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 5E is a mess, my group plays 4th and we're slowly trying out the bits of 5th that we like. Point being that my take on playing IG is based on not having to deal with the (IMHO) dumbed-down and/or broken 5E rules.

Anyway, I would like to see Ogryn "fixed", as I play with them anyway and get some use out of them as-is for counter-assault. I mount them in a Chimera.

I'd also like to have the FW Centaur.

I don't mind KP's being centered on the Command Squads. Stops people using their Officers as suicide units, which never made any sense.

BYE

H.B.M.C. wrote:I don't mind KP's being centered on the Command Squads. Stops people using their Officers as suicide units, which never made any sense.

BYE

I had the same idea at first, but I still think that killing between two to six full infantry squads should count for something. Besides, if only the Command Sections or Command Squads count, the reverse effect could actually apply-- people could snipe them off with indirect fire or Deep Strikers and ignore the main army completely. From a fluff standpoint, I know there's the whole "line Guardsmen are expendable" thing, but so are Orks or Tyranids; while the "decapitate the command structure" thing is cool in fluff, it may not be so fun for the players. This also runs into problems with the rumors of tanks attaching to platoons-- presumably Command Chimeras, attached Leman Russes, and so on would still count?

Nyarlathotep wrote:Anyway, I would like to see Ogryn "fixed",

Seconded. Ogryns in Epic have macro weapons, fer cryin' out loud! Those are, like, powerfists and/or force weapon equivilents! At least give them rending rifle butts or something.

Fetterkey wrote:I had the same idea at first, but I still think that killing between two to six full infantry squads should count for something. Besides, if only the Command Sections or Command Squads count, the reverse effect could actually apply-- people could snipe them off with indirect fire or Deep Strikers and ignore the main army completely.

I agree with that too. It's a rock and a hard place thing. The KP for HQ thing stops people using their Officers as expendible fodder, which makes sense, but at the same time the infantry should be worth something. But if they're all worth something, then the whole army is worth too much and we're left with the current KP problem (which all of us other than DD seem to be able to see). And if we make it just Officers, then each game with the Guard just becomes about killing the Officers, which doesn't make a huge amount of success.

The only other way through I can see is that platoons are worth 1 KP or even 2 KP, and you get 1 at 50% and the other when you wipe them out. People might say that will lead to 'KP denial' tactics, but seriously, if you've got a big squad down to 1 guy, that 1 guy is worth something to the enemy whether it's VPs or KPs, so you're going to try and deny the enemy the kill.

It's a hard one to crack. I really wish KP's didn't exist. They add nothing to the game, and anyone who could work out army list could work out VP's, so other than Alessio's aversion to numbers higher than 10, I really don't see why they did it.

BYE

Pariah Press wrote:

Nyarlathotep wrote:Anyway, I would like to see Ogryn "fixed",

Seconded. Ogryns in Epic have macro weapons, fer cryin' out loud! Those are, like, powerfists and/or force weapon equivilents! At least give them rending rifle butts or something.

Toughness 5'll do. 'Least that allows them to stand up to enemy units in HTH.

BYE

Fetterkey wrote:I had the same idea at first, but I still think that killing between two to six full infantry squads should count for something.

if only the Command Sections or Command Squads count, the reverse effect could actually apply-- people could snipe them off with indirect fire or Deep Strikers and ignore the main army completely.

This also runs into problems with the rumors of tanks attaching to platoons-- presumably Command Chimeras, attached Leman Russes, and so on would still count?

I still think that Guard squads should count as half KPs. If you kill a Guard Platoon unit, you get a tiny cookie instead of a regular cookie.

I think that killing Command should be more of a scenario thing.

Of course, Tanks should count, just like Rhinos and Drop Pods.

Pariah Press wrote:

Nyarlathotep wrote:Anyway, I would like to see Ogryn "fixed",

Seconded. Ogryns in Epic have macro weapons, fer cryin' out loud! Those are, like, powerfists and/or force weapon equivilents! At least give them rending rifle butts or something.

I advocate all Ogryns attacks (shooting and HtH) as Rending.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Orlanth wrote:Psykers keep as they are but roll 2 dice for powers and choose.

So you would have a better chance of rolling a crappy power?

Sanctioned Psykers aren't just bad because of random powers, they're bad because the powers themselves aren't even worth the 12 points you spend to get the Psyker.

BYE

I like Sanctioned psykers, but I wish I had more control over what they get. I do not mind at all that they are weak, IG dont deserve to get Librarians or Farseers, they get a bargain basement psyker who ias a forgettable add on to a unit.

Take it from me TicToc, the best way to fight a wall is to walk away from it.

Really? I thought it was with Dynamite.

Stops people using their Officers as suicide units, which never made any sense.

Except that an army with good officers always has problems keeping them alive. Just look at the Romans, the death rate among Centurions was nearly 3 times that of line men. However, there is something to be said of leading from the front.

When it comes to guard though, I think they should go two ways. Russians, or Germans. Small units of elite infantry supported by aswome tanks. Or hordes of Fanatics who dont' even know which way that missile launcher goes, supported by hundreds of mid to crappy tanks.

My vision of the guard?

Everything is really really cheap, but it all gets a nerf bat. Flashlights now become flouresecent flashlights. Using 75 % less power! And tanks become 13 12 10 and a 30 - 50 point reduc. Also the battle cannon gets brought down. Though the earthshaker should be a long range demolisher shot.

Ratbarf: I'm not necc. disagreeing with your powered down version of the guard (done right, maybe it could work), but from a playing standpoint an army that already takes some practice to play decently will become a lot harder to play. In order to keep things in line, as eveything is powered down, then costed down, you will now need/have to purchase SO much more in the way of models to build to points cost. An army that already can take additional time fo rthe average gamer to play will suddenly sprout in it's point requiemnts. How is this good?

I don't think your vision matches my own, Ratbarf. Guard is expensive enough to collect as is.

I don't like the idea of re-statting all of the IG vehicles, nor do I like the idea that IG lose AV14 Russes - it's one of the few things that doesn't auto-die in the current army.

Maybe Ogryn will have access to the 0-1 power weapon as seen in the Siege of the Vraks army books. If you pair that with an increase in toughness you might get a good tough unit with a small chance of also hurting things.

Personally I've always thought of Guard command units more as support than actual combat units. Squads stand up front and the commanders stand just behind them to let the squads benefit from the command bubble(tm) and lend some support fire along with moral support.

H.B.M.C. wrote:I agree with that too. It's a rock and a hard place thing. The KP for HQ thing stops people using their Officers as expendible fodder, which makes sense, but at the same time the infantry should be worth something. But if they're all worth something, then the whole army is worth too much and we're left with the current KP problem (which all of us other than DD seem to be able to see). And if we make it just Officers, then each game with the Guard just becomes about killing the Officers, which doesn't make a huge amount of success.

The only other way through I can see is that platoons are worth 1 KP or even 2 KP, and you get 1 at 50% and the other when you wipe them out. People might say that will lead to 'KP denial' tactics, but seriously, if you've got a big squad down to 1 guy, that 1 guy is worth something to the enemy whether it's VPs or KPs, so you're going to try and deny the enemy the kill.

It's a hard one to crack. I really wish KP's didn't exist. They add nothing to the game, and anyone who could work out army list could work out VP's, so other than Alessio's aversion to numbers higher than 10, I really don't see why they did it.

BYE

I skimmed your post and was about to post exactly what you suggested for the 50% and 100% KP system. Now that I think about it, would that be with an additional +1 for the commander, for a total of 3, or just 2? Also, if platoons are going to end up as some sort of super structure with attached tanks and support squads there could be 800 point platoons. If this is the case there might need to be more than 2 KPs per platoon.

skyth wrote:This still doesn't solve the major problem with Guard in 5th edition - That they lose 1/3 of thier games before the game starts do to kill points.

Repeating that nonsense doesn't make in any more true.

Nuclear Mekanik wrote:
And 4 points per basic guardsman before upgrades? Sweet!!! Everyone can field a couple of essentially grot units, either use them as speedbumps, mobile cover, el-cheapo objective securing units etc etc. Ok, so they'll get shot to bits and run away IF the enemy fires at them... but your opponent is going to poo himself when he sees six LRs on the other side of the table and throw everything at them, completely ignoring the 60-80 point squad of grunts who are the real threat to objectives.

So you really think the opposition is going to shoot its bolters and frags at the Leman Russes because they're so dumbstruck? Or their lascannon and multimeltas at those grunts? Or will they perhaps divide their fire at relevant targets as it has always been the case?

Shep wrote:The mini-units concept is tired and lame and needs to go away. Deployment, movement phases, shooting phases, multiple units in assault... all of these things become laborious chores when fighting guard.

Could you elaborate why deployment, movement or shooting become any different when fighting Guard (and playing your regular list) than against any other opponent? Having multiple units is a tactical advantage and I see no need to make things any easier for Space Marine players if they have difficulties keeping track of the game. Assaulting multiple units is pretty easy, too. You just announce who's hitting whom, hey presto.

But IG armies monopolize the time in tournament settings. In 2 hours games the guard player is active in a much greater majority than their opponent.

You're welcome to take more units yourself if this is your main complaint. Or you could suggest to the developers to do away with anything that's even remotely time-consuming, and disallow horde armies. Or DSing Guard (which will probably go away with the new dex, so your point is kind of moot). Didn't you say that Guard squads are wiped out extremely easily? How come then that there's that much moving, shooting and multiple assaulting going on until turn 7 that you are this peeved? I mean you can either say they're fragile, then it should not be so hard to whittle down their numbers. Or you can say that the major factor is that you cannot properly figure out what to shoot/assault because there are so many. In this case, why take away such an advantage from an already bottom-tier list? You can however not argue that they are extremely easy to wipe out and give away KP's but take hours to move etc. all game long.

Shep wrote:
This exactly why it should be one unit. ... Even more unworkable would be that you must kill every unit in the platoon to get a single KP. Then we have people taking naked squads and spreading them all over the table and playing squad 'shell games' with them.

You think so? What good are those naked squads in the majority of games? How do they capture objectives against even the lightest opposition? I cannot see how this approach would be very helpful especially in a tourney environment.

Guard infantry armies are not flexible, that is a delusion.

And therefore you're suggesting to make them even more inflexible? Great.

The only thing I'm really hot to get rid of are 5 man and 6 man guard units. The KP pinatas.

Then don't take them. Simple as that. Where's the problem?

Ultimately, the many small units gag is only fun for the guard player, the opponent has more book-keeping to do than usual.

I'm sorry, really, with all necessary disclaimers but that's a laughable argument. I'd try to get it across in a more polite way but I cannot. On one hand, those small units are supposedly 'KP pinatas' but you haven't got the stamina to count to 15 or so for such an advantage? How are 'KP pinatas' fun for the Guard player? Did you not just point out that they make Guard completely unplayable? And what about combat squads? You don't really believe I'd be buying the argument that having 15 units compared to 10 is a major administrative affair I hope.

Could you elaborate why deployment, movement or shooting become any different when fighting Guard (and playing your regular list) than against any other opponent? Having multiple units is a tactical advantage and I see no need to make things any easier for Space Marine players if they have difficulties keeping track of the game. Assaulting multiple units is pretty easy, too. You just announce who's hitting whom, hey presto.

i think he is talking about the sheer number of models in the IG army, and how long it takes for all of those units to move, shoot, assult ect.

Lord Solar Plexus wrote:

skyth wrote:This still doesn't solve the major problem with Guard in 5th edition - That they lose 1/3 of thier games before the game starts do to kill points.

Repeating that nonsense doesn't make in any more true.

What makes it true is that they have lots of easily gotten kill points. Right now, each platoon is worth a minimum of 4 (2 of them in 5 models). It's hardly nonsense. It's bad game design.

Lord Solar Plexus wrote:Then don't take them. Simple as that. Where's the problem?

Oh yes. I can definitely see that you’re full of solutions. Ok... maybe not solutions. But you're definitely full of something.

BYE

Lord Solar Plexus:
With so many more kill points on the board than a similarly pointed out opponent, and said squads being pretty squishy, Guard are set at a disadvantage in kill point games. Now, I understand that sometimes an army just has a crap hand dealt to it with regard to missions, but that seems, to some, to be a bit much. Are you refuting that the kill point count in a guard army puts it at a bad disadvantage? How do you see skyth's comment above as nonsense? Sure, I don't agree with much in the way of absolute statments, there's usually an exception somewhere that reduces them to a generaization; but I'm just curious as to your logic.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:Yes, because lots squads of 10 T3 5+ troops with weapons affectionately called "flashlights" are really going to table the opponent... :S

So you're *not* taking the standard Heavy and Special Weapon upgrades for each squad??? You're *not* supporting them with Tanks & Ordnance??? Are you *sure* you're a Guard player??? :S :S :S

Funnily enough, based off of some of your comments I was contemplating asking you the exact same question.

Just in case you were wondering, I was referring to them not being upgraded. Not that BS3 Lascannons or anything else is that useful (in helping the Guard KP situation), which is why I use Flamers/Grenade Launchers and Rocket Launchers. Even though, my comments still stand. Just because I have a Plasma gun in my squad, does that really help them? Not really.

By the way, I use 3 Leman Russes in 1500, and my whole army has Cameleoline. Then again, my opponents and I hate KP so we don't use them, so the KP situation does not affect me.

I wonder if the ability to attach tanks to platoons might itself help mitigate the KP issue. Between that and making the officer for the platoon an upgrade character, NOT an independant character (making the command squad only 1 KP) it might go a long way towards fixing it.

I am picturing an army with 4-5 Russes, 4 10 man infantry squads in cover, 2-3 command squads in cover/out of sight, an artillery peice or two, and some hell hounds or something. Maybe 12-15 KPs, but with that much armored target saturation and the relative ease of a 4+ cover save (3+ if they include camelione) that might not be too bad. A few more KPs than other armies, but perhaps the difficulty of getting all those KPs from the tanks and artillery would mitigate it a bit?

Alternately, maybe a VOX could let units rally at the officer's LD when below 50%. Having lots of 1-2 man units hiding in the backfield after being shot would deny KPs pretty well too.

Then again, IG might be hosed all together... I really don't know. I just hope they make "doctrines" a costed upgrade for Platoon Commanders, and there is a convincing way of pulling off LatD in the list.

JohnHwangDD wrote:I favor a game based on relatively simple models and simple rules, with limited variety.

Fixed your typo.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Adding chrome for the sake of chrome is poor design.

I agree. Take the new Space Marine codex for example.

Maybe it would be better if a platoon was worth entirely, about 3 or 4 kill points as a standard value, but you will only get them if the entire platoon is wiped? Sure, leaving one man alive that will run to a corner and hide is a problem, but is a platoon really that hard to wipe out if you concentrated your attack? If they get pinned or go to ground then they definitely won't be doing that.

Vladsimpaler wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:Yes, because lots squads of 10 T3 5+ troops with weapons affectionately called "flashlights" are really going to table the opponent... :S

So you're *not* taking the standard Heavy and Special Weapon upgrades for each squad??? You're *not* supporting them with Tanks & Ordnance??? Are you *sure* you're a Guard player??? :S :S :S

Funnily enough, based off of some of your comments I was contemplating asking you the exact same question.

Just in case you were wondering, I was referring to them not being upgraded. Not that BS3 Lascannons or anything else is that useful (in helping the Guard KP situation), which is why I use Flamers/Grenade Launchers and Rocket Launchers. Even though, my comments still stand. Just because I have a Plasma gun in my squad, does that really help them? Not really.

By the way, I use 3 Leman Russes in 1500, and my whole army has Cameleoline. Then again, my opponents and I hate KP so we don't use them, so the KP situation does not affect me.

The difference being that I never made mention of actually fielding non-upgraded squads, unlike you...

I don't understand why anybody would talk about non-upgraded Guardsmen in any context other than them being W1. And the notion that BS3 lascannon / plasma not being useful / helpful is just plain wierd. IMO, the only purpose for taking regular Guardsmen at all is because you can field a lot of upgraded guns.

As for what I field, I start with 3 Demolishers and 2 Hellhounds, and let the remaining points fall where they may. Which means lots of Plasma, Melta, and MLs on Wounds wearing Camo.

As HBMC and others have pointed out, there really isn't an elegant solution to the KP problem, based on the current structure of 1 Command Squad + 2-5 Infantry Squads. Hopefully a revised platoon structure as outlined by the OP will present a logical and effective solution. (Note to Mods, please add *holds breath* orkmoticon.)

On a related topic, any word on the rumor* for a AV14 Command Bunker option (and model) for the HQ Command Squad that uses the 5e Building rules ?

*And by rumor I mean personal wishlist.

JohnHwangDD
I don't understand why anybody would talk about non-upgraded Guardsmen in any context other than them being W1. And the notion that BS3 lascannon / plasma not being useful / helpful is just plain wierd. IMO, the only purpose for taking regular Guardsmen at all is because you can field a lot of upgraded guns.

As for what I field, I start with 3 Demolishers and 2 Hellhounds, and let the remaining points fall where they may. Which means lots of Plasma, Melta, and MLs on Wounds wearing Camo.

Buuuuuuuulllllllllllllllllllllllsssssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitttttttttttttttttttttttt


The way to win in 5th with gunline gaurd is to take at least 1 un-upgraded infantry squad, I like the term crapfantry

time for a basic tactical lesson, are we sitting comfortably, then i'll begin (shelling)


in 5th aside from KP, which do cause a few problems unless you are pretty sure you will table your opponent, in which case i asume you are playing on your own, the biggest problem to gunline gaurd is that the enemy can run and outflank.

This cuts down your chances to shoot them before they get to your squishy underbelly of lascannon goodness.

The advantages of 5th is that:
1) the enemy can't consolidate into you
2) your guys cowering at the back can have a better armour save than a space marine (3+ cover for thse of you who are more simple)

so in order to counter the problem of nasties getting to you quickly, you need something to slow them down, perhaps something sacrifical.

now when i'm looking at my willing volunteers to 'take one for the team' who do i pick?

a)the 6 man lascannon heavy squad

b)the 5 man leadership bubble comand unit (worth two KP's)

c)a line squad with Lascannon and plasmagun + vet sgt. + vox + lots of other things which are usefull but expensive and move or fire

d)the leman russ tank which blocks line of sight stopping the heavy weapons behind shooting

e)the 10 man squad of monkeys with lasguns, costing a bank busting 60 points, and with no heavy weapon that i lose a turn shooting when i move them forward

now i know some people like to assault with their heavy squads, but I'm going to take a squad of crapfantry, run them forward in front of the platoon, get all my heavy weapons a cover save, and shield the line from assaulting, bringing the assaulters into rapid fire range of the rest of the army...

oh and if you give the crapfantry cameleoline and go to ground, shooting at them becomes a real pain.


with the amount of cover saves in 5th you have to accept with gaurd your lascannons are likely to end up giving a 4+ cover save, sod it accept it and use it to your advantage.

oh and the crafantry can take objectives if need be.

Wehrkind wrote:I wonder if the ability to attach tanks to platoons might itself help mitigate the KP issue. Between that and making the officer for the platoon an upgrade character, NOT an independant character

I think that removing IC status is an obvious change. As for attaching Tanks, I don't see that as a major game-changer, aside from adding a bit more quality firepower.

Railguns wrote:Maybe it would be better if a platoon was worth entirely, about 3 or 4 kill points as a standard value, but you will only get them if the entire platoon is wiped?

If IG does that, I'll always be taking a WH Inquisitor in Land Raider and a DH Inquisitor in Land Raider. Throwaway the Inquisitors (1 KP), and move a naked line squad (3+ KP) into each Land Raider. I can take 3 Demolishers (<500 pts), 2 =I= Land Raiders (~550 pts), and HQ + 2 Platoons (~450 pts) for 1500 pts. I'll lose the HQ and both Inquisitors (3KPs), but after that, good luck scoring the remaining 11 KPs off the Demolishers and LRs...

Using 70-pts of nakedCamo Guardsmen as speed bumps? That's crazy.

That's what Grenadiers are for. 70-pts but they have 2 Special Weapons, so they're supposed to go up front...

JohnHwangDD wrote:Using 70-pts of nakedCamo Guardsmen as speed bumps? That's crazy.

That's what Grenadiers are for. 70-pts but they have 2 Special Weapons, so they're supposed to go up front...

no, that's crazy, i'd be terminally pissed off i'd wasted 4 plasma gun shots, or 2 meltagun shots, or that someone had been dumb enough to spend points on special weapons in a sacrificial unit.

course you could use a remnants squad if you're cheaping out...

Taking a wound off Ogryns would make them better IMO. Giving then a 4+ Armour save, two wounds, FNP and two rending CCW's (Ripper gun would be 'Pistol 2' instead of 'Assault 2') along with a points decrease would cover most of their problems.