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.

The idea behind this thread came from a recent discussion about the "proper" use of an IG CCS. I would like to get a wider feel for what the posters of Dakka think about IG and Powerfists. I am of the camp that Powerfists are not just a waste of points for IG, but there are always pros and cons.

Pros:
Swinging at S6 ignoring armor saves, wounding on a 2+ on MEQ
Able to be taken on several non-IC models so they can't be singled out in CC
Able to penetrate most vehicles RA
At 15 points not prohibitively expensive
Able to deal with Walkers better than grenades
At Init 3, IG are going last in CC against the majority of opponents, so I1 of a Powerfist isn't a problem most of the time

Cons
Whereas most everyone else with a PF is at S8 or higher, IG PF's are only S6
At T 3 with a standard 5+ armor save, that PF wielding Guardsman isn't long for this world
PF's play on a weakness (generally) of IG, CC
The points spent on a PF could be spent instead on X or Z that plays more to IG strengths
At WS 3, IG don't hit as often
Short of builds designed with it in mind, IG doesn't belong in CC in the first place

Not all of these are my thoughts (nor all inclusive), but it is in my opinion that the pros outweigh the cons enough to justify the use of PF's as IG. With 5th Edition as it is, the Assault Phase is of greater importance for everyone. I have found from my own experience that PF's on my CCS, and often my Vet Sgt's, have not been a waste. So, follow IG players and Dakka users, what do you think? Are Powerfists worth it for the IG or are they just a waste of points better spent elsewhere? I would like to hear from those that field PF's as IG and those that have faced against IG wielding PF's.

Here is my argument against PF for IG:

Look at the units you are gonna give this to CCS, PCS even Vets. Look at the numbers when you get charged by a 10 man Tac squad (assume PF Sarge) at Initiative 4 18 attacks hitting on 3's = 12hits wounding on 3's = 8 wounds armour saves reduce that to 5-6 dead. At this point the PCS is dead the CCS is likely only the commander left and the vets is down to 5/4 members. Initiative 3 you attack back well if you took vets you attack back, lets be generous and assume 5 survivors thats 4 attacks (PF doesn't go till Init 1) 2 hit wounding on 5's = 1 wound being generous after saves realistically no damage. Initiative 1 PF's go Vet Sarge (hit's once kills a marine woo-hoo) or Commander (Hits twice kills 2); Marine sgt hits twice and kills 2 (2 normal bods in your vet squad or Instant death on your commander.). If anyone is left you lose combat by 6-7 and die or run.

All this for 15pts.

Too be fair, the tac squad has the same number of models as the vet squad but vets are 7pts a model while a tac marine is (avg cost for a 10man squad) 17.

Now let's run that scenario again, only the vets are charging.

9 Marines go first, 3+ to hit and wound.
6 hits, 4 wounds, 3 dead vets.

6 vets now go, 4+ to hit and 5+ to wound. 12 attacks.
6 hits, 2 wounds, about one dead marine.

The vet Sgt. goes, 3 attacks, 1-2 hits and 1-2 dead marines. Let's assume 2 dead marines.

Now the SM sgt hits back, 2 attacks.
Realistically, it's one more dead vet.

So you lost combat by 1-2, not bad for a unit that costs significantly less. And that's not including shooting. Then again, the tac squad rapid firing bolters would murder the vet squad.

Of course your right if he charges the marines then he'll only lose by 1-2 and be stuck in combat with a tac squad which will kill the vets in the next assault phase.

The Strange Dude wrote:Here is my argument against PF for IG:

Look at the units you are gonna give this to CCS, PCS even Vets. Look at the numbers when you get charged by a 10 man Tac squad (assume PF Sarge) at Initiative 4 18 attacks hitting on 3's = 12hits wounding on 3's = 8 wounds armour saves reduce that to 5-6 dead. At this point the PCS is dead the CCS is likely only the commander left and the vets is down to 5/4 members. Initiative 3 you attack back well if you took vets you attack back, lets be generous and assume 5 survivors thats 4 attacks (PF doesn't go till Init 1) 2 hit wounding on 5's = 1 wound being generous after saves realistically no damage. Initiative 1 PF's go Vet Sarge (hit's once kills a marine woo-hoo) or Commander (Hits twice kills 2); Marine sgt hits twice and kills 2 (2 normal bods in your vet squad or Instant death on your commander.). If anyone is left you lose combat by 6-7 and die or run.

All this for 15pts.

How true. However, by getting that 1 assured kill, the PF has already earned its points back. I don't go around looking to get into CC with my PF models, I resign myself to the idea that sooner or later I will be in an assault. which I am more than likely to lose. Instead of being completely ineffective in CC, I find it worth it to take an upgrade that will at the very least break even on points. I do agree that a PF is wasted on the PCS, but is viable in a CCS and Vet Sqds. You did make me think of something else though, for those of you that do not think that PF's are worth it for IG, what would you spend those points on?

Might I mention OP that you said that PF were better than grenades against armour. Might I mention for a third of the cost of a PF you can get krak grenades for a squad giving you 10 S6 attacks against armour.

wizard12 wrote:Might I mention OP that you said that PF were better than grenades against armour. Might I mention for a third of the cost of a PF you can get krak grenades for a squad giving you 10 S6 attacks against armour.

I said that against Walkers PF are better than grenades. Instead of hitting a Walker with a 6 with a grenade, a PF will go off of WS, you get all of your attacks as opposed to 1, and short of meltabombs you're doing the same or better S with the PF. Grenades are great for most other vehicles, having a PF just gives more options, not necessarily better ones against non-Walker vehicles.

The Strange Dude wrote:Of course your right if he charges the marines then he'll only lose by 1-2 and be stuck in combat with a tac squad which will kill the vets in the next assault phase.

Well if we keep on running the scenario, the marines will still kill the same number of vets. So 4 more go, and the vet PF will pull down one more. And will then probably run and get SA'd.

But now you have a small combat squad left that is probably in front of all your big guns.

Also grenades are useless at wounding MC's, Powerfists aren't.

Evil Lamp 6 wrote:
How true. However, by getting that 1 assured kill, the PF has already earned its points back. I don't go around looking to get into CC with my PF models, I resign myself to the idea that sooner or later I will be in an assault. which I am more than likely to lose. Instead of being completely ineffective in CC, I find it worth it to take an upgrade that will at the very least break even on points. I do agree that a PF is wasted on the PCS, but is viable in a CCS and Vet Sqds. You did make me think of something else though, for those of you that do not think that PF's are worth it for IG, what would you spend those points on?

The PF doesn't really earn it's points back until the squad it is in has killed it's total points worth of enemy.

That as an aside 15pts in a guard army is 3 flamers, a melta and melta bombs, a plasma rifle/pistol, and lots of other stuff.

I don't as a rule take any cc upgrades in my guard because I don't intend to get into cc and if I do I want them to lose first phase so I can shoot the assaulter next turn.

I wasn't going to try to bring shooting into this because it adds many more variables and what-ifs to an already situational use weapon. But if we are to go that route, include Shotgun/Melta Vets shooting and then assaulting into the equation.

Evil Lamp 6 wrote:I wasn't going to try to bring shooting into this because it adds many more variables and what-ifs to an already situational use weapon. But if we are to go that route, include Shotgun/Melta Vets shooting and then assaulting into the equation.

I'm not trying to bring shooting in (as your right it does overcomplicate the issue). I'm just saying that shooting is where the IG's main strength is and one of the ways for an opponent to avoid it is to be stuck in CC, by making squads useless in CC you go a long way to denying them that option.

The Strange Dude wrote:

The PF doesn't really earn it's points back until the squad it is in has killed it's total points worth of enemy.

That as an aside 15pts in a guard army is 3 flamers, a melta and melta bombs, a plasma rifle/pistol, and lots of other stuff.

I don't as a rule take any cc upgrades in my guard because I don't intend to get into cc and if I do I want them to lose first phase so I can shoot the assaulter next turn.

Fair enough. I agree with the whole lose assault on their turn, fall back, and shoot them up tactic, but I am also of the opinion that I don't want to be completely ineffective at killing in the assault phase. As far as the points buying other special weapons, I make sure to max those out first before I buy my fists. It comes down to where I have the other weapons I want first, but not the points for a whole other squad and weapons, so I spend some on a PF or two.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

The Strange Dude wrote:

I'm not trying to bring shooting in (as your right it does overcomplicate the issue). I'm just saying that shooting is where the IG's main strength is and one of the ways for an opponent to avoid it is to be stuck in CC, by making squads useless in CC you go a long way to denying them that option.

I couldn't agree more with all of that, but I don't see a PF taking away from still having CC be lost as a whole. It just leaves them with a bloody nose first.

If you want to use assault use what little assault units are open to the guard. Rough Riders are cheap (pts wise) and can cause most things a headache; Ogryn expensive but tough good for tarpitting; Large blobs with commisars (my least favourite).

Thats part of my love of guard though the fact that there are many viable approaches and theories to list building and army tactics.

In any squad where you can take a powerfist, you will probably not have stubborn (a PCS can get stubborn through a commissar, but then you're paying a lot for only 6 T3 wounds) so the unit will be eaten up in 1-2 turns of combat. I don't think that's enough time for a powerfist to really justify it's cost. People say 'oh, if it kills one marine, you've made your points back' but that's not really how things work. Taking powerfists means that you're losing more points whenever the squad dies to shooting, which should be fairly often - especially since, if you're trying to assault people with non-fleet infantry, you will often have to eat a turn of rapid fire.

Special weapons have a much higher chance to come into play than powerfists, and often do more damage. I'll take those instead. The only good IG infantry for close combat are large stubborn blobs, and those can't take powerfists.

I always have one on my Company Commander after he took down a tyrannofex with his in a game

ChocolateGork wrote:I always have one on my Company Commander after he took down a tyrannofex with his in a game

That sounds really cool, good job, but I don't see why it should affect your tactical thinking or list-making.

A tyrannofex has 6 wounds, an IG powerfist hits on a 3+, wounds on a 4+. A company commander has 3 attacks - so you're looking at 1 wound a turn. I mean, I assume the tyrannofex was already severely wounded? A tyrannofex also has 3 attacks, hits a CCS on a 4+ and kills on a 2+, so it should chew up the squad before being killed itself. Also it has a template weapon, so I don't see how you even assaulted it with a CCS.

My point being, this will probably never happen again. I just don't understand how people get these powerfist-armed command squads in combat with things and don't lose the whole squad getting into charge range, or simply get all 5 models chewed up over 1-2 rounds of combat.

I said it in the previous thread and I guess I'll re-iterate myself here as well...equipping your Guard for CC is a waste of points unless you are specifically taloring your list for CC by including Straken and multiple, combined PIS with lots of power weapons.

The reasoning is really quite simple. The strength of the CCS is their BS of 4 coupled with their ability to wield four special weapons. When you start throwing on extraneous bumph like power fists and standards your making a small, fragile and expensive squad even more expensive for no additional increase in protection. Furthermore, that squad that had a dedicated role (from the special weapons) is now confused, as you've given it CC equipment. So now if you shoot, your not using your CC equipment, and if you enter CC your not shooting to your maximum effectiveness; either way you are only using 50% of your equipment effectively.

A lot of people say that they use power fists as contingency plans, on the outside chance that their CCS gets stuck into CC. I would argue that if your careless enough to get your CCS embroiled in CC, a single power fist isn't really going to help; the entire squad, bar the Commander will get eaten, and he'll kill one, maybe two MEQ, flee, and get run down for his troubles. Good use of that 15pts wasn't it?

Moreover, if your not actively seeking combat with that squad, then why buy it a power fist in the first place? Why not use that points allowance on upgrading other squads with ranged weaponry that stands a much better chance of doing some damage? Guard is not an all-round army. Tactical Sergeants get away with wielding fists because their T, armour save, and squad-mates ensure that they can soak up the damage prior to swinging. Guard are far too squishy to try and pull the same trick.

Throwing anecdotes around about how your CCS mashed a 'Nid MC in CC is all well and good. If your dice go crazy hot and his go freezing cold then yes, there's a very, very, very slim chance of that occuring, but please don't use situational examples to try and promote the merits of an otherwise very sub-standard piece of equipment.

L. Wrex

I-bounty-hunt-the-elderly wrote:In any squad where you can take a powerfist, you will probably not have stubborn

This is the real problem with power fists, actually. It basically requires you to spend more points on commissars.

That said, for 15 points, I think people should compare power fists to plasma guns:

- both wound infantry on 2+
- both ignore armor saves
- both put down a couple attacks when you use them

And then from there, you break it out:

- power fists ignore cover saves, plasma doesn't
- power fists attack rear armor, plasma doesn't
- power fists can attack units locked in close combat, plasma can't.
- power fists are used during both game turns. Plasma is used just once.

- plasma can be single tapped to attack at medium range, powerfists can't
- plasma wounds T6 on 3+, power fists do it on 4+
- plasma can take "bring it down!", power fists can't
- plasma burns, power fists don't

So we have two weapons that are the same cost that do basically the same thing. The difference is that plasma is better for taking down monstrous creatures (more attacks before it gets to you, and orders), while power fists are better for clearing infantry out of cover and multi-turn assaults where your firepower will be found seriously lacking.

As such, the power fist takes a certain amount of killing power against the same targets to more different circumstances while the plasma is better against MCs and sacrifices being good in non-perfect circumstances for being better in pefect circumstances.

Ailaros wrote:power fists are better for clearing infantry out of cover and multi-turn assaults where your firepower will be found seriously lacking.

Except not really, because the only guard squads likely to have power fists will be 5-man command squads (or straken and friends) who will rarely live long enough to swing it (okay, maybe one round if you're lucky). And while Priests may be effective anti-tank attachments, they drop pretty quick if they ever actually step into combat with something that fights back.

sometimes you get multi-turn stuff with low-model-count squads (like, say, when cleaning up remnants of bigger squads), but what I was more alluding to was to be able to do damage to units which are engaged with other units of yours (like blobs) which have a tendency to survive for several game turns in close combat. powerfists let you charge in and kill stuff without needing to sacrifice a blob so that the plasma guns have targets on your turn.

As for anti-tank, against some targets plasma is the same (rhinos), or even better (raiders), but against other targets, powerfists are decidedly better (like against guard artillery or chimeras, or preds, for example). Yes, these squads can get krak grenades which also put down S6 attacks, but the power fist can put down a couple, which makes it not all that bad at its secondary role.

Ailaros wrote:

I-bounty-hunt-the-elderly wrote:In any squad where you can take a powerfist, you will probably not have stubborn

This is the real problem with power fists, actually. It basically requires you to spend more points on commissars.

That said, for 15 points, I think people should compare power fists to plasma guns:

- both wound infantry on 2+
- both ignore armor saves
- both put down a couple attacks when you use them

And then from there, you break it out:

- power fists ignore cover saves, plasma doesn't
- power fists attack rear armor, plasma doesn't
- power fists can attack units locked in close combat, plasma can't.
- power fists are used during both game turns. Plasma is used just once.

- plasma can be single tapped to attack at medium range, powerfists can't
- plasma wounds T6 on 3+, power fists do it on 4+
- plasma can take "bring it down!", power fists can't
- plasma burns, power fists don't

I think that list of comparisons is specious. Plasmaguns can move and fire 18" (or fire a single shot at 24"), whereas powerfists can only move to attack 12". That's a very significant difference when IG are so vulnerable to rapid fire and to flamers. It gives plasma guns a much higher chance of actually coming into play. I should point out that this mobility difference only becomes more pronounced when squads are in chimeras.

When you use a plasma gun, it may get hot, and be only in your shooting phase, not 2 phases per turn, but at least your opponent doesn't get free swings at you first. To even say a powerfist allows you to fight in both player turns is to assume that an IG powerfist will survive more than a single round of combat, which is seldom the case.

You say that powerfists hit rear armour - yes, on a 4+ or 6+ unless your opponent is immobilised or an absolute moron who leaves stationary vehicles within 12" of enemy infantry.

Frankly, I think the major benefit of ranged weapons over close combat - they can be brought to bear far more easily - outweighs any of the reasons you've given to take powerfists.

I think we have only 1 valid unit to take a powerfist into. And that is the Company commander in a CCS.

Because he has 3 wounds and due to wound allocation you will be able to keep that guy alive for a long time.

But still you must be careful who you attack. Of course you cannot stand against Crushers or 10 Assault terminators or a Trygon.
You will be wiped out in one phase and gain nothing from that. That is worthless.

But:

classical situation, we have 10 terminators to kill, throw the whole shooting on them and kill 7. What happens? 3 of them go for multi assault and down 3 of your units. How do we avoid that? Take the powerfist, save your option to charge the 3 remnants, they wont kill you in one turn, but you will perhaps stand the assault phase or even defeat them. That saves your shooting next turn and instead of 3 targets the enemy in the worst case has got one: The expendable CCS.

This situation can be replaced by every other unit, which is ALMOST shot down. The fist+melta-CCS is a nice unit finishing off injured enemies.

And actually the only thing you lose are 15 points. The rest is just gain. You dont lose weapons, you dont lose the shooting ability. You gain 3-4 attacks s6 powerweapon, you gain the ability to use them in the enemys phase so actually it happens 2x in one game turn and not just 1x like shooting.

And we have to ask ourselves honestly: How often in one game do we use the special weapons of one squad? It takes perhaps 2 turns of moving up to target, 1-2x shooting, thats it. And dont mentioning the sneaking vet chims that have to score and therefore cannot be thrown apon the enemy carelessly.
And maybe the fists saves your special weapons from being charged down by a remnant squad. So you will kill that squad, that would normally have killed you and you get your special weapons (or some of them at least) free.

There may be games, you wont use your fist, because the opponents are either dead or too strong. But there are certainly games, where the powerfist really excels. And thats is worth the investation imho.

Powerfists are not worth it for Imperial Guard. Its pointless to get a power fist on a small squad like a CCS or PCS because you won't be there to swing it and even if you are your still losing combat. Even on Veterans its not worth it. Hitting on rear armor with a fist is just bad. Get meltas guns instead. The points are better spent on plasma or melta guns to enhance your shooting phase.

If you want to do close combat with guard take Straken and then take power weapons in your combined platoon infantry squad sarges and a commisar with power weapon. If you could get a power fist in this combined infantry squad then it wold be worth it since you have plenty of ablative wounds in a 30-50 man squad and are stubborn ld 9 with a reroll when you lose from the commissar so your power weapons will grind down the enemy eventually even if you lose combat.

From playing agianst guard a time or 2 when something charges a unit of guardsmen. You actually WANT to loose combat. Yes you lost a unit of your men. Oh well, but now that unit that charge said guardsmen are standing out in the open with there finger in there nose.

I debated for awhile if giving the sarge any sort of CC weapons was a good idea and I dont think it is. If you do. You increase your chance of living threw that first charge. However they will kill you in the next round of combat leaving them open to move on their turn. Its ussually best to just die on the charge.

Evil Lamp 6 wrote:

wizard12 wrote:Might I mention OP that you said that PF were better than grenades against armour. Might I mention for a third of the cost of a PF you can get krak grenades for a squad giving you 10 S6 attacks against armour.

I said that against Walkers PF are better than grenades. Instead of hitting a Walker with a 6 with a grenade, a PF will go off of WS, you get all of your attacks as opposed to 1, and short of meltabombs you're doing the same or better S with the PF. Grenades are great for most other vehicles, having a PF just gives more options, not necessarily better ones against non-Walker vehicles.

While power fists are certainly better than krak grenades against walkers, that isn't saying much. An IG power fist with two attacks will glance a normal Dreadnought one-sixth of the time and do nothing to an Ironclad or Furioso. An IG trooper trying to plant a melta bomb will hit one-sixth of the time, but then have significantly improved chances to damage the vehicle. Melta bombs are slightly worse than IG power fists against AV 12 walkers and infinitely better than IG power fists against AV 13 walkers.

Fetterkey wrote:

Evil Lamp 6 wrote:

wizard12 wrote:Might I mention OP that you said that PF were better than grenades against armour. Might I mention for a third of the cost of a PF you can get krak grenades for a squad giving you 10 S6 attacks against armour.

I said that against Walkers PF are better than grenades. Instead of hitting a Walker with a 6 with a grenade, a PF will go off of WS, you get all of your attacks as opposed to 1, and short of meltabombs you're doing the same or better S with the PF. Grenades are great for most other vehicles, having a PF just gives more options, not necessarily better ones against non-Walker vehicles.

While power fists are certainly better than krak grenades against walkers, that isn't saying much. An IG power fist with two attacks will glance a normal Dreadnought one-sixth of the time and do nothing to an Ironclad or Furioso. An IG trooper trying to plant a melta bomb will hit one-sixth of the time, but then have significantly improved chances to damage the vehicle. Melta bombs are slightly worse than IG power fists against AV 12 walkers and infinitely better than IG power fists against AV 13 walkers.

better to give the squad a priest. reroll to hit on assault and instea dof a PF give the squad a eviscerator wielding holy man... 2d6 arm pen on str6 with reroll to hit if you attack it.

I believe that the Dreadnought can just squash the priest before he attacks, unfortunately, unless you meant a Ministorum one.

Fetterkey wrote:I believe that the Dreadnought can just squash the priest before he attacks, unfortunately, unless you meant a Ministorum one.

yes ministorium, he joins with a ig squad... has a 4+ invuln...

CHeck that, my own curiosity and lack of use of ind chars has made me prove myself wrong about pile in... still hes got invul... and rerolls hits for everyone...

I was referring to Ministorum Priests from Codex: Witch Hunters, who aren't Independent Characters and can thus be very, very dangerous in a big blob of Guardsmen.