post by: Dirk Reinecke


LOL I just put in a big order of plasma guns with Mad Robot. I'd been planning to anyway as part of the HUGE change that allows Scions to take 4 special weapons, but I figured I'd better do it now before there is a run on them


Wait what, they could always take 4 special weapons <confused face>


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 15:13:11


Post by: Tittliewinks22


Seems like a blanket buff to allow IG to keep up in the lethality creep until their codex drops. I do not expect to keep the auto wounds and immune to indirect nerfs post codex.

The 6's wound doesn't help Scions at all since they do not have the <Regiment> keyword.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 15:36:40


Post by: alextroy


 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
FWIW the balance sheet just made some big changes including free wargear upgrades.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/804579.page
I must say I am shocked that GW actually gave all upgrades to Infantry Squads for free. Suddenly lore-centric squads are the way to go. They need to do this for more units.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 15:51:36


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


ANNNND QUE the horde of people chanting GW ONLY BUFFS FACTIONS ABOUT TO BE RELEASED!!!


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 15:55:37


Post by: H.B.M.C.


So, Guard Squads pay nothing for their squad upgrades. Meaning that, in the eyes of GW, every possible special or heavy weapon upgrade is equal in value. They did that with almost every option Tyranid Warriors can take, even though some weapons (Boneswords) are clearly a better choice than the others.

If every upgrade is free, then you're just playing with a different version of Power Levels.

Oh well, I guess Kan will be happy. He gets watch points values get destroyed and pretend like auto-wounding everything on a 6 makes total sense.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 16:09:02


Post by: Insectum7


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
So, Guard Squads pay nothing for their squad upgrades. Meaning that, in the eyes of GW, every possible special or heavy weapon upgrade is equal in value. They did that with almost every option Tyranid Warriors can take, even though some weapons (Boneswords) are clearly a better choice than the others.

If every upgrade is free, then you're just playing with a different version of Power Levels.

Oh well, I guess Kan will be happy. He gets watch points values get destroyed and pretend like auto-wounding everything on a 6 makes total sense.
That's an odd development. However it does mean we'll probably see a lot more IS with Heavies and Specials in them, which is nice. Or you could interpret this as a discount on the infantry themselves squeezing some extra points in for the upgrades.

It'd be nice to see Guardsmen armed with something other than just Lasguns.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 16:32:25


Post by: G00fySmiley


I like the moving ti more into line with power level. I have always hated the sargents in squads of guard, marines, orks etc not taking a power weapon or fist/claw and not taking special weapons being even an option. I would even go so far as saying those power weapons and special/heavy weapons should be chosen during deployment. in theory you have some intelligence about what you are going to fight so would choose a loadout accordingly.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 16:42:12


Post by: Kid_Kyoto


Dirk Reinecke wrote:


LOL I just put in a big order of plasma guns with Mad Robot. I'd been planning to anyway as part of the HUGE change that allows Scions to take 4 special weapons, but I figured I'd better do it now before there is a run on them


Wait what, they could always take 4 special weapons <confused face>



Not when I started this particular army, it was 2 per squad. Now it's 2 per squad, plus 2 more if you've got 10 dudes

The only problem I read that AFTER I finished an army using OOP metals...



Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 17:14:53


Post by: H.B.M.C.


 G00fySmiley wrote:
I like the moving ti more into line with power level.
Why would you want something to be more inline with Power Levels? They are an inherently less granular system allowing for no variation, where a units abilities in game can vary wildly with zero representation of said power in the points you pay for them.



Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 17:24:50


Post by: G00fySmiley


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 G00fySmiley wrote:
I like the moving ti more into line with power level.
Why would you want something to be more inline with Power Levels? They are inherently less granular system allowing for no variation, where a units abilities in game can vary wildly with zero representation of said power in the points you pay for them.


how does taking more different equipment make it less varied? I see it more of a balance issue. if they put effort into profiles and you had to say choose between a heavy 1 lascannon str 9 ap-4 D 3+d3 or a heavy bolter with heavy 4 str 5 ap-1 D2 and an auto cannon at heavy 2 str 7 ap-3 Damage 3. each seems tailored to a job and squads could be equipped for different roles and set up closer or farther from the enemy accordingly. with current profiles though yea its just going to be which weapon maths out the best for points. I would not change to this method in a vacuum


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 17:26:57


Post by: H.B.M.C.


If everything has the same "cost" (in this instance, 0) then you're always going to take the best option.

If there's granularity in the points costs for different weapons, then you have to weigh the efficacy of weapon vs the cost in your entire army.

The former is Power Level. The latter is points. GW are making points into power level with extra digits.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 17:29:01


Post by: BlackoCatto


Or... or just hold on for one moment... or... GW have no idea how to fix the Guard Squad and that one way of doing it was essentially cut the fat and give them free stuff. Nothing to do with PL.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 17:52:30


Post by: Kid_Kyoto


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
If everything has the same "cost" (in this instance, 0) then you're always going to take the best option.


I always thought the IG heavy weapon selection was fairly good in that there wasn't a best option.

You can go low strength, high rate of fire (Heavy Bolter)
High strength, low rate of fire (Lascannon)
The middle (autocannon)
Jack of all trades (missile launcher)

EDIT - Indirect fire (mortar)

Yeah in some editions one might be marginally better but generally you've got 5 choices with none standing out as fantastic.

On the special weapon side they didn't do as good a job. Plasma's high strength and AP, plus rate of fire, is just better. If it was assault 1, or if Grenade Launchers were rapid fire it might be more balanced.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 17:53:24


Post by: Some_Call_Me_Tim


I’d just make grenade launchers ignore los, they do it in only war if I remember correct.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 17:57:13


Post by: G00fySmiley


 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
If everything has the same "cost" (in this instance, 0) then you're always going to take the best option.


I always thought the IG heavy weapon selection was fairly good in that there wasn't a best option.

You can go low strength, high rate of fire (Heavy Bolter)
High strength, low rate of fire (Lascannon)
The middle (autocannon)
Jack of all trades (missile launcher)

Yeah in some editions one might be marginally better but generally you've got 3 choices with none standing out as fantastic.

On the special weapon side they didn't do as good a job. Plasma's high strength and AP, plus rate of fire, is just better. If it was assault 1, or if Grenade Launchers were rapid fire it might be more balanced.


it is pretty good, i am sure somebody with a spreadsheet doing a meta analysis with tournament results would say one is clearly the best. but the truth is none is the best in every scenario. that lascannon isn't doing much if your opponent does some insane tide of cheap bodies list.

as mentioned before I even think you should get to choose the weapon for the squad based on the opponent army, and that all armies should get to do that. Suddenly space marines tacticals are more versitile and battle specific, ditto guard squads, ork boyz with big shootas vs rokkitz etc.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 18:15:50


Post by: Insectum7


 Some_Call_Me_Tim wrote:
I’d just make grenade launchers ignore los, they do it in only war if I remember correct.
That'd be a neat move.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 21:49:31


Post by: ccs


Fix #1: remove the new auto-wound on hit rolls of 6.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 22:05:42


Post by: Kanluwen


ccs wrote:
Fix #1: remove the new auto-wound on hit rolls of 6.

Nope. This is what the people wanted, clamoring for horde Guard to be the only Guard.


I bloody called it years ago. There's nobody on the design team who knows how to do anything but stick with Cruddace's terrible vision of Guard being Stalingrad.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 22:49:30


Post by: yukishiro1


I'd make hits of 6 auto-wound....said nobody, ever. Except the dev team.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 23:03:02


Post by: Gert


I am tempted to see how many Conscripts it takes to end a Knight or something. Just for kicks. The true Imperial Guard experience.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 23:25:39


Post by: Kanluwen


yukishiro1 wrote:
I'd make hits of 6 auto-wound....said nobody, ever. Except the dev team.

And some of the people whining that it should be a thing for FRFSRF.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/14 23:53:41


Post by: Arcanis161


 Gert wrote:
I am tempted to see how many Conscripts it takes to end a Knight or something. Just for kicks. The true Imperial Guard experience.


Assuming you get the FRFSRF order off on them, per 30 (in Rapid Fire range):
120/3=40, 20 auto wound so 20/6=3
Roughly 23, so 23/3 is roughly 7.6666667 Unsaved wounds. Per Conscript: just over .25 wounds per.

So that's just under 48 per Armiger, 96 per Crusader, and 112 per Castellan.

So if you have 4 Squads of Conscripts within Rapid Fire range, and can get off the FRFSRF order, you can delete any Knight in one round of shooting.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/15 00:28:28


Post by: H.B.M.C.


 Kanluwen wrote:
This is what the people wanted...
"Let Guard auto-wound everything on a 6" is not what the "people wanted", Kan.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/15 00:29:37


Post by: Pyroalchi


96 Conscripts are almost 500 points... that got weithin 12 inch unmolested, received 4 orders by commander that cost additions points. O can live with that removing a Knight...


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/15 10:34:03


Post by: Kid_Kyoto


Like I said I basically think the 5 heavy weapons are well balanced choices. I would only add the heavy flamer but with the same loader requirement as the other weapons.

Special weapons however I think need work, the plasma gun is just too much better than any of the others.

I would go with:
Plasma Gun - S8, AP-3, 24" range, Assault 1, 2 damage, gets hot
Melta Gun - S10, AP -4, 8" range, Assault 1, d6 damage
Flamer - S4, AP -, 12" range, Assault d6, 1 damage, auto hit
Grenade Launcher (Frag) - S3, AP -, 24" range, Blast d6, 1 damage, indirect fire
Grenade Launcher (Krak) - 6, AP -1, 24" range, Assault 1, d3 damage, indirect fire
Sniper Rifle - S5, AP -2, 36" range, Heavy 1, 2 damage, Shooter chooses model hit
Heavy Stubber - S4, AP -, 36" range, Heavy 3, 1 damage

Obviously since IG are the closest to a real world army we can keep going adding LAW rockets and SAWs and Stingers and whatever else but I think 6 guns each with a unique role does the job. Plus this would give heavy weapon something that synergizes with it.

Right now the 24" plasma gun is the only thing that really synergizes with anything.

I changed the melta gun to having one profile at 8" to cut bookkeeping and make it a genuinely scary anti tank gun. The sniper rifle also got a buff.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/15 11:05:48


Post by: Gert


Arcanis161 wrote:
Assuming you get the FRFSRF order off on them, per 30 (in Rapid Fire range):
120/3=40, 20 auto wound so 20/6=3
Roughly 23, so 23/3 is roughly 7.6666667 Unsaved wounds. Per Conscript: just over .25 wounds per.

So that's just under 48 per Armiger, 96 per Crusader, and 112 per Castellan.

So if you have 4 Squads of Conscripts within Rapid Fire range, and can get off the FRFSRF order, you can delete any Knight in one round of shooting.

That is cursed.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/15 11:27:31


Post by: Kanluwen


 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Like I said I basically think the 5 heavy weapons are well balanced choices. I would only add the heavy flamer but with the same loader requirement as the other weapons.

No thanks. It's already dumb that Mortars and Missile Launchers are available to every infantry/veteran squad. Or that these squads are carrying the equivalent of a dug-in and emplaced weapons team with them.

Special weapons however I think need work, the plasma gun is just too much better than any of the others.

Because the others are garbage on a T3 BS4+ 5+ save platform.

There's literally no getting around that.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/15 23:50:38


Post by: Jarms48


 Kanluwen wrote:

No thanks. It's already dumb that Mortars and Missile Launchers are available to every infantry/veteran squad. Or that these squads are carrying the equivalent of a dug-in and emplaced weapons team with them.


You literally chose the worst examples. Missile Launchers are shoulder fired. Mortars don’t weight that much. You’re thinking of the tripod weapons HB, autocannon, and lascannon.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/16 00:41:30


Post by: Kanluwen


Mortars are specialized weapons that shouldn't be on Infantry Squads.

Missile Launchers are stupid as heavy weapons. They should be specials, or upgraded to a higher profile across the board if not meant to be disposable AT4 styled launchers.

Additionally, I literally called out the tripod bits immediately after.

I've said all this before man. You know this.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/16 00:50:16


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


So literally in my unit, every squad has at MINIMUM a HW guy with either a M203 or a AT4, and at least 1 guy with a heavy machine gun, 240B, and likely 2 guys with DMRs or SAWs. Then we have 60mms that we carry with us in our kit usually dispersed among the squad. Thats a standard Infantry squad of 12 guys. 4 squads to a platoon, 5 if you count the PLs team. 4/5 platoons to a company. Thats a gak ton of HWs. It's also kinda sorta how Guard operate. They have an explosive trooper, and two guys dedicated to a HW, in a single squad.

It's completely practical for a infantry squad to control self contained Indirect fire weapons, or heavy machine guns, and sniper weapons (lite)

Also, sometimes that AT4 is a TOW. And sometimes that soldier retires with back problems.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/16 00:55:59


Post by: Kanluwen


HMGs aren't considered a two person gig though, right?
Nor are the SAWs?

DMRs, IIRC, usually at least have someone spotting with them yeah?

And while we're at it, your squad gets broken down into how many person fireteams?

And IIRC, that kind of loadout isn't always used is it?


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/16 02:05:06


Post by: dadx6


My three fixes for Guard (one of which will affect other armies as well):

1) Imperial Guard units firing BLAST weapons double the number of models in the target unit for the purposes of determining how many shots they get. ie, 3 models = min 3 shots, 6 models = max shots.

2) Vehicles roll armor saves on a D12 instead of a D6. 4+ save becomes 7+ save, on a D12. 2+ save becomes 3+ save on a D12, and AP is unchanged. A vehicle with a 5+ save (on D12) hit by an AP-4 weapon now saves on a 9, 10, 11, or 12. Baneblades now have 3+ saves on D12, and AP-4 weapons reduce that to 7+ on D12, effectively halving the effectiveness of AP vs vehicles. Leman Russes get 4+ saves instead, so they're a little less tough. Adds granularity and doesn't require rolling each save independently on 2D6. Include a free branded D12 in every model package that includes a vehicle!

3) Bring back platoons and allow them to "combat squad" into one big unit. As long as the Platoon Leader is alive, halve the number of casualties when determining morale results. Adding a Commissar allows a re-roll or +1 to the roll (+2 if the PL is also alive) or summat.

Ditch the stupid 6's auto-wound, though. That's redonkulus.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Kanluwen wrote:
HMGs aren't considered a two person gig though, right?
Nor are the SAWs?

DMRs, IIRC, usually at least have someone spotting with them yeah?

And while we're at it, your squad gets broken down into how many person fireteams?

And IIRC, that kind of loadout isn't always used is it?


Heavy Machine guns (.50 cals) are definitely 2-man or 3-man operations (especially since they're usually vehicle mounted anymore). A 240B is a light machinegun, and is still usually assigned an assistant gunner.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/16 04:09:10


Post by: ccs


 Kanluwen wrote:
ccs wrote:
Fix #1: remove the new auto-wound on hit rolls of 6.

Nope. This is what the people wanted, clamoring for horde Guard to be the only Guard.


Anyone who actually wants & supports this auto-wounding on 6s to hit just because Guard being Guard non-sense are people who's opinions need not be taken seriously.
Hopefully there aren't very many of them....

Fortunately, as I don't play I'm tournies, I don't have to entertain such people IRL. I'll just decline to play them.




Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/16 04:21:21


Post by: Eonfuzz


It's pretty simple tbh.


1. Guard units now auto hit and wound on 6's
2. Guard units now ignore the new artillery rule
3. Guard units now auto pass armor saves on 6's


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/16 04:50:43


Post by: Matt.Kingsley


 Kanluwen wrote:
Mortars are specialized weapons that shouldn't be on Infantry Squads.

Missile Launchers are stupid as heavy weapons. They should be specials, or upgraded to a higher profile across the board if not meant to be disposable AT4 styled launchers.

Additionally, I literally called out the tripod bits immediately after.

I've said all this before man. You know this.

True, guardmens should only have Lasguns (and Laspistols for the Sergeant). The humble flashlight has a 1/6 chance of instantly killing anything so why invest in heavier weapons. It doesn't make sense fluffwise why the Departmento Munitorum would waste all those resources more valuable than human life when a lasgun or pistol is so much better.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/16 18:48:20


Post by: brainpsyk


Overall, this dataslate was meh, as overall Guard is flat-to-down after the changes.

- Auto-wounding on 6s was a good change for the army, but far from the best. Between the free upgrades and wounding on 6s, it increases overall output of Infantry squads. Agreed that wounding Knights and tanks seems quite wacky, but it does relieve the pressure on the tanks to kill EVERYTHING. Now infantry stand a chance of plucking those couple wounds off units with something besides the TCs, and are actually worth shooting.

- Manticores, LRBTs and TCs actually got worse, because of the Armor of Contempt affects all the heavy hitters, and every shot that used to hit now takes an AP penalty. While 1/4 shots auto wounds, it used to wound on a 2 or 3 anyway. This wouldn't be so bad, but the majority of the armies in the game are powered armor. In fact, the Basilisk got hit the hardest, as it was already a steaming pile of poop, this change just gave it a warm diarrhea gravy.

- Guard is more effective against non-Powered Armor armies, but to be honest, this isn't going to help Guard against Custodes, Tau, Eldar or Nids, or even DE as those armies are playing an entirely different game than Guard.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/16 18:50:56


Post by: Kanluwen


Jeez, it's like the bloody War Convocation all over again when it comes to the "free upgrades".

When there's basically one must-take option that is extremely expensive, that's what is going to be taken. It was going to be taken whether it was free or paid for.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/16 22:20:32


Post by: alextroy


For those of us taking notes, what is this best choice Infantry Squad that everyone will be taking


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/16 23:58:51


Post by: Jarms48


 alextroy wrote:
For those of us taking notes, what is this best choice Infantry Squad that everyone will be taking


The best choices are:
- Special: Plasma/Melta
- Heavy: Heavy bolter/Lascannon
- Sergeant: Plasma pistol and power sword
- Take the vox

 Kanluwen wrote:
Jeez, it's like the bloody War Convocation all over again when it comes to the "free upgrades".

When there's basically one must-take option that is extremely expensive, that's what is going to be taken. It was going to be taken whether it was free or paid for.


I really hate this change. It basically made every <Regiment> infantry unit that's not an Infantry Squad useless. Why should I bother taking a Veteran Squad now? After factoring in all the costs for their upgrades that's basically 2 Infantry Squads with all the free wargear options. Command Squads might still be situationally viable, but I'd have like to see their Regimental Standard and Medi-kit become free too.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
brainpsyk wrote:
Overall, this dataslate was meh, as overall Guard is flat-to-down after the changes.

- Auto-wounding on 6s was a good change for the army, but far from the best. Between the free upgrades and wounding on 6s, it increases overall output of Infantry squads. Agreed that wounding Knights and tanks seems quite wacky, but it does relieve the pressure on the tanks to kill EVERYTHING. Now infantry stand a chance of plucking those couple wounds off units with something besides the TCs, and are actually worth shooting.

- Manticores, LRBTs and TCs actually got worse, because of the Armor of Contempt affects all the heavy hitters, and every shot that used to hit now takes an AP penalty. While 1/4 shots auto wounds, it used to wound on a 2 or 3 anyway. This wouldn't be so bad, but the majority of the armies in the game are powered armor. In fact, the Basilisk got hit the hardest, as it was already a steaming pile of poop, this change just gave it a warm diarrhea gravy.

- Guard is more effective against non-Powered Armor armies, but to be honest, this isn't going to help Guard against Custodes, Tau, Eldar or Nids, or even DE as those armies are playing an entirely different game than Guard.


Completely agreed. This basically just reinforces the fact that Demolishers are the only good Russ type.

Honestly, I'm just going to keep play my pure infantry Scion lists. They're loving Hammer of the Emperor, and Lambdan Lions don't really care about the marine armour buff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dirk Reinecke wrote:

Wait what, they could always take 4 special weapons <confused face>


If Scion Squads number 10 models they get 4 special weapon slots.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 CommunistNapkin wrote:
In all seriousness, why exactly do so many folks want to bring back platoons? I remember in 5-7th editions, I loved using platoons and thought they were great in the context of those editions. But in 9th, I don't really understand what problem would be fixed by recreating platoons. We can take lots of every force organization slot very easily with the current detachment system.


Many players play pure infantry Guard. That requires 3 battalions to field 18 infantry squads, which costs 6 CP and requires a minimum of 6 mandatory HQ slots.

Bringing back Platoons means you could fit that into a single detachment. Meaning you've just saved a ton of CP and points from HQ tax. Though I would prefer we bring back the old 3rd - 3.5 edition Platoons. Not the 5th - 7th edition ones.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/17 00:48:31


Post by: brainpsyk


If I did my math right, firing at Marine Intercessors within 12", assuming the sarge has a plasma pistol (overcharged), then 8 lasguns@2shots (no FRFSRF) each plus

- 1 Lasgun (no special/heavy weapons): 0.4W
- 1 Meltagun: 1.9W (note, this includes the damage that waaaayyy overkills the marine)
- 1 Plasmagun (overcharged): 1.3W
- 1 Lascannon: 1.3W
- 1 HB: 1.0W

So I'd say best shooting loadout within 12" is:
- Sarge with Plasma Pistol
- 1xMeltagun
- 1xlascannon (includes the Lasgun)
- 6xLasguns

which yields about 2.3 mean wounds.

so under FRFSRF, that would be 2.5W. However, the math changes because of the MG & LC, where Take Aim! would be a bigger buff to those weapons, so the total damage goes to ~2.8 (remember the MG way overkills the marine). Now if you're Cadian and don't move, so you re-roll all hits, then the average damage of MG/LC/PP/7xLG goes to about 3.5.



Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/17 02:11:33


Post by: H.B.M.C.


 Kanluwen wrote:
Jeez, it's like the bloody War Convocation all over again when it comes to the "free upgrades".

When there's basically one must-take option that is extremely expensive, that's what is going to be taken. It was going to be taken whether it was free or paid for.
So, exactly what happens when one uses Power Levels over points?



Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/17 05:05:51


Post by: Insectum7


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
Jeez, it's like the bloody War Convocation all over again when it comes to the "free upgrades".

When there's basically one must-take option that is extremely expensive, that's what is going to be taken. It was going to be taken whether it was free or paid for.
So, exactly what happens when one uses Power Levels over points?
Zinger


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/18 13:48:24


Post by: Stevefamine


1) Make Heavy Weapon teams Elite. Buff to moving and shooting with missiles and maybe heavy stubbers. They shouldnt be so static unless its a mortar team

2) Give vehicles armor facing values again / 10th edition change to 5th ed vehicle rules

3) Give Imperial Guard access to blast templates again, less random D6 shots, more blast rules similar to 4th edition


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/18 14:14:13


Post by: Gert


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
So, exactly what happens when one uses Power Levels over points?

Not in my experience. If someone is playing with a competitive or tournament mindset it doesn't matter what is used because they're going to use that system to their advantage regardless. The game balance is scuffed to the point where Power vs Points doesn't matter because some armies are just utterly amazing in both systems. T'au in Power and T'au in points are still going to turn you into soup.
My group isn't competitive but in a 2v2 game, the T'au and Custodes players still both dropped horrendous amounts of damage on each other while I and the other player just kinda watched the fireworks. Neither was playing the meta lists, were essentially learning their new tactics and profiles, all while taking stuff that wouldn't be unexpected in their respective armies but yet they still wiped the floor with each other.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/18 14:14:47


Post by: Kanluwen


Jarms48 wrote:
 alextroy wrote:
For those of us taking notes, what is this best choice Infantry Squad that everyone will be taking


The best choices are:
- Special: Plasma/Melta
- Heavy: Heavy bolter/Lascannon
- Sergeant: Plasma pistol and power sword
- Take the vox

As opposed to when points are used, when exactly that same loadout is taken...

 Kanluwen wrote:
Jeez, it's like the bloody War Convocation all over again when it comes to the "free upgrades".

When there's basically one must-take option that is extremely expensive, that's what is going to be taken. It was going to be taken whether it was free or paid for.


I really hate this change. It basically made every <Regiment> infantry unit that's not an Infantry Squad useless. Why should I bother taking a Veteran Squad now? After factoring in all the costs for their upgrades that's basically 2 Infantry Squads with all the free wargear options. Command Squads might still be situationally viable, but I'd have like to see their Regimental Standard and Medi-kit become free too.

I love and hate this change for exactly this reason.

It's a great showcase of exactly why I keep saying they need to split out Infantry Squads into being different types.
It's a great showcase of exactly why I keep saying they need to really do something to make Command Squads into more of a bodyguard-esque unit than a Special Weapons Squad replacement like most people run them.
It's a great showcase of exactly why I keep saying that opening up some design space for different types of units(infantry and otherwise!) in different slots would be great.

I hate that it basically took them having a moment of saying "Screw it! Do whatever!" to finally get it into some of the thick skulls on here.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/18 15:51:51


Post by: waefre_1


 Kanluwen wrote:
Jarms48 wrote:
 alextroy wrote:
For those of us taking notes, what is this best choice Infantry Squad that everyone will be taking


The best choices are:
- Special: Plasma/Melta
- Heavy: Heavy bolter/Lascannon
- Sergeant: Plasma pistol and power sword
- Take the vox

As opposed to when points are used, when exactly that same loadout is taken...

....Where? Plasma I'll grant you, but I'm pretty sure Sergeant melee upgrades aren't taken outside fluff/meme lists, voxes aren't always taken as that's a significant point investment when you start getting into lists above ~1k points, and the last I heard a lot of people were opting for completely naked Infantry Squads (where they bother to take Infantry Squads at all) so they could squeeze out points for Manticores/TCs/allied detachments/etc.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/19 14:02:48


Post by: Andykp


I would like

1. As said before return to the platoon command structure meaning something. Easier or better orders only allowed in command chain of platoon.

2. Option to choose to be defensive or offensive, at start of battle. Defensive and you get a “dug in” bonus to saves until you move. Offensive you get a bonus to advance and a preliminary barrage. Or something like that.

3. A boost for taking tank squadrons. Like a combined fire, or all random number of shots weapons fire at max number if squadron in coherency (6”)


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/19 14:47:41


Post by: Gert


Why not have Infantry Squads function in the same way as Leman Russ's?
Change the unit name to Infantry Platoon or Infantry Squads and have it as a one-unit base then up to two additional units added on. That way you still need to fill out the basic slots with single squad units but then have the option to expand without going over the limit.

I still think Command Squads should be split like the Marine version, and change how the various Commanders can be taken in a list to a manner similar to Marines. So it would be something like:
For every Company Commander, you make take two Platoon Commanders without taking up a force org slot (that being an HQ slot).
For every <Officer> model you may include a unit of Guard Veterans (change it so they start at 2 models) without taking up a force org slot (that slot being Elites).
For every unit of Guard Veterans, you may include a Standard Bearer/Medic/Regimental Advisors without taking up a force org slot (again being Elites).

That way if you only want the Banner or a Master of Signals you still can but if you want it all then you don't waste all the slots.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/19 14:59:05


Post by: Tittliewinks22


 Gert wrote:
Why not have Infantry Squads function in the same way as Leman Russ's?
Change the unit name to Infantry Platoon or Infantry Squads and have it as a one-unit base then up to two additional units added on. That way you still need to fill out the basic slots with single squad units but then have the option to expand without going over the limit.

This is an avenue I could support, but expand upon more.

Re-introduce platoons as a troop option with these caveats.
1-5 Infantry Squads
*0-1 Command Squad (including Platoon commander)
**0-5 Heavy Weapon Squads
**0-3 Special Weapon Squads
**0-1 Conscripts

*You can only include these units if this platoon contains 2 or more Infantry Squads
**You can only include these units if your platoon contains a command squad. No more than 1 Heavy/Special squad per infantry squad included in the platoon.

Along with this make veterans a troop option outside of the platoon


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/19 15:09:09


Post by: kirotheavenger


Because the 40k "engine" doesn't work like that.
It's fine for Leman Russes because they're single model units, you can just say every unit goes it's own way.

If you tried that with infantry squads, it'd be an absolute word salad trying to constrain people to splitting the super-unit they've bought into actual Infantry Squads.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/19 15:24:41


Post by: Tittliewinks22


 kirotheavenger wrote:
Because the 40k "engine" doesn't work like that.
It's fine for Leman Russes because they're single model units, you can just say every unit goes it's own way.

If you tried that with infantry squads, it'd be an absolute word salad trying to constrain people to splitting the super-unit they've bought into actual Infantry Squads.


Word salad has never been a design constraint for GW B team.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/19 15:27:40


Post by: Gert


I'm not so sure it would. Something like this:
This unit contains one Infantry Squad. It can include an additional Infantry Squad (X Power Rating) or two additional Infantry Squads (X Power Rating)
Each Infantry Squad consists of 1 Sergeant and 9 Guardsmen.
- Each Guardsman is armed with a Lasgun and Frag Grenades
- Each Sergeant is armed with a Laspistol and Frag Grenades.
Wargear options:
- A single Guardsman in each squad may be equipped with a Vox Caster.
- Two Guardsmen in each squad may form a HWT who must take an item from the HW list.
- A single Guardsman in each squad may exchange their Lasgun with an item from the SW list.
- Each Sergeant may replace their Laspistol with an item from the Ranged Weapons list.
- Each Sergeant may take a Chainsword or Power sword.

Then put in the Vox caster ability at the bottom.
If not that then an army rule called "Massed Ranks" or something where Infantry Squads ignore the limitations on Troop force org slots. You'd still get Conscripts and Scions with limits but you could do your platoons to the heart's content.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/19 16:19:38


Post by: Kanluwen


Reread that statement, Gert, and tell me what you think is goofy about it...


I mean seriously. Infantry Squads ignoring limitations on the FOC...but CONSCRIPTS don't?


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/19 16:30:25


Post by: H.B.M.C.


We used to have platoons before. It's not that hard.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/19 16:53:47


Post by: Gert


 Kanluwen wrote:
Reread that statement, Gert, and tell me what you think is goofy about it...


I mean seriously. Infantry Squads ignoring limitations on the FOC...but CONSCRIPTS don't?

Conscripts should be a rarity, not the default.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/19 17:23:25


Post by: Andykp


 Gert wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
Reread that statement, Gert, and tell me what you think is goofy about it...


I mean seriously. Infantry Squads ignoring limitations on the FOC...but CONSCRIPTS don't?

Conscripts should be a rarity, not the default.


They should be limited to no more than infantry squads or one per detachment.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/19 17:31:48


Post by: G00fySmiley


 Gert wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
Reread that statement, Gert, and tell me what you think is goofy about it...


I mean seriously. Infantry Squads ignoring limitations on the FOC...but CONSCRIPTS don't?

Conscripts should be a rarity, not the default.


yes and no, i mean a drug fueled penal legion being directed into combat seems pretty grimdark to me. I would personally like to see like in all codexes the ability for a player to take whatever they think their army should be. Now the guardsmen themselves should have superior rules and stats to the conscripts showing they are trained soldiers, but that does not mean a cheaper worse stat conscript unit should be terrible and limited.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/19 18:03:40


Post by: Gert


Andykp wrote:
They should be limited to no more than infantry squads or one per detachment.

I could get behind one per detachment.

 G00fySmiley wrote:
yes and no, i mean a drug fueled penal legion being directed into combat seems pretty grimdark to me. I would personally like to see like in all codexes the ability for a player to take whatever they think their army should be. Now the guardsmen themselves should have superior rules and stats to the conscripts showing they are trained soldiers, but that does not mean a cheaper worse stat conscript unit should be terrible and limited.

The problem comes from freedom of choice for the player and a balance between the units.
I oppose the 5th Ed Platoon system where you need to have a Commander and Command Squad for a Troops choice because I don't want to run Command Squads. So a system where I can run lots of infantry without a tax is preferred.
However, I don't think that Conscripts should be the go-to choice for an infantry-heavy army just because they are cheap. The discrepancies between Conscripts and Infantry Squads are also easily fixed for little cost. There isn't really a reason to bring Infantry Squads over Conscripts, and TBH I don't think they should exist as a unit at all.
Not sure where being "Grimdark" comes into play.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/19 18:29:08


Post by: G00fySmiley


 Gert wrote:
Andykp wrote:
They should be limited to no more than infantry squads or one per detachment.

I could get behind one per detachment.

 G00fySmiley wrote:
yes and no, i mean a drug fueled penal legion being directed into combat seems pretty grimdark to me. I would personally like to see like in all codexes the ability for a player to take whatever they think their army should be. Now the guardsmen themselves should have superior rules and stats to the conscripts showing they are trained soldiers, but that does not mean a cheaper worse stat conscript unit should be terrible and limited.

The problem comes from freedom of choice for the player and a balance between the units.
I oppose the 5th Ed Platoon system where you need to have a Commander and Command Squad for a Troops choice because I don't want to run Command Squads. So a system where I can run lots of infantry without a tax is preferred.
However, I don't think that Conscripts should be the go-to choice for an infantry-heavy army just because they are cheap. The discrepancies between Conscripts and Infantry Squads are also easily fixed for little cost. There isn't really a reason to bring Infantry Squads over Conscripts, and TBH I don't think they should exist as a unit at all.
Not sure where being "Grimdark" comes into play.


I think you handle that with differentiation not just saying no. An all gretchin ork army of gretchin, killa kans, grot tanks and runtherds is not going to win games but you can run it. Consrcipts while i think should nto be limited also would lack the skills to do most objectives beyond maybe ones involving destroying them. so limited activation uses, BS5+, lower leadership and a 6+ armor save (basically orks minus the toughness, and with weaker guns) people probably would not take many of em unless infantry squads are just awful all around.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/19 21:40:59


Post by: Andykp


 G00fySmiley wrote:
 Gert wrote:
Andykp wrote:
They should be limited to no more than infantry squads or one per detachment.

I could get behind one per detachment.

 G00fySmiley wrote:
yes and no, i mean a drug fueled penal legion being directed into combat seems pretty grimdark to me. I would personally like to see like in all codexes the ability for a player to take whatever they think their army should be. Now the guardsmen themselves should have superior rules and stats to the conscripts showing they are trained soldiers, but that does not mean a cheaper worse stat conscript unit should be terrible and limited.

The problem comes from freedom of choice for the player and a balance between the units.
I oppose the 5th Ed Platoon system where you need to have a Commander and Command Squad for a Troops choice because I don't want to run Command Squads. So a system where I can run lots of infantry without a tax is preferred.
However, I don't think that Conscripts should be the go-to choice for an infantry-heavy army just because they are cheap. The discrepancies between Conscripts and Infantry Squads are also easily fixed for little cost. There isn't really a reason to bring Infantry Squads over Conscripts, and TBH I don't think they should exist as a unit at all.
Not sure where being "Grimdark" comes into play.


I think you handle that with differentiation not just saying no. An all gretchin ork army of gretchin, killa kans, grot tanks and runtherds is not going to win games but you can run it. Consrcipts while i think should nto be limited also would lack the skills to do most objectives beyond maybe ones involving destroying them. so limited activation uses, BS5+, lower leadership and a 6+ armor save (basically orks minus the toughness, and with weaker guns) people probably would not take many of em unless infantry squads are just awful all around.


The fix for that could be to limit them and make them crap, so no obsec but dirt cheap. Then have an army of renown that can be all conscripts. Then could gain obsec but not allow other troop choices. That way there is no reason to take conscripts as the main troop type but yiu can still an army of them.



Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/20 12:01:53


Post by: G00fySmiley


honestly i hate the army of renound route and anything limiting what models you can bring beyond rule of 3. personally I have 2 sort of different imperial guard armies built and painted. 1 is a tempestus scion air drop army which is currently illegal as i cannot bring the flyer transports, and a the 2nd a penal legion army of orange jumpsuit troops with commisars pushing them forward into the grinder protected by thier bullgryn bodyguards. would suck to have both invalidated.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/20 12:19:10


Post by: locarno24


Jarms48 wrote:

Many players play pure infantry Guard. That requires 3 battalions to field 18 infantry squads, which costs 6 CP and requires a minimum of 6 mandatory HQ slots.


To be fair that could be (mostly) solved easily by adding an INFANTRY unit to fast attack - maybe a recon squad, or even the Special Weapons Squad. That would allow you to take a Brigade without being forced to take VEHICLE units.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/20 12:47:07


Post by: Jarms48


Just give the Special Weapon Squad a pre-game move like Dominions and make them Fast Attack. Might actually make them useful.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/20 15:42:29


Post by: waefre_1


Giving SWS a Scout move feels a bit weird, so if we're set on a new FA choice, getting a full "forward scout" kind of squad would be better IMO (something between a SWS and the old "Veterans with Forward Sentries" gig). If not, would RR be considered sufficient (assuming they are in the 9e dex and all the rumours/signs aren't an out-of-season April Fool's joke)? Or is the goal "all infantry, all the time"?


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/20 15:56:48


Post by: Kanluwen


I have literally said this so many times.

This is where breaking some of these nonsense catch-all squads into specialized units would be nothing but a benefit.

Want FA?
Artillery Spotters and Sniper Teams. How are they "Fast Attacks", you might wonder?
Give them a forward infiltration role, ala Tau Pathfinders.

When I first started Guard with the Doctrines codex as well, we had 3 distinctive types of Heavy Weapons Squads.
-Fire Support had Heavy Bolters and Autocannons.
-Antitank had Missile Launchers and Lascannons
-Mortar had...mortars, obviously?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Gert wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
Reread that statement, Gert, and tell me what you think is goofy about it...


I mean seriously. Infantry Squads ignoring limitations on the FOC...but CONSCRIPTS don't?

Conscripts should be a rarity, not the default.

And there's other ways to address that...but you've literally argued against my suggestions about Conscripts before that would be used specifically to make them a rarity or to underline that Conscripts are not necessarily part of the regimental structure in the past.

Things like the new Cadian Whiteshield stratagem are a better way to handle it then "Infantry Squads don't count as mandatory Troop choices".

In an ideal world?
Conscripts would be broken into two setups:

Penal Legionnaires, which are closer to a Guard Infantry Squad for setup but lose their Regimental traits and have an Auxilia status with the Officio Prefectus keyword(if we're stuck with Commissars, might as well make use!)
The Conscripts we have now but having been dulled down a bit. 6+ save, Raw Recruits, Autoguns, Shotguns, or Autopistols+CCWs--also the Prefectus keyword. Great little spot to work in Newcromunda models too...

And then, to top it all off, this opens up the design space for properly detailing Guard Infantry Squads.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/20 16:15:32


Post by: Gert


 Kanluwen wrote:
And there's other ways to address that...but you've literally argued against my suggestions about Conscripts before that would be used specifically to make them a rarity or to underline that Conscripts are not necessarily part of the regimental structure in the past.

Things like the new Cadian Whiteshield stratagem are a better way to handle it then "Infantry Squads don't count as mandatory Troop choices".

I don't remember every discussion I have on this website Kan and it's been a while since I've discussed Guard in any major capacity. I don't remember what you've said about Conscripts before and I also have no idea what the Whiteshields strat does because I don't have the Octarius book with the Cadian Supplement.
I also never said that Infantry Squads shouldn't count as mandatory Troops choices, rather that they would ignore the restrictions on force org slots and that was a secondary suggestion to my primary one where Platoons functioned in a similar way to vehicle squadrons.
If we're going to discuss this can you at least read my posts properly and discuss what I wrote.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/20 16:19:58


Post by: Kanluwen


Ignoring the restrictions on force org slots means "they wouldn't count as mandatory troop choices".

There really isn't anything more to discuss about it. Platoons are not something that is realistically feasible now as anything except an army special rule, letting you organize things for drops.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/20 17:10:45


Post by: Voss


And there is certainly a limit to 9th edition books having army special rules...

There are half-a-dozen ways to do platoons that are dead easy and fluffy.
Its not like basic guard squads are some sort of threat to metagame balance.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/20 17:15:59


Post by: Gert


As I said, it was a secondary suggestion to my primary one where Platoons function the same way as the various Guard vehicle squadrons.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/20 17:51:45


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Thank god they nerfed the hell out of Scions. I was about havin heart palpitations over here, thinking these boy's might actually be worth half a wet fart, but thankfully GW swooped in and altered the Rules that altered the rules. The already altered rules.

Now we can go back to debating the merits of further nerfing Custodes.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/20 18:17:13


Post by: Kanluwen


Voss wrote:
And there is certainly a limit to 9th edition books having army special rules...

There are half-a-dozen ways to do platoons that are dead easy and fluffy.
Its not like basic guard squads are some sort of threat to metagame balance.

Sure they're not, but also you shouldn't have to build an army that has a minimum of close to two hundred frigging models as just their mandatory troop takes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Gert wrote:
As I said, it was a secondary suggestion to my primary one where Platoons function the same way as the various Guard vehicle squadrons.

None of which addresses the problem of the very real issue of player fatigue when it comes to the fact that outside of cutting options?
The Infantry Squad has remained basically unchanged as long as I've been involved with 40k.

There's a reason I keep saying they need to focus more on actually differentiating the infantry archetypes out over putting the dumpsterfire that would be Platoons in 9E.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/20 19:13:25


Post by: Gert


 Kanluwen wrote:
None of which addresses the problem of the very real issue of player fatigue when it comes to the fact that outside of cutting options?
The Infantry Squad has remained basically unchanged as long as I've been involved with 40k.

Ok but that wasn't the issue I was addressing with my suggestions regarding reworking the Platoon system. You can't get mad that I haven't addressed B when I'm discussing A.

There's a reason I keep saying they need to focus more on actually differentiating the infantry archetypes out over putting the dumpsterfire that would be Platoons in 9E.

The archetypes being what exactly? Infantry, Conscripts, and Vets?
I don't get how Platoons are automatically a "dumpster fire" just because you don't like them. You need to actually explain the reasoning behind your opinions instead of just assuming everyone knows what you're talking about.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/20 19:35:17


Post by: I_am_a_Spoon


Apologies if these have already been said (these aren't necessarily my 'top 3 fixes', and this is a lot more than 3), but some half-formed thoughts that could be interesting:

UNITS:

- Give Infantry Squads access to two special weapons (like real-life infantry sections, which typically have one support weapon per fireteam). This would allow them to specialise (or generalise) a little better, and could make shooting with special weapons (like meltaguns) more reliable. (Also, please just let me take lasguns on my section leaders, or shotguns.) Note that this would coincide with NO HEAVY WEAPON TEAMS in Infantry Squads (see below). Infantry Squads would be more about mobile firepower, leaving the big, cumbersome weapons to other units.

- Heavy weapon teams aren't available as a direct upgrade for Infantry Squads. They come only as budget (25-30pt) heavy support units: basically 5-man Infantry Squads, but with access to one heavy weapon instead of two special weapons. For every Infantry Squad in your detachment though, you can take a Heavy Weapon Squad in the same detachment slot. They can also take plasma cannons, multi-meltas, etc… maybe a gun shield upgrade/feature as well that gives the gunner +1 to his T and Sv, or a signum/scanner upgrade/rule that lets another Guardsman model sacrifice its shooting phase to 'assist' the gunner model (+1BS)?

- Command squads could lose the special weapon access (which seems unfluffy to me), and become all about buffing nearby infantry and protecting characters. They could have more powerful medic characters who automatically heal wounds/revive models – not just on a 4+ – and who could have something akin to the Apothecary’s “Narthecium Aura” ability (units within 3" can ignore wounds on a 6). The Command Squad could also include vox ‘administrators’ or something, who count as regular Vox operators but also grant any officers within 3” an additional order. The squad should also start off with regular Guardsmen, not BS3+ Veterans (see below).

- No more dedicated Veteran squads. Any non-Scion infantry unit (or this could include vehicle units?) could be upgradable with the <Veteran> tag, in which case all models in those units gain +1 to their A and Ld. <Veteran> units could also double their existing access to special weapons, and benefit from a stratagem that gives them +1 or similar to hit (ranged or melee) in a given phase (rather than having flat BS3+ for example).

- No more dedicated Conscript squads. Some infantry/vehicle units (maybe all <Core> units?) could be upgradable/degradable with the <Conscript> tag. Models in <Conscript> units would lose -1 WS, BS and Ld, and halve their access to special weapons… however any time <Conscript> units get destroyed they can reappear on the field the turn after. Maybe Conscripts should also lose the ‘orders only take effect on a 4+’ rule as well. If you want a big Conscript squad, use the Consolidate Squads stratagem.

- Scions get the same range on their hotshot weapons as non-hotshot ones – all “hotshot” does is confer +2 AP. I’d also like if Scions could swap out their hotshot lasguns with “hellguns”: a different weapon entirely at something like Range 18”, AP0, Assault 4. And giving Scions options for auxiliary weapons, combi-weapons or plasma/melta pistols could be interesting – more flavourful IMO than just letting them pick the same special weapons as regular infantry.

- Ditch Special Weapon squads. If you want concentrated special weapons, take a <Veteran> Infantry Squad or Scion Squad.

WARGEAR

- Additional wargear options. Infantry units (or at least Sergeants) should be able to take krak grenades, maybe melta bombs or demo charges too. Non-hotshot volley guns could also be included in the special weapons list to give regular infantry a high-RoF weapon, as could new single-shot anti-tank or anti-flyer missile weapons? You could also do other misc things, like let any infantry unit take cameleoline cloaks, carapace armour or medipacks. Things like cameleoline and medipacks could be particularly valuable for Scions dropping into danger, and would also help infantry squads trying to hold objectives.

- Maybe some actual bonuses for taking bayonets (aka, as a lite melee option for Infantry Squads). Something defensive (like a bracing stratagem) could be interesting, and might gel well with their battlefield role. Alternatively, just something like +1 WS and/or AP in a turn where they charge/are charged.

- Turn the grenade launcher into a Heavy 2 weapon using the current rotary-magazine model? Alternatively, make the current weapon profile an auxiliary/combi-weapon option on the Sergeant, with a new underslung model? Another option to make grenade launchers more appealing could be to let them indirect-fire, like short-ranged budget mortars.

- I think flamers should become Assault 2D6, Blast. On the flip side, I also think they should fire at regular or +1 BS instead of auto-hitting (meaning the firer’s BS still matters), and should maybe have a range of 6” instead of 12”. They (or ‘flame’ weapons more broadly) could also reduce cover bonuses by 1, and/or reduce the Ld of any unit they successfully wound/damage.

- To make meltaguns more reliable (on top of being able to take 2 per Infantry Squad), they could also be +1 to hit or Assault D3, Blast (with a worse statline). I mean, you’re talking about unleashing the plasma energy of a fusion reaction, right? Lava is hot enough to kill you from dozens of metres away… how the operators of these weapons survive is beyond me.

- As a general rule, the minimum number of attacks made by blast weapons could be half the model count of the squad they're targeting. Maybe this could be a quarter for 'small blast' weapons like flamers and grenades, or equal to the target squad size for 'large blast' weapons.

- Vox casters could be longer range? They could also provide indirect fire units with direct line-of-sight if other units (ones with line-of-sight to the weapon’s target) are linked via vox. This might be a more sensible way of circumventing the new ‘-1 BS to indirect fire’ rule than just straight-up saying AM are exempt.

- Missile launchers (and potentially other "missile" weapons) should be able to re-roll misses by default, or fire at +1 BS.

ORDERS/STRATEGEMS

- Maybe a 'variable power setting' order/stratagem for las weapons (or just lasguns)? I.e. a 'maximum power' option wherein las weapons get +1 Strength or rerolls to wound, and potentially +1 AP as well. You could also have a 'minimum power' option (replacing FRFSRF, and being less of an auto-choice) which could do the opposite: extra/double shots, -1 Strength and/or -1 AP. This would allow a bit of tactical flexibility, and would also bolster weapons like lascannons (you can always fire 2 minimum-power shots to improve your chances of a hit).

- A martyrdom-style stratagem that lets guardsmen 'overcharge' their lasgun power packs could be fun as well. E.g. if a unit is killed during a Fight Phase with this stratagem active, the attacking unit suffers D6 hits/mortal wounds.

MISC THOUGHTS

- Infantry Squads get the "long-las", not sniper rifles. Long-lases could have AP1 or AP2 (in the lore, they often use hotshot packs)? Sniper rifles are reserved for Ratlings (and made a bit more potent)? Just like vehicle squadrons, snipers could be bought as units but then split up and operate independently once the game starts. Each sniper could upgrade with a spotter and form a two-man unit; the spotter can assist the sniper (+1 BS) during the shooting phase in lieu of shooting himself. 48" range, AP1, and mortal wounds on hit (not wound) rolls of 6?

- Maybe we could start replacing heavy bolters in the AM lineup with multilasers – mostly for fluffy reasons, but also because of the similarity between the Heavy Bolter and Autocannon statlines. On the same note, I wish pintle weapons were volley guns instead of the less-fitting (IMO) heavy stubbers and storm bolters.

- Speaking of bolt weapons, they need a boost. I personally think AP1 would be a good start, and maybe +1 Strength or Damage (or mortal rounds on wound rolls of 6?)


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/21 08:19:15


Post by: Jarms48


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Thank god they nerfed the hell out of Scions. I was about havin heart palpitations over here, thinking these boy's might actually be worth half a wet fart, but thankfully GW swooped in and altered the Rules that altered the rules. The already altered rules.

Now we can go back to debating the merits of further nerfing Custodes.


This is what GW should have done with Hammer:

“If every unit in your army has the Astra Militarum keyword, then each time a <Regiment> or <Tempestus Regiment> model from your army makes a ranged attack, an unmodified hit roll of 6 automatically wounds the target.”


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/21 22:17:23


Post by: generalchaos34


Heres my 3

1. Bring back stripped down platoons, IE 1 LT (cheap and can only order his platoon) 2-5 infantry, 0-3 HWS, 0-3 SWS, 0-1 Conscripts with the point buy option to make them endless. Veterans are moved to Troops as an alternative to taking a platoon, as its purpose is to free up heavy and elite slots and give access to conscripts. Right now taking a HWS as a heavy choice is kind of a waste of slots.

2. Regiment Specializations: Each detachment picks a regiment type when it is established. The regiment type will be something like Infantry, Mobile Infantry, Artillery, Armor, Combined Arms, etc. These will place limits on what kind of units can be taken in the detachment (IE infantry has no leman russes). These will give special bonuses for the specialty. Combined Arms will be "take what you want" designation with a very basic bonus. Specific regiments like Cadia, Valhalla, etc, might have a stratagem or associated bonus that adds to this as well (ie Steel Legion get an extra mobile infantry bonus, Krieg get an extra artillery bonus)

3. Vehicles: some vehicles need a bit of an overhaul, transports like taurox and chimeras need to be much cheaper to make them worthwhile, especially considering they are often far more expensive than their occupants, and Russes just need a bit more survivability. Even if they aren't any more killy a tank should be able to take some hits without an invuln save, like a -1 D, more wounds, or even a FnP mechanic. Guard vehicles in general are not grav, made of alien materials, graceful, or high tech. They are a block of metal with some redundant moving parts strapped to a cannon and it should be reflective of that.

Bonus: SOMETHING else for fast attack, be it death riders or something for petes sake, an infantry option would be amazing like Spotters that can confer a bonus to artillery and aircraft, scouts, that get an infiltrate move but are limited to sniper rifles and demo charges, or even just a moved SWS squad with a scout move.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/24 11:42:56


Post by: OldMate


1 Allow squadrons of carnodons and malcadors to be taken to add some variety of tanks on the board. Allow mixed squadrons of all mentioned imperial guard battle tanks.

2 mounted infantry fast attack: rough rider squad that is instead equipted with lasguns rather than hunting lances, 2 members of the squad can be equpted with SWs. They still are equipted with chainswords so get +1attack in melee. Under cavalry regiment doctirne can be taken as troops.

3 veterans to troops and scouts, grenadiers and assault teams to take their place in elites. Sniper teams become scout teams and they can infiltrate, and can provide rerolls to artillery and to aircraft attacks. Grenadiers good old stormies. Assault teams when declaring a charge against an enemy unit every member of the squad throws a grenade. Can be upgraded to carry krak grenades, for charging vehicles with. Armed with lasguns and bayonets, can be upgraded with chainswords, IG chain glaives(a +1 strength chainsword profile(basicallythe cutty part of a chainsword on a stick), or shotguns 2 members of the section maybe upgraded with SWs or power weapons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
On the whole conscript thing: yeah totally should be able to take them as troops within the platoon structure. It would represent the real world practice of deploying conscripts and draftees as bulk alongside professional and highly motivated troops which provide backbone, make sure the draftees/conscripts are doing their job and are not just dying from making amateur mistakes. It could also represent penal troops(mutants, lower class or lower caste) being used as chaff and meatshields alongside actual soldiers.

I personally think an imperial guard sergeant or officer should be upgradable to have a underslung grenade launcher on lasgun/boltgun.
I think a 1 man heavy stubber team would be a good upgrade(like a SAW, light or medium MG) sure in real life you usually have an assistant, BUT unlike other weapons they are not vital to the operation of the weapon in good time. I mean we have a guy soloing a HB. i think soloing a bren,mg42, Mag, SAW etc is not without historical precidents and is not unreasonable. Would be a heavy weapon but act like a SW.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/26 06:57:04


Post by: Jarms48


https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/ubi8pr/meta_monday_42422_new_dataslate_in_the_house/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

The results are in, even after the balance dataslate we still have a 26% winrate. It's almost like Hammer of the Emperor was completely overblown by the community and wasn't a massive buff like they hoped...


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/26 07:07:59


Post by: Insectum7


Jarms48 wrote:
https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/ubi8pr/meta_monday_42422_new_dataslate_in_the_house/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

The results are in, even after the balance dataslate we still have a 32% winrate. It's almost like Hammer of the Emperor was completely overblown by the community and wasn't a massive buff like they hoped...
It's not that it's crazy powerful, it's that it's crazy stupid. Getting free Heavy/Specials is a much better buff, also more thematic, and also not yet-another-in-game-extra-rule. It's just a list/model thing.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/26 07:19:42


Post by: Jarms48


The free wargear is just as stupid. As players will only take the best and all options. Suddenly every squad has a rare plasma gun and pistols.

It also does nothing for durability. So you could take 18 infantry squads all with plasma and lascannons, but after T1 or T2 you've lost 66% of them. Cause they die to a still breeze.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/26 16:34:06


Post by: Insectum7


Jarms48 wrote:
The free wargear is just as stupid. As players will only take the best and all options. Suddenly every squad has a rare plasma gun and pistols.

It also does nothing for durability. So you could take 18 infantry squads all with plasma and lascannons, but after T1 or T2 you've lost 66% of them. Cause they die to a still breeze.
I disagree. Seeing Guard armies without Heavies/Specials in their squadd was more stupid. Certainly the rule could have been implemented better, or the weapons could be made more equal in value so there weren't "auto-takes", but on the whole it's an improvement.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/26 20:49:25


Post by: generalchaos34


 Insectum7 wrote:
Jarms48 wrote:
The free wargear is just as stupid. As players will only take the best and all options. Suddenly every squad has a rare plasma gun and pistols.

It also does nothing for durability. So you could take 18 infantry squads all with plasma and lascannons, but after T1 or T2 you've lost 66% of them. Cause they die to a still breeze.
I disagree. Seeing Guard armies without Heavies/Specials in their squad was more stupid. Certainly the rule could have been implemented better, or the weapons could be made more equal in value so there weren't "auto-takes", but on the whole it's an improvement.


I think if they change up how grenade launchers work (indirect maybe, gas rounds? a more swiss army approach could make it viable) and give the sniper rifle some more value (more AP and a +1 BS) they would all be roughly on par with the task you need them to be. Heavy weapons are fairly close to be equal in usage with maybe the autocannon needed a little bit of a bump (ive got nothing except maybe making it D3)


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/26 21:16:58


Post by: OldMate


This is why i think guardsmen need to be able to go to ground as a standard action in the movement or shooting phase and they should become much more resilient. Because they're not soaking up the damage on their squishy bodies and armour. The ground is. They can't move, can't charge but a decent cover save because unlike most other factions they can squish themselves into the smallest folds and features in the ground, firstly making them hard to hit but also making near misses more survivable and there like cockroaches they endure even under the greatest punishment. Unless someone starts throwing around eradicator shells, fire, or terrible music but that is besides the point. (It would also make flamers much more viable than plasma against guard as they sorta should be)

Sure they'd still be murderised in melee but that is sorta expected. In a gunfight the standard infantry squad should be annoyingly resilient. Guard on the defensive should be a pain in the gluteus maximus. Guard infantry on the offensive should be guys pressing forwards so they can lie on the ground somewhere else and take potshots with their flashlights from there. Movement should be a casualty intensive exercise for them without transports or tanks support but once they are in place and on their tummies in the mud or dirt their infantry should be stubborn.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/27 00:42:20


Post by: Jarms48


 Insectum7 wrote:
I disagree. Seeing Guard armies without Heavies/Specials in their squad was more stupid.


This is actually more thematic. There are trillions of Guardsmen. There's dozens of stories with ranks of Guardsmen with nothing but lasguns. Supported by tanks and artillery. Obviously the real answer is somewhere in the middle, there should be some Guardsmen with special weapons.

Certainly the rule could have been implemented better, or the weapons could be made more equal in value so there weren't "auto-takes", but on the whole it's an improvement.


They should have just reduced the costs of the bad special weapons. Make the Flamer and Grenade Launcher 3 points instead of 5. Then drop the Infantry Squad back to 50 points. Maybe Power Swords could have different costs depending on WS, like how Plasma and Melta are 5/10, could make Power Swords 3/5. Also make Bolt Pistols 1 point, as 2 points is pretty bad for something with half the firepower of a Bolter.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/27 06:22:02


Post by: Pyroalchi


 OldMate wrote:
This is why i think guardsmen need to be able to go to ground as a standard action in the movement or shooting phase and they should become much more resilient. Because they're not soaking up the damage on their squishy bodies and armour. The ground is. They can't move, can't charge but a decent cover save because unlike most other factions they can squish themselves into the smallest folds and features in the ground, firstly making them hard to hit but also making near misses more survivable and there like cockroaches they endure even under the greatest punishment. Unless someone starts throwing around eradicator shells, fire, or terrible music but that is besides the point. (It would also make flamers much more viable than plasma against guard as they sorta should be)

Sure they'd still be murderised in melee but that is sorta expected. In a gunfight the standard infantry squad should be annoyingly resilient. Guard on the defensive should be a pain in the gluteus maximus. Guard infantry on the offensive should be guys pressing forwards so they can lie on the ground somewhere else and take potshots with their flashlights from there. Movement should be a casualty intensive exercise for them without transports or tanks support but once they are in place and on their tummies in the mud or dirt their infantry should be stubborn.


That's definitly an image I would appreciate. And it would (in my opinion) make Guard more interesting. Bonus points for being useful für those that would prefer smaller numbers of more elite, better equipped Guardsmen as well as those that want to go more into mäßige numbers of poor infantry or even penal Guard.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/27 06:52:45


Post by: Jarms48


Alright. I did my quick fixes for the current codex. It's a lot more than 3.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sWyXhpYNt8JsV8kvHWYmcTKMzdhDTEN6o8KIDlz0UYs/edit?usp=sharing


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/27 14:54:03


Post by: The_Real_Chris


 Insectum7 wrote:
Jarms48 wrote:
The free wargear is just as stupid. As players will only take the best and all options. Suddenly every squad has a rare plasma gun and pistols.

It also does nothing for durability. So you could take 18 infantry squads all with plasma and lascannons, but after T1 or T2 you've lost 66% of them. Cause they die to a still breeze.
I disagree. Seeing Guard armies without Heavies/Specials in their squadd was more stupid. Certainly the rule could have been implemented better, or the weapons could be made more equal in value so there weren't "auto-takes", but on the whole it's an improvement.


I am all for 'Guard squads having equipment. Conscript/penal blobs are fine with basic stuff, but Guard is supposed to be a military force. I think it could have been handled better with the 'bad' options being free and the squad cost at 50, then very cheap further upgrade options. But then I would have liked to see more freedom with the upgrades too to cover different squad types and weird and wonderful org tables.

Certainly stuff like the sniper rifle needs a boost. With the general power creep previously outrageous options look quite reasonable now.

As an aside my dream build a squad table would be...
Spoiler:
Base infantry squad - Vox, 2 special weapons (choice of Grenade launcher, flamer, sniper rifle and heavy stubber)
Sarge has lasgun option...
1 heavy weapon team can be added to the squad (taking it to 12 men)
1 or both special weapons can be replaced with better guns (Melta, Plasma)
Both special weapons can be replaced with a heavy weapons team with weapon



Automatically Appended Next Post:
And my slightly altered 3 fixes...

1) Make the damn thing simpler, strip away the strats, the ones that are always used bake into the units, bin the rest. Build on the speed aspects (so stuff like FRFSRF instead of doubling shots auto hits, other effects give fixed boosts/skip stages, all to make the army playable by the average human in a reasonable time).

2) Then sadly as well as the unit rebalancing you will need something extra. Personally I would go for a special rule like 'combined arms'. Represents infantry using armour for cover and armour using infantry to supress and disrupt enemy MANPAD/heavy weapon attacks. 'Combined arms' goes in as a keyword (stuff like hellhounds put infantry off and they wouldn't get it). Below is a badly written example.

If an infantry unit with combined arms comes under fire and are within 3" of a vehicle with 'combined arms' that is not engaged, take a LD test for the infantry. If successful the infantry use the tank for cover and the vehicle uses its weapons to distract the enemy and draw fire onto it. For any hits scored against the infantry roll to wound against the vehicle and any unsaved hits cause damage to it not the infantry.

If a vehicle with combined arms comes under attack and an infantry unit with combined arms is within 12" of the firing unit and has LoS tot he firing unit, the infantry unit may take a LD test. If passed make any wound rolls against the infantry squad as they valiantly draw fire onto themselves and supress the enemy weapons.

3) A bunch of other thematic changes, but that is for style/flavour, not balance.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/27 15:07:20


Post by: brainpsyk


Jarms48 wrote:
Alright. I did my quick fixes for the current codex. It's a lot more than 3.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sWyXhpYNt8JsV8kvHWYmcTKMzdhDTEN6o8KIDlz0UYs/edit?usp=sharing


Quick read, overall I like it, but it doesn't go far enough, it's an incremental improvement when we're not even playing the same game. Right now, there is 2 fundamental problems with the guard:

1 - inability to play the same game (Google "generals fighting the last war")
2 - inability to play the missions even if we get to play the same game.

We're still playing 8th edition, and our lack of output shows. Watching AoW40K yesterday, and their quote of "even Tau want to melee with us because Tau can fall back and shoot all game, and as soon as Guard get touched it's game over". So #1, we're not even playing the same game. Good players have realized the way to beat guard is to come straight at us. Even if they lose half their army turn 1 (which they won't), turn 2 they touch into us and it's game over. Literally, one squad of guardians or gaunts will shut down a LRBT for 2-3 turns.

To that end, the points cost on the LRBTs is still WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYY to high. A LRBT with battlecannon has HALF the output of the Onager, and that's including Grinding Advance, and the Onager isn't even that good (but it is a middle-of-the-meta unit). Even a LRBT Demo Cannon only kills 2-3 marines (~2 with AoC). Sixes auto-wound wasn't near enough, and AoC was a far bigger nerf to guard than 6sAW was a buff. So Grinding Advance needs to go away, then buff the output from there.

I disagree on the 50points for a guard unit. The problem is durability, and just being 50 points doesn't change that. Paying for wargear just means you don't take the wargear, and our output is pathetic enough already.

So, to fix #1, guard output needs to seriously increase. It needs to be enough that enemies can't just come straight at us, or just touch a tank and it's game over. While guard is digging themselves out of their own DZ, opponents control the board and win.

So, once we fix the output, then guard can start playing the missions. To that end, infantry have to change away from just being screening units for the tanks. For that, we need some kind durability on our ObSec. Bullgryns need a 4++ or 5+++ and get ObSec. Look Out Sir! from tanks, smoke launchers make a 6" bubble of -1 to hit / obscuring / fight last (it's once per game, triggered instead of shooting, it dang well better be good!). Cheaper and/or more durable Chimeras, and/or make Chimeras ObSec(5) when they have an ObSec unit in them. Chimera hulls need a pre-game move, and/or hellhounds need free outflank (and make their flamers assault). Something to threaten opponents on multiple vectors, otherwise opponents just have to deal with what's in front of them, and that's easy to do.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/27 15:09:26


Post by: JNAProductions


What Onager do you compare the Leman Russ to?

Because a Russ is definitely more durable (T8 2+ is miles better than T7 3+/5++), but what weapons are you comparing?


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/27 15:26:08


Post by: The_Real_Chris


Jarms48 wrote:


This is actually more thematic. There are trillions of Guardsmen. There's dozens of stories with ranks of Guardsmen with nothing but lasguns. Supported by tanks and artillery. Obviously the real answer is somewhere in the middle, there should be some Guardsmen with special weapons.


Having the 'conscript' squad just become regular stat'ed guardsmen but with no starting special weapons (and only flamer and grenade launcher options) as a core infantry choice should cover that.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/27 18:40:34


Post by: Pyroalchi


As far as "thematic changes" go: some things I considered during kitbashing projects that I personally would find pretty cool (and would give Guard something to make it special:

1. Minelaying mechanism: some units can lay anti tank/anti personel mines. Basically like the spore mines of the Tyranids, just static. Place an empty 25 mm token, if something touches it, it does mortal wounds. Bonus points for a minelaying vehicle that can throw out several of those a turn. Or if you can place them hidden before the battle. Option for Manticors to fire cluster rockets deploying d6 mines, option for Vendettas to drop cluster bombs with D6 mines.
2. Some real working fortifications. Bunkers (that are worth the points), turret emplacements, trenches (that are worth it), dragons teeth/czech hedgehogs, a mechanism to lay barbed wire as infantry barrier...
3. Smoke screen mechanism: for example an unarmed variant of the Sentinel that can place a number of 25mm tokens along its line of movement. Every token has a plushy "smoke screen" on top of it. No line of fire can be drawn through the smoke screen. As with the mines: option to shoot Smoke screens with artillery, maybe Basilisks, Mortars and wyverns
4. Vehicles that can explode on purpose when being destroyed. Make sure that blown up hellhound takes some enemies with it...


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/27 18:55:09


Post by: Some_Call_Me_Tim


Giving guard good bunkers/trenches that are cheap and they can deploy up to the half way mark would be pretty interesting.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/27 20:18:05


Post by: Kanluwen


Minefields are definitely coming. There's literally a transfer sheet section on the DKoK stuff just for them.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/27 21:03:59


Post by: OldMate


Being able to fire smoke shells onto targets and impeding their ability to hit would be hilarious.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/27 23:32:11


Post by: Tygre


A smoke barrage Stratagem that you can use if the enemy gets the first turn, might be useful.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/27 23:50:44


Post by: Jarms48


brainpsyk wrote:

Quick read, overall I like it, but it doesn't go far enough, it's an incremental improvement when we're not even playing the same game.


It's not suppose to be meta, it's purely there to bump us to at least 40% until the new codex supersedes it.

To that end, the points cost on the LRBTs is still WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYY to high. A LRBT with battlecannon has HALF the output of the Onager, and that's including Grinding Advance, and the Onager isn't even that good (but it is a middle-of-the-meta unit). Even a LRBT Demo Cannon only kills 2-3 marines (~2 with AoC). Sixes auto-wound wasn't near enough, and AoC was a far bigger nerf to guard than 6sAW was a buff. So Grinding Advance needs to go away, then buff the output from there.


Dunecrawler with the blasters into a marine squad kills 1.778 marines. The LRBT kills 1.792 marines, cause you have to factor the hull HB as well.

brainpsyk wrote:
I disagree on the 50points for a guard unit. The problem is durability, and just being 50 points doesn't change that. Paying for wargear just means you don't take the wargear, and our output is pathetic enough already.


I've somewhat improved durability. You could take Cadians and say Wilderness Survivors. So when you're not MMMing you get Light Cover.

 JNAProductions wrote:
What Onager do you compare the Leman Russ to?

Because a Russ is definitely more durable (T8 2+ is miles better than T7 3+/5++), but what weapons are you comparing?


In terms of durability brainpsyk has answered that.

"For tank durability, again I use 3 eradicators, as that's the meta choice, and is about the same output and cost as 3 attack bikes. So 3 Eradicators shooting at:
- a LRBTs (T8, AV2): median 5 +/-3 for std deviation, avg 5.0 damage
- Onager Dunecrawler (T7, AV3, 5++): median 5 (+/-3 std deviation), avg 5.3 damage.

Now using 4 Lascannon shots:
- a LRBTs (T8, AV2): median 3 +/-2 for std deviation, avg 3.6 damage
- Onager Dunecrawler (T7, AV3, 5++): median 3 (+/-2 std deviation), avg 3.5 damage.

With doctrines, the AP goes up, so the Onager actually does better than the LRBT, since the Onager has the 5++."

For output I measured the Russes against their closest counterparts. Vanquisher to the neutron laser, which is still superior but I don't want to make the Vanquisher any cheaper. Even if you used that 5 point difference to give the Vanquisher a lascannon it still loses against all targets.

Everything else to the blasters as that's the best option. Eradicator and Exterminator, with the heavy bolter also considered, are roughly equal to the blaster. Though with armour of contempt the Exterminator might have to go down to Vanquisher levels, as it's AP was entirely neutered. Only when you start getting to the other variants does that damage start to go up, thought the Battle Tank might need to go down too as it's barely better than an overcharged Executioner now too, which is why those variants cost more.



Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/28 15:34:14


Post by: brainpsyk


Jarms48 wrote:

To that end, the points cost on the LRBTs is still WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYY to high. A LRBT with battlecannon has HALF the output of the Onager, and that's including Grinding Advance, and the Onager isn't even that good (but it is a middle-of-the-meta unit). Even a LRBT Demo Cannon only kills 2-3 marines (~2 with AoC). Sixes auto-wound wasn't near enough, and AoC was a far bigger nerf to guard than 6sAW was a buff. So Grinding Advance needs to go away, then buff the output from there.


Dunecrawler with the blasters into a marine squad kills 1.778 marines. The LRBT kills 1.792 marines, cause you have to factor the hull HB as well.


The Twin Phosphor blasters (8 shots, S6, AP2, D2) does 3.5 (Median 4) damage against Marines, ignores cover, and is ~50% faster (M8" compared to the M5" of the LRBT to get the Grinding Advance). The LRBT with 6sAW, BC and HB has moved up to ~D2.1.

Jarms48 wrote:

brainpsyk wrote:
I disagree on the 50points for a guard unit. The problem is durability, and just being 50 points doesn't change that. Paying for wargear just means you don't take the wargear, and our output is pathetic enough already.


I've somewhat improved durability. You could take Cadians and say Wilderness Survivors. So when you're not MMMing you get Light Cover.

part of the problem is we're either 1-MMM! to get to an objective, or 2-we're hiding out of LOS. There's enough indirect, even post-nerf that even the hiding units still still die.

The fundamental problem there is that our cheap screens can't screen anymore. So our tanks, which rely on the screens, no longer have any screens. We can't back out of combat, and we can't shoot our way out of it. Even a TC with punisher does ~5W between the Punisher and the HB during normal shooting, for costing 33% more than Trajann.

With all the terrain on 9th edition tables, we're always at point-blank range with zero durability. Until we have a way of digging ourselves out of our own DZ, incremental improvements are not enough. As best as I can figure, we need some serious combination of
1 - points reduction
2 - output boost, on the order of 75-100%
3 - durability boost on tanks (like AoC or Ramshackle)
4 - tanks ignoring INFANTRY models within engagement range. Realistically, it should be "TANK models ignore enemy INFANTRY models when moving, but may not stop within 1" of any enemy models when moving. TANK models can move out of engagement range of INFANTRY models without penalty, and ignore abilities from INFANTRY models that prevent falling back or leaving combat/engagment range. This rule does not apply to enemy units with any MONSTER, VEHICLE or TITANIC keywords".

Jarms48 wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
What Onager do you compare the Leman Russ to?

Because a Russ is definitely more durable (T8 2+ is miles better than T7 3+/5++), but what weapons are you comparing?


In terms of durability brainpsyk has answered that.

"For tank durability, again I use 3 eradicators, as that's the meta choice, and is about the same output and cost as 3 attack bikes. So 3 Eradicators shooting at:
- a LRBTs (T8, AV2): median 5 +/-3 for std deviation, avg 5.0 damage
- Onager Dunecrawler (T7, AV3, 5++): median 5 (+/-3 std deviation), avg 5.3 damage.

Now using 4 Lascannon shots:
- a LRBTs (T8, AV2): median 3 +/-2 for std deviation, avg 3.6 damage
- Onager Dunecrawler (T7, AV3, 5++): median 3 (+/-2 std deviation), avg 3.5 damage.

With doctrines, the AP goes up, so the Onager actually does better than the LRBT, since the Onager has the 5++."

For output I measured the Russes against their closest counterparts. Vanquisher to the neutron laser, which is still superior but I don't want to make the Vanquisher any cheaper. Even if you used that 5 point difference to give the Vanquisher a lascannon it still loses against all targets.

Everything else to the blasters as that's the best option. Eradicator and Exterminator, with the heavy bolter also considered, are roughly equal to the blaster. Though with armour of contempt the Exterminator might have to go down to Vanquisher levels, as it's AP was entirely neutered. Only when you start getting to the other variants does that damage start to go up, thought the Battle Tank might need to go down too as it's barely better than an overcharged Executioner now too, which is why those variants cost more.







Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/28 15:37:48


Post by: Kanluwen


Onager v LRBT comparisons never seem to factor in that Onagers aren't in squadrons anymore.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/28 15:58:16


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Make Primaris Psykers equivalent to SM psykers, give them +1 to casts/deny

Make Wyrdvane Psykers +1 for every model after 3.

Make Sly Marbo auto-wound every model within 6" of him when he appears, d3 MWs.

Make Deathstrikes do a flat 10MW, starting with the target, and d6MW to everything within 30".

Make the Ratling sniper brothers now do Heavy 3 S6 AP3 d6 damage each, and convert all damage to MWs on 6's.

Baneblades should now get a special tank order, that can only be given by a Lord Commissar, "UNALIVE THAT TARGET MISTER!" Where any model or unit within the range of the main gun of the Blade variant is "Unalived" This unit is destroyed. This order can only be given once per game.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/28 16:25:53


Post by: Insectum7


^ hehe

Can I put my 2 cents in and suggest "Disalived" instead? I think the hard consonant sounds better and it might be more grammatically accurate, if that counts for anything (not much.)


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/28 16:47:18


Post by: ERJAK


 Insectum7 wrote:
^ hehe

Can I put my 2 cents in and suggest "Disalived" instead? I think the hard consonant sounds better and it might be more grammatically accurate, if that counts for anything (not much.)


Or you could just say 'kill'?

Twitter/Tiktok censor words are so unfunny that they shoot right past 'ironic use' and 'cringe comedy' and straight into 'makes me tired'.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/28 17:16:41


Post by: Insectum7


ERJAK wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^ hehe

Can I put my 2 cents in and suggest "Disalived" instead? I think the hard consonant sounds better and it might be more grammatically accurate, if that counts for anything (not much.)


Or you could just say 'kill'?

Twitter/Tiktok censor words are so unfunny that they shoot right past 'ironic use' and 'cringe comedy' and straight into 'makes me tired'.
Ok boomer?

I didn't even know there was a trend of twitter/tiktok sensor words, so boomer's on me I guess. Makes sense though. Whatever, I'll still pull 13375p34k from time to time for yuks.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/28 18:07:19


Post by: generalchaos34


 Insectum7 wrote:
ERJAK wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^ hehe

Can I put my 2 cents in and suggest "Disalived" instead? I think the hard consonant sounds better and it might be more grammatically accurate, if that counts for anything (not much.)


Or you could just say 'kill'?

Twitter/Tiktok censor words are so unfunny that they shoot right past 'ironic use' and 'cringe comedy' and straight into 'makes me tired'.
Ok boomer?

I didn't even know there was a trend of twitter/tiktok sensor words, so boomer's on me I guess. Makes sense though. Whatever, I'll still pull 13375p34k from time to time for yuks.


"see that target over there? I don't want to anymore"

"Make it unexist"

"Delete the target"

or, if you want to get victorian about it,

"that devilish thing offends my sensibilities, could you be a gentleman and ensure that it no longer interferes with my perception of the battlefield?"

with guard all orders are valid! Have some fun with it.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/28 18:46:11


Post by: Insectum7


"that devilish thing offends my sensibilities, could you be a gentleman and ensure that it no longer interferes with my perception of the battlefield?"

^Beautiful


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/04/29 12:05:51


Post by: OldMate


Or the more uncouthed side of the guard spectrum: "Take that fething thing out!"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I just can't reconcile melee combat against a tank with melee weapons or minig equipment(actual weapons designed for purpose; shaped charges or energy bombs on the other hand... yeah they should be great). Especially the high sided imperial guard tanks, which would seem to be pretty challenging to climb onto during combat, which would effectivelykeep enemy troops in the killzone. Any sudden movement of the vehicle left right backwards or forwards will kill infantry like they are not even there. And if they're not at the rear of the vehicle what the hell do they actually think they're going to achieve? Sure you breached the hull with a drill or super duper power weapon, its not a kinetic penetrator with tons of energy that will be dumped into the crew compartment setting fire to the ammunition stored in the vehicle or carrying through and destroying the engine, or a high explosive shaped charge which will penetrate the armour and deliver exsplosive force into the crew or engine compartment.
You might at great risk to yourself imobilse the vehicle (which would have put you in a prime position to get squished like a bug should the vehicle want to move) and if you imoblise it, its still a pretty formidible bunker. Weapons that cut or drill holes in tanks are only one stage in knocking the thing out. You actually then need to deposit exsplosive force or evil little gribbles into the vehicle to knock it out.

I think big dumb tracked tanks unlike walkers (which have some pretty obvious weaknesses, usually two of them, which if targeted will logically lead to said warmachine falling on its ass and becoming pretty combat ineffective) or hover tanks should be the bane of any melee squad that does not have dedicated anti tank weapons like melta charges, magnetic mines or the like. A 30-40ton leman russ should pop the shells of power armoured troops under its treads like a crocodile pops the shell of a turtle it has caught, whilst a baneblade or macharius should do the same to carnifexes and enemy walkers. A tank should on a ramming attack against something of less 'robustness class (based off strength/toughness maybe?)' if it rolls a 6 get special rule"gets target underneath hull" and just auto kills, as the tank has just used its greatest asset, tons of reinforced steel, to obliterate its target.
Instead of other factions wanting to close with guard tanks to destroy them, big dumb tanks should be terrifying.
After all, why would you hover over your enemies when you can crush and grind them to jam?


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/03 10:58:58


Post by: SYKOJAK


My 3 fixes.
#1: bring pack the platoon structure. Tyranids get 30 gant broods, Orks get 30 boy mobz, I want my 50 man platoons back.
#2: command squads should be an option to take with Company Commanders and/or Platoon Commanders. They should not be burning up an elite slot to do so
#3: we need more Fast Attack options. Split the Hellhounds, Devil Dogs, and Banewolves into 3 separate data sheets. And bring back the Rough riders.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/03 18:25:36


Post by: DeadliestIdiot


 OldMate wrote:
Or the more uncouthed side of the guard spectrum: "Take that fething thing out!"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I just can't reconcile melee combat against a tank with melee weapons or minig equipment(actual weapons designed for purpose; shaped charges or energy bombs on the other hand... yeah they should be great). Especially the high sided imperial guard tanks, which would seem to be pretty challenging to climb onto during combat, which would effectivelykeep enemy troops in the killzone. Any sudden movement of the vehicle left right backwards or forwards will kill infantry like they are not even there. And if they're not at the rear of the vehicle what the hell do they actually think they're going to achieve? Sure you breached the hull with a drill or super duper power weapon, its not a kinetic penetrator with tons of energy that will be dumped into the crew compartment setting fire to the ammunition stored in the vehicle or carrying through and destroying the engine, or a high explosive shaped charge which will penetrate the armour and deliver exsplosive force into the crew or engine compartment.
You might at great risk to yourself imobilse the vehicle (which would have put you in a prime position to get squished like a bug should the vehicle want to move) and if you imoblise it, its still a pretty formidible bunker. Weapons that cut or drill holes in tanks are only one stage in knocking the thing out. You actually then need to deposit exsplosive force or evil little gribbles into the vehicle to knock it out.

I think big dumb tracked tanks unlike walkers (which have some pretty obvious weaknesses, usually two of them, which if targeted will logically lead to said warmachine falling on its ass and becoming pretty combat ineffective) or hover tanks should be the bane of any melee squad that does not have dedicated anti tank weapons like melta charges, magnetic mines or the like. A 30-40ton leman russ should pop the shells of power armoured troops under its treads like a crocodile pops the shell of a turtle it has caught, whilst a baneblade or macharius should do the same to carnifexes and enemy walkers. A tank should on a ramming attack against something of less 'robustness class (based off strength/toughness maybe?)' if it rolls a 6 get special rule"gets target underneath hull" and just auto kills, as the tank has just used its greatest asset, tons of reinforced steel, to obliterate its target.
Instead of other factions wanting to close with guard tanks to destroy them, big dumb tanks should be terrifying.
After all, why would you hover over your enemies when you can crush and grind them to jam?


Might I introduce you to the wonderful world of Tank Shock and Death or Glory from rules of old. In 5th edition at least, tank shock was basically driving your tank through an enemy unit. The enemy makes a morale check. On failure, it falls back towards it's own table edge (this is old morale rules where units fall back towards their map edge). On success the enemy is given an option. Simply let the tank pass as though the enemy models weren't there...or (if you don't hate fun ) DEATH OR GLORY! Death or glory worked as follows: a single model from the tank shocked unit rolls a single ranged or melee attack (as in a single die, even if you normally get multiple attacks, e.g., assault 3). That attack automatically hits the tank's front armor and you resolve that attack normally (via vehicle damage tables). If the attack successfully manages to stun, destroy, or immobilize the tank, the tank stops in it's tracks (and potentially blows up, leaving the wreck as a new piece of terrain). If the attack fails, the tank shock continues as normal and the model that performed death or glory is crushed beneath the treads and is removed from play (regardless of wounds or saves or anything else).

The obvious choice (in terms of payoff) when presented with a tank shock was usually to just let the tank pass. But the fun choice was to attempt death or glory. Why did they get rid of this rule? It was so fun and flavorful.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/03 20:59:23


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


ERJAK wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^ hehe

Can I put my 2 cents in and suggest "Disalived" instead? I think the hard consonant sounds better and it might be more grammatically accurate, if that counts for anything (not much.)


Or you could just say 'kill'?

Twitter/Tiktok censor words are so unfunny that they shoot right past 'ironic use' and 'cringe comedy' and straight into 'makes me tired'.


I honestly don't know if you were referring to me here, but "Unalive that target" was a phrase I was politely informed existed from my CSM (Command Sgt Major) when he was ordering a bevy of 155 High Ex onto an enemy position in Afghanistan. If you want to call him a twitter/tiktok star, go ahead, but you need to furnish me with the URL, because that man spouted some of the funniest gak I've ever heard in my life.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/05 10:32:12


Post by: GiToRaZor


1. Bring back Platoons as one standard choice (1 Officer IN his Command Squad (Unit gets look out Sir but not character), 2-6 Infantry Squads, 0-1 Conscripts, 0-3 Heavy Weapon Squads) and lower their individual base price by 30%
2. Merge all the off-shot Units into ultra flexible Veterans (Crusaders, Special Weapon Squads, Gaunt's Ghosts, Inquisitorial Guard, Kasrkin etc.) - this helps with focusing on internal balance instead of just pumping more garbage into the roster
3. Change all W6 attacks weapons to 8 attacks


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/05 10:45:03


Post by: OldMate


DeadliestIdiot wrote:
 OldMate wrote:
Or the more uncouthed side of the guard spectrum: "Take that fething thing out!"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I just can't reconcile melee combat against a tank with melee weapons or minig equipment(actual weapons designed for purpose; shaped charges or energy bombs on the other hand... yeah they should be great). Especially the high sided imperial guard tanks, which would seem to be pretty challenging to climb onto during combat, which would effectivelykeep enemy troops in the killzone. Any sudden movement of the vehicle left right backwards or forwards will kill infantry like they are not even there. And if they're not at the rear of the vehicle what the hell do they actually think they're going to achieve? Sure you breached the hull with a drill or super duper power weapon, its not a kinetic penetrator with tons of energy that will be dumped into the crew compartment setting fire to the ammunition stored in the vehicle or carrying through and destroying the engine, or a high explosive shaped charge which will penetrate the armour and deliver exsplosive force into the crew or engine compartment.
You might at great risk to yourself imobilse the vehicle (which would have put you in a prime position to get squished like a bug should the vehicle want to move) and if you imoblise it, its still a pretty formidible bunker. Weapons that cut or drill holes in tanks are only one stage in knocking the thing out. You actually then need to deposit exsplosive force or evil little gribbles into the vehicle to knock it out.

I think big dumb tracked tanks unlike walkers (which have some pretty obvious weaknesses, usually two of them, which if targeted will logically lead to said warmachine falling on its ass and becoming pretty combat ineffective) or hover tanks should be the bane of any melee squad that does not have dedicated anti tank weapons like melta charges, magnetic mines or the like. A 30-40ton leman russ should pop the shells of power armoured troops under its treads like a crocodile pops the shell of a turtle it has caught, whilst a baneblade or macharius should do the same to carnifexes and enemy walkers. A tank should on a ramming attack against something of less 'robustness class (based off strength/toughness maybe?)' if it rolls a 6 get special rule"gets target underneath hull" and just auto kills, as the tank has just used its greatest asset, tons of reinforced steel, to obliterate its target.
Instead of other factions wanting to close with guard tanks to destroy them, big dumb tanks should be terrifying.
After all, why would you hover over your enemies when you can crush and grind them to jam?


Might I introduce you to the wonderful world of Tank Shock and Death or Glory from rules of old. In 5th edition at least, tank shock was basically driving your tank through an enemy unit. The enemy makes a morale check. On failure, it falls back towards it's own table edge (this is old morale rules where units fall back towards their map edge). On success the enemy is given an option. Simply let the tank pass as though the enemy models weren't there...or (if you don't hate fun ) DEATH OR GLORY! Death or glory worked as follows: a single model from the tank shocked unit rolls a single ranged or melee attack (as in a single die, even if you normally get multiple attacks, e.g., assault 3). That attack automatically hits the tank's front armor and you resolve that attack normally (via vehicle damage tables). If the attack successfully manages to stun, destroy, or immobilize the tank, the tank stops in it's tracks (and potentially blows up, leaving the wreck as a new piece of terrain). If the attack fails, the tank shock continues as normal and the model that performed death or glory is crushed beneath the treads and is removed from play (regardless of wounds or saves or anything else).

The obvious choice (in terms of payoff) when presented with a tank shock was usually to just let the tank pass. But the fun choice was to attempt death or glory. Why did they get rid of this rule? It was so fun and flavorful.


I do like that idea and that old rule-set makes a lot of sense, its pretty sensible, I guess they did the 'retreat to closest board edge' because this was back in the day when attacking a giant steel box in melee combat was considered insane, even by the designers of a table top game. I still maintain that melee assaults against an armoured steel box that can crush you like you're not there whilst having the high likelihood of not actually destroying the vehicle should be a last resort, or a very very bad circumstance to find yourself in.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/08 10:25:45


Post by: DoctorDanny


1) Vehicles give ' Look out sir' to infantry units within 3". Alternatively they could allow infantry to use the save of the vehicle unit.
2) Remove the 'move half range' part of Grinding Advance.
3) Leman Russ variant allways use top bracket regardless of wounds taken.

Explanation:
1) Infantry squads have zero staying power in the current game. Models that survive the turn will probably run in morale phase. It's fluffy and realistic to have the infantry advance with the tanks and use them for cover.
2) Our tanks are still top notch when it comes to shooting, especially the demolisher. However with the low BS they really need to shoot twice in order to be effective.
3) Same as above really, the movement and BS degradation cripple the tanks way too hard. Russes are simple, tough and reliable, they just keep working until they die.

Armour of Contempt really fragged the Guard over. We have way to many low AP weapons that turn our too few shots. Marines can ignore multilaser, heavy flamer, heavy bolter. Autocannons and battlecannons basically become -1. That's just silly really.

Oh and like the guy above me said, infantry assaulting a main battle tank should suffer. Badly.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/08 12:23:18


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Giving a 135ppm (Demolisher) unit a non degrading statline? No thank you. Especially when it has 2D6 S10 AP3 d6dam shooting. (With double shoot, or flat 12 with full payload). Yeah, I'll go ahead and say no thank you to that. I can MAYBE see it on a Superheavy like a Baneblade, but the Lehman russ shouldn't be the hardest thing on the battlefield. Hell, according to the fluff, a sufficiently pissed off space marine can rip the turret off of one with bare hands.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/08 14:54:29


Post by: DeadliestIdiot


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Giving a 135ppm (Demolisher) unit a non degrading statline? No thank you. Especially when it has 2D6 S10 AP3 d6dam shooting. (With double shoot, or flat 12 with full payload). Yeah, I'll go ahead and say no thank you to that. I can MAYBE see it on a Superheavy like a Baneblade, but the Lehman russ shouldn't be the hardest thing on the battlefield. Hell, according to the fluff, a sufficiently pissed off space marine can rip the turret off of one with bare hands.


I kind of agree with yo (unless we're going for 9th edition broken OP, which I'd rather not have). LRBT does need more survivability, but so do most vehicles. I'd like to see some core rules changes to give a small buff to survivability. Not sure what though.

On a different topic, I'd like to see them bring back the versatility of the vanquisher (similar to the SoB Castigator). Used to be an option between blast and nonblast round. Make it cost 5pt more for the option between battle cannon stat line and the vanquisher stat line. Also, maybe give it a bit more range since that was the vanquisher's other thing iirc (won't come into play often, but it'd be fluffy)


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/08 17:42:22


Post by: brainpsyk


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Giving a 135ppm (Demolisher) unit a non degrading statline? No thank you. Especially when it has 2D6 S10 AP3 d6dam shooting. (With double shoot, or flat 12 with full payload). Yeah, I'll go ahead and say no thank you to that. I can MAYBE see it on a Superheavy like a Baneblade, but the Lehman russ shouldn't be the hardest thing on the battlefield. Hell, according to the fluff, a sufficiently pissed off space marine can rip the turret off of one with bare hands.


Uhhh, you have no idea what you're talking about here.

- With a BS of 4, that 2d6 shots translates to TWO models killed (provided they are less than 3W each)
- Only moving 5" in a game where the victor is determined in the movement phase.
- Full Payload is for artillery, like Basilisks and Manticores, which a Basilisk kills ~1.2 model per turn, a manticore (against AoC) 1.7, and are in contention for the worse units in the game. (Even with FP)
- You could be referring to 'Hail of Fire', which is max shots against a vehicle (not even a monstrous creature) for 2CP, which is no big deal in comparison to the new Tau, Eldar, Nid units, and the strats in the new codexes (like new strats having to be capped a 6MW, when my entire tank only does 7 wounds total...)
- the LRBT with a DC is 150 points, not 135, more with side sponsons (the cheapest being 30 points for a pair...)
- Throw out 'fluff' reasoning. In this game a guy with a sword is more powerful than a Battle Cannon, and 60-ton main battle tanks run away after being touched by a snotling.





Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/08 17:44:07


Post by: tneva82


150 so if gw got game right should kill about 50pts when firing. Alas gw screws things up :(


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/08 19:33:05


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Here's a fun idea, lets stop focusing on the Heavy units of the Guard, since vehicles are uniformly trash along most factions of 9th. Let's focus on making guard's light/fast attack stuff actually good. Make Salamanders and Chimeras have the Assault transport rule, make Sentinels BS3+ and give the Hellhounds an "ignores Cover rule. I don't care how good your shield is. Chem cannons and Melta Cannons shouldn't have to argue with rolls.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/08 21:43:35


Post by: Jarms48


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Giving a 135ppm (Demolisher) unit a non degrading statline? No thank you. Especially when it has 2D6 S10 AP3 d6dam shooting. (With double shoot, or flat 12 with full payload). Yeah, I'll go ahead and say no thank you to that. I can MAYBE see it on a Superheavy like a Baneblade, but the Lehman russ shouldn't be the hardest thing on the battlefield. Hell, according to the fluff, a sufficiently pissed off space marine can rip the turret off of one with bare hands.


Demolishers are 150 points. You have to pay 15 for the heavy bolter. Also, full payload can't be used on Russes.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/09 15:49:51


Post by: brainpsyk


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Here's a fun idea, lets stop focusing on the Heavy units of the Guard, since vehicles are uniformly trash along most factions of 9th. Let's focus on making guard's light/fast attack stuff actually good. Make Salamanders and Chimeras have the Assault transport rule, make Sentinels BS3+ and give the Hellhounds an "ignores Cover rule. I don't care how good your shield is. Chem cannons and Melta Cannons shouldn't have to argue with rolls.

Heck ya!

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Right now, Guard relies on infantry to perform 4 roles to win a game. Until we break this cycle, Guard aren't playing 9th.

1 - Holding Objectives
2 - move blocking our opponent
3 - screening our heavy hitters
4 - killing stuff

this was all fine and dandy in 8th, where the game wasn't near as lethal. But in 9th, and the level of lethality, we still rely on Infantry to do too much.

Buffing chimeras to 9W -1D and ObSec(5) Open-topped for ~75 points means we can put 19 semi-durable Obsec Wounds on an objective. Tanks being able to ignore infantry while moving and can move out of engagement range of INFANTRY without penalty frees up the rest of our army from having to be 100% screened, and means we provide threats on multiple fronts.

It means we've removed #3 from the Infantry To-Do list, HotE (bad fix but oh well, it's something) boosts #4. So now Infantry only has to do #1 OR #2, and can do it while protected by being in a Chimera.

That frees up Hellhouds and Sentinels to strike flanks and weakly-held objectives, and with a Strat to make a vehicle ObSec. Now heavy support is on clean-up duty.

Otherwise, we have to be ridiculously OP to even play the game, and I'm getting quite tired of the codex creep. With these changes, we don't need to be that next-level of lethality. We just removed our limiters.





Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/09 20:30:16


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I will say, worst of any of the factions, save Space MahReens, Guard have too much worthless bloat.

Units that serve little to zero purpose:
Chimeras
Deathstrikes
Ogryns (Why when you could take Bullgryns instgead?)
Platoon Leaders
Astropaths
Wyrdvane Psykers
Base Taurox
All their named Characters (looking at YOU RAINE) Except PASK
Commissars
Lord Commissars
All their Flyers except Valks
All Baneblades
75% of the LRBT catalogue
Master of Ordinance
Fleet Officers
Servitors
Tech Priests
Medics
Vox operators
Hydras
The majority of their FW stuff

Half their entire book is trash or just above the line.

You can't fix this faction without burning it to the ground first. And you can't fix it in 3 steps.

Make everything but Troops, light vehicles, and Tanks Legends, and slowly re-do the datasheets. Cut the dead weight. Why are


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/09 20:36:10


Post by: DoctorDanny


Oh Fezzik, we disagree on some units on that list:

Platoon leaders: with the recent update FRFSRF can cause quite a lot of extra wounds. More orders = more shots = more wounds. (shame that they're taking up that elite slot though).

Astropath: I usually take these in spearheads to give my tank commanders that +1 sv and -1 hit.

Hydra: if you know your enemy takes flyers they can shoot the hydra first turn so your tanks survive a little longer. As an acutal AA tank it sucks big time.

Agree with all the rest. Lots of fluffy choices that serve no real purpose like commissars.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/09 20:58:32


Post by: waefre_1


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
...Units that serve little to zero purpose:
Chimeras...

Good to see your list has gotten even dumber since the last time you posted it. Will your next one be everything other than Guardsmen and LRBTs?


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/09 22:11:53


Post by: generalchaos34


honestly they should make guard vehicles dirt cheap, like less than 50pts, they don't accomplish much and should never be more expensive than the unit inside. Id love to see mech guard on the table.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/09 23:07:42


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Saying you'd take Hydras if you knew your opponents list says more about what type of player you would be given the opportunity, than the usefulness of that unit.

Astropaths are a dirt cheap psyker unit that can easily be replaced by a better, dedicated psyker unit.

Same with most guard units. They have a specialist unit for literally every occasion, and now, with the advent of 9th flipping the script on how to play 40k, the generalist role reigns supreme. A unit like Bullgryns are one of their best because it does a lot of things well. Soaks up heavy fire, hard to take down, and slaughters in melee with a priest backing them up.

A lot of Guard's problems were born of the fact that they are still fighting with units designed in editions that suited them. You can't do that now. It's why GW is hamfistedly trying their best to force Primaris as the standard. What with their Primaris only sub factions now. They are trying to cut out the old dead weight that's holding back the entire faction. What good is a Predator tank when you have infantry units that can do the job better? What good is a Basalisk when their are much better options available?


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/09 23:30:40


Post by: OldMate


I think making the standard chimera dirt cheap and reviving the storm chimera with options for a taurox battle cannon or twin auto cannons for the turretmaking that 5pts more than the current chimera. And just outright throwing the lasgun array away and saying 8 passengers may fire from the vehicle (6 from the sides, 2 from the hatch). I hate the look of those little paddly guns and useing chimeras as guntrucks(or you know, actual IFVs, should be a thing. I'd also make the taurox capable of being 'downgraded' to have base chimera guns and also being dirt cheap. Make the taurox faster, cheaper than a chimera and when + an infantry squad worth of passengers it should fill a fast attack slot.

I have issues with grinding advance. Namely that it only applies to LRBTs, like their mainline tank, you'd think that whatever tech they had in it to be able to shoot twice would translate to all imerial armour with the same calibre weapons and the same or greater turret spac, etc especially higher presigue vehicles such as the macharius which currently has the firepower of a base leman russ, despite boasting twice the guns.
Id also boost the BS of these more prestigious vehicles inherenrly up 1, as firstly, you're crews are going to have better training, secondly they are going to have better sights and targeting systems(i mean you'd hope so), thirdly they are probably going to be under less duress if they're in a giant and heavily armoured tank and fourthly a larger and more heavier vehicle actually provides a more stable firing platform. i mean look at the dimensions of a LRBT, its going to be quite hard to keep your gun on target after your first shot, its a breezy platform.

The second issue i have with grinding advance, because i am a bit pedantic, its attempting to make up for what the guard lost when they lost templates. But it does not apply to all units, such as artillery, which were great with templates. And heavy artillery should be great.
Basilisks should, be just for being a giant cannon which can fire across the entire board, one of the best units on the game. But they should be glass cannons and extremely susceptible to deep strikes outflanking or any fast attacks that break through the main line of resistance.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/10 00:18:12


Post by: Jarms48


 waefre_1 wrote:

Good to see your list has gotten even dumber since the last time you posted it. Will your next one be everything other than Guardsmen and LRBTs?


Whilst I don't agree with everything on his list, Chimeras are definitely trash. Why take a Chimera when your infantry are faster and can go through terrain? Just take more infantry.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/10 02:28:32


Post by: waefre_1


Jarms48 wrote:
 waefre_1 wrote:

Good to see your list has gotten even dumber since the last time you posted it. Will your next one be everything other than Guardsmen and LRBTs?


Whilst I don't agree with everything on his list, Chimeras are definitely trash. Why take a Chimera when your infantry are faster and can go through terrain? Just take more infantry.

The Chimera being trash right now doesn't justify nuking it. A nerf to MMM! would immediately boost the Chimera's value, and a lot of the rest of the issues with it are generic issues with vehicles and movement/table size that affect multiple armies, not just Guard. This is just Fezz's usual mindless whine that not everything in the Guard's repertoire is absolutely SSS rank and thus deserves to be wiped, which is utterly insane and which I've never seen him apply to any other faction.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/10 14:33:40


Post by: brainpsyk


It's not that those units are worthless, it's why those units are worthless

- They can't screen
- They have no output
- They have no durability
- They don't have ObSec
- They can't perform Actions
- They don't buff other units in any meaningful way

In short, none of those units have the tools necessary to play the 9th edition missions.

Why take an 85 point chimera that has no durability for screening (since it has no output and is not ObSec) when we can take a 60-point infantry squad with ObSec to do the same. Bullgryns are supposed to be a bully unit, but they lack durability, output and/or ObSec to actually bully anything but Gretchin.

Given Guard points costs, most Guard units have HALF the output of similar priced units, or have some restriction on them that was representative of an static 8th edition gunline army. We don't get re-rolls (or only get them on targets over 36" away on a 6x4 board...), our strats are overpriced, etc.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/10 15:32:45


Post by: DoctorDanny


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Saying you'd take Hydras if you knew your opponents list says more about what type of player you would be given the opportunity, than the usefulness of that unit.


Ok, was nice talking to you.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/10 17:23:51


Post by: VladimirHerzog


 DoctorDanny wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Saying you'd take Hydras if you knew your opponents list says more about what type of player you would be given the opportunity, than the usefulness of that unit.


Ok, was nice talking to you.


Yeah, imagine implying that taking a unit designed to be "sideboarded" when facing things its good against is TFG behavior.

Hydras really need the same kind of updage that Onager Dunecrawlers got, where they don't get -1 to hit against non flyers at the very least.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/10 19:04:36


Post by: waefre_1


brainpsyk wrote:
It's not that those units are worthless, it's why those units are worthless

- They can't screen
- They have no output
- They have no durability
- They don't have ObSec
- They can't perform Actions
- They don't buff other units in any meaningful way

In short, none of those units have the tools necessary to play the 9th edition missions.

...Which is eminently fixable with rules changes (either in-codex or in-BRB). If somebody wants to justify removing so many units, the onus would be on them to prove that these units cannot be fixed. So far all I've seen from Fezz is whining that "balans hard tho ;_;", which is contemptibly inadequate to the task especially in a thread where fixes for these issues have been actively discussed.
Why take an 85 point chimera that has no durability for screening (since it has no output and is not ObSec) when we can take a 60-point infantry squad with ObSec to do the same. Bullgryns are supposed to be a bully unit, but they lack durability, output and/or ObSec to actually bully anything but Gretchin.

Lore? Army composition? Scenarios? To tone down/add variety to your list because you're teaching someone else to play? Because not everyone plays in Karol's hellworld meta and a Chimera can be fine even if it's not 110% efficient at its role? Because someone just fething wants to? Seriously, it's not hard at all to come up with reasons to use "subpar" units.
Given Guard points costs, most Guard units have HALF the output of similar priced units, or have some restriction on them that was representative of an static 8th edition gunline army. We don't get re-rolls (or only get them on targets over 36" away on a 6x4 board...), our strats are overpriced, etc.

All of which, again, can be fixed with rules changes in the new 'dex. Will they? I don't know, we'll have to wait to find out (much as I hate to use the phrase). I do know what won't fix them, though - crippling the entire 'dex and gakking all over the playerbase by invalidating entire playstyles because Fezz, specifically, doesn't like that IG have options.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/10 21:53:18


Post by: OldMate


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Giving a 135ppm (Demolisher) unit a non degrading statline? No thank you. Especially when it has 2D6 S10 AP3 d6dam shooting. (With double shoot, or flat 12 with full payload). Yeah, I'll go ahead and say no thank you to that. I can MAYBE see it on a Superheavy like a Baneblade, but the Lehman russ shouldn't be the hardest thing on the battlefield. Hell, according to the fluff, a sufficiently pissed off space marine can rip the turret off of one with bare hands.


Well a sufficiently pissed off spacemarine can also apparently beat an adeptus custodes or an avatar of Khaine to death with his bare hands if you go by the fluff. Its also stated that custodes can slay spacemarines like spacemarines slay guardsmen(although a sufficiently pissed off Sly Marbo could also probably beat a squad of CSM to death with their own bolt guns as well), and that hormigaunts can cut through power armour(cut being the active word here, not stab into the gaps between plates, but cut through it, like whack whack there goes a limb). There is a lot of factional BS in the fluff it is very contradictory and does not always make sense and is probably not meant to be taken at face value. I mean, no wonder why your hyperthetical marine was so pissed off, he must have misplaced his melta charges...


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/10 21:59:53


Post by: Voss


brainpsyk wrote:
It's not that those units are worthless, it's why those units are worthless

- They can't screen
- They have no output
- They have no durability
- They don't have ObSec
- They can't perform Actions
- They don't buff other units in any meaningful way

In short, none of those units have the tools necessary to play the 9th edition missions.

Why take an 85 point chimera that has no durability for screening (since it has no output and is not ObSec) when we can take a 60-point infantry squad with ObSec to do the same. Bullgryns are supposed to be a bully unit, but they lack durability, output and/or ObSec to actually bully anything but Gretchin.

Given Guard points costs, most Guard units have HALF the output of similar priced units, or have some restriction on them that was representative of an static 8th edition gunline army. We don't get re-rolls (or only get them on targets over 36" away on a 6x4 board...), our strats are overpriced, etc.


The horrifying thing is, I'm half expecting Bullgryn and things like them to get a nerf or a points hike, because they show up in large units in some influencer videos (like Tabletop Tactics, who are among the folks that get sent playtest stuff. Though they take them because they like them, mostly.)


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/11 12:45:39


Post by: DeadliestIdiot


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I will say, worst of any of the factions, save Space MahReens, Guard have too much worthless bloat.

Units that serve little to zero purpose:
Chimeras
Deathstrikes
Ogryns (Why when you could take Bullgryns instgead?)
Platoon Leaders
Astropaths
Wyrdvane Psykers
Base Taurox
All their named Characters (looking at YOU RAINE) Except PASK
Commissars
Lord Commissars
All their Flyers except Valks
All Baneblades
75% of the LRBT catalogue
Master of Ordinance
Fleet Officers
Servitors
Tech Priests
Medics
Vox operators
Hydras
The majority of their FW stuff

Half their entire book is trash or just above the line.

You can't fix this faction without burning it to the ground first. And you can't fix it in 3 steps.

Make everything but Troops, light vehicles, and Tanks Legends, and slowly re-do the datasheets. Cut the dead weight. Why are


All this "bloat" is extremely fluffy units. While I agree that focusing on a smaller set of data sheets would make balancing easier, that can be done internally. Once the core units are feeling good, expand the focus. And while chimeras aren't great, getting rid of them would get rid of mechanized guard lists as an option. I came to guard for the tanks (big gun go boom makes me happy lol). I have always run mech guard. Other people run pure infantry guard and the fact that guard can accommodate both and everything in between is something we need to keep in the codex.

Also, if you play casual, I suggest trying emperor's blade (yes, I know, that's why I said casual). Overwatch on a 4+ with all of a chimera's weapons is fun and makes your opponent second guess things. Plus you can overwatch again on 6+ with the usual overwatch strat.

In more comical news, I've come to the conclusion that the only way I'd take a deathstike is if it cost less than 5 points and I had the points left over (I'm joking of course, at some point it becomes cheap enough that it's viable as a heavy bolter or flamer platform)


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/11 13:05:29


Post by: Pyroalchi


I think two things you could do to the deathstrike that would also make more sense regarding it's an ICBM on a very small battlefield:

1. instead of making damage it creates VP. If your opponent cannot keep you from firing an ICBM on a command bunker off table, you deserve some VP
2. its a giant Cyclops demolition charge. If you fracked up enough that the enemy came that close to your ICBM you might as well use it as a suicide charge. But then it should really do some damage.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/11 20:28:45


Post by: Dirk Reinecke


The big issue with the current Guard codex is that it was made for a different codex where the rules for detachments and command points were very different. In fact, it was even before the rule of 3 became official.

So for minor rules that can be fit into the next dataslate I would do the following.

1) All the regimental orders count as ordinary orders. The infantry ones as well as the tank ones. The Tallarn order can be very useful. The other regimental orders can also help in a very situational fashion.

2) Make it so that 1 lascannon and 2 heavy bolters don't cost 50pts for the baneblade so one can run one with sponsons without it driving up the price 25%

3) This is the big one, the biggest problem with the guard is that it gives up victory points so easily with almost any of the rules. So I would turn that around. The imperial guard should get a faction secondary that counts 1vp for each Guard unit destroyed. It is thematic in that high command would consider a unit that isn't taking heavy casualties as one that simply is trying hard enough. The extra 15 vp from this would make a big difference in allowing the imperial guard to actually win battles.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/11 20:50:55


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Dirk Reinecke wrote:
The big issue with the current Guard codex is that it was made for a different codex where the rules for detachments and command points were very different. In fact, it was even before the rule of 3 became official.

So for minor rules that can be fit into the next dataslate I would do the following.

1) All the regimental orders count as ordinary orders. The infantry ones as well as the tank ones. The Tallarn order can be very useful. The other regimental orders can also help in a very situational fashion.

2) Make it so that 1 lascannon and 2 heavy bolters don't cost 50pts for the baneblade so one can run one with sponsons without it driving up the price 25%

3) This is the big one, the biggest problem with the guard is that it gives up victory points so easily with almost any of the rules. So I would turn that around. The imperial guard should get a faction secondary that counts 1vp for each Guard unit destroyed. It is thematic in that high command would consider a unit that isn't taking heavy casualties as one that simply is trying hard enough. The extra 15 vp from this would make a big difference in allowing the imperial guard to actually win battles.


I actually like 1 and 3, but 2 is wrong for several reasons.

Currently, there is no rule stating how many sponsons a Baneblade can take. It is required to have at least 2, but it just says "You can add two more for X cost". IF they clear that up and say you can only have a max of 4 per tank, I see no issue in making them baked into the total cost, instead of extra.

I do think that Baneblades are kinda a broken thing that either need a different game, or a completely different ruleset to actually be viable. You can't give them Invulns, that would be broken, and you can't give them better BS/WS as that would also be borked. Again, and I hate to say it because they are easily my favorite model in my collection, but they really have zero use in current 40k, where small teams of units are the key these days.

I think we should take a frank look at the possibility of allowing Guard to Break the Ro3 or the other universal game rules that hamper other horde armies. Let them DS on turn 1, or let them pick and choose the order of phases? Shoot, combat Psychic, Move, then the opponent goes.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/11 21:13:21


Post by: Sledgehammer


#1 acknowledge that the guard is not a monolith. The guard is THE most varied fighting force in the universe. From elite shock troops, stealth specialists, siege aficionados, armored might, human waves, and air cavalry, the guard has it all. Why i literally cannot even run a list with more than two valkyries or three veterans is beyond me. I can no longer even run my army anymore under the current rule of 3 and aircraft limitations....

#2 fix the lasgun and veterans / troopers in general. When a unit only really exists to sit there on an objective, or be cannon fodder I tend to not find that interesting, fun, or engaging. I play guard for the guardsmen and their heroics. When that's impossible why would I want to play guard?

#3 give us fast attack options that actually work. I would like to actually be able to play aggressively rather than stand back and do nothing...


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/11 22:13:33


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


 Sledgehammer wrote:
#1 acknowledge that the guard is not a monolith. The guard is THE most varied fighting force in the universe. From elite shock troops, stealth specialists, siege aficionados, armored might, human waves, and air cavalry, the guard has it all. Why i literally cannot even run a list with more than two valkyries or three veterans is beyond me. I can no longer even run my army anymore under the current rule of 3 and aircraft limitations....

#2 fix the lasgun and veterans / troopers in general. When a unit only really exists to sit there on an objective, or be cannon fodder I tend to not find that interesting, fun, or engaging. I play guard for the guardsmen and their heroics. When that's impossible why would I want to play guard?

#3 give us fast attack options that actually work. I would like to actually be able to play aggressively rather than stand back and do nothing...


I think this is a really great point. Guard are built with the idea of SUPER DEFENSIVE play in mind. Obviously this style of gameplay is no longer valid, or even possible. How do we force guard to play offensive style, but still keep them as "guard style"? This is where I think heavily focusing on infantry rushes, deep striking, etc. Loading up 3 transports or Valks, with Full plasma/Melta Scions and dropping them turn 1 in the enemy flanks or rear is a really great feeling. That should be rewarded, more than just sitting back and holding the line with Wyverns and Mortars/HB teams.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/11 22:20:52


Post by: Unit1126PLL


My solution to IG has been to play 4th edition with the excellent 3.5 book, as well as the sub lists like Armored Company and the artillery company lists, Armored Battlegroup (the dilemmas for a tank lover!), Elysians, etc.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/12 01:02:08


Post by: Jarms48


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Here's a fun idea, lets stop focusing on the Heavy units of the Guard, since vehicles are uniformly trash along most factions of 9th. Let's focus on making guard's light/fast attack stuff actually good. Make Salamanders and Chimeras have the Assault transport rule, make Sentinels BS3+ and give the Hellhounds an "ignores Cover rule. I don't care how good your shield is. Chem cannons and Melta Cannons shouldn't have to argue with rolls.


Why would you make Sentinels BS3+? There's no lore reason for that at all. Sentinels are also one of the best options Guard still have left. Incredibly durable for their point cof sts, decently mobile, and can count for a ton of obsec models with the Cadian stratagem. The only issue with Sentinels current is their weapon upgrade costs. Drop each of those by 5 points and they would be fine, IE:

- Heavy flamer or autocannon: 5 point upgrade.
- Missile launcher, lascannon, or plasma cannon: 10 point upgrade.

Also just buff the Sentinel Chainsword to give +1 Attack like regular Chainswords would be nice too.

Salamanders aren't transports. They're also Legends. If they do come back, they should be somewhere between Sentinels and Hellhounds. Faster than both, more durable than Sentinels but less durable than Hellhounds, with twice the firepower as Sentinels.

Hellhounds could be fixed by points, something around:
- Bane Wolf: 85 points.
- Devil Dog: 90 points.
- Hellhound: 100 points.

Would make them okay. If the Bane Wolf chem cannon was increased to 12 inch range that would be nice. Inferno cannon to 18 would be nice as well. Then the Devil Dog melta cannon to heavy 3, which could probably make it go up to around 95 - 100 points.

The Chimera would be more useful when MMM is nerfed. That really is its biggest issue right now. I'd also do the same thing as Sentinels and reduce its weapon upgrade costs by 5 points. Meaning a double heavy bolter or heavy flamer Chimera is 80 points rather than 85 points.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I will say, worst of any of the factions, save Space MahReens, Guard have too much worthless bloat.

Units that serve little to zero purpose:
Chimeras
Deathstrikes
Ogryns (Why when you could take Bullgryns instgead?)
Platoon Leaders
Astropaths
Wyrdvane Psykers
Base Taurox
All their named Characters (looking at YOU RAINE) Except PASK
Commissars
Lord Commissars
All their Flyers except Valks
All Baneblades
75% of the LRBT catalogue
Master of Ordinance
Fleet Officers
Servitors
Tech Priests
Medics
Vox operators
Hydras
The majority of their FW stuff

Half their entire book is trash or just above the line.


- Chimeras: Already covered above.
- Deathstrikes: There's no saving them right now. They need to be completely redone. Either make it a traditional weapon, one-shot only and devastating damage. Keep the mortal wound thing but make it more devastating. Even some kind of VP generation could be interesting, maybe 3 primary points on a turn it's successfully fired. Anyway GW choose to go, they have to make it more reliable to actually fire in the first place.
- Ogryns: Presumably GW will give both Ogryns and Bullgryns a 5+++ save, as well as the new Bodyguard ability and remove the Ogryn Bodyguard datasheet. Ogryns at 20 points per model would be alright with that and their current datasheet.
- Platoon Leaders: They're fine at the moment, they do exactly what they need to. Provide orders. Though presumably GW will make them some kind of secondary HQ choice with RR1 to Wound auras. Like SM Lieutenants.
- Astropaths: Are also fine at the moment, everyone takes them over Primaris Psykers and Wyrdvanes. That's why they keep getting nerfed. In fact they've become even more useful for denying Armour of Contempt armies light cover. If anything, Guard just need better Psychic Powers in general.
- Wyrdvane Pskyers: They are trash. A point drop to 5 points per model could make them useful, either as cheap batteries for the stratagem or the ability to field units of 6 for 30 points for the +2 to cast. One way to fix them is remove the single D6 and just leave them as regular Pskyers, maybe allow them to give their modifier to a nearby Primaris instead of using it for themselves.
- Taurox needs to be far cheaper. If it was 75 points it wouldn't be terrible. Better firepower and speed to the Chimera, but less transport capacity and durability.
- Most named characters need to be cheaper as well, or just have better stat-lines. Yarrick for example should be around 80 - 90 points, not 105.
- Commissars and Lord Commissars either need to be better support characters or better fighting characters. Lord Commissars could go up to 5 wounds and 4 attacks, then they might be okay for 40 points. Means they can actually do something with their power sword or power fist.
- Other flyers, again, either massive point drops or better weapons.
- Baneblades: Need BS3+, if a Tank Commander gets it they should too. They also need some kind of -1 damage, 2+ save (still stupid the Russ got a 2+ and not the Baneblade), and more wounds. Sponsons could also be free, and the additional sponson option removed.
- Russes: Either need to be both cheaper and have better point costs between variants. Though, I assume GW will buff their weapons in the next codex. From rumours they're getting +1 to Hit on turret weapons as well as the ability for turret weapons to shoot outside engagement range. If they also get -1 damage and 14 wounds they'd be okay.
- Master of Ordinance: Should be able to buff any Artillery unit, as well as have their minimum range reduced to 18 inch.
- Fleet Officers: If aircraft get better than they'd become more useful.
- Servitors: Honestly, they should just become additional models to all Tech-Priest and Tech-Marine characters. As well as make those units repair ability more reliable. So each Servitor with a servo arm could add +1 to a repair roll, so instead of D3 you could repair flat 3 wounds if you have 2 Servitors accompanying your Tech-Priest.
- Tech-Priest profile should just match the Ad-Mech one. If they get the ability to give a +1 to Hit to Guard vehicles that would be nice.
- Medics: All they need is the Apothecary treatment. 6 inch aura of 6+++, heals D3 lost wounds on a single model, then a stratagem to revive models. Say D3 Guardsmen or 1 Ogryn.
- Voxes: Should be treated exactly like Data Tethers.
- Hydras: Their statline and weapons are fine, all that needs to change is their weapon ability. Get rid of the debuff against non-flyers. Keep the +1 against flyers and they'd be fine.
- FW stuff either need massive point drops, better statlines, or better synergy with the rest of the codex. Such as inclusion with stratagems.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
My solution to IG has been to play 4th edition with the excellent 3.5 book, as well as the sub lists like Armored Company and the artillery company lists, Armored Battlegroup (the dilemmas for a tank lover!), Elysians, etc.


What I like to do is use the 5th edition codex, with the 3.5 edition codex and armoured company doctrines.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/12 10:28:52


Post by: AtoMaki


Jarms48 wrote:
[Why would you make Sentinels BS3+? There's no lore reason for that at all.

Sentinel pilots are supposed to be elite-ish, or at least a cut above the normal guardsman. This is in the lore for quite some time, and I think in the old RPG the Sentinel pilot even gets extra Ballistic Skill, so there is that.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/12 14:30:37


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I feel like a "command" sentinel wouldn't be a bad option. Gives nearby (12"ish range) sentinels +1 to BS, and +6" range on shooting. Has to be a scout sentinel.

Make Armored Sentinels T7 W9, and Scout Versions T6 with W7 and an 14" move, and they'd be worth actually taking as harrying units. A Squad of 3 with HFs actually gives a pretty awesome Alpha Strike, with 3d6 Auto-hitting S5 AP1 D1, for only 132 points. Even on a large map, with Scout move the should be able to get in close and do good work turn 1.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/12 14:36:55


Post by: I_am_a_Spoon


What if Tank Commanders were allowed to operate Baneblades? Or most vehicles? I.e. 'any vehicle may take a Tank Commander upgrade, in which case that vehicle occupies a HQ slot instead of its usual slot'.

In a Baneblade for example, this would help solve both the Baneblade's poor efficiency and the Tank Commander's vulnerability. Ideally it'd be coupled with more auras and fewer self-orders. And above all else it's just fluffy for the tank commander to be operating out of the biggest, meanest tank on the battlefield.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/12 14:43:16


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


 I_am_a_Spoon wrote:
What if Tank Commanders were allowed to operate Baneblades? Or most vehicles? I.e. 'any vehicle may take a Tank Commander upgrade, in which case that vehicle occupies a HQ slot instead of its usual slot'.

In a Baneblade for example, this would help solve both the Baneblade's poor efficiency and the Tank Commander's vulnerability. Ideally it'd be coupled with more auras and fewer self-orders. And above all else it's just fluffy for the tank commander to be operating out of the biggest, meanest tank on the battlefield.


Do you really need to guess? A Tank commander would need a group of tanks to command. What lists have two or more Baneblades in them?


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/12 15:50:10


Post by: waefre_1


Why lock it by vehicle type? Company Commanders are still allowed to order Veterans same as Heavy Weapons Teams same as Infantry Squads so long as they share a <Regiment>, right? Just do something similar for TCs - "Unit may issue orders to any <Regiment> <Vehicle>".


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/12 15:56:17


Post by: Gadzilla666


 waefre_1 wrote:
Why lock it by vehicle type? Company Commanders are still allowed to order Veterans same as Heavy Weapons Teams same as Infantry Squads so long as they share a <Regiment>, right? Just do something similar for TCs - "Unit may issue orders to any <Regiment> <Vehicle>".

Which is already in the balance dataslate. So I suspect it will be in the actual codex. Though it does exclude TITANIC vehicles from receiving Orders, for "REASONS".


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/12 17:20:41


Post by: brainpsyk


Jarms48 wrote:
- Hydras: Their statline and weapons are fine, all that needs to change is their weapon ability. Get rid of the debuff against non-flyers. Keep the +1 against flyers and they'd be fine.

Ummm... what? 4 Autocannons is fine? For 115 points? With AP1? On a T6 chassis?

You're better off with 4 heavy bolters, for like 80 points. Anything that gets exposed in 9th is dead, and it's not like the Hydra is arty that stays hidden. The hydra has to pop out... and survive.

4 Predator ACs with 2d3 shots at D3, with +1 to hit vs. fliers while ignoring 'Hard to Hit' penalties, then 115 points is still overpriced, because the hydra is a niche unit whose primary target is flyers who can move 12-18" (or more) and hide behind cover. Anything with a 4+ save gets ~2-3 hits. At D3 that's respectable for the DE-era meta, but flyers are T7, and T8 now. Even that needs to be upped for the Eldar & Bug meta.

That's why I proposed the strat to let the a Hyrda platoon fire in the opponent's movement and/or charge phase. At least then the Hydra can disrupt enemy movement, and potentially pick off key unit(s) at inopportune times.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/12 18:14:22


Post by: ccs


brainpsyk wrote:
Jarms48 wrote:
- Hydras: Their statline and weapons are fine, all that needs to change is their weapon ability. Get rid of the debuff against non-flyers. Keep the +1 against flyers and they'd be fine.

Ummm... what? 4 Autocannons is fine? For 115 points? With AP1? On a T6 chassis?

You're better off with 4 heavy bolters, for like 80 points. Anything that gets exposed in 9th is dead, and it's not like the Hydra is arty that stays hidden. The hydra has to pop out... and survive.




brainpsyk wrote:
That's why I proposed the strat to let the a Hyrda platoon fire in the opponent's movement and/or charge phase. At least then the Hydra can disrupt enemy movement, and potentially pick off key unit(s) at inopportune times.


But.... wouldn't the Hydra need to be exposed, & somehow still alive, to manage that disruption?


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/12 19:53:19


Post by: Bobthehero


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
My solution to IG has been to play 4th edition with the excellent 3.5 book, as well as the sub lists like Armored Company and the artillery company lists, Armored Battlegroup (the dilemmas for a tank lover!), Elysians, etc.


If only Stormtroopers had AP 3 guns back then


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/12 19:55:29


Post by: ph34r


 Bobthehero wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
My solution to IG has been to play 4th edition with the excellent 3.5 book, as well as the sub lists like Armored Company and the artillery company lists, Armored Battlegroup (the dilemmas for a tank lover!), Elysians, etc.


If only Stormtroopers had AP 3 guns back then
You'll be AP 5 ripping through those fierce eldar guardians and guardsmen with their 5+ saves! Unless they're in cover.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/12 20:43:05


Post by: Bobthehero


I'll not be doing anything since there was no way to run Stormtroopers on their own, now that I think about it, lol. But I do think making them AP 3 was a really good design choice, to make Stormies more than just Tac Marines -1.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/12 21:18:34


Post by: JohnnyHell


Three fixes?

1) Get rid of orders and make officers have simple auras.

B) Basic Infantrymen should be basic. No shots and rerolls for days just lasguns and weight of numbers.

iii) Make Ogryns cool and deadly and nerf Bullgryns because Bullgryn is a stupid word.

Bonus round: bring back Rough Riders. Just because.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/12 22:52:52


Post by: Sledgehammer


 JohnnyHell wrote:


B) Basic Infantrymen should be basic. No shots and rerolls for days just lasguns and weight of numbers.


And do you realistically expect people to buy enough guardsmen to even make that possible? We've looking at a situation where cadians are $50 a kit for 60 points of standard guardsmen. Kreig are $60 for that same point value as well. How many people are actually going to want to pay that kind of price, assemble them, paint them, and field them when you know for certain that $150 dollars isn't even enough to scratch the surface of an enemy unit.

I can get a lrbt for $60 dollars right now. Why the hell would i ever want to buy guardsmen and waste my money.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/12 22:59:56


Post by: brainpsyk


ccs wrote:
brainpsyk wrote:
Jarms48 wrote:
- Hydras: Their statline and weapons are fine, all that needs to change is their weapon ability. Get rid of the debuff against non-flyers. Keep the +1 against flyers and they'd be fine.

Ummm... what? 4 Autocannons is fine? For 115 points? With AP1? On a T6 chassis?

You're better off with 4 heavy bolters, for like 80 points. Anything that gets exposed in 9th is dead, and it's not like the Hydra is arty that stays hidden. The hydra has to pop out... and survive.


brainpsyk wrote:
That's why I proposed the strat to let the a Hyrda platoon fire in the opponent's movement and/or charge phase. At least then the Hydra can disrupt enemy movement, and potentially pick off key unit(s) at inopportune times.

But.... wouldn't the Hydra need to be exposed, & somehow still alive, to manage that disruption?


Depends. With the strat you can be behind cover and shoot at a charging unit. If the Hydra is exposed, then it can shoot in the opponent's movement phase before being picked up. In either case it's not strong in terms of overall output, but strong in that it can force opponents to make longer charges if they don't want to get shot, or get shot and charge with weakened unit, or play cagey to avoid LoS which buys time and allows counter-play.

Think of it this way. If a DE player is planning on charging with Incubi and their raider, but using the raider first to soak overwatch, and there's a Hydra sitting there. How would that strat impact your plans? Alternatively, how do these units now have to change their playstyle:
- Swooping Hawks
- Voidweavers
- Flying Hive Tyrants that pop-in and then retreat on their own turn
- all jump pack units
- etc.

Just the threat of "going hot" with 8d3 shots is terrifying, even if it's normally 2-3 models. That threat, regardless of how effective it really is with AoC essentially ignoring the AP1, and big bugs being T8, will force opponents to play around it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 JohnnyHell wrote:
Three fixes?

1) Get rid of orders and make officers have simple auras.

B) Basic Infantrymen should be basic. No shots and rerolls for days just lasguns and weight of numbers.

iii) Make Ogryns cool and deadly and nerf Bullgryns because Bullgryn is a stupid word.

Bonus round: bring back Rough Riders. Just because.


Have to disagree here on #1 and #2. Auras are good for a lot of armies, because those characters (SM captains for example) lead from the front. Guard commanders, and the hallmark of a good commander is they don't lead with their fists. Having an aura would mean they're in the thick of things, rather than directing the battle. However, if we bring back platoons, then Lts should have a RR1s to wound aura, since they will be leading from the front. Tanks in squadrons would get the RR1sTW aura from their platoon leader. Arty squadrons get RR1sTW from the Master of Ordinance, Master of the Fleet gives RR1sTW to Hydras.

My idea, rather than an aura, was to have the Warlord pick an objective marker, and AM units get to RR1s to hit against any unit within 3" of that Objective Marker. Now the entire AM army is focused on a singular purpose. (Inspiration: Movie 'Patton' - "Hit them hard on the right flank. We've got them by the nose, kick them in the ").

Totally agree on the Rough Riders, or some kind of Cavalry unit. Horse riders, wolf riders, mechanical hounds, something! Sooooo cool and thematic.

Making chimeras open-topped, ObSec(5) and semi-durable means we can put infantry in them and have some durability to contest the point. Being open topped means infantry can pluck wounds off anything that gets close freeing up heavy-hitters to go splatter something else. It's just that right now, guard stuff is too expensive, lacks ObSec and/or the firepower to actually accomplish anything. But taking away their weapons and orders means we take away their firepower, and any reason to take them.



Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/12 23:30:31


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


What about instead of FRFSRF, they instead made Infantry squads and any las unit, Scions, etc. (Must be all Lasrifles) have a dual shooting by unit profile?

All Lasguns are RF1 on "aimed" fire, and RF3 on "Full Auto". Balance it out by making full auto BS5. thematic, practical, and removes a stupid mechanic of having to order soldiers to make them shooty. Just have them Full Auto, or aimed shooting.

Agree with dropping re-rolls for las. Just make it a strat. or an Aura.

Expand the Aura units.

Commissars give Ld10, and +1 to BS. Infantry only.

Priests give +1 to Armor and +1 to attacks. Infantry only.

Company Commanders give Re-roll 1s, and +6" Range. Infantry only.

Platoon leaders give Re-roll 1s and double movement distance. Infantry Only.

Tank Commanders give +1 to wound other vehicles, and Extra 6" range. Vehicles only.

Tempestor Primes give +1 to BS and double shoot to Las weapons only. Infantry and Taurox Primes.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/12 23:33:51


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Bobthehero wrote:
I'll not be doing anything since there was no way to run Stormtroopers on their own, now that I think about it, lol. But I do think making them AP 3 was a really good design choice, to make Stormies more than just Tac Marines -1.


Yes there was. Run a command squad in carapace Armor with plasma guns, a Senior Officer in carapace Armor with whatever, and take the Grenadiers doctrine to put Storm Troopers in the army as troops choices, then fill your Elites with storm Troopers as well. Then ally in some Inquisitorial Storm Troopers for the lulz.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/13 01:07:56


Post by: Bobthehero


Oh right, I forgot about that.

Just a bit sad that you might as well be playing Space Marines with that set up, still, point taken.

(I really like the AP on the hotshots, lol)


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/13 01:39:37


Post by: Sledgehammer


 Bobthehero wrote:
Oh right, I forgot about that.

Just a bit sad that you might as well be playing Space Marines with that set up, still, point taken.

(I really like the AP on the hotshots, lol)
I would actually use storm troopers if their weapons had a range of 24inchs...

I mean the range is basically the same as an airsoft gun...


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/13 02:09:13


Post by: Bobthehero


There's a Stormtrooper regiment for that


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/13 02:17:01


Post by: RegularGuy


Bring back easy build guardsmen at a low price point. Make it less economically challenging to build a 200+ infantry army.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/13 05:59:15


Post by: Jarms48


brainpsyk wrote:

Ummm... what? 4 Autocannons is fine? For 115 points? With AP1? On a T6 chassis?

You're better off with 4 heavy bolters, for like 80 points. Anything that gets exposed in 9th is dead, and it's not like the Hydra is arty that stays hidden. The hydra has to pop out... and survive.


4 72 inch Autocannons, with +1 or +2 to Hit against Aircraft. That way no debuff against ground targets. You’re also forgetting it also has a Heavy Bolter as well. It’s also 110 points, not 115. The only thing making it bad now is the fact you’re hitting everything without Fly on a 5+, remove that and it’s actually not too bad. It’s 10 points per T6 wound, and has 5 heavy weapons.

Where are you getting 4 Heavy Bolters for 80 points from? A 3 Heavy Bolter HWS is 50 points, 2 of them is 100 for 6.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/13 08:41:16


Post by: JohnnyHell


 Sledgehammer wrote:
 JohnnyHell wrote:


B) Basic Infantrymen should be basic. No shots and rerolls for days just lasguns and weight of numbers.


And do you realistically expect people to buy enough guardsmen to even make that possible? We've looking at a situation where cadians are $50 a kit for 60 points of standard guardsmen. Kreig are $60 for that same point value as well. How many people are actually going to want to pay that kind of price, assemble them, paint them, and field them when you know for certain that $150 dollars isn't even enough to scratch the surface of an enemy unit.

I can get a lrbt for $60 dollars right now. Why the hell would i ever want to buy guardsmen and waste my money.


We’ve seen people buying over 100 Gaunts. Also you’re assuming the Codex wouldn’t support different playstyles instead of only “spam so many wounds the enemy can’t kill them all”.

People already field hundreds of basic infantry, and that’s not even what I’m advocating here. Just that Guardsmen who can run faster than a Skimmer, or put out more shots than an army, is daft. Dial it back. Keep any buffs or rules simple instead of Guardsmen somehow being able to do everything all of the time.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/13 12:29:54


Post by: Kanluwen


The FW hydra was best hydra--and the appropriate route for all AA chassis to take.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/13 13:17:17


Post by: brainpsyk


Jarms48 wrote:
brainpsyk wrote:

Ummm... what? 4 Autocannons is fine? For 115 points? With AP1? On a T6 chassis?

You're better off with 4 heavy bolters, for like 80 points. Anything that gets exposed in 9th is dead, and it's not like the Hydra is arty that stays hidden. The hydra has to pop out... and survive.


4 72 inch Autocannons, with +1 or +2 to Hit against Aircraft. That way no debuff against ground targets. You’re also forgetting it also has a Heavy Bolter as well. It’s also 110 points, not 115. The only thing making it bad now is the fact you’re hitting everything without Fly on a 5+, remove that and it’s actually not too bad. It’s 10 points per T6 wound, and has 5 heavy weapons.

Where are you getting 4 Heavy Bolters for 80 points from? A 3 Heavy Bolter HWS is 50 points, 2 of them is 100 for 6.


A 4xAC hydra plus HB does about 2.5 damage vs. Intercessors (not including the +1 vs. flyers, but including HotE). A decent unit gets a 40% return on it's points value brings the Hydra up to 62.5. 80 points is almost 25% overcosted compared to the output and durability of a Tau hammerhead with an Ion Cannon and 2xACB, even accounting for the points differential.

It's so easy to underestimate how far Guard are behind other units. We need more than a few points tweaks, because with BS4, and being 50% of the output of other units means we need to double the number of shots, and then boost the durability.

For example, for every 50 points, a Hydra and Voidweaver have roughly the same output vs. Intercessors. (2.5W vs 2.9 for the VW). For and giggles, if you get the +1 to hit vs. the Intercessors, the units are even at 2.9W each. Yet the Hydra has 40% of the durability of the Voidweaver for it's points, and that's entirely ignoring the mobility advantage of the voidweaver, in a game that's won in the movement phase.

So let's take the Tau hammerhead instead. For every 50 points, a HH with Ion Cannon and 2ACB does ~6.3W to Intercessors compared to the 1.2 of the Hydra, and for it's points, the Hydra is ~20% less durable, and still FAR less manueverable, with FAR worse strats, and the Hammerhead isn't even that good!

When you start looking at all these factors, a 10% points reduction just won't cut it, we're really talking 40-50%, or more.



Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/13 21:42:18


Post by: Kid_Kyoto


 JohnnyHell wrote:
Three fixes?

1) Get rid of orders and make officers have simple auras.

B) Basic Infantrymen should be basic. No shots and rerolls for days just lasguns and weight of numbers.

iii) Make Ogryns cool and deadly and nerf Bullgryns because Bullgryn is a stupid word.

Bonus round: bring back Rough Riders. Just because.


No real comments on the substance but bonus points for 1, B, iii. You could write a GW rulebook with skills like that.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/13 23:33:50


Post by: Tresson


 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
 JohnnyHell wrote:
Three fixes?

1) Get rid of orders and make officers have simple auras.

B) Basic Infantrymen should be basic. No shots and rerolls for days just lasguns and weight of numbers.

iii) Make Ogryns cool and deadly and nerf Bullgryns because Bullgryn is a stupid word.

Bonus round: bring back Rough Riders. Just because.


No real comments on the substance but bonus points for 1, B, iii. You could write a GW rulebook with skills like that.


Isn't that sorta like saying you have the face for radio?



Anyway my three changes

1) Give them a army wide rule that give all infantry a 7+ cover save. If they don't move in their turn they get all covers saves increased by +2. This would represent the squads digging and/or improving the cover around them.

2)Give frag grenades and missiles, all flamers and all other weapons designed to flushing enemy out of cover a rule that if an unit takes wound from it then then the unit taking the would has to take a leadership test and if the fail then they fall back.

3) Give tanks an armour thickness stat that reduces the strength of weapons firing on it. So say a Chimera might have a stat 2 so an autocannon firing on it would be strength of 5. Weapons with the anti armour trait would ignore this. This might need a re gigging of weapons and maybe a reduction of the toughness trait for tanks.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/13 23:46:05


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I think it's funny that the majority of posts here agree with my earliest sentiments on Guard. The only way to save them is to radically alter 40k, or invent new super special rules for JUST them.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/14 00:08:46


Post by: Tresson


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I think it's funny that the majority of posts here agree with my earliest sentiments on Guard. The only way to save them is to radically alter 40k, or invent new super special rules for JUST them.


To be fair I'm general unhappy with how limited our choices are with interacting with the other army. It's pretty much just killy actions. Why can't have stuff like a glue spore mine that stop a unit from moving for a turn or a suppressing fire rule that debuffs a unit in some way or a weapon the can be used to turn an area of terrain into difficult terrain and other things like that? Right now that sort of thing is really just limited to pykers and even then you can't do much.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/14 01:23:45


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Like I said, the best chance for Guard to ever get a playable faction in this new style of 40k, is to make them a faction that can soup free of charge, like the Free cities faction in AoS. Give them the ability to soup, without losing any CP or abilities. Make them able to take units, but not entire formations. Want to add a squad of devestators, go ahead. Want to add two Whirlwinds and a Thunderhawk? Go for it. Want to add a full squad of Custodian Guard? Awesome. Here's the kicker: Those units Get NONE of their chapter goodies, strats, or abilities. Blood Angles don't get +1 to wound in melee, or Black Rage. That nice squad of Eradicators don't get shoot twice.
You get the statlines, and pay the cost, but you don't get all the cool toys.

There, I fixed soup.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/14 03:38:23


Post by: Jarms48


brainpsyk wrote:
A 4xAC hydra plus HB does about 2.5 damage vs. Intercessors (not including the +1 vs. flyers, but including HotE). A decent unit gets a 40% return on it's points value brings the Hydra up to 62.5. 80 points is almost 25% overcosted compared to the output and durability of a Tau hammerhead with an Ion Cannon and 2xACB, even accounting for the points differential.


I didn't say it was good, just that in terms of everything else in the codex it'd be okay if it was able to shoot at ground targets without the debuff. Comparing it to anything outside the codex is of course going to show how bad Imperial Guard in general need a new codex.

Though, I could imagine GW making it D3 damage. Look at the size of those autocannons. Should have similar damage to the Predator one.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/14 07:32:21


Post by: cuda1179


Many, many things in the IG codex need rebalancing, and I really don't want to have to reinvent the wheel for them. Keep it Simple Stupid.

Many of the things in the book are radically over costed for what they do, but we can't just slash points. They do need some amount of synergy and design flow.

In the Hydra example above, those are all ready NOT standard autocannons. If normal autocannons still stayed at Damage 1 for game consistency, would it be too much to make those bespoke autocannons D-2? That would make a huge improvement to the Hydra.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/14 11:31:09


Post by: Jarms48


From the new Knight codex profiles. Looks like Multi-laser is moving to Heavy 4 and Battle Cannon definitely looks like it will be S8 AP-2 D3


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/14 14:29:28


Post by: brainpsyk


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I think it's funny that the majority of posts here agree with my earliest sentiments on Guard. The only way to save them is to radically alter 40k, or invent new super special rules for JUST them.


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:Like I said, the best chance for Guard to ever get a playable faction in this new style of 40k, is to make them a faction that can soup free of charge, like the Free cities faction in AoS. Give them the ability to soup, without losing any CP or abilities. Make them able to take units, but not entire formations. Want to add a squad of devestators, go ahead. Want to add two Whirlwinds and a Thunderhawk? Go for it. Want to add a full squad of Custodian Guard? Awesome. Here's the kicker: Those units Get NONE of their chapter goodies, strats, or abilities. Blood Angles don't get +1 to wound in melee, or Black Rage. That nice squad of Eradicators don't get shoot twice.
You get the statlines, and pay the cost, but you don't get all the cool toys.

There, I fixed soup.


Not at all, and I don't think soup is the right/only answer. I think Guard can easily be a playable faction again. Yes, the ultimate fix is a new codex, but we don't need to revamp the entire game. If you look at most of the ideas, they're about durability buffs and output, rightfully so for a 5-year-old codex.

Personally, I think Jarms48 points costs are about right (still slightly high, but now in the range of 5-10 points, not 50), IF you remove most of the 8th edition static-gunline limiters.

* Fall back and shoot with tanks so they're not touched and out of the game with *ZERO* damage against them, and/or let tanks ignore infantry when moving.
* Drop Grinding advance, let turrets fire twice by default (even with Grinding Advance, LRBTs have HALF the firepower of similarly costed units).
* Strat cost reductions. Our strats have early 8th edition static-gunline costs. "Fire on My Position" for 3CP?!?!? Make that 1 CP, and usable by units prevented from falling back, and have it affect both units!
* Point cost reductions as mentioned.

Do we really think that at 1CP "FOMP" is any more powerful than any of the new Nid strats, like doing psychic actions AND an additional 3MW? Gargoyles disappearing and reappearing next turn? Even Overlapping Fields of Fire for 0CP. So we can pick off ONE unit, is that OP in any way? Most other armies have some form of fall-back-and-shoot, why can't our overcosted tanks do the same?

FOMP is soooo powerful for 1CP. Prevented from falling back? Just pluck a model to be out of coherency, then pluck until you're out of engagement range, then pluck until you're back in coherency.

If tanks ignore infantry, then after the opponent charges & wipes our screens, then piles/consolidates into the tank, the tank just moves 12" away and blasts them.

Guard isn't hard to get back in the game, Guard just need to break out of the 8th edition paradigm.




Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/20 13:22:01


Post by: Kid_Kyoto


I've been giving the durability issue some thought, what about folding the trenches/defense lines/bunkers formally into the IG rules? Something like this:

Defense Line: For 20 points an Infantry Squad may take a defense line no more than 12"x1/2". It is deployed with the squad and cannot move during the game. Models behind the line get a +2 save against attacks from the front.

Now guardsmen can have 3+ saves but only behind a non-moving defense line and only in 1 direction.

Add to that:

Bunker: For 40 points an Infantry Squad may take a bunker no more than 8"x8". It is deployed with the squad and cannot move during the game. Models inside the bunker get a +2 save against all attacks.

So double the points and get all-around protection. Keep the rules simple, no rules for access points, blowing up bunkers etc. Since it's a flat armor save boosts things like las cannons and power fist still tear through it.

So these give guardsmen significant saves without needing new models or changing the character of the army. Plus it gives GW a new way to sell Aegis lines and Walls O'Dead Cadians and that's always good right?


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/25 19:00:07


Post by: Blndmage


 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
I've been giving the durability issue some thought, what about folding the trenches/defense lines/bunkers formally into the IG rules? Something like this:

Defense Line: For 20 points an Infantry Squad may take a defense line no more than 12"x1/2". It is deployed with the squad and cannot move during the game. Models behind the line get a +2 save against attacks from the front.

Now guardsmen can have 3+ saves but only behind a non-moving defense line and only in 1 direction.

Add to that:

Bunker: For 40 points an Infantry Squad may take a bunker no more than 8"x8". It is deployed with the squad and cannot move during the game. Models inside the bunker get a +2 save against all attacks.

So double the points and get all-around protection. Keep the rules simple, no rules for access points, blowing up bunkers etc. Since it's a flat armor save boosts things like las cannons and power fist still tear through it.

So these give guardsmen significant saves without needing new models or changing the character of the army. Plus it gives GW a new way to sell Aegis lines and Walls O'Dead Cadians and that's always good right?


How about instead of inventing totally new things, we use the fortifications GW has already given us? *Edit: just read it and realized there could be some harsh tone here, none is intended.

Like, what if the Guard are the Imperial force that makes best use of them?


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/25 21:16:20


Post by: Kid_Kyoto


Oh yeah, that's what I mean. Instead of treating fortifications as a separate type of unit, just make them an option for IG squads just like weapons or transports.

(they could even add, units with a defense line cannot take a transport)

And by just making it a flat +2 to save you don't need to create new stats and rules for bunkers and walls and trenches, it's just like paying points for extra armor.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/25 21:45:24


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


How about we nerf the Hammer of the Emperor so that All Conscript lists don't become the new only viable way to play Guard?

Here's a couple: Don't give whiteshields auto-pass order rolls. Make it a strat cost, once per game.

Make Conscripts non-las weapons, i.E Autogun, or something that doesn't trigger HotE.



Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/25 22:07:21


Post by: ccs


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

Make Conscripts non-las weapons, i.E Autogun, or something that doesn't trigger HotE.


You do know that HotE is not dependent upon las weapons, right? It works on any shooting attack. So giving the conscripts autoguns won't do anything. Besides, GW doesn't even make a Guard kit with autoguns....
You'd be better off petitioning GW to add Conscript/Whiteshield to the short list HotE doesn't apply to.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/26 01:44:26


Post by: DeadliestIdiot


I mean, HotE is, presumably, a band aid that GW will rip off in the new codex (no clue what they'd replace it with but there's plenty of suggestions above)... although I could also see it being here to stay I suppose

(And besides, if everyone goes all in anti horde to counter guard then vehicles can be good again...right?...right?...please? rofl)


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/26 07:24:37


Post by: Dirk Reinecke


Another way to fix the Guard army is to actually get rid of things.

For example, if you go back to the original rules and points costs that were published in the codex many units would have a better utility.

Commissars aren't terribly useful at the moment, but they were very useful so useful that their rules were "adapted" into uselessness.

I'm a bit confused when people say points changes aren't the way to fix things. They totally are. A strong expensive unit will see less play than a strong cheap unit.

There are some very good units in other codeci that never see play, because there are better cheaper units. Look at how many nerfs the Drukari codex survived, each time the strongest unit was toned down they moved to the next set of strong units.

If conscripts cost 3points per model (as they did originally), guard would be the top meta army, as the 300 conscripts would only cost 900pts leaving considerable room for other support units.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/26 10:52:12


Post by: Jarms48


^ this. To make Guard useful right now we need massive point drops. Like 10 - 20% across the board.

To be honest. I don't see Commissars morale abilities being buffed at all in the next codex. Look at Orks, basically was neutered of all their morale abilities. If Commissars get buffed I predict GW will just make them better combat characters with the support abilities they currently have.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/26 14:40:42


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Jarms48 wrote:
^ this. To make Guard useful right now we need massive point drops. Like 10 - 20% across the board.

To be honest. I don't see Commissars morale abilities being buffed at all in the next codex. Look at Orks, basically was neutered of all their morale abilities. If Commissars get buffed I predict GW will just make them better combat characters with the support abilities they currently have.


Yes, lets make Conscripts with auto-wounds on 6s 3ppm instead of 5. Lets make Guardsmen who get free plasma rifles and HWTs 5ppm. Lets make BANEBLADES 350ppm. That's silly. Even for me.

Make Lasguns S2 to compensate for HotE.

Make HWTs unable to fire after moving.

Make LR double shooting standard, on all variants, if they haven't moved that turn.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/26 14:48:33


Post by: VladimirHerzog


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Lets make BANEBLADES 350ppm. That's silly. Even for me.


they might actually be playable at that points cost


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/26 14:49:53


Post by: CommunistNapkin


 VladimirHerzog wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Lets make BANEBLADES 350ppm. That's silly. Even for me.


they might actually be playable at that points cost


Still pretty overcosted to things like the Stormsurge, but that would probably at least make them playable in casual games without being an active detriment to your army.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/26 14:49:58


Post by: generalchaos34


Jarms48 wrote:
^ this. To make Guard useful right now we need massive point drops. Like 10 - 20% across the board.

To be honest. I don't see Commissars morale abilities being buffed at all in the next codex. Look at Orks, basically was neutered of all their morale abilities. If Commissars get buffed I predict GW will just make them better combat characters with the support abilities they currently have.


Agreed, I played against tyranids last night and it occurred to me that a Tyrannofex is LITERALLY BETTER IN EVERY WAY to a Tank Commander. Its cheaper, more wounds, has much better weapons, better access to rules, AND its not giving up assassination. Rupture cannons were wrecking my armigers and I realize that even a properly kitted out Commander isn't going to get close to that kind of shooting output and its less points somehow.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/26 14:50:05


Post by: Kanluwen


brainpsyk wrote:

Guard isn't hard to get back in the game, Guard just need to break out of the 8th edition paradigm.



Implying that Guard were ever in the 8th edition paradigm, lol.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/26 16:21:55


Post by: The_Real_Chris


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Jarms48 wrote:
^ this. To make Guard useful right now we need massive point drops. Like 10 - 20% across the board.

To be honest. I don't see Commissars morale abilities being buffed at all in the next codex. Look at Orks, basically was neutered of all their morale abilities. If Commissars get buffed I predict GW will just make them better combat characters with the support abilities they currently have.


Yes, lets make Conscripts with auto-wounds on 6s 3ppm instead of 5. Lets make Guardsmen who get free plasma rifles and HWTs 5ppm. Lets make BANEBLADES 350ppm. That's silly. Even for me.

Make Lasguns S2 to compensate for HotE.

Make HWTs unable to fire after moving.

Make LR double shooting standard, on all variants, if they haven't moved that turn.


You are saying if you played 2300 points vs a top tier 2000 point army you would crush it? Because they is what a 15% discount would be in effect.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/26 16:57:31


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


What I'm saying is that units that have troop rules, 30 ablative wounds, and as WhiteShields get Auto-FRFSRF, for 90 points per unit, is foolish. It's currently what someone is doing in the Meta right now, with 10 30man squads of White Shields. You can do that, but have fun when I quit 2nd round and force you to waste the time re-packing all 300+ models back in your box. Hope that was worth it.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/26 17:01:47


Post by: Some_Call_Me_Tim


Are we really back to complaining about horde armies, everyone has the tools to deal with them.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/26 17:23:48


Post by: ERJAK


 Some_Call_Me_Tim wrote:
Are we really back to complaining about horde armies, everyone has the tools to deal with them.


Not every event has chess clocks. Which is by far the most important tool to have available when facing a horde army.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/26 17:25:21


Post by: Some_Call_Me_Tim


Anyone bringing a horde army to a competitive scene, especially in this environment, is going to know how to play them quickly. Ask any ork player worth their salt how fast they can move boy blobs.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/26 17:35:08


Post by: brainpsyk


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
What I'm saying is that units that have troop rules, 30 ablative wounds, and as WhiteShields get Auto-FRFSRF, for 90 points per unit, is foolish. It's currently what someone is doing in the Meta right now, with 10 30man squads of White Shields. You can do that, but have fun when I quit 2nd round and force you to waste the time re-packing all 300+ models back in your box. Hope that was worth it.

While I agree the whole 300 conscripts is a (poor) meme army, he's got those 300 conscripts on 10 trays, so he just packs those 10 trays away and is done. The downside is that his pack for carrying all of those models is like 60 lbs (27 kilos).

Guard need more than just a points cut at this point. Looking at a Carnifex with a Stranglethorn Cannon, it's got a D3+3 shot battlecannon at BS4 for 110 points, is far more durable despite being 9W (so it only gives up 1 BID point), and isn't 100% useless in melee for 25% less points than a LRBT. It can even be AP3 for 115 points. Even a 30% points cut at this point isn't unreasonable, and we'd still struggle. They could increase the points cost of that Carnifex by that 25%, and the Carnifex would still be better than the LRBT. And yet the Carnifex is still just a distraction from the real threats.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/26 18:22:00


Post by: DeadliestIdiot


What if...and here me out...guard are fine and everything else needs to be nerfed and have significantly simpler rules?


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/26 18:36:37


Post by: CommunistNapkin


DeadliestIdiot wrote:
What if...and here me out...guard are fine and everything else needs to be nerfed and have significantly simpler rules?


I'm not totally opposed to the idea that most armies could lose some of their rules bloat and have some of their power toned down a bit, but Guard are definitely not fine. The internal balancing of the codex is terrible, and even if other armies were toned down a little, Guard still don't have a realistic way to play 9th edition that doesn't reward their opponent 15 VP just for playing against Guard.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/27 01:40:05


Post by: DeadliestIdiot


 CommunistNapkin wrote:
DeadliestIdiot wrote:
What if...and here me out...guard are fine and everything else needs to be nerfed and have significantly simpler rules?


I'm not totally opposed to the idea that most armies could lose some of their rules bloat and have some of their power toned down a bit, but Guard are definitely not fine. The internal balancing of the codex is terrible, and even if other armies were toned down a little, Guard still don't have a realistic way to play 9th edition that doesn't reward their opponent 15 VP just for playing against Guard.


That's a fair assessment. I was really just highlighting that most 9th edition codices are either overpowered and/or have an excessive amount of complex rules bloat and neither is particularly desirable, imho


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/27 01:46:55


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


DeadliestIdiot wrote:
 CommunistNapkin wrote:
DeadliestIdiot wrote:
What if...and here me out...guard are fine and everything else needs to be nerfed and have significantly simpler rules?


I'm not totally opposed to the idea that most armies could lose some of their rules bloat and have some of their power toned down a bit, but Guard are definitely not fine. The internal balancing of the codex is terrible, and even if other armies were toned down a little, Guard still don't have a realistic way to play 9th edition that doesn't reward their opponent 15 VP just for playing against Guard.


That's a fair assessment. I was really just highlighting that most 9th edition codices are either overpowered and/or have an excessive amount of complex rules bloat and neither is particularly desirable, imho


I think that's an okay START, but I really think the imbalance is too inherent in the system. How in Charles Darwin's Bushy tit are you going to balance something like Custodes against something like IG? Honestly. Saying balance the edition right now, is like saying "grab a mop" after the hurricane has past thru and torn the place asunder. A Mop's not gonna fix this, we need to burn it down and start over. I suggest we stop playing 40k and go to play OPR instead.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/27 01:49:24


Post by: Jarms48


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:


Yes, lets make Conscripts with auto-wounds on 6s 3ppm instead of 5. Lets make Guardsmen who get free plasma rifles and HWTs 5ppm. Lets make BANEBLADES 350ppm. That's silly. Even for me.


You really misunderstand me sometimes, did I say anything about removing the 5 point floor? No.

I’m purely talking about internal balance. You made a list of units that were useless previously. I’m basically suggesting things like those need a 10 - 20% decrease.

Also, Baneblades would still be gak at 350 points. They’re too large to move around 9th edition terrain layouts. Do less damage than 2 Leman Russ tanks and have less durability than 2 Leman Russ tanks. Even at 350 they’d still be more expensive than Stormsurges. Lol.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/27 09:41:52


Post by: DeadliestIdiot


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
DeadliestIdiot wrote:
 CommunistNapkin wrote:
DeadliestIdiot wrote:
What if...and here me out...guard are fine and everything else needs to be nerfed and have significantly simpler rules?


I'm not totally opposed to the idea that most armies could lose some of their rules bloat and have some of their power toned down a bit, but Guard are definitely not fine. The internal balancing of the codex is terrible, and even if other armies were toned down a little, Guard still don't have a realistic way to play 9th edition that doesn't reward their opponent 15 VP just for playing against Guard.


That's a fair assessment. I was really just highlighting that most 9th edition codices are either overpowered and/or have an excessive amount of complex rules bloat and neither is particularly desirable, imho


I think that's an okay START, but I really think the imbalance is too inherent in the system. How in Charles Darwin's Bushy tit are you going to balance something like Custodes against something like IG? Honestly. Saying balance the edition right now, is like saying "grab a mop" after the hurricane has past thru and torn the place asunder. A Mop's not gonna fix this, we need to burn it down and start over. I suggest we stop playing 40k and go to play OPR instead.


Starting a fire in the aftermath of a major hurricane is a bad idea as emergency services will already be stretched thin and infrastructure, such as water mains, will likely be inoperable. A mop is the first step in piecing things back together.

Poor metaphor aside, this wouldn't be an overnight change. Guard would hopefully get a small boost (preferably on the defense side of things) and internal rebalancing. Then 10th edition would be about GW undoing this mess.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/27 10:38:47


Post by: AtoMaki


DeadliestIdiot wrote:
What if...and here me out...guard are fine and everything else needs to be nerfed and have significantly simpler rules?

That's the obvious solution, but booooooooooooy it would generate enough salt to make Earth uninhabitable for centuries...


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/27 11:17:54


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Jarms48 wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:


Yes, lets make Conscripts with auto-wounds on 6s 3ppm instead of 5. Lets make Guardsmen who get free plasma rifles and HWTs 5ppm. Lets make BANEBLADES 350ppm. That's silly. Even for me.


You really misunderstand me sometimes, did I say anything about removing the 5 point floor? No.

I’m purely talking about internal balance. You made a list of units that were useless previously. I’m basically suggesting things like those need a 10 - 20% decrease.

Also, Baneblades would still be gak at 350 points. They’re too large to move around 9th edition terrain layouts. Do less damage than 2 Leman Russ tanks and have less durability than 2 Leman Russ tanks. Even at 350 they’d still be more expensive than Stormsurges. Lol.


To make Guard useful right now we need massive point drops. Like 10 - 20% across the board.


How was I supposed to understand this? Now that you've been called out on this ridiculous brain fart, you're shifting the goal posts. You never mentioned it, because you're exact words were, "across the board". Perhaps be more selective in the future?


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/27 12:07:32


Post by: Jarms48


Have you not seen my document? That I’ve posted countless times, even have an entire thread dedicated to it, or my other posts saying what the point costs of things should be. That you’ve actually replied to.

To refresh your memory here’s some examples of what I said:

Leman Russ:
- Vanquisher: 110 points (with hull heavy bolter)
- Eradicator and Exterminator: 115 points (with hull heavy bolter)
- Executioner: 120 points (with hull heavy bolter)
- Battle Tank: 125 points (with hull heavy bolter)
- Demolisher and Punisher: 130 points (with hull heavy bolter)

Hellhound:
- Bane Wolf: 85 points
- Devil Dog: 90 points
- Hellhound: 100 points.

Artillery:
- Basilisk, Deathstrike, and Wyvern: 110 points
- Manticore: 130 points

Transports:
- Taurox: 75 points

Basically all Guard vehicles are incredibly overcosted for what they do. Not once have I ever suggested to go below the 5 point floor.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/27 14:40:21


Post by: Some_Call_Me_Tim


5 point floor is sort of a silly concept, I’m all for removing it.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/27 17:18:08


Post by: Kanluwen


Frankly, I've said it hundreds of times...

The solution is and always will be making Infantry Squads better. Make Conscripts trash, like they should be. They should be the "Cultist"/"Grot" equivalent of the book.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/27 17:25:54


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


T2 BS/WS6+, 1W, 4LD 6+Sv?

I think you just have to make the "no more than X troops choice" rule for them. You can't have more conscripts than Commissars or 1 to 1, would be my change.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/27 17:40:31


Post by: Pyroalchi


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
T2 BS/WS6+, 1W, 4LD 6+Sv?

I think you just have to make the "no more than X troops choice" rule for them. You can't have more conscripts than Commissars or 1 to 1, would be my change.


I know you mean 1 UNIT of conscripts per Commissar, but I just had a good laugh picturing a real 1:1 ratio in mind. Each Conscript having his/her very own Commissar looking over their shoulder with grim determination...


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/27 19:20:36


Post by: brainpsyk


 Kanluwen wrote:
Frankly, I've said it hundreds of times...

The solution is and always will be making Infantry Squads better. Make Conscripts trash, like they should be. They should be the "Cultist"/"Grot" equivalent of the book.

Conscripts *are* trash. They're only "doing well" because most opponents aren't prepared to deal with 300 of them. They're just a skew list, not a good army. Anybody getting around AoC with volume over AP (quantity over quality) will wipe those 300 conscripts like nothing.

The thing we have to remember is not that conscripts are so good, it's that comparatively, everything else is so bad. The rest of the codex is massively overpriced and underpowered. It's the same as a TC or FP Manticore. Those units haven't been good in a long time, it's just that they were better than the alternatives.

I disagree that the solution is to make generic infantry squads better. At 60 points with free upgrades, they're about as good as they are going to get. Even AV3 was getting so bad that they needed AoC to boost it, so AV4 isn't going to cut it, and there is sooo much that ignores cover that a bonus to cover save isn't worth it either.

So the real solution is to free up infantry from trying to do too much (ref: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/180/804449.page#11361237 ) and bringing other units up to the point where they are worth taking. Then there will be less conscript spam. A nerf (of any kind) is the last thing Guard needs right now.



Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/27 19:22:03


Post by: Kanluwen


You can disagree all you want.
Infantry Squads need to be broken into archetypes and they need to be given specific roles.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Kanluwen wrote:
1. Break Infantry Squads into 3 distinctive entities. Veteran status is conferred when building your army, not by a unit choice.
1A. "Raider"/"Skirmisher" archetype, with a 5+ save and a bonus in terrain. No Heavy Weapon Teams, Lascarbines as standard. Special Weapons are able to be doubled up if no Heavy Weapon taken.
2A. "Line Infantry" archetype, the "Cadian look". 4+ save, no bonus in terrain. Heavy Weapon Teams as an option. Lasguns or Lascarbines as options. Single special weapon and single Heavy Weapon if no HWT.
3A. "Heavy Infantry" archetype, the "Grenadier" or "Kasrkin" look. 3+ save or a 4+ with an additional wound or something. Hellguns as standard. No HWT, doubling up Special Weapons or Heavy Weapons.

2. Heavy Weapon and Special Weapon list is revised, as are Heavy Weapon Teams themselves. HWTs are able to be deployed separately to the unit drawn from. HWTs get a bonus save while stationary in cover. Mortars are their own independent team, restricted to a Heavy Support option but gaining a "variable fire mode". Smoke rounds, incendiary/airburst rounds, HE rounds, etc. Fire mode is decided immediately after you fire the preceding round so thought is necessary for how you want to use them.
HWTs get a rule that effectively gives them their own version of autocannons, heavy bolters, lascannons, and twin heavy-stubbers by doubling their ROF at the expense of becoming fire OR move. Missile Launchers become a Heavy Weapon option alongside of a Heavy Stubber, Hellshot Rifle(lorewise they're cutdown lascannons intended to be used similar to an AT rifle), single operator capable AC/HB .
Plasma Guns become a separate choice in and of themselves.

3. Sergeants and Officers gain a pseudo-special weapon list. Plasma Guns, Lasguns, Hellguns, Boltguns, Shotguns. Things like this go into the "Officer/Veteran" armory pool.

I could go on, but y'all said 3.

Reiterating, again.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/27 21:13:59


Post by: brainpsyk


 Kanluwen wrote:
You can disagree all you want.
Infantry Squads need to be broken into archetypes and they need to be given specific roles.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Kanluwen wrote:
1. Break Infantry Squads into 3 distinctive entities. Veteran status is conferred when building your army, not by a unit choice.
1A. "Raider"/"Skirmisher" archetype, with a 5+ save and a bonus in terrain. No Heavy Weapon Teams, Lascarbines as standard. Special Weapons are able to be doubled up if no Heavy Weapon taken.
2A. "Line Infantry" archetype, the "Cadian look". 4+ save, no bonus in terrain. Heavy Weapon Teams as an option. Lasguns or Lascarbines as options. Single special weapon and single Heavy Weapon if no HWT.
3A. "Heavy Infantry" archetype, the "Grenadier" or "Kasrkin" look. 3+ save or a 4+ with an additional wound or something. Hellguns as standard. No HWT, doubling up Special Weapons or Heavy Weapons.

2. Heavy Weapon and Special Weapon list is revised, as are Heavy Weapon Teams themselves. HWTs are able to be deployed separately to the unit drawn from. HWTs get a bonus save while stationary in cover. Mortars are their own independent team, restricted to a Heavy Support option but gaining a "variable fire mode". Smoke rounds, incendiary/airburst rounds, HE rounds, etc. Fire mode is decided immediately after you fire the preceding round so thought is necessary for how you want to use them.
HWTs get a rule that effectively gives them their own version of autocannons, heavy bolters, lascannons, and twin heavy-stubbers by doubling their ROF at the expense of becoming fire OR move. Missile Launchers become a Heavy Weapon option alongside of a Heavy Stubber, Hellshot Rifle(lorewise they're cutdown lascannons intended to be used similar to an AT rifle), single operator capable AC/HB .
Plasma Guns become a separate choice in and of themselves.

3. Sergeants and Officers gain a pseudo-special weapon list. Plasma Guns, Lasguns, Hellguns, Boltguns, Shotguns. Things like this go into the "Officer/Veteran" armory pool.

I could go on, but y'all said 3.

Reiterating, again.


I like these I think they're fluffy as heck.

1A & 1B could just be an infantry squad can take 2 special weapons. For each special weapon not taken, 2 members can form a HWT. The difference in saves/wounds doesn't add a whole lot of value, especially when we're talking a model is worth 5/6/7 points.

 Kanluwen wrote:

HWTs (snip...)by doubling their ROF at the expense of becoming fire OR move


Now THAT'S an idea!

I'm of the mind that we should bring platoons back, each platoon is 2-3 infantry/conscript/veteran squads. For each squad taken we can take a 'detached' HWT. Very similar to your idea, except with the platoon, the Lt. grants orders and RR1sTW. Cadian mortar pits shooting twice with full RRs to hit and RR1s to wound..

Both your idea and mine have the same issue - there's nothing stopping the HWTs from being targed and wiped. Even with a cover save, anything AP-1 will just clear a 6W HWS as easily as a 10W infantry squad. They need something to prevent them from being targeted in the first place. Without something to prevent them from being targeted, no amount of cover or -1 to hit will help them, they're still in a "Call them an Uber" situation, as they're going to get picked up.

I'm of 2 minds to fix this:

1 - Give HWTs (and Infantry units in general) Look Out Sir! If LRBTs/Chimeras were halfway decent, we'd take those to cover the units pushing up the board, then the units in the back would be protected by Basilisks/manticores/wyverns or even hydras and fire support LRBTs.

2 - Make smoke launchers create a whole Obscuring cloud. Something like "smoke launchers create a cloud of Obscuring mist that makes shooting at a unit within X" (~3-6") -1 to be hit. LOS cannot be traced thru the cloud, only to units within the cloud". This would wreak havoc on enemy shooting, while being a massive durability buff to the whole Guard army.

I'm kinda against trading shooting for popping smoke. Nowadays smoke and -1 to be hit is a Strat, so I'd keep it that way.


I guess in my mind, a unit comes down to 3 purposes:
1 - holding an objective
2 - clearing an objective
3 - specialty units for tasks like RND, Engage On All Fronts, etc.

The next problem is that most of our ideas are focusing on #2, but #1 and #3 are equally as valid, and require just the cheapest units they can be. We don't load those units up with goodies, as they're just there to accomplish 1 task and then die. For example, a Chimera pushing up to the mid board is going for #1. But the Iotan scions dropping within 5" is aiming for #3. Right now, we have to focus on #2, simply because Guard is so bad at it.

So when we talk about boosting units, let be sure to talk about #1 and #3 as well, as those allow Guard to play the game, and not just kill things.





Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/27 22:16:15


Post by: El Torro


Regarding Heavy Weapon Teams, for a long time I’ve though they should have higher toughness, perhaps a better save too. To represent them hiding behind their heavy weapons. Not sure it would make much difference in the current state of the game though.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/28 00:36:44


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I feel like any changes to the standard troops choice pretty much has to take into effect the fact that, in 9th at least, Troops are the only units that can hold Objectives.

My suggestion stands.

Make all Guard units dependent on symbiosis with other units. Troops need Commissars and Company Commanders, or they break and run, and can't get special orders.

Tanks/vehicles need Enginseers and some form of command vehicle, bet it a Command Chimera, or a Command Sentinel, not JUST a TC. They should be able to convert the current Strats into flat out orders.

Max Payload is now an order for all artillery units.

Steel PHalanyx should be an order?

Sanctimonious charge?
Suppresive Fire?
Pounding Barrage?
Defensive Gunners?

You name it. It should be orders. That's how you fix Guard. You remove them from the CP system.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/28 01:29:39


Post by: brainpsyk


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I feel like any changes to the standard troops choice pretty much has to take into effect the fact that, in 9th at least, Troops are the only units that can hold Objectives.

I like it. But, since our troops have no durability, if we make Chimeras ObSec(5) while they contain an ObSec unit we've added durability to that infantry to hold the Objective.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

My suggestion stands.

Make all Guard units dependent on symbiosis with other units. Troops need Commissars and Company Commanders, or they break and run, and can't get special orders.

I kinda see where you're going here, but I think the problem is that this is too much of a limitation on basic troops so commanders & commissars become a tax, rather than a buff. If we shift the idea a little, let the commissars be a leadership buff (Ld9, plus some kind of bonus like ignoring attrition modifiers for units within 6"). Let Company Commanders have a special aura/ability/order, or let the Company Commander Order stack with other Orders.

Just throwing out an idea here, but what if the CC gave out double-ObSec to an infantry unit, or some form of "can't take away ObSec" from an infantry unit. Then medpacs give a 6++ (from Jarms48), and Commissars giving Ld buffs and ignoring attrition modifies, in an ObSec(5) Chimera and infantry become tough to shift.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Tanks/vehicles need Enginseers and some form of command vehicle, bet it a Command Chimera, or a Command Sentinel, not JUST a TC.

YES!! Let the LRBTs/Hellhounds/Sentinels/Arty be taken in squadrons, and the lead tank in the platoon gives the orders which affect all units in that platoon within 6". Then a TC can give a special aura/ability/order that stacks with the platoon order.


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

They should be able to convert the current Strats into flat out orders.

Max Payload is now an order for all artillery units.

Steel PHalanyx should be an order?

Sanctimonious charge?
Suppresive Fire?
Pounding Barrage?
Defensive Gunners?

You name it. It should be orders. That's how you fix Guard. You remove them from the CP system.

Again, I like where you're going (we're too reliant on the 8th edition strats), but I would tweak it a bit.

- Max Payload/Pounding Barrage - unnecessary if we fix weapon profiles. Double shooting just leads to either underpowered or overpowered units, with nothing in-between. Just give units a solid profile instead of random+random+random
- Defensive Gunners - unnecessary if tanks get cover, which then gives Defensible and overwatch on 5s.

I'm torn on Steel Phalanyx. It's too weak in it's current incarnation, but might be too powerful if baked in. But I would be in favor of dropping the attacks of a tank down to 0 and just giving tanks Steel Phalanx or 'Breaking Through' by default. It's stupid IMHO that a tank is just going to sit there and try to slap somebody with it's battle cannon rather than just run them over and/or just drive away and shoot them. Tanks are not infantry, and tanks are not Monstrous Creatures looking for lunch.

100% agree on Suppressive Fire & Sanctimonious Charge. I'd even build Suppressive Fire into the Basilisk profile by default. I suggested a long time ago that the Specialist Detachments from Vigilus should be applied to units instead of detachments. So I think you're idea of baking them into the profile is spot-on.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/28 02:02:10


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


brainpsyk wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I feel like any changes to the standard troops choice pretty much has to take into effect the fact that, in 9th at least, Troops are the only units that can hold Objectives.

I like it. But, since our troops have no durability, if we make Chimeras ObSec(5) while they contain an ObSec unit we've added durability to that infantry to hold the Objective.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

My suggestion stands.

Make all Guard units dependent on symbiosis with other units. Troops need Commissars and Company Commanders, or they break and run, and can't get special orders.

I kinda see where you're going here, but I think the problem is that this is too much of a limitation on basic troops so commanders & commissars become a tax, rather than a buff. If we shift the idea a little, let the commissars be a leadership buff (Ld9, plus some kind of bonus like ignoring attrition modifiers for units within 6"). Let Company Commanders have a special aura/ability/order, or let the Company Commander Order stack with other Orders.

Just throwing out an idea here, but what if the CC gave out double-ObSec to an infantry unit, or some form of "can't take away ObSec" from an infantry unit. Then medpacs give a 6++ (from Jarms48), and Commissars giving Ld buffs and ignoring attrition modifies, in an ObSec(5) Chimera and infantry become tough to shift.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Tanks/vehicles need Enginseers and some form of command vehicle, bet it a Command Chimera, or a Command Sentinel, not JUST a TC.

YES!! Let the LRBTs/Hellhounds/Sentinels/Arty be taken in squadrons, and the lead tank in the platoon gives the orders which affect all units in that platoon within 6". Then a TC can give a special aura/ability/order that stacks with the platoon order.


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

They should be able to convert the current Strats into flat out orders.

Max Payload is now an order for all artillery units.

Steel PHalanyx should be an order?

Sanctimonious charge?
Suppresive Fire?
Pounding Barrage?
Defensive Gunners?

You name it. It should be orders. That's how you fix Guard. You remove them from the CP system.

Again, I like where you're going (we're too reliant on the 8th edition strats), but I would tweak it a bit.

- Max Payload/Pounding Barrage - unnecessary if we fix weapon profiles. Double shooting just leads to either underpowered or overpowered units, with nothing in-between. Just give units a solid profile instead of random+random+random
- Defensive Gunners - unnecessary if tanks get cover, which then gives Defensible and overwatch on 5s.

I'm torn on Steel Phalanyx. It's too weak in it's current incarnation, but might be too powerful if baked in. But I would be in favor of dropping the attacks of a tank down to 0 and just giving tanks Steel Phalanx or 'Breaking Through' by default. It's stupid IMHO that a tank is just going to sit there and try to slap somebody with it's battle cannon rather than just run them over and/or just drive away and shoot them. Tanks are not infantry, and tanks are not Monstrous Creatures looking for lunch.

100% agree on Suppressive Fire & Sanctimonious Charge. I'd even build Suppressive Fire into the Basilisk profile by default. I suggested a long time ago that the Specialist Detachments from Vigilus should be applied to units instead of detachments. So I think you're idea of baking them into the profile is spot-on.


I agree with 100% of what you're suggesting. The weapon profiles would be a better target. I think Basalisks, and I'm sorry to say this, are a relic of a bygone era, if there ever was one. Who needs 240"? Like, that's 3 times the length of any table currently used for actual play. Give it a realistic window, and just say yeah, it's got 72" range, or anything currently on the map is legally within range, the end. We don't need magical numbers like 300
" that will never actually be relevant.

Also, make Guard artillery something that can actually be "Bracketed" so fluff wise, you make everything within 36" of the weapon difficult terrain, or do mortals against chargers within a certain distance. You shouldn't be able to walk up a punch a basalisk driver in the face. It should be extremely difficult to get up close to an IDF weapon.

I personally like the idea of making the Tremor cannon the rule for all IDF. All terrain within range is half movement, or difficult terrain.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/28 05:35:53


Post by: cuda1179


Opinions Needed:

I mentioned this pages ago, and I'd really like to know what you guys think. Commissars suck right now, especially as they take up slots. How would you guys feel about making them unit upgrades like in 3rd-7th edition?

For example, Infantry squad: 9 Imperial Guard Infantry, 1 Sergent, 0-1 Commissar.

You could keep the lesser Commissars kinda sucky, but there would be more of them, they could hide in squads, and in combat the Sergent and the Commissar working together would at least be somewhat of a threat to other race's squad leaders.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/28 05:58:09


Post by: Jarms48


 cuda1179 wrote:
Opinions Needed:

I mentioned this pages ago, and I'd really like to know what you guys think. Commissars suck right now, especially as they take up slots. How would you guys feel about making them unit upgrades like in 3rd-7th edition?

For example, Infantry squad: 9 Imperial Guard Infantry, 1 Sergent, 0-1 Commissar.


Ideally I would go back to 3rd edition. Where Command Squads were HQ choices that included the Officer, 4 Veterans, and could take a regular Commissar as an additional model. I also wouldn't mind other regimental advisors becoming unit upgrades to the Command Squad again as well. Such as Astropaths, Officers of the Fleet, and the Ogryn Bodyguard. What does this do:

- It forces players to be more conservative with their Command Squads instead of using them as better Special Weapon Squads. Because now you're also risking your Officer's lives, as well as any additional models you purchased.
- It would give Command Squads character protection, as they character ability applies to an entire unit not just a single model.
- It would cutdown on our Elite slot bloat. That's minimum 2 Elite choices foldered into a single HQ choice, potentially 5 if you extend it to the others suggested.

Sadly though, I don't think GW will do that. What I think GW will do with Commissars is:
- Make Commissars HQ choices, rather than Elites.
- Remove Lord Commissars as a datasheet, instead that will become a character upgrade like Chapter Command. Likely called something like Regimental Command.
- Buff the Commissars datasheet to be similar to the current Lord Commissar one.
- No change to their morale abilities, look at Orks, another horde army who lost all their morale abilities. Commissars morale buffs will remain as they are, but their combat ability will probably get better. To a point where they're the best human fighters in our codex. Imagine the Canoness statline except with a 4+ save and 5++ invul.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Some_Call_Me_Tim wrote:
5 point floor is sort of a silly concept, I’m all for removing it.


I don’t mind the 5 point floor. The issue is the difference between single digit point models, IE: 5 point model against a 6 or 7 point model is a massive jump in power level. What GW needs to do to actually make the 5 point floor viable is to start pushing unit point costs up, anything that’s underperforming gets either no point increase or a smaller one.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/28 09:06:30


Post by: AtoMaki


 Kanluwen wrote:

Spoiler:
size=9]Automatically Appended Next Post:[/size]
 Kanluwen wrote:
1. Break Infantry Squads into 3 distinctive entities. Veteran status is conferred when building your army, not by a unit choice.
1A. "Raider"/"Skirmisher" archetype, with a 5+ save and a bonus in terrain. No Heavy Weapon Teams, Lascarbines as standard. Special Weapons are able to be doubled up if no Heavy Weapon taken.
2A. "Line Infantry" archetype, the "Cadian look". 4+ save, no bonus in terrain. Heavy Weapon Teams as an option. Lasguns or Lascarbines as options. Single special weapon and single Heavy Weapon if no HWT.
3A. "Heavy Infantry" archetype, the "Grenadier" or "Kasrkin" look. 3+ save or a 4+ with an additional wound or something. Hellguns as standard. No HWT, doubling up Special Weapons or Heavy Weapons.

So, basically, have the Imperial Guard take up the old Tactical/Assault/Devastator/Scout layout the SM used to have and the SoB is currently having? I'm all in for that!


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/28 16:03:26


Post by: brainpsyk


Jarms48 wrote:
 cuda1179 wrote:
Opinions Needed:

I mentioned this pages ago, and I'd really like to know what you guys think. Commissars suck right now, especially as they take up slots. How would you guys feel about making them unit upgrades like in 3rd-7th edition?

For example, Infantry squad: 9 Imperial Guard Infantry, 1 Sergent, 0-1 Commissar.


Ideally I would go back to 3rd edition. Where Command Squads were HQ choices that included the Officer, 4 Veterans, and could take a regular Commissar as an additional model. I also wouldn't mind other regimental advisors becoming unit upgrades to the Command Squad again as well. Such as Astropaths, Officers of the Fleet, and the Ogryn Bodyguard. What does this do:

- It forces players to be more conservative with their Command Squads instead of using them as better Special Weapon Squads. Because now you're also risking your Officer's lives, as well as any additional models you purchased.
- It would give Command Squads character protection, as they character ability applies to an entire unit not just a single model.
- It would cutdown on our Elite slot bloat. That's minimum 2 Elite choices foldered into a single HQ choice, potentially 5 if you extend it to the others suggested.

Sadly though, I don't think GW will do that. What I think GW will do with Commissars is:
- Make Commissars HQ choices, rather than Elites.
- Remove Lord Commissars as a datasheet, instead that will become a character upgrade like Chapter Command. Likely called something like Regimental Command.
- Buff the Commissars datasheet to be similar to the current Lord Commissar one.
- No change to their morale abilities, look at Orks, another horde army who lost all their morale abilities. Commissars morale buffs will remain as they are, but their combat ability will probably get better. To a point where they're the best human fighters in our codex. Imagine the Canoness statline except with a 4+ save and 5++ invul.

Unfortunately, the game has changed since 3rd edition. Having a squad means the character is targetable, and with the lethality of 9th, that squad will just get picked up. So people will either 1 - just hide them all game so the extra models become a tax or b - just not take them.

I'm fully in favor of giving the command squad bonuses, like Bodyguard, not take up a Force Org slot, and even a limitation where they have to be within 3" of an officer. But making the character part of the squad just means a dead character.

One thing I would like to change is not give most of our single-models the 'CHARACTER' keyword, but just give them the 'OFFICER' keyword. An OFFICER is, for all intents and purposes a CHARACTER, but an OFFICER doesn't count toward Assassinate. The Company Commanders, Primaris Psykers, Tempestor Primes, and even a TC should count toward Assassinate, and even a Lord Commissar. Probably even the Priests. But Lieutenants, main-line Commissars, Officers of the Fleet and Masters or Ordinance I think should just remain Officers.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/28 18:30:30


Post by: CommunistNapkin


brainpsyk wrote:


I'm fully in favor of giving the command squad bonuses, like Bodyguard, not take up a Force Org slot, and even a limitation where they have to be within 3" of an officer. But making the character part of the squad just means a dead character.

One thing I would like to change is not give most of our single-models the 'CHARACTER' keyword, but just give them the 'OFFICER' keyword. An OFFICER is, for all intents and purposes a CHARACTER, but an OFFICER doesn't count toward Assassinate. The Company Commanders, Primaris Psykers, Tempestor Primes, and even a TC should count toward Assassinate, and even a Lord Commissar. Probably even the Priests. But Lieutenants, main-line Commissars, Officers of the Fleet and Masters or Ordinance I think should just remain Officers.


Actually I'm fairly certain that if the UNIT has the CHARACTER rule, Look Out, Sir applies. So in this hypothetical situation, the unit should still be protected.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/28 18:40:26


Post by: JNAProductions


 CommunistNapkin wrote:
brainpsyk wrote:


I'm fully in favor of giving the command squad bonuses, like Bodyguard, not take up a Force Org slot, and even a limitation where they have to be within 3" of an officer. But making the character part of the squad just means a dead character.

One thing I would like to change is not give most of our single-models the 'CHARACTER' keyword, but just give them the 'OFFICER' keyword. An OFFICER is, for all intents and purposes a CHARACTER, but an OFFICER doesn't count toward Assassinate. The Company Commanders, Primaris Psykers, Tempestor Primes, and even a TC should count toward Assassinate, and even a Lord Commissar. Probably even the Priests. But Lieutenants, main-line Commissars, Officers of the Fleet and Masters or Ordinance I think should just remain Officers.


Actually I'm fairly certain that if the UNIT has the CHARACTER rule, Look Out, Sir applies. So in this hypothetical situation, the unit should still be protected.
I think every model needs the Character Keyword to benefit from it.

Not 100% sure, though.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/28 18:43:03


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Rhine and Raus are the only two model unit that has character protection I think, I can't for the life of me think of a second. Maybe Eisenhorne and Cherubael? What other units have multiple named characters in them?


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/28 19:16:16


Post by: CommunistNapkin


Main rulebook, page 219. Look Out, Sir:

"Models cannot target a unit that contains any CHARACTER models with a Wounds characteristic of 9 or less with a ranged weapon while that unit is within 3" of any other friendly VEHICLE or MONSTER unit, or while it is within 3" of any other friendly units that have 3 or more models, unless that CHARACTER unit is both visible to the firing model and it is the closest enemy unit to the firing model..."

So an old fashioned Command Squad should benefit from Look Out, Sir, as long as at least one of the models in it has the CHARACTER keyword and that model has 9 or fewer wounds.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/28 19:37:48


Post by: Pyroalchi


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Rhine and Raus are the only two model unit that has character protection I think, I can't for the life of me think of a second. Maybe Eisenhorne and Cherubael? What other units have multiple named characters in them?


Gaunts Ghosts
Ephrael Stern and Kyganil (SoB)
Celestine and Geminae Superia
Aestred Thurga and Agathae Dolan

Might even be more of them


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/28 20:12:47


Post by: JNAProductions


 CommunistNapkin wrote:
Main rulebook, page 219. Look Out, Sir:

"Models cannot target a unit that contains any CHARACTER models with a Wounds characteristic of 9 or less with a ranged weapon while that unit is within 3" of any other friendly VEHICLE or MONSTER unit, or while it is within 3" of any other friendly units that have 3 or more models, unless that CHARACTER unit is both visible to the firing model and it is the closest enemy unit to the firing model..."

So an old fashioned Command Squad should benefit from Look Out, Sir, as long as at least one of the models in it has the CHARACTER keyword and that model has 9 or fewer wounds.
Huh. Would you look at that.

Thanks for the knowledge!


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/29 00:16:29


Post by: brainpsyk


 CommunistNapkin wrote:
Main rulebook, page 219. Look Out, Sir:

"Models cannot target a unit that contains any CHARACTER models with a Wounds characteristic of 9 or less with a ranged weapon while that unit is within 3" of any other friendly VEHICLE or MONSTER unit, or while it is within 3" of any other friendly units that have 3 or more models, unless that CHARACTER unit is both visible to the firing model and it is the closest enemy unit to the firing model..."

So an old fashioned Command Squad should benefit from Look Out, Sir, as long as at least one of the models in it has the CHARACTER keyword and that model has 9 or fewer wounds.


Yep, I read that wrong. Good catch!


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/29 06:32:59


Post by: cuda1179


brainpsyk wrote:
 CommunistNapkin wrote:
Main rulebook, page 219. Look Out, Sir:

"Models cannot target a unit that contains any CHARACTER models with a Wounds characteristic of 9 or less with a ranged weapon while that unit is within 3" of any other friendly VEHICLE or MONSTER unit, or while it is within 3" of any other friendly units that have 3 or more models, unless that CHARACTER unit is both visible to the firing model and it is the closest enemy unit to the firing model..."

So an old fashioned Command Squad should benefit from Look Out, Sir, as long as at least one of the models in it has the CHARACTER keyword and that model has 9 or fewer wounds.


Yep, I read that wrong. Good catch!


So, with that in mind, with the addition of bringing an extra couple wounds, and a couple power weapon attacks, adding a Commissar would make an Infantry Squad tougher to shoot. Take them back to "execute a guy and they won't run away".

This would make Infantry squads still fragile in close combat, but they will stick around longer until they get assaulted. Other gunline armies might be forced to actually maneuver and get closer.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/29 16:48:45


Post by: brainpsyk


What if Commissars allowed nearby units to take morale tests on a d3 instead of a d6, just like our current strat.

Combine that with the Ld9 aura, then even after losing 6 models, an infantry squad still only fails morale on a 5-6.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/29 17:17:41


Post by: Kanluwen


what if commissars got removed from the book?

I like that idea better.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/29 18:06:53


Post by: CommunistNapkin


brainpsyk wrote:
What if Commissars allowed nearby units to take morale tests on a d3 instead of a d6, just like our current strat.

Combine that with the Ld9 aura, then even after losing 6 models, an infantry squad still only fails morale on a 5-6.


That would certainly make them better than they are now, although I feel it would remove some of their flavor. Commissars have been executing men to pass morale for ages, so I think that you've gotta tie the executor in there somewhere. There has to be a middle point between "execute a guy and ignore the morale mechanic completely" and "commissars are an actual detriment to your army because more often than not, you're executing a model and still failing morale anyway." Just spitballing, but what if the rule was more like...

"Prior to taking a Morale test on a unit, a Commissar within 6" may execute one or more models from that unit. For every model removed this way, subtract 3 from the total result of the next Morale test."

A couple examples:

An Infantry Squad lost 5 men this turn. With a Leadership 7 sergeant, the squad would normally have to roll a 1 or 2 to pass (ignoring any leadership buffs that Commissars might provide for this example). So in this situation, a player could have his nearby commissar execute a single model, making it so a 1-5 passes, but a 6 would still fail. Alternatively, that player could just go ahead and execute two models instead, and guarantee the unit will pass, however at a higher cost.

I suppose you could also have the execution apply after taking and failing a Morale test, but that kind of completely removes the gamble from it. "Oh, I rolled a 4 but I needed a 2 or less? Guess I just execute a single model." "Oh, I rolled a 6 but needed a 2 or less? Guess I can just execute 2 models."


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/29 21:09:03


Post by: Jarms48


Execute with a RR on a D3. Then we can get rid of the Fight to the Death stratagem.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
brainpsyk wrote:

Unfortunately, the game has changed since 3rd edition. Having a squad means the character is targetable, and with the lethality of 9th, that squad will just get picked up. So people will either 1 - just hide them all game so the extra models become a tax or b - just not take them.


Having a single character in a unit gives the entire unit LoS. Which is why bringing back old school command squads would work.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/30 06:10:00


Post by: Dirk Reinecke


The problem with putting the officer in the command squad is that it will give the whole squad the characther keyword as well.

As was pointed out this will give the squad 'look out sir' but will also give the easiest 15 victory points ever. 7 t3 +5 wounds for 15 victory points? Who would say no to that?


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/30 07:03:35


Post by: Jarms48


No, you have split keywords. All you need is something like:

- KEYWORDS (COMPANY COMMANDER): CHARACTER, INFANTRY, OFFICER, COMPANY COMMANDER
- KEYWORDS (VETERANS): INFANTRY, VETERANS, COMMAND SQUAD

Done, now the CC provides the entire squad LoS and only counts as 3 VP for assassinate. Datasheets with split keywords like this already exist such as Commander Shadowsun.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/30 12:29:28


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Honestly, how about we just remove morale from the game? It's a dumb system that hasn't worked properly since 8th, and no one mains horde armies anymore. It's a relic play style.

Remove Commissars
Remove Conscripts
Make infantry squads 5-10 now.
Remove Morale from vehicles and characters. It's dumb. Remove from game.


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/30 12:47:07


Post by: VladimirHerzog


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Honestly, how about we just remove morale from the game? It's a dumb system that hasn't worked properly since 8th, and no one mains horde armies anymore. It's a relic play style.

Remove Commissars
Remove Conscripts
Make infantry squads 5-10 now.
Remove Morale from vehicles and characters. It's dumb. Remove from game.


Or, make it actually work. Forcing units that failed morale to lose 1 BS/WS that turn or move away from the enemy would already be more interesting than just losing more models


Imperial guard, your 3 fixes? @ 2022/05/30 13:35:17


Post by: Kanluwen


Jarms48 wrote:
No, you have split keywords. All you need is something like:

- KEYWORDS (COMPANY COMMANDER): CHARACTER, INFANTRY, OFFICER, COMPANY COMMANDER
- KEYWORDS (VETERANS): INFANTRY, VETERANS, COMMAND SQUAD

Done, now the CC provides the entire squad LoS and only counts as 3 VP for assassinate. Datasheets with split keywords like this already exist such as Commander Shadowsun.

or even simpler and more in line with what we have now, a "Command Squad" is a rule that lets you take, without using up a FOC slot, for each officer taken in your army:

-1x Signals Officer
-1x Standard
-2x Veteran Bodyguards