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.

Considering the Combat Squad rule in recent codicies, and the recent trend of some units unlocking options in other units (such as Interrogator-Chaplains allowing a Sacred Standard to be taken by a Command Squad), I think it's reasonable to assume that the basic unit of the Imperial Guard will become Platoons in the way Conscript Platoons are already configured. I'd expect a Combat Squad like rule that allows individual squads to be detached from their Platoons and to operate as units - perhaps like Independent Characters in that being within 2" will make them part of the same unit, while being further away (and perhaps having a vox caster) will make them operate independently.

George Spiggott wrote:re cheaper guardsmen: I think the opposite. Guardsmen should cost more points, perhaps 7 each with frag greandes as standard equipment.

to make up for this Sentinels, Chimeras Advisiors, rough riders some weapon options and Orgyns should be (much) cheaper, Ratlings and Veterans should be easier to get (i.e. not 0-1) and Advisors, Orgyns, Mortars Autocannons and Storm Troopers should be more powerful.

I'd like to see a streamlined Doctrine system but I've seen GW 'streamline' things before

Guardsmen with Frags aren't worth 6 pts and definitely not 7 pts. BS3 Guardsmen with a Lasgun are worth about 4 or 5 pts. Frags are worth less than 1 pt to a WS3 T3 A1 Ld7 Sv5+ Guardsman. The only way Guardsmen are worth 7 pts is if they get Cameoline or Carapace bundled in with the Frags.

I generally agree with your lists of overcosted / too-limited / underpowered units.

I don't know why you're worried about the Doctrines. A few discrete choices should stay. Most of it should be scrapped.

Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Barring long OOP stuff like the Mk 1 land raider and the old Ork battlewagon (still not replaced!) the Russ is the oldest of them. Isn't the Chimera from the same time? They're still a decent looking kits, they just need some more options. Or we'll lose the ones not supported (like from mounted HBs on Russes and turret HBs on chimeras).

But I think you're looking at it in reverse of how GW will. These days GW is asking what models does it have, what models does it want to sell and what are the best rules to make that happen.

I'd expect hellhounds, griffins and exterminators to come back with new sprues

Dropping would be limited to elite storm troopers, vets would get infiltrate. Close order drill and iron discipline if they survive at all would become wargear (the Iron Eagle Metal of Disciple or something).

Command platoons I think would be heavily reworked. Heavy weapon teams would go into heavy support where they should have always been. With luck, command platoons will become more like the IG General's retinue (WD a few years back) or Inquisition retinues.

The Russ is the model kit that has aged the most. It's scale is clearly for 25mm, not 28mm, and it's design and proportions are way off. As can be seen from the Forgeworld band-aids of new hull and turret, the Russ is a kit that really needs to be redone with the next IG Codex. The Chimera, OTOH, is fine.

Going from models to Troops Platoons still gives plenty of options:
Cadians = Infantry Platoon (Sv5+)
Catachans = Light Infantry Platoon (Sv6+ w/ Cameoline)
Stormtroopers = Grenadier Platoon (BS4 Sv4+)
Chimera = Mechanized Platoon
WFB Flagellants = Conscript Platoon

I agree the Hellhound will be done in plastic; hopefully, this is FW Artemia-pattern. The Exterminator adds relatively little but would be nice.

Deep Strike should be restricted to Storms and Sentinels. Tho a Drop Troop Platoon for plastic Elysians would be awesome.

Vox, ID should be HQ rules / options. COD and Sharpshooting should go away.

Command Platoon should be reworked, and the Heavy Weapons Squads should attach to the Troops Platoons, not to Heavy Support. IG Heavy Support is for Pie.

IG Troops should use the Platoon model of multiple 10-man squads exclusively, but the Command Squads should be variable size of 5 to 10 men. This standardizes the rules for the Guard and makes a clear statement of how they fight. Mobs are how Orks fight, so would be inappropriate for IG.

Storm Lord wrote:But whne I read the new CSM codex I was really disapointed with it, not really being customisable enough for my liking (Deamon Princes and Chaos Lords spring to mind)

I don't know what CSM Codex you might be talking about, because the current CSM Codex is what got me excited to play CSM again. As far as I'm concerned, all of the important options are there, particularly for HQs and Troops.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Guardsmen with Frags aren't worth 6 pts and definitely not 7 pts. BS3 Guardsmen with a Lasgun are worth about 4 or 5 pts. Frags are worth less than 1 pt to a WS3 T3 A1 Ld7 Sv5+ Guardsman. The only way Guardsmen are worth 7 pts is if they get Cameoline or Carapace bundled in with the Frags.

I generally agree with your lists of overcosted / too-limited / underpowered units.

I don't know why you're worried about the Doctrines. A few discrete choices should stay. Most of it should be scrapped.

I feel that Guardsmen are about right at 6 points each and I field about 95 'warm bodies' in 1500 points (and I suspect JJ does too). However what the IG codex needs more than anything is a move towards a more maneuver based fighting style. In order to do this you need to make many of the faster under-performing units in the codex (Sentiels, rough riders hellhounds, Ogryns etc.) cheaper or better (or both). If you do this without raising the base cost (even indirectly by forcing wargear upgrades) of guardsmen then the IG army will simply become more powerful (perhaps too powerful) as opposed to different, the essence if codex creep.

What it comes down to is, what are you prepared to give up in order for the under par units to be brought up to speed?

Why am I worried about Doctrines? Because I have several squads of carapace armoured guardsmen (models with no official model support) who only just survived the change from the old Elysian WD list and I saw what happened to Codex Chaos.

Nurglitch wrote:The end result of this unimaginative attitude has been the bland homogenization of the Imperial Guard back into cookie-cutter Imperial Guard armies.

Looking at the IG armies I play and play against I’m not seeing this. I think you missed your mark here.

Well, one way to fix the guard would be to make the base platoons say 100 pts? Then just add on the points used for special weapons and troop upgrades. But make the actual number of gaurds men vary. So for 100 pts you would have to have at least a command squad and two squads of infantry. Then you could add 1-4 more squads for no extra cost. So your 360 guardsmen now cost 600 pts without any wargear or special weapons. Have the heavey weapon platoons be upgrades you can buy with the platoons command squad. And make Chimeras cheaper, say 35 pts for 12 11 10 armour. (seeing as the Str 4 Defensive weapon would mean that it can't really move and fire as well) and make the kit 35 dollars. Also make it so that every squad in the platoon can buy the Chimera. That should increase maneuverability and firepower at the same time while still fitting with the theme of massed infantry. Seeing as you get 60 guardsmen at roughly 1.75 pts each to 5 pts each. The more Guardsmen you take the cheaper they get.

The Vostroyans have carapace armor, and they were only released two years ago with a larger line of minis then either Sisters or Grey Knights got with their codices.

Not that GW won't wave the "Counts as" wand over them, but there is at least a chance that GW will want to keep selling Vostoyans.

Here's an interesting thought: will GW bring back the idea that IG armies on the tabletop represent an amalgamation of various regiments? Now that Eldrad fights for any craftworld and Emperor's Children and Berzerkers are BFF, why not bring back the 2nd edition ideal of varying regiments?

Polonius wrote:The Vostroyans have carapace armor, and they were only released two years ago with a larger line of minis then either Sisters or Grey Knights got with their codices.

So they have, You're right. According to the GW website the Vostroyans have the following doctrines:

* Restricted Troops:
Special Weapon squads
* Restricted Troops:
Heavy Weapon platoons
* Sharpshooters
* Carapace armour
* Hardened Fighters

Interestingly they are not wearing (much) Carapace armour on the models (less than Cadians who don't have Carapace armour) and are desperately short of Heavy and Special weapon options (Meltagun, Autocannon and Missile Launcher). Given the model range the Vostroyans have a very odd Doctrine set indeed.

George Spiggott wrote:... what the IG codex needs more than anything is a move towards a more maneuver based fighting style. In order to do this you need to make many of the faster under-performing units in the codex (Sentiels, rough riders hellhounds, Ogryns etc.) cheaper or better (or both). If you do this without raising the base cost (even indirectly by forcing wargear upgrades) of guardsmen then the IG army will simply become more powerful (perhaps too powerful) as opposed to different, the essence if codex creep.

What it comes down to is, what are you prepared to give up in order for the under par units to be brought up to speed?

Why am I worried about Doctrines? Because I have several squads of carapace armoured guardsmen (models with no official model support) who only just survived the change from the old Elysian WD list and I saw what happened to Codex Chaos.

I completely agree that the IG need to be changed to support maneuver warfare. I disagree that Sentinels, etc. are "good enough" for their current points and that points increases would be warranted. I don't believe that Guardsmen are worth 6 pts in a maneuver environment - they were bumped from 5 to 6 because the environment was static shooting. So I'm not worried about Codex creep from fixing the problem units - they're not taken so much because they're simply bad.

Making more units more-playable will simply trade off against other currently-playable units. So the overall power level would remain the same, but the player would have more viable options to work with.

As for Doctrines, I have several squads in Cameoline. I fully expect Platoon of Cameoline Guardsmen, and you should expect Platoon of Carapace Guardsmen.

Ratbarf wrote:Well, one way to fix the guard would be to make the base platoons say 100 pts? Then just add on the points used for special weapons and troop upgrades. But make the actual number of gaurds men vary. So for 100 pts you would have to have at least a command squad and two squads of infantry. Then you could add 1-4 more squads for no extra cost. So your 360 guardsmen now cost 600 pts without any wargear or special weapons. Have the heavey weapon platoons be upgrades you can buy with the platoons command squad.

And make Chimeras cheaper, say 35 pts for 12 11 10 armour. (seeing as the Str 4 Defensive weapon would mean that it can't really move and fire as well) and make the kit 35 dollars. Also make it so that every squad in the platoon can buy the Chimera. That should increase maneuverability and firepower at the same time while still fitting with the theme of massed infantry. Seeing as you get 60 guardsmen at roughly 1.75 pts each to 5 pts each. The more Guardsmen you take the cheaper they get.

I think the current Platoon structure and pricing model is OK, just a bit overpriced. It would be simpler to have discrete Platoons, a la Cult Marines, because then it's easier to tailor the options to the Platoon and make each distinctive.

I believe general consensus for Chimeras should be AV 12/11/10, tho I think 50 pts with both Heavy weapons added would be about right.

Polonius wrote:The Vostroyans have carapace armor, and they were only released two years ago with a larger line of minis then either Sisters or Grey Knights got with their codices.

Here's an interesting thought: will GW bring back the idea that IG armies on the tabletop represent an amalgamation of various regiments?

The Vostroyans are still in stock, and Carapace is popular, so I think they'll hang around for a little while.

I think that we could (and should) see mixed-role IG Regiments. For example, a valid IG Regiment could be composed of 2 Light Infantry Platoons with a (Mechanized) Grenadier Platoon or some other mix. This would expand modeling and tactical options considerably in the same way that Chaos Skittles is possible. That's what I'm betting on.

JohnHwangDD wrote:I disagree that Sentinels, etc. are "good enough" for their current points and that points increases would be warranted.

Disagree with who? Not me. Sentinels are over priced.

JohnHwangDD wrote:As for Doctrines, I have several squads in Cameoline. I fully expect Platoon of Cameoline Guardsmen, and you should expect Platoon of Carapace Guardsmen.

You hold your breath John, I'll wait and see, best not to get my hopes up. In addition this wouldn't help my army in any way. My army consists of the following carapace armoured troops, as you an see carapace armoured platoons would be of no help.

Command Squad
Heavy Bolter Squad
2-3 Hardened Veteran Squads
3 Grenadier Squads
2 Inquisitorial Storm Trooper Squads w/ Rhinos

I was contemplating increasing the number of heavy and assault weapon squads I have, however I don't have enough faith in the new codex.

I voted yes (hoping for a change for the good).They need to make the Chimera cheaper ever try to do the math hammer on a Me ch army it doesn't work its going to cost way to much . the only one thats got you close was the storm trooper army you could win if you played it right and had a lot of luck. i have about three platoons of Steele legion guys with 2 Russ and about 5 las canons siting on my shelf waiting to b painted I'm just holding off for the new codex. GW make me with there long over do codex's and old models that go up in price ever year

noooo. my entire army is built around light infantry and sharpshooters

Maybe there are 'too many' options but I think it is one of the few ways to actually make the list competitive and still be based around flashlight toting chumps and big tanks.

George Spiggott wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:I disagree that Sentinels, etc. are "good enough" for their current points and that points increases would be warranted.

Disagree with who? Not me. Sentinels are over priced.

If the Sentinel were made worth its points, either by cutting cost or improving the unit, that's no reason to increase the cost on Guardsmen or any other unit. If you overinflate the cost of Guardsmen, all you do is make Guardsmen suck instead of Sentinels.

George Spiggott wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:As for Doctrines, I have several squads in Cameoline. I fully expect Platoon of Cameoline Guardsmen, and you should expect Platoon of Carapace Guardsmen.

You hold your breath John, I'll wait and see, best not to get my hopes up.

Given the recent Codices, it's hard to imagine any other approach to be taken for IG Troops.

George Spiggott wrote:In addition this wouldn't help my army in any way. My army consists of the following carapace armoured troops, as you an see carapace armoured platoons would be of no help.

Command Squad
Heavy Bolter Squad
2-3 Hardened Veteran Squads
3 Grenadier Squads
2 Inquisitorial Storm Trooper Squads w/ Rhinos

I was contemplating increasing the number of heavy and assault weapon squads I have, however I don't have enough faith in the new codex.

Your models would be fully-playable, just not necessarily in the exact same configuration. To me, it looks like they would reshuffle into 2 Grenadier Platoons for your Troops, along with Vets and HQ. Instead of burning 5 Troops slots, you might only use 2 (or 3), but you'd lose nothing in terms of Scoring Units.

George Spiggott wrote:Looking at the IG armies I play and play against I’m not seeing this. I think you missed your mark here.

No, still seems right on the mark. The plural of anecdote is not data, so I've heard, and so you'd need to look at everyone else's IG armies besides the ones in your corner of the world. My experience suggests no two Imperial Guard armies are alike, but then I don't pretend that I have the same gaming experience as most of the people playing the game.

It would be interesting to see whether my claim is actually true, that we see very little variation in armies called "competitive", but it doesn't seem like we can. In the absence of positive proof I think the fact that words like "mandatory" and "garbage" are used to describe doctrines suggests widespread public perception of homogeneity regardless of the actual state of things. After all, even if the codex actually allows a diversity of competitive lists to be fielded, that actuality is irrelevant in the face of GW's need to appeal to some profitable quorum (not necessarily the loudest voices either...).

man, I'm gonna miss doctrines, hopefully they will allow you to keep your trools mechanised otherwise im screwed

Well i think one thing we can look forward to (i hope)is new models . Or GW will lower the points cost on some things so you have to buy more models which means more $$$ feed to GW

Another big hole in the IG codex is, other than the ubiquitous plasma gun there's no good stand and shoot special weapon. GLs might be good if they were 5 points per.

Adding the heavy stubber as a special weapon option would require new models, but would make the gun line squads more interesting.

Also I think the plastic catachans are now the oldest of the multi-part plastics. They'd be likely candidates for a re-do or recut. It probably means a stealth price hike, from $35 for 20 to $22 for 10 but if they added the special weapon options it would almost be a price cut.

The old IG codex is only broken because in the crazy mixed-up world of 40k if you bring a knife to a gunfight, you win!

The problem is not the IG codex, it is the fact that in 4th ed (don't have a clue with 5th, frankly I'll wait until its out and see what happens before I can be bothered to think about it) standing and shooting makes for a boring game (which is the fault of the rules, there are many other games in which standing and shooting makes for an interesting game), so the rules encourage "close combat". Therefore armies that suck at close combat aren't "competitive" and therefore are only played by those who prefer an uphill struggle.

The obvious "quick fix" would be to make IG tanks less vulnerable to close combat - the whole idea of a demon snipping one open with its crab claws is just ridunkulous to me...

Of course somehow that would have to be fiddles so that it didn't make non-IG tanks stupidly good so, it probably won't work in the meta game.

Nurglitch wrote:

It would be interesting to see whether my claim is actually true, that we see very little variation in armies called "competitive", but it doesn't seem like we can. In the absence of positive proof I think the fact that words like "mandatory" and "garbage" are used to describe doctrines suggests widespread public perception of homogeneity regardless of the actual state of things. After all, even if the codex actually allows a diversity of competitive lists to be fielded, that actuality is irrelevant in the face of GW's need to appeal to some profitable quorum (not necessarily the loudest voices either...).

Of course those "less effective" doctrines are still around permitting more thematic/fluffy players the ability to do what they desire. Elimination of doctrines, even if not impacting the tourney scene, impact the ability to field those types of lists. If I want to play some sort of feral, roman legion (warrior weapons, close order, carapace, rough riders) I can under the current codex. Will it be stomped by a Tier One list-potentially. But remove those doctrines and its highly likely that option goes by the wayside.

Thats my issue with the doctrine removal. Some minor tweekages in points (or lack of points) and they could be much more balanced. Indeed, instead of removing doctinres, more should be added, to provide greater variety and sales. Imagine rough rider companies, rhino doctrines, tank riders, and more points efficient ogryns. But it won't happen.

i am amazed that there are so many people who want to get rid of doctrines. you don't have to use the doctrines to play IG. doctrines were the last real innovation in 40k, something all armies should have had access to.

do you guys complain that there are too many varieties of beer ? seriously, even if you don't use all the options it nice that they are there.

anyway, i vote HELL NO !!!

I will be honest, I started my Guard army when the green 3rd codex came out. When the 3.5 codex came out my army didn't change a bit, well I did loss my ratling squad, and a squad of IG troops so i could trade my griffon in for a second bassy and pay for the up costed heavy and special weapons in the other ones. I looked at the doc and read them , and honestly the only one I have found myself wanting to use is the one that lets me have 3 squads of vets.

Now I will admit I play a SAFH gunline IG, with 3 pie plates , 5 las cannons, 3 autocannon/rocketlauncher, 1multi laser, 1heavy bolter, 1 heavy stubber, 2 plasma, 1 melta, 1 storm bolter, and 34 flashlights at 1000 points. I won't miss docs at all, but I don't use them. A re-write of the guard codex really most likely would only help me as its very likely for the guard to drop to 5 points each, its unlikly for the specials or heavy's to go up in cost, and I might actually get my griffon back, or the points to put my ratlings back on the field.

On the other hand i do understand that alot of people are playing very fluffy ig armies useing warrior weapons and carp armor for the guard army of dieing. These are the people who are gonna get burned by a re-write, its very likely that drop troop will be in the ig dex as a troop option, same for camo, and mech. The stuff they will drop is the stuff the fluff bunnies are useing.

Kid_Kyoto wrote:Another big hole in the IG codex is, other than the ubiquitous plasma gun there's no good stand and shoot special weapon. GLs might be good if they were 5 points per.

Adding the heavy stubber as a special weapon option would require new models,

Also I think the plastic catachans are now the oldest of the multi-part plastics.

Each Special weapon is supposed to have a different role, so it's OK that the Plasma Gun is the only good stand-and-shoot gun. That's the point.

I agree Heavy Stubber would be a good thing to add.

The plastic Catachans should stay, and the IG should simply get a 3rd plastic regiment. I'd suggest Tallarn for Cameoline to sit along plastic Stormtroopers in Carapace.

jeremycobert wrote:i am amazed that there are so many people who want to get rid of doctrines.

You presume that Doctrines are the only way to provide variety, and that is a very poor assumption. With more Troops Platoon types and well-focused unit options, Doctrines are completely unnecessary.

For once, I have to agree with JHDD. A sensible unit spread and options for those units should be able to give the dex variety just as well as doctrines do (or rather could--they are very poorly balanced right now). Whether GW will manage a sensible spread is another thing entirely, but the potential for a good dex without doctrines is there.

I too, agree with John. As other posters have pointed out (I think it wa Ozy and/or Nurglitch, but I could be wrong), there is a huge difference between an array of choices and an array of choices that are actually in any way appealing. Generally speaking, when people are worreid about a loss of choice, or a loss of options, they're really mostly concerened with losing the option they like. that's fine and natural, but let's not confuse the two issues.

I also think you'd have to look pretty hard to find lots of people that want to scrap doctrines. I like them, I think it would be swell if they were kept and simply better balanced, but I think we all know that's not going to happen.

The doctrines system is considered successful primarliy because it gave a huge amount of flexibility to the basic IG platoon, a unit that was pretty good to start with and could become a buch of things with doctrines. What this concealed was a staggering lack of actual unit options in the book, both in terms of not having many units to begin with, and having some really, really bad units (particularly in the Elites section).

I think if the new book was both internally balanced and competitve AND had doctrines, everybody would be thrilled. I, for one, would trade the flexibilty of taking Independent commisars and Die-Hards for better Ogryn, Stormtroopers, sentinels and Chimeras.

Doctrines are a good idea, but the implementation is not without faults. I think they were better done than Traits. In general, I think it would be best if each Doctrine option had an included mandatory drawback instead of (or in addition to) the options you need to 'buy back' if you use Doctrines.

My big issue with traits and doctrines is that the drawbacks tend to be too easy to work around. Especially with Space Marine traits, it's usually easy to find a couple units that won't be used, at least in normal sized games, and accept that you can't take those... In some cases it might be an option you wouldn't want to take anyway, so it's even less of a drawback.

That's basically the problem I identified back on the first page of this thread: that doctrines are a good idea (because promoting diversity is good), but the implementation of them is bad (because they way they are implemented is easy to game). The options should be integrated into the list so that if you want a Mechanized infantry list, then you simply take Chimeras and so on. One way of balancing points would be to make some options depend on others. I like the idea of taking certain HQs to allow some shifts in force organization a la the Warboss and Belial, and taking some upgrade to allow units an option to a la Grotsnik and Fabius Bile.

Something like:

HQ
1. Senior Officer
2. Commissariat Cadre
3. Primaris Psycker Cadre
4. Ministorum Cadre
5. 1 Command Platoon per Senior Officer (1 Command Squad, 0-3 Support Squads)

Elites
1. Storm Trooper Platoon (1-3 Storm Trooper Squads)
2. Ogryn Platoon (1-3 Ogryn Squads)
3. Veteran Platoon (1-3 Veteran Squads)
4. Sniper Detachment (1-3 Sniper Teams)
5. 1 Enginseer per Vehicle or Vehicle Squadron

Troops
1. Conscript Platoon (1-5 Conscript Squads)
2. Infantry Platoon (1 Command Squad, 2-4 Infantry Squads)

Light Support
1. Rough Rider Platoon
2. Sentinel Platoon
3. Salamander Light Tank

Heavy Support
1. Leman Russ Main Battle Tank
2. Demolisher Infantry Support Tank
3. Hellhound Flame Tank
4. Basilisk Self-Propelled Gun
5. Medusa Self-Propelled Mortar

Senior Officer
WS4 BS4 S3 T3 W3 I3 A3 Ld9 Sv5+

Wargear: Lasgun or Laspistol and Chainsword, Flak Armour

Command Squad
1 Junior Officer + 1 Sergeant + 3 Guardsmen

Wargear: Lasgun or Laspistol and Chainsword, Flak Armour, 1 Vox-caster
Options: May take Company Standard Bearer or 0-1 Regimental Standard Bearer if HQ choice, Medic, Mechanicus Liason (Enginseer), 1 Heavy Weapon (Heavy Stubber, Mortar, Autocannon, or Rocket Launcher unless Mechanicus Liason then also Heavy Bolter, Lascannon, or Multi-Laser), up to 3 Special Weapons (Grenade Launchers and Flamethrowers unless Mechanicus Liason then also Plasma Guns or Melta Guns). May take Chimera as dedicated transport, in which case the entire Platoon must take Chimera dedicated transports. May take Carapace Armour, in which case the entire Platoon must take carapace armour.

Infantry Squad - 50pts
1 Sergeant + 9 Guardsmen

Wargear: Lasgun, Flak Armour, 1 Vox Caster, Frag Grenades.
Options: Sergeant may exchange Lasgun for Laspistol and Chainsword. May take one Special Weapon and one Heavy Weapon as Command Squad. Must take a Chimera dedicated transport if the platoon command squad takes one. Must all take Carapace Armour if the platoon command squad takes one. All models may be equipped with krak grenades.

Conscript Squad - 30pts
1 Conscript Sergeant + 9 Conscripts

Wargear: Lasgun
Options: 1 Heavy Weapon (Heavy Stubber, Mortar, Autocannon, or Rocket Launcher), 1 Special Weapons (Grenade Launchers and Flamethrowers).

Storm Trooper Squad
1 Junior Officer + 9 Storm Troopers

Wargear: Lasgun or Shotgun, Carapace Armour, Targeters, Frag and Krak Grenades. Grav-Chutes.
Options: Junior Officer may exchange his Lasgun for a Las Pistol and Chainsword. The Laspistol may be upgraded to Plasma Pistol. The Chainsword may be upgraded to a Power Weapon. Any model in the squad can carry Melta Bombs. One Junior Officer in the platoon may be upgraded to a Senior Officer. Two Storm Troopers per squad can take either a Flamethrowers, a Melta Gun, or a Plasma Gun. May take Valkyrie as dedicated transport, if so, then the entire Platoon must take Valkries as dedicated transports.

Veteran Squad
1 Sergeant + 9 Veterans

Wargear: Either (1) Lasgun or (2) Shotgun or (3) Laspistol and Close Combat Weapon, Frag and Krak Grenades, Vox-Caster
Options: One Veteran Sergeant in the platoon may be upgraded to a Junior Officer. Junior Officer may exchange his Lasgun for a Las Pistol and Chainsword. The Laspistol may be upgraded to Plasma Pistol. The Chainsword may be upgraded to a Power Weapon. Any model in the squad can carry a heavy weapon, three models not carrying the heavy weapon may take special weapons or demolition charges. Veterans can take a Chimera as a dedicated transport. The entire Veteran platoon may be upgraded to Carapace Armour or lose their save entirely and gain Stealth and Move Through Cover. Veterans can infiltrate if they do not take a dedicated transport.

Support Squad
1 Sergeant + 5 Guardsmen

Wargear: Lasgun, Flak Armour, 1 Vox Caster
Options: Three Guardsmen must exchange their lasguns for either Heavy Weapons or Special Weapons, as Command Squad. Likewise Carapace Armour or Chimera Dedicated Transport if Command squad takes these options.

Salamander Light Tank
Armour 12/12/10, BS3, Type: Fast, Tank, Crew: Imperial Guard
Weapons: Heavy Flamethrower, Autocannon
Equipment: Searchlight, Smoke Launchers
Options: Autocannon may be upgraded to Twin-Linked Lascannon, Heavy Flamethrower may be exchanged for a Heavy Bolter, may take Extra Armour (loses Fast), Rough terrain Modification (loses Fast), Track Guards, Pintle Heavy Stubber

Vox-Caster
If a squad has a Vox-Caster, then it can be split off from its parent platoon like an independent character. In addition that detached squad may still use that platoon's highest Ld for Morale and Pinning so long as that platoon's Command Squad has a vox-caster.

Master-Vox
If a Command squad has a Master-Vox, then any platoon whose Command squad has a vox-caster can use that Command squad's Ld for Morale and Pinning tests.

wow to much to read at work lol

Nurglitch wrote:One way of balancing points would be to make some options depend on others. I like the idea of taking certain HQs to allow some shifts in force organization a la the Warboss and Belial, and taking some upgrade to allow units an option to a la Grotsnik and Fabius Bile.

That's OK, though I'd rather have things unlocked and part of the basic list. There isn't anything in the IG that is so powerful or rare it needs to be handled this way.

Of course, the way this is currently done in the Codex is clumsy: May only take 1 AF Squad and/or Conscript Platoon per Infantry Platoon.

This isn't about something being rare and powerful so much as creating themes like those that can be made under the Doctrine system.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

You presume that Doctrines are the only way to provide variety, and that is a very poor assumption. With more Troops Platoon types and well-focused unit options, Doctrines are completely unnecessary.

you assume GW has writers that can competently write interesting yet balanced rules. i however have been around the block a few times and know differently.

the doctrine system was very innovative for a codex, it allowed the end users to create their own unique army and even allowed you to make crappy units somewhat worthwhile.

jeremycobert, is the the Doctrine system an instance of an interesting yet balanced rule? Is there any reason why a new, Doctrine-less codex would necessarily be less interesting and less balanced?

It is a crap shoot, to be sure, but there's a difference between a crapshoot and Certain Doom. I suspect what IG players eventually get will be less than ideal, but I know it could be otherwise. Sometimes you get the Chaos dex, but other times you get Orks or Eldar.

As pointed before by Kid we all know what will happen: [tongue in cheek]Las Cannons will be bumped to 200 pts each while mortars will be free in each squad to redress balance issues (i.e. GW´s IG warehouse is full with unselled mortars), the Chimeras will be replaced by Rhinos and the new heavy option will be Land Raiders ala Rogue Trader (did you notice the new box went up 10 pounds?) but don´t go yelling Yahooo! yet the land raiders will last only until next year revision of the codex to be substituted by elven chariots on the TO&E.
And of course, the doctrines will be dropped new players to dumbhammer can´t endure having to choose between many options, their brains overload (I wonder where GW find their playtesters nowadays? Perhaps in Miss Marbles School for slowed Monkeys?) [/tongue in cheek]
So like it or not a new codex without doctrines is due, no matter that some were good and some not, simplification is the new rage word at the studio I think.

M.