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.

I think GW just despises the Imperial Guard because they lose every single white dwarf battle report they're in. This time they lost to necrons... necrons! Are they even trying?


Anyway, is there a reason that the guard lose every single battle report they're involved in?

Its white dwarf. Deal with it.

Because IG are merely humans, and are a great foil to get whipsmacked by the mean old aliens.

Thought better of sinking to someone's level.

White Dwarf reports suck. But this is good, that means we will get buffed even more the next codex.

When a Moderator edits your post to leave your point intact, but remove antagonistic personal remarks about another posters, it is a violation of Dakka's rules to edit said personal remarks back in. - The Mgmt.

I wouldn't pay this battle report much mind. IG regularly cleans up most armies with a competent player behind them.

Commander Endova wrote:I wouldn't pay this battle report much mind. IG regularly cleans up most armies with a competent player behind them.

I guess I haven't played against a competent player then Haha. I've played against 3 IG players and horrendously spanked all of them: one used all tanks, one used IG blob squads, and the third used blob squads with grey knights (against my daemons). In fact, my daemons hosed ALL 3 of those various armies. To be fair, the army with grey knights was during the last codex. But the other 2 army setups had no excuses. I haven't had a rough time against them at all, with any armies that I play, including chaos marines who LOVE chosen with outflanking rhinos and meltaguns...

timetowaste85 wrote:

Commander Endova wrote:I wouldn't pay this battle report much mind. IG regularly cleans up most armies with a competent player behind them.

I guess I haven't played against a competent player then Haha. I've played against 3 IG players and horrendously spanked all of them: one used all tanks, one used IG blob squads, and the third used blob squads with grey knights (against my daemons). In fact, my daemons hosed ALL 3 of those various armies. To be fair, the army with grey knights was during the last codex. But the other 2 army setups had no excuses. I haven't had a rough time against them at all, with any armies that I play, including chaos marines who LOVE chosen with outflanking rhinos and meltaguns...

You want a medal? We're not really talking about if you can beat IG or not.

Happygrunt wrote:Its white dwarf. Deal with it.

This

In short, WD has rarely had good battle reports.
Except for that one I read about, during the Medusa IV campaign (I think that's what it was). IG versus Orks in a Cities of Death battle.
The IG lost that, too, now that I think about it. Hmm. OP seems to have a convincing point.

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:In short, WD has rarely had good battle reports.
Except for that one I read about, during the Medusa IV campaign (I think that's what it was). IG versus Orks in a Cities of Death battle.
The IG lost that, too, now that I think about it. Hmm. OP seems to have a convincing point.

Sadly true. I think the last white dwarf battle I read and enjoyed reading was years ago with Black Templars versus Orks. The Orks had a looted basilisk and it was firing direct and flattened most of a squad of templars .

Lexx wrote:

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:In short, WD has rarely had good battle reports.
Except for that one I read about, during the Medusa IV campaign (I think that's what it was). IG versus Orks in a Cities of Death battle.
The IG lost that, too, now that I think about it. Hmm. OP seems to have a convincing point.

Sadly true. I think the last white dwarf battle I read and enjoyed reading was years ago with Black Templars versus Orks. The Orks had a looted basilisk and it was firing direct and flattened most of a squad of templars .

See? Our collective memories of good battle reports take place so far back all we can remember is the one or two funny details!
For shame, GW. For shame indeed.

Lexx wrote:
Sadly true. I think the last white dwarf battle I read and enjoyed reading was years ago with Black Templars versus Orks. The Orks had a looted basilisk and it was firing direct and flattened most of a squad of templars .

I remember an orks vs Templars one that ended with only the Emperors champion, a chaplain and a few assault marines on the field, everything else was dead.

Thinking back I do remember the guard winning a couple of old games. One when the second 3rd ed codex came out they infantry blobbed with mass heavy weapon support and stormed an ork held stronghold. The second one was vs the LatD, it was a 2vs2 in a ruined city. On one half of the map the guard shot the mutants to pieces on the other it was a hard slog but the guard emerged victorious.

Of course space marines (who I also like) win battle reports all the time.

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:

Lexx wrote:

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:In short, WD has rarely had good battle reports.
Except for that one I read about, during the Medusa IV campaign (I think that's what it was). IG versus Orks in a Cities of Death battle.
The IG lost that, too, now that I think about it. Hmm. OP seems to have a convincing point.

Sadly true. I think the last white dwarf battle I read and enjoyed reading was years ago with Black Templars versus Orks. The Orks had a looted basilisk and it was firing direct and flattened most of a squad of templars .

See? Our collective memories of good battle reports take place so far back all we can remember is the one or two funny details!
For shame, GW. For shame indeed.

Whilst that may be part of it. It will also be it was probably 7 or more years back and I haven't reread my older issues in a long time . I stopped buying them in 2006. White Dwarf used to be something I looked forward to every month. Now it feels like when I do pick up a copy its just an advertising brochure for what GW are pushing to sell at the moment. Plus the battle reports to me feel a lot more rigged than they used to be. So that the new release model armies nearly (if not always ) win every time. When the Necrons first came out they fought guard but both sides got decimated by each other. Now it seems that whoever is the new releases opponents they will get tanned as another effort to sell new products to people. Another thing I miss is the fact they used to have a lot more short story fiction based on the warhammer and 40k settings. Those were awesome.

Yeah, I agree with that. Some of my favourite batreps were the ones where they were just doing it for fun or story or something, as opposed to showcasing their newest army. I remember another good batrep which involved old SM and older Orks tearing into each other; it was great.
Still, I can always read the batreps on Dakka, I guess. I just miss the days when WD actually used to be of some value.

I remember back when the Old DE codex was still relatively new, the Catachan force gave them a bit of a smacking. Though I don't know if Catachan were considered the same as generic IG back then.

I think they had their own codex, E-F. Hard to remember now, it was a while ago.

Emperors Faithful wrote:I remember back when the Old DE codex was still relatively new, the Catachan force gave them a bit of a smacking. Though I don't know if Catachan were considered the same as generic IG back then.

Back then they had their own mini codex. Played it a few times. Lots of flamers and crazily good at shooting through forests and using cover.

WD battle reports have some flaws.
The army lists are not well-designed, they should exhbit as many different units as possible.
The players make sometime strange decision during the battle (see the battle report of BA vs. CSM when the new BA were released).
New armies released tend to win their games, hands down; I think there was one exception so far (Orks).
In terms of the last battle report IG vs. Crons, it didn't really matter who won it.

Lexx wrote:

Emperors Faithful wrote:I remember back when the Old DE codex was still relatively new, the Catachan force gave them a bit of a smacking. Though I don't know if Catachan were considered the same as generic IG back then.

Back then they had their own mini codex. Played it a few times. Lots of flamers and crazily good at shooting through forests and using cover.

I never played them, but I remember there being some sort of rule where commissars could have 'accidents'. And I swear the commissar in the battle report made it through.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

wuestenfux wrote:New armies released tend to win their games, hands down; I think there was one exception so far (Orks).

If you include fantasy, I think Ogres lost their battle against Empire, and Dwarfs lost theirs against Undead.

wuestenfux wrote:New armies released tend to win their games, hands down; I think there was one exception so far (Orks).

And SW. They drew their batrep.

New armies have to win so people like them and but all their miniatures. IG along with SM are the most common armies to fight against, so they lose the most.

Emperors Faithful wrote:I remember back when the Old DE codex was still relatively new, the Catachan force gave them a bit of a smacking. Though I don't know if Catachan were considered the same as generic IG back then.

Well, the DE got their long overdue revenge during the recent DE vs IG battle report. 14 KP versus 6 KP if I recall correctly. Although the lineup was typical WD quality ( meaning crap ). An infantry army ( not a single Chimera! ) and suboptimal vehicle choices. The only one I understood was the Manticore. Oh, and did I mention the IG had Ogryns ?

Methinks GW needs competant IG generals. Playing spess mahrines makes the flesh weak and soft.

I'd suggest the IG take on something they can handle... like necrons! Oh, wait... Dark Eldar! Hmm... nope...

For all their awesome rules Guard don't deserve to die this much.

A-P wrote:

Emperors Faithful wrote:I remember back when the Old DE codex was still relatively new, the Catachan force gave them a bit of a smacking. Though I don't know if Catachan were considered the same as generic IG back then.

Well, the DE got their long overdue revenge during the recent DE vs IG battle report. 14 KP versus 6 KP if I recall correctly. Although the lineup was typical WD quality ( meaning crap ). An infantry army ( not a single Chimera! ) and suboptimal vehicle choices. The only one I understood was the Manticore. Oh, and did I mention the IG had Ogryns ?

I think the fact that the IG general slpit up the units rather than utilise combined squads. And the interesting army lists I see do sometimes make for entertaining battle reports. Although I don't follow the current WD issues as solidly as I used to. Ah, those were the days, when an Emperors Champion would walk through Defilers and squads of CSM to be the last man standing... >reminiscence<

The absolute best WD battle report I ever read was the yoooooge one they did for the Armageddon campaign, where it was mostly written from the perspective of the soldiers fighting. That was just a brilliant read. I'm sad that I've lost that copy of WD.

Da Boss wrote:The absolute best WD battle report I ever read was the yoooooge one they did for the Armageddon campaign, where it was mostly written from the perspective of the soldiers fighting. That was just a brilliant read. I'm sad that I've lost that copy of WD.

Oh yeah, that was fantasitic. Interacting battles (where the Basilisk on one board could fire at the main field, but had to be protected from Orks) and the seperate battle over whose reserves arrived (White Scars or Speed Freaks). That was so awesome, I really wish that we could experiment with that at our club.

EDIT: In fact, I'll try to get ahold of it and show it to our Club leader. Do you remeber the issue? (even a rough guess)

Best IG battle i ever read was Rork's Drift. It was 5 waves(games) of feral orks against a pretorian outpost. They even had persistant casuallties, wound tables and a "walking wounded" squad. It really was awesome but i forget who won. Need more crazy scenarios that they publish alongside battle reports.

Trickstick wrote:Best IG battle i ever read was Rork's Drift. It was 5 waves(games) of feral orks against a pretorian outpost. They even had persistant casuallties, wound tables and a "walking wounded" squad. It really was awesome but i forget who won. Need more crazy scenarios that they publish alongside battle reports.

Rorks Drift. Great times.

Hehe... I gave up caring about the White Dwarf battle reports back in the 2nd edition when GW had the balls to print a battle report involving the Necrons and the Sisters of Battle where the Sisters were wiped out and the necrons lost like 4 models. Why waste paper on a report like that? Personally, it would not surprise me if reports were just made up and not even played out.