Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So, i am preparing to start a IG army, but am not sure what kind of army build i want.

I guess the main two types of army are Gunline and Mech, (i guess there are valkyrie heavy armies too? But i don't really see myself doing that) but i am not entirely clear what the best way to build those armies are.

In my limited understanding, Gunline seems to be made up of mostly infantry platoons backed by different tanks and stuff, whereas Mech seems to pile everything into Chimeras to burn/melt/blast things.

So, i guess my question is what are some of the basic Gunline and Mech army builds for around 1500 points, and depending on what build i am using, how do the roles of certain unit's change? For example, from what i have seen, a common build for the CCS is 4 plasmas in a Chimera, which i assume is for a mostly Mech build. Would i want the CCS outfitted differently in a Gunline type army, such as more long range based to stay with the infantry platoons giving order's? IG just have so many different options, i am feeling a little overwhelmed, lol.

Any examples of basic lists and the general strategies behind them would be very helpful, as i want to get these kind of questions out of the way now, so i don't assemble a my squads and then find out I've given units things they don't need...

Thanks for any help.

Glad you are interested in the Guard.

Gunline and mechanized are indeed some of the more popular builds, but they also double as some of the most boring to play against/with.

Now, there are of course quite a few different flavors of gunline and mech - e.g. Pure infantry gunline, artillery + infantry, artillery + mech and so on. The command squad for example, is more useful throwing orders in an infantry heavy army, than sitting in a chimera with plasmaguns.

In general there are a few obvious things to keep in mind:
The infantry in general is fragile, especially out of cover, but dirt cheap, which makes them sort of survivable. Adda commissar and they even survive close combat.
The main battle tanks are very survivable with very good weapons.
The artillery units have the best guns and the worst life expectation.

I would strongly recommend though that you borrow/proxy an army for a few games and go nuts. Try out different army types and see what seems most intuitive and fun to you. For example, lots of people will advise you that hybrid mech/infantry is bad and weak. However, you might as well find out that he way you use it is very effective.

Bottom line: I am not advising you to just throw random units in a list. If nothing else, most IG army lists have to be created with the bigger picture in mind, because you cannot afford to leave a critical weakness for the enemy to exploit (e.g. not taking something that can reliably be in the enemy's DZ by turn 4).

There's a lot of questions you have, but I'll start by saying that the gunline/mech phenomenon is, in my opinion, a false dichotomy. I've had good experiences with mixed army types, and I don't think you should feel you have to go all one way or another way. It's also important to note that the quality of a given type of list (this is true of every army) is heavily dependent on terrain. So if effectiveness carries a lot of weight with you, think about what your local boards look like.

Although this is the tactics forum, I will also say that you need to make an army that you love. I will admit bias, but I think this is more true for Guard than for many other armies. You have a lot of guys to assemble (and convert) and paint, and a lot of vehicles. This makes the army expensive and time consuming, and if you don't love it you might be a few hundred USD down with an army on Ebay.

Back to the OP:

CCS in more static list provides support to other units with orders and a regimental standard, and kills things with special weapons. This also happens to be what they are used for in a mech list, but often with a 4th special weapon in the place of the standard. In most of my experiences, they have a Chimera in static list, because of the effective boost to the order and standard radius of effect, and the bonus the Chimera gives when you really need to get the special weapons somewhere. They, of course, always have a Chimera in a mech list. While static lists usually don't have the saturation of AV12 hulls that mech lists do, a static CCS Chimera is pretty far away, and most static lists still have plenty of armor that demands more immediate attention than a command squad's Chimera (Leman Russes, Artillery, Hellhounds).

I wouldn't ever give a static CCS a heavy weapon, as I often find that even in a more static army, the CCS is moving around to issue orders to units that can take the best shots or is moving around to set up their own shots with their fantastic selection of special weapons.

One alternative, I suppose would be to use a static CCS with a heavy weapon and the Master of Ordinance. I think in most games this is a waste of points, but in very large games, where the table is packed and you can have two CCSs, it's probably free kills every turn.

For the Mech CCS, I think your options are more straightforward. 4 Meltas or 4 Plasmas, although I've seen good arguments for a split assortment. In this format, they're driving around with veterans in chimeras, instead of sitting around issuing orders to infantry squads with heavy weapons. They will use their orders less, usually only when they or a veteran squad disembarks to take out something really important. You have to be careful this way, because you're closer to the enemy, and there are many units that can hurt a command squad pretty easily. This might be okay, however, as a 4 melta CCS with the "Bring it Down" order stands a good chance of killing nearly any tank in the game, and the 4 plasma CCS with the "Bring it Down" order will kill nearly any monstrous creature and threaten a lot of tanks (and almost never overheat).

Well, that's the CCS. I'll stop here at this point, because I've said a lot, and continue later with some other units if you've found this useful.

So, the guard actually come in more flavors than originally implied. The guard can take any of the following fragments and stick them together into a complete list:

infantry horde
mechanized
air-cavalry
armored
artillery

Generally speaking, you're only going to want to pick 2 or so, and go with that. For example, I run a 2/3ds infantry horde, 1/3 artillery list, while a "leafblower" list (another popular build) is 2/3ds mech, 1/3 artillery.

Note that gunline refers to a way that you play moreso that the army type you bring (although you do have to give your armies certain weapons to play a gunline). For example, I play an infantry-artillery army, but I do NOT play a gunline. While the artillery component does pretty much just sit there, my infantry wave always charges forward, and 1/3 of the infantry outflank with al'rahem.

Anyways, each combination has its certain strengths and liabilities that you'll have to learn how to play with in your particular choice. Once you've chosen, you can post stuff up in the army lists board.

welcome to the guard!

Yeah, I've found this useful, and plan to experiment some with the few IG i have with some orks added in to proxy for stuff, so that should help some.

I think I am leaning more towards a more static list, but am wondering how that generally works.

Being new to 40k, i do not think i've every really seen a IG gunline actually play, and have only experienced the more mech and horde (namely SW and Orks) style armies, so the concept of a gunline is strange to me.

Like, is it usually a CCS in a chimera, a few infantry platoons placed in cover, with some heavier tanks and artillery backing them up? Are there certain units I would use to counter assault, or is the strategy to gun everything down before it gets to you?

I realize that there are probably a lot of differing builds, and mixes of mech and gunline, as well as many units that are situational, or up to my preference, but what are some of the core units I "NEED" for a static gunline to work? Like a list of must have units, and a basic explanation of their function in the group as a whole. I think once i understand that i think i should be able to test out the different more optional units and figure out which i like the best.

Thanks for the help so far, and for bearing with what are probably very simple questions that i am over-thinking to the extreme

jcd386 wrote:I think I am leaning more towards a more static list, but am wondering how that generally works.

It doesn't. Gunlines were kings of 3rd ed, and still pretty good in 4th. In 5th ed, prepared to be whipped over the barrel.

5th. ed has made long ranged firepower much worse because everything gets nice cover. Meanwhile the engagement time has gone way down as infantry sprint, transports are cheap, and lots of stuff can outflank and deepstrike. This means you get way fewer turns of shooting at them, and no longer are they forced to march out into the open against you.

But getting horribly flanked while not putting out that much damage is only the first part. The more important part is that 2/3ds of the mission types require you to be mobile in order to win (objectives missions), while you're going to have a much harder time gaining KP with long-ranged weapons than before.

In short, don't do a gunline, it's just going to loose you games. That you're unfamiliar with this play style is actually a strength, unlike in days of yore.

Oh, well thats good to know, lol. i did think it would be difficult to keep the enemy off you...

Can you give me examples of what are some of the more viable options?

I think the infantry horde type list has the biggest appeal to me, but i also want to be able to win my fair share of games...

What would an example of the 2/3rds infantry 1/3rd artillary list look like at around 1500 points? I'd like to be able to get a general feel for what it looks like, and how it works.

Well, you pick two of the following:

infantry horde
mechanized
air-cavalry
armored
artillery

If you want infantry horde as your primary, then it's a matter of what you want with your secondary. Do you want your army to charge forward under a murderous hail of artillery fire? Do you want your army to advance side by side with Russes as they blast at the enemy? Do you want to charge forward with a big wave that has a mechanized wing for greater mobility (like cavalry of old), or a wave that charges into an enemy who is being rattled and confused by units falling out of the sky on 3x twin-linked lascannon rocket pod of doom hovercraft?

As for the infantry part itself, it sort of depends on what you're looking for. Generally speaking platoons with commissars for the purposes of blobbing is a good thing as blobs are already pretty darn resiliant to long ranged gunfire with "incoming!" and the commissar's stubborn rule makes them much harder to sweep away in close combat leaving you with some pretty tough squads. Apart from this, you'll also want your infantry to do some damage, which may come in the form of SWSs, vets, power blobs, or, if you're insane, ogryn. The real strength of infantry is bodies in the field durability and the fact that you can take LOTS of special weapons.

here is an example of a 1500 infantry primary artillery secondary list. I only played with this once, and there are some changes I'd make to it now (such as dropping the mortar batteries for another power blob), but it's not the worst possible start. That said, it is MY start. YOUR start might look very different depending on what you're wanting your list to do.

Hmm, yeah, ok, this is helpful.

I assume you blob up the two power weapon groups, and they form your main close combat unit while the rest advances, shooting? They actually look pretty deadly for a mob of guardsmen...thats a lot of power weapon attacks...I'll have to try it out.

Well, thanks for the help. i'll probably proxy up something or other, read here and other places, and start trying out stuff for myself as i buy/build/paint the army...

Generally a good IG army is a mix of mech and foot.

Artillery is where most of the damage is done while the foot platoons offer protection from assaults.

If you like infantry horde a lot, I think Leman Russ hulls are usually the best heavy support units. Since you don't have that many tanks, you want your tanks to be tough. AV12 artillery, while often cheap and powerful, is not tough at all. If all you have is infantry and AV 14, a lot of weapons won't be effective against your army at all, as you don't have any good targets for "midrange" firepower. Alternatively, you could mix in indirect artillery out of LOS for your heavy support. This gets toughness from cover saves and fewer shots against it (but don't fool yourself into thinking you'll be able to use cover to completely remove shots against your artillery unless you have a lot of cover). I don't like this option as much, however, because it is much more susceptible to outflankers as it often can't move or shoot and is open topped. Either way, side armor 10 on artillery means that any weapon that gets shots stands a reasonable chance of silencing it.

While I'll agree with Ailaros that gunline isn't as good as it is previously, you can add gunline elements to an infantry horde pretty cheaply. There are debates in a number of threads where the value of this is questioned. Short answer: Ailaros doesn't believe it's worth the points, most others think at least 10 point autocannons are worth throwing into a few squads to allow them to shoot at armies rushing forward.

The army you outlined suggests that Colonel Straken might be a good choice for HQ if you play with special characters. He makes those solid packs of guardsmen even better, and is basically a 12" no-go zone for vehicles (even walkers). He is good in close combat against non-CC specialists, but the small size and weakness of his supporting squad means he can't really take on elite CC units. That's not a very harsh critique against a guard character. He's not cheap, but the utility you get for him is huge. .

Although I just raved about Straken, I don't believe counterassault is really necessary in a guard army. Platoon command squads, company command squads, and veteran squads easily have enough special weapons to wipe out assault troops that just killed one of your units or vehicles.

No matter what list you pick (I play several different kinds of IG, depending on my mood) Fill leftover points with chimeras. I dont even use them to transport. They are pretty much mobile multilazers for less then 60 points. I use a gunline and park the chimeras in the front of the more vulnerable units (artillery, etc), and watch the magic happen.

They're pretty good transports too, from what I hear

jcd386 wrote:I assume you blob up the two power weapon groups, and they form your main close combat unit while the rest advances, shooting?

That depends on the rest of your list. In my case, I spend about a third of my points on artillery, a third on blobs, and a third on special weapons. Neither the special wepaons nor the blobs do much damage until you're in close, so most of my army spends the first couple of turns "go go go!"ing alot.

Biophysical wrote: AV12 artillery, while often cheap and powerful, is not tough at all.

Actually, a basilisk and a LRBT are exactly equally tough in close combat, and are effectively as tough against highly mobile units (combi-melta sternguard popping out of drop pods, dark lance raiders, multimelta speeders, anything outflanking, etc.)

Really the basilisk and the LRBT are the same vehicle except with the russ you're spending 25 points and the ability to shoot indirectly for the ability to care much less about your opponent's long-range anti tank and the ability to shoot the hull weapon and the battlecannon at the same time.

When you branch out, the disparities become painful as you need to spend a lot more points for meager more survivability while the artillery needs to spend only some more points for doing lots more damage.

And if you're doing infantry and have points to throw around, take more infantry. Spending 60 points for what winds up being pretty mediocre damage (unless you're heavy flamer charging) of a chimera isn't really worth it compared to leveraging even more into your infantry advantages.

I think I've been running into problems with my IG list because I've picked at least 3 of the types listed above. We typically play 2,000 points at my FLGS, and in that I take (just going to boil it down):

CCS, with 1-2 advisers, no special weapons, chimera
1x Infantry Platoon with 3 squads, each with an AC/HB
1x Vet squad with plasma + Chimera
1x Vet squad with Melta + Chimera
1x Vendetta
3x Armored Sentinals
3x LR: LRBT, Vanquisher, and Executioner
1x Manticore

What I've noticed is that I seem to wind up fairly static during many of my games, and that I struggle to deal with MCs. I've been thinking about moving towards a more mechanized list, maybe dropping a Russ for a Basilisk (which I already have the model for). The other idea is to get some more of the unassembled guys I've got ready to go and focus in on the Infantry/Arty model.

Ruckdog wrote:I think I've been running into problems with my IG list because I've picked at least 3 of the types listed above. We typically play 2,000 points at my FLGS, and in that I take (just going to boil it down):

CCS, with 1-2 advisers, no special weapons, chimera
1x Infantry Platoon with 3 squads, each with an AC/HB
1x Vet squad with plasma + Chimera
1x Vet squad with Melta + Chimera
1x Vendetta
3x Armored Sentinals
3x LR: LRBT, Vanquisher, and Executioner
1x Manticore

What I've noticed is that I seem to wind up fairly static during many of my games, and that I struggle to deal with MCs. I've been thinking about moving towards a more mechanized list, maybe dropping a Russ for a Basilisk (which I already have the model for). The other idea is to get some more of the unassembled guys I've got ready to go and focus in on the Infantry/Arty model.

Why give your CCS a ride, if he's got nothing to do(no special weapons!)?
when you say AC/HB do you really mean Autocannon and heavy bolter? if so, the can't both be in each PIS.
your list looks lite for 2000, imho.

at the OP:
i've found that a Mech core is a good start.
i'm still tinkering with the rest of my 1/2 to 1/3. i switch it up alot.
i like the Manticore and a couple of Naked Russes as my HS core too.

Sorry, I meant that the squads have a mix of 1 HB and 2 AC between the three squads. Here, I'll be a little more specific. This is the 2000 pt list I played with last night:

HQ: Company Command Squad (105 pts)
Company Commander (Plasma Pistol; Power Weapon), Officer of the Fleet, Master of Ordnance Vox Caster, Chimera

Infantry Platoon (375 pts)
Platoon Command Squad (Flamer x3; Heavy Flamer), Chimera
Infantry Squad (Vox Caster; Grenade Launcher; AC)
Infantry Squad (Vox Caster; Grenade Launcher; AC)
Infantry Squad (Vox Caster; Heavy Bolter; Commissar)

Veteran Squad (180 pts)
(Shotgun x1; Plasmagun x3, Chimera)

Veteran Squad (100 pts)
(Meltagun x3, Cammo Cloaks)

Armoured Sentinel Squadron (180 pts)
3x Armoured Sentinel (Smoke Launchers, ML)

Fast Attack: Vendetta Gunship Squadron (140 pts)
(Heavy Bolter Sponsons x2)

Heavy Support: Leman Russ Squadron (415 pts)
Leman Russ Battle Tank (Lascannon; Heavy Bolter Sponsons x2)
Leman Russ Executioner (Heavy Flamer; Plasma Cannon Sponsons x2)

Heavy Support: Leman Russ Squadron (220 pts)
Leman Russ Vanquisher (Lascannon; Knight Commander Pask)

Heavy Support: Manticore Rocket Launcher (160 pts)

Ailaros wrote:

jcd386 wrote:I assume you blob up the two power weapon groups, and they form your main close combat unit while the rest advances, shooting?

That depends on the rest of your list. In my case, I spend about a third of my points on artillery, a third on blobs, and a third on special weapons. Neither the special wepaons nor the blobs do much damage until you're in close, so most of my army spends the first couple of turns "go go go!"ing alot.

Biophysical wrote: AV12 artillery, while often cheap and powerful, is not tough at all.

Actually, a basilisk and a LRBT are exactly equally tough in close combat, and are effectively as tough against highly mobile units (combi-melta sternguard popping out of drop pods, dark lance raiders, multimelta speeders, anything outflanking, etc.)

In a majority infantry list, it is laughably easy to keep meltas outside of their 6" range, and pretty reasonable to keep them outside of their 12" range. If they can't deepstrike or outflank close enough the the vehicle, they can't kill it. Outflanking bolters, however, will stop artillery from firing. This is a notable difference. LRBT are, in fact tougher in close combat because they are not open topped, and they can continue to move and fire effectively. Something that most artillery cannot do.

Biophysical is completely right. Yes, close combat and deep-striking meltaguns make a mockery of a LRBT's high front and side armour. But a big mass of infantry can stop these threats from getting at your LRBT.

I-bounty-hunt-the-elderly wrote: Yes, close combat and deep-striking meltaguns make a mockery of a LRBT's high front and side armour. But a big mass of infantry can stop these threats from getting at your LRBT.

Sure, but a couple of infantry squads isn't exactly the Rock of Gibraltar here. It shouldn't be TOO hard for your opponent to kill them if they absolutely need to be dead.

Unless, of course, you're running a gunline and have dozens of troops protecting your tanks, in which case you have other problems.

Biophysical wrote: Outflanking bolters, however, will stop artillery from firing.

If you're going to assume that it's pretty reasonable to keep meltaguns out of 12" when they outflank, then it's also pretty reasonable to assume that you're keeping bolters out of 12" range. Then you have to factor in cover from said infantry, even if they are in range.

Biophysical wrote: LRBT are, in fact tougher in close combat because they are not open topped, and they can continue to move and fire effectively. Something that most artillery cannot do.

Both artillery and LRBTs fire ordnance while moving 6". The advantage that the LRBT gets is that, for +20 points, it can fire 3x heavy bolters on the move. A worthwhile upgrade, perhaps, but not exactly a bank-breaker over the artillery's indirect fire capabilities.

And yeah, lack of open topped makes them slightly tougher, but unless we're talking about better surviving a frag grenade assault, the vehicle's going to be dead or seriously damaged regardless.

Ailaros wrote:
Both artillery and LRBTs fire ordnance while moving 6". The advantage that the LRBT gets is that, for +20 points, it can fire 3x heavy bolters on the move. A worthwhile upgrade, perhaps, but not exactly a bank-breaker over the artillery's indirect fire capabilities.

Ord. Barrage can't move and fire. anything you want Artillery to fire indirect, can't if they move.

Ailaros wrote:The advantage that the LRBT gets is that, for +20 points, it can fire 3x heavy bolters on the move.

I don't think this is right. According to my rulebook, a LRBT can fire its turret, plus *one* additional weapon of Str5+, plus any defensive weapons when it moves. Only a fast vehicle (hellhound or valk variant) can fire multiple str5+ weapons when moving.

alarmingrick wrote:

Ailaros wrote:
Both artillery and LRBTs fire ordnance while moving 6". The advantage that the LRBT gets is that, for +20 points, it can fire 3x heavy bolters on the move. A worthwhile upgrade, perhaps, but not exactly a bank-breaker over the artillery's indirect fire capabilities.

Ord. Barrage can't move and fire. anything you want Artillery to fire indirect, can't if they move.

I wasn't assuming a barrage. Most artillery can move and fire directly, just like a LRBT.

Flavius Infernus wrote:

Ailaros wrote:The advantage that the LRBT gets is that, for +20 points, it can fire 3x heavy bolters on the move.

I don't think this is right. According to my rulebook, a LRBT can fire its turret, plus *one* additional weapon of Str5+, plus any defensive weapons when it moves. Only a fast vehicle (hellhound or valk variant) can fire multiple str5+ weapons when moving.

Oh... I think you might be right. That makes russes much worse.

Ailaros wrote:

alarmingrick wrote:

Ord. Barrage can't move and fire. anything you want Artillery to fire indirect, can't if they move.

I wasn't assuming a barrage. Most artillery can move and fire directly, just like a LRBT.

And in doing so give up their advantage of not being shot at. This isn't really a problem with AV12 spam lists, but if all you have is a few artillery pieces and infantry, the number of turns they are able to fire should be counted on one finger.


Bolters were a bad example, because there's not that many things that outflank or deep-strike with relentless bolters, but there's plenty of fast vehicles carrying S4,5,or 6 multishot guns, and all of those rip up the side armor of artillery, and cannot touch LRBTs. I'm not sure how you say that Open-Topped doesn't matter. It's like giving all the enemy guns AP1. We all know that matters.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
It should also be noted that infantry won't be giving cover to tanks. You have to fully obscure half the face of a tank being shot at to get a cover save. I don't believe infantry do that, at least not against higher up weapon mounts that are common on most vehicles.

Ailaros wrote:

Flavius Infernus wrote:

Ailaros wrote:The advantage that the LRBT gets is that, for +20 points, it can fire 3x heavy bolters on the move.

I don't think this is right. According to my rulebook, a LRBT can fire its turret, plus *one* additional weapon of Str5+, plus any defensive weapons when it moves. Only a fast vehicle (hellhound or valk variant) can fire multiple str5+ weapons when moving.

Oh... I think you might be right. That makes russes much worse.

I just give my Russ a hull heavy flamer and never use the Lumbering Behemoth rule. It keeps the cost down at 150 and gives the tank a blast/template threat range that goes all the way from the hull to the 72". If I want 3 HBs at BS3, there are better places in a guard army to buy them than LR sponsons.

I don't think there is a hull weapon that a mainline LRBT would benefit from with lumbering behemoth.

The lascannon. Takes off meq with no saves, just like the battle cannon (plus teq), and bolsters the natural anti-vehicle capabilities of the battle cannon as well. I've been running a lascannon and no sponsons, to take full advantage of lumbering bohemeth (just moving a bit means CC hits 50% instead of autohit, or even better is now out of range). Our artillery is obviously easier to neutralize than our tanks with ranged weaponry, but having ordnance barrage on the field is pretty nice, and one is easy to hide behind terrain and/or my other vehicles.

Back on topic, I'd like to argue for the IG gunline. Not to say mech or aircav isn't competitive - Dakka abuzzes with those lists, and obviously people are using them. Hybrid - I'm not sure where the line is, people tell me 2 chims isn't. So I've got a gunline. I've always had one, and I've been playing alot of battles in the last few weeks, and after dropping vets I've started to find success. This has been my first serious run of 5th edition battles and came after lengthy Dakkasearch, including pestering people with unsolicited pleas for advice, all in order to get competitive use out of my models. I've played against Blood Angels quite a few times, which was great testing against fast transport, deepstriking, teleporting assault madness including Mephiston (fleet with 4 S10 rerolled attacks). I've been competitive enough and I think I'll get better.

The backbone of the gunline is two platoons. 40-60 regular infantry, sometimes blobbed, sometimes not. Sometimes one platoon as a power blob, sometimes armed as the second platoon - HB/GL. They provide anti- light infantry, and are also the bubblewrap for the rest of the army.

The platoons bring along HWS's for firepower - over 1000 pts I've got 2 LC squads, an AC squad and a mortar squad, and I have a couple ML squads for higher point battles. The LC's and AC's get the best firing position in my deployment zone, with good fields of fire and hopefully (and usually) cover. The PIS's and HWS's are all scoring, so often start the game already capping an objective (or two).

The CCS has the job of holding the HWS's in line and firing to full effect. They stay near them, sometimes in a chimera, sometimes not. Except in small, 1000 pts or less games I bring a Lord Commissar as well, and hide him in the CCS. Then my oh-so-fragile HWS are testing for morale on ld10 with a reroll, and so basically aren't going anywhere and must be completely destroyed to silence the battery. The company commander's BiD and FoMT, while not critical, are now received on ld10, which makes the guns more efficient at killing their targets. Note this is also the case for any regular infantry squads that happen to be in range as well, although the HWS are the priority for my 'command triad' of Company Commander/Regimental Standard/Lord Commissar. The weapons I usually keep cheap, usually just a mortar. Having 10 wounds and two refractor fields makes me like adding a medic, so that the squad has some durability.

The infantry are backed up by a Basi, a LRBT, an armoured plasma sent, and at higher points a hellhound and a demolisher. The Basi is easily hid by terrain and my own vehicles, and moves out for direct fire in the end game. The LRBT has the firepower and mobility to stay in the best firing spots all game, out of range of much AT fire and mobile enough to sometimes evade assaults. Those two are easily bubblewrapped by all my infantry if I desire, making it difficult for deepstrikers to get melta close. Gapping up a board edge with my many units neutralizes outflankers. The sent is easy to find cover for, and brings some anti-teq to the list until the LRD gets there. The hellhound has range and mobility which makes it useful, but sometimes struggles against power armour.

My two PCS's get chims, as they are naturally mobile squads. Sometimes they loan the boats to HWS's, or PIS's, depending on the situation. Sometimes I give the Lord Commie one too, and put the CCS in it with him to expand all the leadership bubbles, or sometimes he hosts a HWS, or gets out and gives it to a PIS to go score. They aren't critical, as infantry can always run.

The name of the game is 'expendable'. Every unit in the army can be thrown away, and I have alot of units. I try for redundancy as far as shooting at different target types. The tanks are protected by the HWS's which are protected by the regulars. The enemy has trouble killing them all, and for alot of armies I'm thinking leaving a troop choice to guard an objective is an expensive prospect that weakens the assault on my lines. My regular blood angel opponent's troop choices are fairly expensive, and not exactly something you want just sitting around, making sending everything to push me off my objectives a tempting plan. I also have enough long range pie to shell a unit off an objective in a couple turns of fire, and can also use my vehicles to contest. Also, one third of battles don't have objectives, and another third have only two, and in that case you place it after you know what deployment is going to be. Ailaros, in other threads you say that transports aren't necessary, and that commanders shouldn't be worried about losing them early because they can still move 7-12"; why do you say here that a gunline is dead because mobility and objectives rule? Just because it's a gunline doesn't mean it has to stay still, certainly not all of it.

Sorry for the lengthy post, I thought the detailed perspective may benefit the OP. I'll post my latest list in the Army Lists section so it's a little more clear as to what I'm talking about. I'm a technotard, so don't expect a link - I call my lists Heavy Infantry Companies.

Gunlines have no mobility, though, so you are screwed on 2/3ds of the missions.

Furthermore, a gunline takes infantry weapons which are much worse per shot than their special weapon equivalent. This is taken care of when you get several turns to fire at your opponents (per the like 1 you get with special weapons). The problem is, everything moves twice as fast, and lots of stuff can outflank and deepstrike, which means that you don't get these lots of turns of shooting. Add in that cover is better and easier to find, and that heavy weapons start having serious problems at close range (as you're shooting through your own stuff and you can't reposition and shoot in the same turn), and you get weapons whose firepower isn't all that good anymore.

The end result is an immobile, low-firepower army. Not going to do well against sufficiently mobile and objectives-oriented opponents.

I don't get it though, Al. In other threads you go off about how transports don't matter, there's no need to kill them at range, the troops can still walk, etc. etc. Why does a gunline need transports if no one else does? Why assume that a gunline has no transports? You seem selective with your arguments when in one thread you say losing a transport barely slows troops down, because they can still move 7-12", but in this thread you say 'everything moves twice as fast'. Which is it? I don't think I'm screwed for 2/3 of missions - capture and control has two objectives, of which I'll be sitting on one. Seize ground has 3-5, meaning some are likely to be within marching distance. As I said above, just because it's a gunline doesn't mean it has to sit still, certainly not every unit all game.

I've already addressed outflanking and deepstriking - they can be neutralized or minimized with proper deployment, there are inherent risks related to their use as well, and of course not all armies I'll face make use of such tactics. Of course they are a problem, maybe even my biggest problem, but not so much that I should just get a new army, or go home when someone starts pulling out drop pods.

I'm not sure what you mean about heavy weapons 'having serious problems at close range (as you're shooting through your own stuff)'. I'm shooting through my own stuff when the enemy is far away too. I also don't know what you mean about them being 'much worse per shot than their special weapon equivalent.' What is the special weapon equivalent to the lascannon? The meltagun? Different weapon with different advantages and disadvantages. The only thing I see as remotely equivalent is ML to GL, and for that comparison, the ML is obviously better per shot. I suppose PG is the special weapon AC - again, different weapon with different advantages and disadvantages, the only thing the same is the strength. The only time the plasmagun is better per shot is when it's power armour or better, otherwise the AC is cheaper, longer ranged, and has a better rate of fire beyond 12".

murdog wrote:I don't get it though, Al. In other threads you go off about how transports don't matter, there's no need to kill them at range, the troops can still walk, etc. etc. Why does a gunline need transports if no one else does? Why assume that a gunline has no transports? As I said above, just because it's a gunline doesn't mean it has to sit still, certainly not every unit all game.

A gunline needs mobility, regardless of if it uses transports or not.

I think some of the confusion here may be with regard to how we each define "gunline". To me, a gun line is something that sits there with a bunch of infantry with long ranged guns with some support vehicles sitting behind. These kinds of armies suffer heavily from mobility problems.

If you're choosing to define a gunline as simply "a line of dudes with guns", then the list that I run would also qualify as a gunline, and none of my previous comments would be valid by this definition.

murdog wrote: I don't think I'm screwed for 2/3 of missions - capture and control has two objectives, of which I'll be sitting on one.

...which you opponent only needs to contest because they will have their own seized if you don't have any mobility. Once again, I think this is incommensurability due to definition of "gunline".

murdog wrote:You seem selective with your arguments when in one thread you say losing a transport barely slows troops down, because they can still move 7-12", but in this thread you say 'everything moves twice as fast'. Which is it?

Both. Infantry now move 7-12", which means they move up to twice as fast as they used to. 7-12" is also not that much slower than a transport moving 12".

murdog wrote:You seem selective with your arguments when in one thread

It's sort of subtle. In the dealing with transports side, I was saying that they should be ignored and handled at close range. In the case of gunlines, I'm saying that long-range weapons are going to have problems once the transports come close.

The unifying factor in both of these is that long-range guns aren't good against transports. In the case of the "dealing with" it's because of the poor damage of the guns themselves, combined with metagame reasons, and in the case of "gulines" it's because you don't have any serious short ranged weapons to handle the transports when they arrive.

murdog wrote:I'm not sure what you mean about heavy weapons 'having serious problems at close range (as you're shooting through your own stuff)'.

You get to set up fire lanes with heavy weapons to get clear shots across the field. Very often, once you start having to shoot into your own guys, you will find serious problems with cover saves and LOS problems due.

murdog wrote: I'm shooting through my own stuff when the enemy is far away too.

unless, of course, this is true. In this case you ALWAYS have this disadvantage with infantry heavy weapons.

murdog wrote:I also don't know what you mean about them being 'much worse per shot than their special weapon equivalent.' Different weapon with different advantages and disadvantages.

Sure, heavy bolter=flamer, autocannon=plasma gun, lascannon=meltagun. In all of these cases, the special weapon does more damage. The only advantage to the heavy weapon is range, but, as mentioned, that advantage took a hell of a beating by 5th ed rules.

The only exception is the missile launcher and the grenade launcher, the latter being a weapon I'm not going to rush to defend (not that the missile launcher is all that great either).

Static gunlines are just as viable now as they were back in previous editions. The difference being that now, it needs to be supplemented with a mobile element in order to be effective.

This is how I play. I have a few Platoons that I keep on my board edge, loaded with heavy weapons and holding my 'home' objective. I then have an armoured assault section that consists of 2 x Demolishers, 2 x Vendettas and 4 x Chimeras (2 x melta-Vets, 1 x flamer-PCS, 1 x plasma-CCS). I find this to be a pleasant list to play as it comprises all the key elements of a Guard army into a fun and competitive package.

The arguement over Guard heavy weapons has been done to death in this Forum and if always has the same outcome. Basically, nearly everyone has found a use for, and employs, heavy weapons in their Guard to good effect. Ailaros does not like heavy weapons. This is how he plays his game, not neccesarily how YOU should play yours.

If you are interested in a hybrid list (and it is a lot of fun) take a look at the lnk in my siggy; it'll take you to my blog where you'll find my army list posted up.

I'll more than likely expand on this later, I'm just a bit tired at the moment!

L. Wrex

^
I think he's referring to a static gunline. Hybrid lists where the blob camps on objectives work very well, in my experience. Like yours.