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've always been of the opinion that the platoon was the heart and soul of the army and the all-vet army was an exercise in missing the point. Now that it's part of the game I won't tell anyone their army concept is invalid but it does feel sadly unimaginative. Oh look, 2-6 10-man troops units with transports, I've never seen that before.

Just my two cents,

In my army I have one Chimera, and I have used it one or two times.

I have 170 guardsmen, and one transport.

Personally Mech Guard in sardine cans, is waste of points I could use for more Troops.

Asuron, criticising my opinions with a refutation is perfectly fine, and all over the forums I'm happy to engage in debate about the value or validity of a certain tactic.

When someone's entire post is "Your post is flamebait trash" with a big offensive picture, there is nothing REMOTELY similar to "constructive criticism" in there. Just garbage. It is my opinion that someone is trolling when they are trolling. Your post here is a criticism of me (albeit misguided it seems), without being offensive or trolling. Nothing wrong with that. But if there is nothing of value to a post, and it exists solely to insult someone, it shouldn't have been made in the first place. Do you disagree?

I wouldn't but in some instances , the key word being here some, you have done what I talked about
But this isn't really worth derailing the thread about it
Especially since I enjoy your work most of the time and reading the Ork strategies you provide=)

Tzeentchling9 wrote:My problem with IG is that my three armies('Nids, Daemons, Thousand Sons) will never have enough anti-tank to win against 7+ chimeras, 2 Vendettas, and 2 Manticores. My games against this list have usually boiled down to popping a few chimeras, but not having killed enough of them nor having enough models left to fight what actually had their transports taken out. I don't mind losing, but it's pretty boring when I can do next to nothing about it.

I have to agree with DashofPepper. (IMO)IG players should branch out some more. The most fun game I've ever played against IG(and lost) was against a unit of triple Executioners, a Deathstrike, a Medusa, only 1 chimera, and the rest of the points put into veterans on foot with sniper-rifles(it was 1k, I think).

Well, that game was probably fun because veterans on foot with snipers is fairly awful :/

I generally use my single chimera either as a base of operations for my command squad (as they usually get lashed or shelled pretty quickly) or to move around my single unit of tank hunting meltavets. I'm planning on using Forgeworld rules for a Salamander Command tank for god's sakes.

People hate them because that mech build is strong.

Thats it.

Hi there!
First of all, everybody who don't like to play against IG: they don't like the army, not YOU (the owner of the army).
Second thing: I really understand that you like the army and you like to play it. Maybe you like to play against it. That doesn't change the fact somebody else doesn't. You can't just prove that he's wrong. I could in return try convince you that some food you don't like is in fact very good. That is just nonsense. It may be tasty to me, but for you it isn't.

OK, now Ill try to kinda explain why many people don't like IG. It's based on feeling and English is not my first language so this may suck a bit..
The long range, volume of fire and barrage/ordnance fire is irritating. That's also what makes IG feel(!) like a no-brainer army.. While you need to get need to get into position, consider cover, target and get into range, artillery ignores most of those things.. Standing in a corner, having range to everything, ignoring los and intervening cover plus being good against vehicles AND massed infantry makes it feel so easy.. Static gunline is really boring.. Put two in front of each other and it's snooze fest.. Put two CC armies and it's starting to get interesting..
Leafblower is just terrible concept.. Wow, I lost one roll before game even begun, I'm screwed.. Definitely not fun..
And please don't talk about changing strategy.. That's not the point.. Being able (or not) to win against IG is not the problem here..
That there are many different builds in the Codex. So what? It's not like they are being taken..
IG being powerful doesn't help, but it's not the main issue.. I'd much, much rather be hacked to pieces by drunks on giant squirrels than just shot..

DakkaDakka wrote:

My only issue with the Guard is the chimera parking lot (and the vendetta, but that's because it's a better wave serpent and that's a whole other topic). I don't like fighting it because it's like assaulting a bunker line. You just throw stuff at it until it dies.

Now with guard infantry, this is quite interesting because the infantry present an intimidating force. With the chimera, is just feels like you have to go break open another box. Overall it just doesn't look interesting. Imagine each piece of terrain on the table looked exactly the same. It may work by rules, but the appearance is just dull.

The chimera line is tough to deal with because of critical mass, but it isn't intimidating. 180 guardsmen is tough to deal with, and very intimidating. Overall, I just don't like fighting armies that use transports like bunkers. Mech Eldar I can't stand because the units virtually never come out of their transports (or are expected to die right after).