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.

Barksdale wrote:I don't know if you can get more gunline than this.

To be fair, only 755 points were spent on explicitly gunline things. Meanwhile, my choppy CCS, ogryn, stormies and fireball PCS (all explicitly non-gunline things) comes to the price of 665, with the rest of the 440 being able to go either way. Yeah, it's not all-charge all the time, but there are ways to make IG WAY more gunliney. I mean, just look at a leafblower...

The question is if I NEED to only go all-in-your face, rather than a relatively balanced list.

Ailaros wrote: If only there were a way that I could take stormtrooper PLATOONS

If you really love Stormtroopers, play 2000 points and take an extra FOC so you can get 6 Squads.

And by the way if you really want to spice up games where you play gunlines, send in al'rahem and force your opponent to react.

So, as for Al'Rahem, yeah, I used to take him. I'll direct your attention to the last game that I fielded him, and the game before that. The following is an excerpt:

Interestingly enough, I think this game demonstrates a problem that I've been slowly starting to see with Al'Rahem. Yes, when he shows up from reserve and trashes stuff that my opponents leave foolishly on the edges (like the hellhound in this game) he does rather well. This time, though, my opponent was much smarter, keeping his forces much better out of range. While the damage he did was less than in the game against sisters, he was able to successfully deny my outflanking blobs a bunch of free 6" of movement with charging, which really hurt this game.

Why did it hurt? Well, the problem with taking Al'Rahem is that he splits my forces up. Yes, decluttering my DZ is a good thing, and outflanking is obviously nice, but it makes it so that in every game, I'm basically stuck spending the mid-game trying to re-consolidate my forces. I'm left to wonder how things would have gone if I would have turned al'rahem and the astropath into a squad of conscripts and had everything start out consolidated on the field.

Of course, these are the words of a different person of a different time. That said, some of it still rings true today.

Yes, it would force my opponent to react, but it wouldn't necessarily make him react in any way interesting (as game 27 shows), but I guess reacting at all is better than not at all.

The thing that's really sad, though, is that Al'Rahem will no longer be showing up with fleeting priestly power blobs, and even if he could, he could no longer charge from off the board, making him much less epic.

I mean, I'll consider it, but the option has lost some of its lustre.

Can you buy chimeras for your stormies and give them to outflanking units in Al'Rahem's platoon? In that case, you could take some SWS's with him and 2 cheap as dirt infantry squads (remember those 60pt melta squads I told you about?) and mount the SWS's and Al rahems PCS in chimeras, and have an 11th hour armored cavalry charge into the heart of the enemy line. Plus, they can sit there and shoot if need be, and move out to grab objectives.

Of course, this relies on being able to grab chimeras for the SWS's. If you can't then obviously this idea is dead in the water.

uhh... if you take them for the stormies, then they're a dedicated transport. I'm pretty sure that a different squad can't start in someone else's transport, same as last edition.

I guess an outflanking mechanized cavalry charge would be kind of interesting. Showing up and shouting SURPRISE! with 4 or 5 2xHF chimeras (with guys inside also with flamers for no good reason, of course).

Moot point as I don't have a bunch of chimeras laying around, though...

Or you could take creed, go for broke, and just outflank 3 demolishers into his flank. Let's see him dodge THAT.

Al Rahem either makes a game or breaks it for you, i share your thoughts that he may not be useful sometimes but the feeling is mixed about whether i should drop him or keep him for me, sometimes he shows up and grabs objectives and catches my opponent surprised with overwhelming melta shots and other times he shows up on a boardedge with no enemies close.

But like you said its better something than nothing at all, also playing him reminds me of the power blob days where your infantry actually got to your opponents DZ, i suggest you try him out again.

And about using Raham as calvary, i havent tried that out but if you ask me best not to drop too many points unto his platoon, in addition i would only advise you use him in 1500 plus games, otherwise your DZ becomes pretty weak.

I would suggest trying the plasma blob out. We have had a number of discussions about this unit in the last edition and i think that its time to give it a try. The 24" range allows them to sit behind some meat shields plus we all know how much better st7 is.

Consequently I suggest taking al Rahem with plasma out the wahoo. Because people can just sit further away from the sides I would suggest only having 1 plasma blob in this list.

next I would vote for having 2 stormtrooper flamer units and marbo for your elite spot. The stormtrooper units for obvious reasons and marbo for a different unit and more ap2.

Next I would also support the trial of a conscript hoard or a huge 50man power blob with many priests and a LC. If you want to use allies at this point Id say get SW and you can get your hoard a 2+ cover save... this will be possible with my next suggestion...

battle tanks!! run them up your opponents throats and have your guys behind them to make your own terrain! This means that your not so reliant on your table for terrain.

or failing that buy some barricades with AA guns. Frankly im surprised you havent already.

for my last comment I would like to point out that there are also a number of web pages that can give you all the blue prints to making your own tanks/vendettas with plasticard. I know you are pretty handy with your modelling so think that this could be your next progression.

Not bringing real AA in 6th is like not bringing meltas in 5th. You can make it work somewhat, but you are really making things really hard for yourself. As a guard player, not taking vendettas is really hamstringing yourself. You are a scratch-build champ - why not build yourself some cool fighter planes and use them as vendettas?

The list you used in this battle looks very unthreatening. How come you've suddenly taken a liking to autocannons? You hated them before, and now they are worse! Medusa with bastion breacher? Meh, too unreliable in 5th, same now. Collossus, manticore, basilisk are all great choices, don't waste the artillery slots and pts on unreliable medusas.

I think you are taking some rulechanges too hard. Sure, Al'rahem can't charge when he arrives - so make his platoon hit hard with shooting instead then. 2xSWS + PCS + 2 IS squads is a serious threat and it is not that expensive. 4/6 missions use multiple objectives, place your so that no matter what edge Al'Rahem enters, you can place a scoring unit on an objective.

You're also taking the cover changes too hard. It is extremely easy to get cover against normal shooting still. If your model has cover from ONE!!!! of the enemy firing models, it has cover! How hard is that? In addition, you should seriously consider the Aegis line. It gives tons of placable cover and a bit more AA (one AA gun is not enough, but it helps, and interceptor is nasty. Icarus lascannon is best IMO)

I'm guessing you are against using allies? If it is because of some idea of brokenness, then I suggest you try them out, it is clear that GW has actually tested this part of the rules extensively. If you are open to allies, you get your blobs back, better than ever. Ally in 2x divination runepriest in terminator armour and throw them in separate blobs (with power axes - your dismissal of that upgrade is weird too). Your blobs now have ATSKNF, S4 power weapons, Ld10 and support from some insane buffing powers, at minimum re-roll to hit shooting and close combat. It is almost impossible to snipe the runepriest out, so your blobs will fight to the bitter end. If you want a third blob, use a lord commisar.

Directed hits are also not really a big deal. Sure, you may loose a sergeant or special weapon here and there and it may be the death of the commissar-lead blob, but use IC's and you have a 2+ save against directed hits (and usually another save if you miss the first). Even your sergeants have a 4+ save against it.

You are right that mech can play the range game better than foot, but not if you're well within or without of their weapon ranges. Guard has access to excellent short and long range firepower, we have never been the masters of mid-range, so why try to contest that now? Shove special weapons down their throat while you bombard them from the rear.

On a totally different note, LOVE the artillery scratch-build.

Quickly throw-together example type list that may fit your style (without allies, 1850pts):
CCS, heavy flamer, 2x melta, banner, astropath
Veterans, heavy flamer, 2x melta, demolitions
Veterans, heavy flamer, 2x melta, demolitions
PCS, Al'Rahem, 4x plasma
2x IS, melta
SWS, 3x melta
SWS, 3x flamer
PCS, 4x flamer
2x IS, melta
3x Basilisk
3x Vendetta, 2x heavy bolters
Aegis + icarus

Lets you go totaly bananas in your face. Throw vets and CCS out of zooming airplanes while Al'Rahem charges in from a flank and artillery pounds from the safety of the aegis line. Good AA from vendettas + icarus, devastating barrage support, tons of scoring units and utilises IG's devastating long and short range firepower. Win or lose, with a list like this, the game will be awesome. You set the pace of the game, you have answers to everything, you get to do fancy manouvers, tons of stuff will die on both sides etc.

TL: DR: Don't build a boring list that does not have answers to common stuff.

I love your reports so much! I really feel you on the changes in 6th, please keep your head up and keep throwing dice. I have become frustrated and reworked each of my 4 armies now and I am only finally feel better about it all. I think you need to bring back Alrahem and the outflankers to threaten enemy objectives and add a defense line and quad gun. If you do those things (dumping the HWT's like you were saying and probably some ordinance) you will be more dynamic and able survive to the late game. 6th is very much played in 3 parts: pre-game, first blood, late game. I think you are still playing the methodical dice exercise of 5th rather than fully embracing what you can do in 6th.

Deny your opponent the blocks of dudes to shoot at in the early game, hit them with stormtroopers and outflankers, maintain some anti-air shooting. If you are facing a flyer wall then start running around shooting like crazy to deny them good angles and shots, they can only turn 90 and you can hit them just as easily moving as sitting still since you are Snap Firing. Get a stupid cover save from your defense line and overwatch the crap out of stuff. You can win the pre-game by being able to outflank with tons of guys or make a wall with them, you can get first blood and kill the warlord by going for "head of the snake" tactics with stormtroopers, and you can survive and hold objectives in the late game with outflankers or a relentless wall of Folerans finest! I don't have IG so I could just be talking out my @ss though.

I may be extremely biased though, because I always enjoyed the flank charges in your last series of reports. I don't think you need to get Valkyrie/Vendetta squadrons yet, I'd like you see if you can win with your original themed Folerans!

If all else fails, call in some Allied GK or BA of your own. A small investment in a squad or two with a cool HQ could make your army interesting for you again (and add more cool stuff to your narrative that we all love!).

BladeWalker wrote: I think you need to bring back Alrahem and the outflankers to threaten enemy objectives

Illumini wrote: Sure, Al'rahem can't charge when he arrives - so make his platoon hit hard with shooting instead then. 2xSWS + PCS + 2 IS squads is a serious threat and it is not that expensive. 4/6 missions use multiple objectives, place your so that no matter what edge Al'Rahem enters, you can place a scoring unit on an objective.

TheMicah25 wrote:Consequently I suggest taking al Rahem with plasma out the wahoo. Because people can just sit further away from the sides I would suggest only having 1 plasma blob in this list.

dakka farta wrote:sometimes he shows up and grabs objectives and catches my opponent surprised with overwhelming melta shots and other times he shows up on a boardedge with no enemies close.

And this is my second chief complaint against Al'Rahem. My opponents eventually figured out how to just not leave stuff immediately next to a board edge for me to kill. Tell me, what am I really accomplishing with Al'Rahem when my opponent deploys like this:



Nowadays, those fliers wouldn't even start on the table. Really, Al'rahem guarantees nothing, other than that it's more likely to make my opponent bottle up even harder.

TheMicah25 wrote:I would suggest trying the plasma blob out. We have had a number of discussions about this unit in the last edition and i think that its time to give it a try. The 24" range allows them to sit behind some meat shields plus we all know how much better st7 is.

Honestly, I think I'd rather take a pair of foot vets with plasma now. Not really THAT much less survivable anymore, and you get 6 BS4 plasma guns, rather than 2 BS3 plasma guns and 3 BS3 plasma pistols.

Illumini wrote: If you are open to allies, you get your blobs back, better than ever. Ally in 2x divination runepriest in terminator armour and throw them in separate blobs (with power axes - your dismissal of that upgrade is weird too).

TheMicah25 wrote:Next I would also support the trial of a conscript hoard or a huge 50man power blob with many priests and a LC. If you want to use allies at this point Id say get SW and you can get your hoard a 2+ cover save... this will be possible with my next suggestion...

I don't deny the hypothetical utility of a space marine-led blob, but I'm not interested, personally. If I wanted to play space wolves, I'd play space wolves.

TheMicah25 wrote:for my last comment I would like to point out that there are also a number of web pages that can give you all the blue prints to making your own tanks/vendettas with plasticard. I know you are pretty handy with your modelling so think that this could be your next progression.

Hmm.... Such as?

Illumini wrote:Not bringing real AA in 6th is like not bringing meltas in 5th. You can make it work somewhat, but you are really making things really hard for yourself. As a guard player, not taking vendettas is really hamstringing yourself. You are a scratch-build champ - why not build yourself some cool fighter planes and use them as vendettas?

TheMicah25 wrote:or failing that buy some barricades with AA guns. Frankly im surprised you havent already.

Still don't think I need them yet. As mentioned, with average luck this game, I would have definitely killed two of his three fliers, and probably picked all three out with only the loss of a colossus and a handful of guardsmen.

And I'm not that interested in vendettas. I honestly have never seen them as being very cool. A large, ungainly hunk of flying steel that screams "I'm bringing a toy list!". No offense, but fanbois love vendettas. I prefer units of more earthy wholesomeness. Guardsmen are the whole wheat bread to the vendetta's 2L bottle of mountain dew... so to speak...

Illumini wrote:The list you used in this battle looks very unthreatening. How come you've suddenly taken a liking to autocannons? You hated them before, and now they are worse! Medusa with bastion breacher? Meh, too unreliable in 5th, same now. Collossus, manticore, basilisk are all great choices, don't waste the artillery slots and pts on unreliable medusas.

Are you crazy, man? Autocannons got much, much, much better in 6th. New cover rules means they will occasionally actually get to use that Ap4 (I already got to on game 1 here), and being able to glance vehicles to death makes them a serious threat to vehicles. Back in 5th, my autocannons were only a nuisance, at best, just throwing down a few glances. Now I've already killed vehicles by glancing them to death.

As for the medusa, I agree. I'll see what I'm going to do about them.

Illumini wrote:You're also taking the cover changes too hard. It is extremely easy to get cover against normal shooting still. If your model has cover from ONE!!!! of the enemy firing models, it has cover! How hard is that?

Cover is no longer by-unit, and your opponent can focus fire. Throw in new wound allocation, and this seriously affects how you can move your stuff across the board.

Illumini wrote:On a totally different note, LOVE the artillery scratch-build.

So, I was originally going to make some scratch-built basilisks. I got through the cannon part and the project got derailed. With the sudden inclusion of artillery again, it was time to dust of the project. I don't know if I'm going to bother finishing it, though, as I don't know how long artillery is going to stay in my lists.

BladeWalker wrote: 6th is very much played in 3 parts: pre-game, first blood, late game. I think you are still playing the methodical dice exercise of 5th rather than fully embracing what you can do in 6th.

What do you mean by this?

BladeWalker wrote: If all else fails, call in some Allied GK or BA of your own. A small investment in a squad or two with a cool HQ could make your army interesting for you again (and add more cool stuff to your narrative that we all love!).

As mentioned, if I wanted to play grey knights, I'd play grey knights. That said, this is probably the only thing I'd be even remotely interested in occasionally allying to my guardsmen. I kind of always wanted to try running an inquisitor with my guardsmen back in the day, but never got around to it. In this case, I'd probably just ally a cheap justicar, or, more likely, take Coteaz and a single giant mob of henchmen (or three).

Illumini wrote: In addition, you should seriously consider the Aegis line. It gives tons of placable cover and a bit more AA (one AA gun is not enough, but it helps, and interceptor is nasty. Icarus lascannon is best IMO)

BladeWalker wrote: I think you need to add a defense line and quad gun.

No.

Aegis lines basically represent the problem I'm having with 6th edition now. I've already chosen not to enable the problem (note how I put a giant rock in front of my opponent's aegis in game 2), but I'm CERTAINLY not going to propagate this problem by bringing them myself.

---

Alright, I've got a thread for a new armylist.

Cover is on a model basis for the victim, but you get to check if you have cover from the entire enemy unit, if your model has cover from one enemy firer, you get cover. I do agree that it is harder to walk across the table, but no-one is forcing you to do that. You have many other options to bring the fight to the enemy.

As for Al'Rahem, you get to place 1-3 objectives in 4 missions, place yours 6" from the sides, and the ton of scoring guys can do stuff. Denying pretty much half the board to the enemy is also amazing, and a parking lot like that is dead meat from artillery with full strength blast. Bring manticores for maximum fun. In hammer and anvil, it is even harder to deny a real alphastrike from reserves.

No airforce, no skyfire and no interceptor guns = less fun and more helplessness feelings. I was there in my first games in 6th, relying on twin-linked long fangs and a quad-gun. A series of horrible defeats to newcrons made me realize that you need dedicated AA forces. As I said, you don't have to use the vendetta model (which is a love/hate model), you can make yourself some awesome fighters armed with 3x tl-lc and have the "RAAF" provide airsupport for your poor ground pounders. If you just can't make yourself take any airplanes, at least bring skyfire guns.

Search yahoo groups for 40k related blueprints.

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/bwc-archive/

Here is a link to a yahoo group I am a part of with printable blueprints to scratch build every vehicle in the game pretty much....and titans and FW.....

Seriously, I would build my own chimera variants and be done with it. Sounds like you already no what your answer is but just need to find an economical way to implement it. I present you with the tool to fix your problems. Outside this pure infantry is going to struggle, as it should, why shouldn't mechanized infantry outmaneuver foot infantry? So it's gun line boredom or find a happy mix and hit them faster. Aside from that Al'rehem does help you go on the offensive, you just seem unwilling to take advantage of bottling your opponent up. Take two manticores and a basilisk squad and dare them to clump up like your picture illustrated....No, then Al'rehem hits them.

Ailaros wrote:
And this is my second chief complaint against Al'Rahem. My opponents eventually figured out how to just not leave stuff immediately next to a board edge for me to kill. Tell me, what am I really accomplishing with Al'Rahem when my opponent deploys like this:

Plasma Guns would have killed up to 4 of those tanks in the tank castle on the arrival turn.

DarknessEternal wrote:

Ailaros wrote:
And this is my second chief complaint against Al'Rahem. My opponents eventually figured out how to just not leave stuff immediately next to a board edge for me to kill. Tell me, what am I really accomplishing with Al'Rahem when my opponent deploys like this:

Plasma Guns would have killed up to 4 of those tanks in the tank castle on the arrival turn.

Plus, now you take Artillery, so if they bottle up you can punish.

AdeptSister wrote:

DarknessEternal wrote:

Ailaros wrote:
And this is my second chief complaint against Al'Rahem. My opponents eventually figured out how to just not leave stuff immediately next to a board edge for me to kill. Tell me, what am I really accomplishing with Al'Rahem when my opponent deploys like this:

Plasma Guns would have killed up to 4 of those tanks in the tank castle on the arrival turn.

Plus, now you take Artillery, so if they bottle up you can punish.

+1

This was exactly my point. Either way Al'Rahem is making a huge impact on your opponents decisions.

You should probably get your butt into another game soon, I need more of your battle reports to read!!!!!!

Ailaros wrote:And this is my second chief complaint against Al'Rahem. My opponents eventually figured out how to just not leave stuff immediately next to a board edge for me to kill. Tell me, what am I really accomplishing with Al'Rahem when my opponent deploys like this:



Nowadays, those fliers wouldn't even start on the table. Really, Al'rahem guarantees nothing, other than that it's more likely to make my opponent bottle up even harder.

Then punish him for doing so! Look at this another way. You're paying ~70 points (I can't remember his cost offhand) to cut your opponent's deployment zone to 1/3 of normal.

Now, to give context, I'm doing this with C:SM, not IG. But, I run several large (blast) templates ( Vindicators, Thunderfire Cannons, Vortex, Conversion Beamer, and misc others depending on the list ) and Khan for Outflanking on bikes.

So you know your opponent is going to clump his deployment zone to avoid you, so plan your list accordingly. Either mobilize (it seems your option here may be scratch built because of money reasons) or equip your platoon with long range weapons (plasma, autocannons). Meltas may work too. If the opponent clumps, you smack him around with artillery. If he doesn't, you now get your choice of targets with the Outflankers and the alpha strike. Further, if your opponent rushes after your gunline (as has happened in two of your games) it means you can now get rear armor shots, or force your opponent's assault troops to have to pick one part of your army to deal with.

Next, take advantage of terrain. It's a part of the rules for a reason. Think an opponent is going to clump? Drop a big impassable piece of terrain in the middle of his deployment zone.

Have you considered advancing your infantry anyways, despite the nerfs to powerblobs? Yes, you will be firing snapshots when you move those PIS, but those lasguns + FRFSRF benefit quite well from the new rapid fire rules. Further, this will hamper your opponent's movement, making him cluster more for your artillery, as well as spread your infantry out more to reduce the damage templates (yours and your opponent's) do to your army, as well as limiting the effect of assaults on you. This paragraph I'm hesitant about working as I've not tried it myself, but obviously gunline isn't working, so you may as well try something else. More importantly, though - it sounds like what you find fun, especially compared to static gunline. If you're going to lose anyways, may as well do it having fun.

I don't think GTG is nearly as bad as you think it is. Sure, it means a HWS is only firing snapshots the next turn, except can't you use orders to get them back up? Trading an order to waste a significant amount of opponent's firepower has worked out for me with IG allies at least.

Yeah that Yahoo group was actually the main site that I was referring to. Once your in, due to the size of the community, they can point you in the direction in which you would like.

I would also agree with the concept discussed above. Furthermore, this may actually provide a reason to bring out the mortars again... If anyone can make a barrage army work it should be you.

I also feel as though it should be pointed out that this is 6th ed. You will need to adapt. the term: selective optimization with compensation comes to mind with the way that you are struggling to progress in the new 6th ed world.

By that i mean you need to selectively optimize the things that you do like in 40k in 6th ed. while compensating for the things that you dont like.

I cant imagine it would be possible to design an edition of 40k where everyone is happy with the rules. instead of being rigid with your ideas try embracing the areas in which the games designers have quite obviously trying to lead the games.

Use allies. I know im using this opportunity to combine my chaos forces with my IG. I really feel as though that if you want to continue to use hoards and rush them into your opponent the most viable way to do this is through the inclusion of allies. It doesnt seem viable playing vanilla hoard IG right now. That may change, but right now I think you need to be a little more fluid with your games. have fun and go nuts with allies and see if that brings back the fun in your games regardless of whether or not your opponent brings a gun line.

Certainly when things change, you change or you stop altogether. That I'm willing to go without power blobs is an example of my commitment to to the former.

That said, when I hear "you need", it sounds like "I can't figure out any other way than". When times change, what you need is initiative and creativity, not retrenchment and groupthink.

When I hear "you need ADLs", or "you need vendettas, or "you need allies" I hear "I have no idea what to do, so follow the herd". It's not to say that there are no good reasons to take those things, but a few light reasons draped on popularity...

As for Al'Rahem, I'm still really not convinced. The problem with al'rahem is that it's easy for him to punch below his potential. People seem to assume that you will always catch things off guard, which really isn't the case. There is nothing preventing my opponent from not deploying near a board edge and then counterattacking al'rahem's stuff before it even gets a proper shot off. I stopped using al'rahem precisely because the idea of "forcing my opponent to react" wound up being meaningless. Once my opponents figured out how to react, it wound up not actually causing very much disruption for them. And that was back in the day were I could bring proper blobs. Without it, I imagine him showing up, having no choice targets, and then just getting blown away turn 3...

The idea that people are punting around of forcing my opponent to bunch vehicles up so that I can hit them with artillery is just silly. A basilisk or manticore is now half as effective at blowing up artillery as it once was, if not less so due to longer scatter rolls. Plus, not ever opponent is going to be literally immobile, nor will my opponents never figure out what a screener unit is.

Once it became obvious that Al'Rahem could be countered without being much more than a minor inconvenience to my opponents, I stopped using him. I don't see what has changed that will make it so that he will actually give me what I'm looking for.

Ailaros wrote:Certainly when things change, you change or you stop altogether. That I'm willing to go without power blobs is an example of my commitment to to the former.

That said, when I hear "you need", it sounds like "I can't figure out any other way than". When times change, what you need is initiative and creativity, not retrenchment and groupthink.

When I hear "you need ADLs", or "you need vendettas, or "you need allies" I hear "I have no idea what to do, so follow the herd". It's not to say that there are no good reasons to take those things, but a few light reasons draped on popularity...

You have a valid point here. What I will point out however is that you appear to be extremely reluctant to use that which the GW 6ed designers have emphasized. By that i am referring to flyers, allies and emplacements. I dont think that refusing to utilise major aspects of the game which have been added to the game for specific reasons is a very adaptive behavior.

I dont know about the others in this discussion (although im willing to bet they would say the same as we all enjoy your out of the box armies) but I dont want you to play a netlist fanboi IG army. Instead I owuld like to see you use an army which compliments your play style with units which are/can be effective. By this I want to argue that just because lots of people use a certain unit doesnt mean that you should automatically rule it out of your list. Instead I would suggest that you should consider adding it but use it for a purpose tailored to your unique army. You wont automatically get branded an IG fanboi if you use a respective unit. That kind of reputation comes when you use carbon copy lists from the net, something that you certainly dont do.

As for Al'rahem, if your not digging him move on. I really think that there may be scope for 1 mega blob in your army. 4 priests, 2/3 commissars (or a LC with cammo cloak) and a bunch (50+) of guys with melta bombs and krak grenades with sprinkles of melta guns. Run this unit up behind some demolishers for increased cover fun.

Then just have some smaller scoring units on the sidelines for objective grabbing. You could even include some rough riders for a counter charge into units which are tied up in the mega blob.

I should also mention that there are still quite a few non gunline armies out there which are very powerful. Just look at J2Y's battle reports and you can see this. If your looking for a benchmark for your future lists I cant recommend enough comparing it to his armies.

Im not saying that i know where IG armies should be heading for success in this new edition. instead what I am trying to do is suggest possible new avenues for non mainstream IG armies to adapt to a new environment. Its easy to be negative about certain directions this new edition will take us but in the end it will only negatively impact on your enjoyment of the game.

I myself am trying to build a cool IG PDF force with my death guard, with the intention that the DG resiliency will be complimented with LRBTs and hoards of cheap dudes. I challenge you to build a list that uses your new khorne berserkers with your IG. I think that may give you a new perspective on your games.

In this edition I would argue that you should no longer identify yourself as an IG player. Instead I would suggest that 6th ed players should identify themselves as the author for their half of the narrative which can be created in these games. If that means that your half of the narrative involves a khornate IG PDF cult with some berserkers then do it. Dont pigeon hole yourself to just one faction when as we all know in the grim dark 40k universe that things are not always so black and white. especially when your second army of choice is chaos.

TheMicah25 wrote:just because lots of people use a certain unit doesnt mean that you should automatically rule it out of your list.

Fair enough, but...

TheMicah25 wrote:You have a valid point here. What I will point out however is that you appear to be extremely reluctant to use that which the GW 6ed designers have emphasized. By that i am referring to flyers, allies and emplacements. I dont think that refusing to utilise major aspects of the game which have been added to the game for specific reasons is a very adaptive behavior.

But just because something is new does not mean, per se, it is better. I mean, were this principle true, I'd make sure to include a leman russ punisher or eradicator and at least one deathstrike in every army. After all, those are the new things, thus represent how guard are "supposed" to be played.

I don't think it follows that just because something is added, it represents a fundamental shift in the way that the game is supposed to be played.

TheMicah25 wrote:I should also mention that there are still quite a few non gunline armies out there which are very powerful. Just look at J2Y's battle reports and you can see this. If your looking for a benchmark for your future lists I cant recommend enough comparing it to his armies.

Where?

TheMicah25 wrote:In this edition I would argue that you should no longer identify yourself as an IG player. Instead I would suggest that 6th ed players should identify themselves as the author for their half of the narrative which can be created in these games.

Sure, but I shouldn't be REQUIRED to field a non-single-codex force. If what I like from my fluff is just fielding a bunch of guys from my own codex, as an aesthetic, that should still be supported. If, as you say, it is, and on purpose so, then I'll be very sad.

While I do hope that they have made more of an effort to make the 6th ed rules more balanced, I would say that it would be an inappropriate comparison to draw with a single codex (the single codex balance only influencing people who play with that codex whereas the 6th ed rules changes the balance of ALL codex's ((yes im aware that even one codex can influence the meta for the whole game but for this argument please ignore this))).

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/466541.page

As you can see, J2Y's army is very fluid and can handle combat and shoots very well. This army competes in every phase.

I would like to see you make a list that can do this as well. From the articles that I have read from you indicates to me that you are an underdog supporter. By that I am suggesting that you much prefer to use armies that utilize units that are not typically seen as useful.

Unfortunately it has so far been suggested from your evidence that your typical force is a liability in 6th ed. Consequently for you to continue to enjoy using unconventional units it would be at this point that we need to look at changing up your list.

Surely for a bit of a laugh we could devise an unconventional army which can compete in every phase.

It seems like you have a few stipulations for this list.

The biggest appears to be cost. Im sure there are more but without knowing them right now I will assume a safe bet would be to develop a list with you using your current model selection.

As I mentioned earlier I would love to see you build a list combining your IG with your chaos. Just for laughs can we just try to build a list using your chaos with your IG? I would like to see you build an unconventional list combining the two using the models you have.

If you take up this challenge could you take it to your next game and write it up for us to discuss? This would be a great exercise not only for us but also for the 40k community in general as your list should hopefully be an unconventional all-rounder non net list. Every single allied list that i have seen so far has been designed to break the game. your list may offer something different.

What im trying to get at is that you can still hold your values and change with the times. I admit that it is still very early to say how armies should and should not be played but just for 1 reported game can we see you slide your values a little to allow for you to play a game with allies?

Ailaros wrote:

BladeWalker wrote: 6th is very much played in 3 parts: pre-game, first blood, late game. I think you are still playing the methodical dice exercise of 5th rather than fully embracing what you can do in 6th.

What do you mean by this?

BladeWalker wrote: If all else fails, call in some Allied GK or BA of your own. A small investment in a squad or two with a cool HQ could make your army interesting for you again (and add more cool stuff to your narrative that we all love!).

As mentioned, if I wanted to play grey knights, I'd play grey knights. That said, this is probably the only thing I'd be even remotely interested in occasionally allying to my guardsmen. I kind of always wanted to try running an inquisitor with my guardsmen back in the day, but never got around to it. In this case, I'd probably just ally a cheap justicar, or, more likely, take Coteaz and a single giant mob of henchmen (or three).

Illumini wrote: In addition, you should seriously consider the Aegis line. It gives tons of placable cover and a bit more AA (one AA gun is not enough, but it helps, and interceptor is nasty. Icarus lascannon is best IMO)

BladeWalker wrote: I think you need to add a defense line and quad gun.

No.

Aegis lines basically represent the problem I'm having with 6th edition now. I've already chosen not to enable the problem (note how I put a giant rock in front of my opponent's aegis in game 2), but I'm CERTAINLY not going to propagate this problem by bringing them myself.

---

Alright, I've got a thread for a new armylist.

I only meant that it just feels like you are still playing 5th both in strategy and list. I started over completely with all my lists, if you don't take Psykers, Flyers, Challenge Characters, or Fortifications you will be hamstringing yourself and I just don't want you to get discouraged. I see you have strong feelings about allies and fortifications, far be it from us to tell you how to play your army but against a full-on 6th edition army you will continue to be frustrated. It seems your group is fairly competitive while you are more of a narrative driven player, perhaps you should bring the nasty on open play nights and lobby for a narrative or campaign here and there? Whatever keeps it fun your you (and keeps you writing cool reports).

TheMicah25 wrote:

I should also mention that there are still quite a few non gunline armies out there which are very powerful. Just look at J2Y's battle reports and you can see this. If your looking for a benchmark for your future lists I cant recommend enough comparing it to his armies.

Sorry but this is a silly suggestion for Ailaros. jy2 does well but he is definitely not playing for fluff or composition which is a huge influence for Ailaros if you have followed him for any length of time you should spot the difference in the two players intent. For example jy2 follows codex creep to the letter, by that I mean he has played every army as they have been released in the last two years, this is smart for him because he wants to maintain a competitive edge over his opponents, but it is completely the opposite of Ailaros personality, I mean he is building a Khorne cult army, not exactly a current or efficient codex. He knows what can be done to win, he just doesn't want to sacrifice the flavor he has painstakingly created in the Foleran to do it. Sure fliers are currently the best unit type in the game, he doesn't have the will or means to go that route, same with mechanizing his list. So really he wants to take a 4th/5th edition army and make it work for 6th. While he suggests he is open to change he seems to be arguing in the opposite direction.

This is how this discussion has digressed so far:
1. Blobs, dead (before a single game of 6th)
2. Gunline guard? No
3. Stormtroopers? Yes
4. Transports? No
5. Fliers? No
6. Al'rahem? No
7. Fortifications? No
8. Allies? No

Honestly I don't know what the answer is then. Sit out 6th maybe? I am not trying to be a troll but it seems ridiculous to claim to be willing to adapt to change while not taking any action or direction to help mitigate or implement said changes. I mean at this point the discussion is looking more and more pointless. Is your goal to win? To stay very competitive? If yes then currently with the limitations you have given us your options are rather finite. I disagree that using certain units is bandwagon or displays less skill, in certain situations I will agree but not as a generalization. The antithesis is also true, a player winning with a trash list isn't always a demonstration of player skill, rather then a demonstration on the fickle nature of luck. If you are not playing to stay competitive then I would suggest no change, keep the blobs and rush into the breach each game.... You will lose often, but you will be losing the game you want to play. What I am getting at I guess, is that there isn't a whole lot you can do with a guard army if you are playing almost exclusively from the infantry platoon section. Yes it is probably the most flexible troop entry in 40k, but it is only one entry after all and thus is restricting our options heavily.

Red Corsair wrote:

Sorry but this is a silly suggestion for Ailaros. jy2 does well but he is definitely not playing for fluff or composition which is a huge influence for Ailaros if you have followed him for any length of time you should spot the difference in the two players intent. For example jy2 follows codex creep to the letter, by that I mean he has played every army as they have been released in the last two years, this is smart for him because he wants to maintain a competitive edge over his opponents, but it is completely the opposite of Ailaros personality, I mean he is building a Khorne cult army, not exactly a current or efficient codex. He knows what can be done to win, he just doesn't want to sacrifice the flavor he has painstakingly created in the Foleran to do it. Sure fliers are currently the best unit type in the game, he doesn't have the will or means to go that route, same with mechanizing his list. So really he wants to take a 4th/5th edition army and make it work for 6th. While he suggests he is open to change he seems to be arguing in the opposite direction.

I believe that regardless of J2Y's adaptive power creep list his list is actually (currently) very fluffy. My argument is that you CAN make a fluffy awesome narrative list that competes in every phase. Currently i dont think that this list can come from Ailaros's usual lists but that doesnt mean that its impossible to do. Whats wrong with creating a side narrative which involves his khorne army? This army hasnt seen the light of day yet. Why cant it be used in conjunction with some IG PDF? especially when the 6th ed developers have emphasized this potential.

I would also argue that he does have the means. He has spent a fair amount of time teaching himself how to make his own models. with the blue prints from the aforementioned website you can make your own tanks of any variety for the cost of some plasticard and spare time. This is possible. For the record i dont want to see him mechanize his lists, what i do want to see in regard to this argument are some lists which he can build which are not crippled due to cost.

Very nice BR i like the you style of writing. However if i were going to change anything in your list i would say drop the Ogryns in favor of something like a Valkyrie or Vendetta. They are nasty and can pack a major punch for being rather cheap. As a fellow guard player i run to vendettas and they normally clean house for me. Plus if you search Ebay long enough you can pick them up rather cheap

TheMicah25 wrote:

I believe that regardless of J2Y's adaptive power creep list his list is actually (currently) very fluffy. My argument is that you CAN make a fluffy awesome narrative list that competes in every phase. Currently i dont think that this list can come from Ailaros's usual lists but that doesnt mean that its impossible to do. Whats wrong with creating a side narrative which involves his khorne army? This army hasnt seen the light of day yet. Why cant it be used in conjunction with some IG PDF? especially when the 6th ed developers have emphasized this potential.

I would also argue that he does have the means. He has spent a fair amount of time teaching himself how to make his own models. with the blue prints from the aforementioned website you can make your own tanks of any variety for the cost of some plasticard and spare time. This is possible. For the record i dont want to see him mechanize his lists, what i do want to see in regard to this argument are some lists which he can build which are not crippled due to cost.

Opinions will obviously vary but I fail to see how MSU flier spam with wraiths maxed when possible is "fluffy." Plebeian maintenance bots and transports doing all the real fighting makes absolutely no sense to me, from a background and narrative perspective of course.However it makes total sense why you would take these if you are trying to win a tournament that disregards soft scores entirely.

Whether or not he has the means is his call, all I did was reiterate from what responses he gave. Those suggested he didn't have to time and or finances let alone the inclination to add chimeras or fliers. I linked him to the paperk site but those prints take some time to utilize, which I am not sure he currently has. It's understandable if he chooses not to use them.

I also want to make it clear that I am not knocking jy2 for his play style or decisions, just illustrating that we all approach the game differently. To me jy2 is a gamer first and hobbyist second while Ailaros is a hobbyist first and a gamer second, I mean simply look at the difference in their lists and then at the standard to which they model their armies and I think it is pretty clear. One squeezes his codex for every ounce of efficiency while the other restricts himself by the background he has created for his army. Does that mean they don't care about the different aspects of 40k, absolutely not but I don't understand how it's helpful to link a gamers battle reports to a hobbyist especially when the gamer isn't even playing the same army.

I run a tough as hell msu mech vet army and my brother runs a tough as nails blob squad army but simply giving him our lists isn't going to help as he has a specific direction he wants his army to move towards.

Alright, so I'm going to try and give summary answers here, rather than direct quoting.

- I agree that it is possible to make balanced armies that can fight in any phase. However, J2Y's list that was linked isn't very useful, as infantry platoons are very dissimilar to warrior squads, and there's nothing in my codex that is analogous to wraiths.

The trick here is to be able to do this with foot guard. Certainly I could EASILY do this with grey knights or necron or blood angels or space wolves, or any of a variety of armies. I'm not playing those armies, though. Foot guard just got a lot more challenging to figure out in the list building stage.

- Not all ideas are created equal. Just because I ignore or counter-argue something does not mean I'm being stubborn, it's that I need some stronger rhetoric or better ideas. If I reject a few poorly-argued ideas, that does not mean I am against ideas, it means I'm against things that are poorly argued.

Now, before everyone takes offense, I'll say, as before, that this is a really hard problem, actually. I would expect a lot of so-so things to come out of brainstorming. It is the process of brainstorming, though that's going to unlock this problem. I'd hate to stop trying just because a few possible solutions were presented. I don't feel the need to just pick the first things that pass in front of me. The correct solution is infrequently the first one that everyone hysterically gloms on to.

- And I'll deal with one of these things in specific. Just because something is new does not mean that it represents a fundamental shift in the way that the game is played. It just means it's new. End of.

Specific problems have to be addressed on the objective merit of the problem itself, and approached with an open mind to find clever solutions. I'm not interested in groupthink, especially since we're still only a month into this all.

Ailaros, I think you might be on to something with Stormtroopers. Unconventional units that break the mold of foot guard may be what you need to win the day. I am enjoying the use of Penal Legion in my games and finding that they are a good "SURPRISE!" unit. Sure, they have lasguns, but they can be used to tie up things in your opponents back field for a turn. And what ever they dedicated to them is not being shot at you.

Also, I would suggest getting a 'russ in here. I mean, you already mentioned liking the Exterminator. I run one currently (With pask, because BS 4 twinlinked hurts things) and I can say that is has helped me snatch victory from the jaws of what ever I was doing before. It is a reliable antitank that can be turned on fliers no problem. (Four twinlinked +1 damage table shots? YES PLEASE!)