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.

No, it's not. Not by a long shot.

 Melissia wrote:
Still better than a Leman Russ.

Man, now THAT'S a good joke.

Can we not derail into the "which unit is worse: Land Raider or Leman Russ" debate? Though it is interesting it seems like something for another thread, and this thread itself is interesting too.

The imperial guard are just far too diverse to adequately represent the many and varied regiments, along with their tactics and strategems. Games workshop is just not willing to put that many resources toward something that is not as important as space marines. Furthermore making the guard varied makes it harder to use them as a plot device for facless cannon fodder (which is all gw wants them to be.)

 Sledgehammer wrote:
The imperial guard are just far too diverse to adequately represent the many and varied regiments, along with their tactics and strategems. Games workshop is just not willing to put that many resources toward something that is not as important as space marines. Furthermore making the guard varied makes it harder to use them as a plot device for facless cannon fodder (which is all gw wants them to be.)

That more or less sums it up. The guard are one of many effective "NPC" factions in 40K that act as the backdrop for space marines to hog the limelight.

Which would have been fine, had GW not built and promoted armies for them, and established them purely as background chaff from the very beginning.

But they didn't, so now they've got to actually deal with it.

Hopefully Fall of Cadia gives them some sort of incentive to try and revamp the IG line, at least infantry wise.

 Sledgehammer wrote:
The imperial guard are just far too diverse to adequately represent the many and varied regiments, along with their tactics and strategems. Games workshop is just not willing to put that many resources toward something that is not as important as space marines. Furthermore making the guard varied makes it harder to use them as a plot device for facless cannon fodder (which is all gw wants them to be.)

I think representing the diversity of the guard, at least in the rules, could be pretty straightforward.

1) Players choose a specialty (mechanized, light infantry, heavy infantry, shock troopers, drop troopers, etc) which determines how available certain units are and what tactics are available.

2) Players choose training to grant special rules, squad specialists (scouts, snipers, medics), and additional orders for officers

3) Players choose specialty wargear (light carapace armor, camo cloaks, specialty lasgun variants, etc)

You could even have a system where you choose the planet of origin (hive world, fortress world, death world, industrial world, etc) which determine what levels of technology and training the regiment has access to.

Less developed worlds field cheap infantry with access to simple weapons like heavy stubbers and flamers, while more developed worlds field infantry with additional specialty wargear and advanced weapons like plasmaguns.

An issue holding the guard back is that GW thinks that only models make them a profit, and that to push the guards diversity they need dozens of new molds. I think this is ridiculous, and that a new infantry release that has enough customization options (a few styles of heads, chests, arms, and misc accessories) that players can make their armies feel even somewhat unique and fluffy would do a lot to help guard players out.

 Rav1rn wrote:
[snip]

... so basically like Only War's regiment creation?

Don't get me wrong, I don't disapprove-- it just ... struck me as VERY similar to how Only War did it.

 Melissia wrote:

 Rav1rn wrote:
[snip]

... so basically like Only War's regiment creation?

Don't get me wrong, I don't disapprove-- it just ... struck me as VERY similar to how Only War did it.

I didn't know Only War was a thing until I read your comment, but I'm glad to hear the people at FFG took a swing at the IG. I liked a lot of the ideas in the Deatwatch RPG, sounds like I need to pick up some of these books too.

 Grimskul wrote:
Hopefully Fall of Cadia gives them some sort of incentive to try and revamp the IG line, at least infantry wise.

Not sure if i understand you correctly, but if you mean with "revamp the IG line" how Guard armies are setup, then i still that IG detachment where you have to take at least 175 infantry models. That detachment gives no free stuff, so including some heavy weapons and you´re easily reaching the 1750 or 1850 points.
Furthermore it gives no boni to vehicle based armies.

So going from that formation Guard will be footslogging around.
IG Tank armies need a formation like the SM tank detachment.

If you mean the look of the models, then at least there are no sign of a redesign.

Firefox1 wrote:

 Grimskul wrote:
Hopefully Fall of Cadia gives them some sort of incentive to try and revamp the IG line, at least infantry wise.

Not sure if i understand you correctly, but if you mean with "revamp the IG line" how Guard armies are setup, then i still that IG detachment where you have to take at least 175 infantry models. That detachment gives no free stuff, so including some heavy weapons and you´re easily reaching the 1750 or 1850 points.
Furthermore it gives no boni to vehicle based armies.

Which once again basically leaves the IG as footslogging cannon fodder whom have no mobility.

@sledgehammer
Perfect, utterly perfect. you have hit the nail right on the head.

I still think Valkyries are pretty fast.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Actually, you can't. Try running any of the Tempestus formations without Commissars. You can't do it. You are REQUIRED to take Commissars in the flipping Militarum Tempestus formations.
Do you understand how ridiculous that is?!

Or try running the Ogryn Auxilia formation with just Bullgryn. You can't do it, because the designers of the formation apparently decided that they had to make the Guard formations "inclusive" of old stuff. Additionally, I'm actually a fan of the Ogryn/Bullgryn. If you want to design a "counterattack" unit for the Guard, that is where your focus should be. Not on the dead end that is Rough Riders.

Try running formation of IG troopers without sentinels.

Is there formation of just SM assault marines?

Funny thing is formations aren't SUPPOSED to have just what players want. That's the trade off you are supposed to pay for otherwise free bonuses.

tneva82 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Actually, you can't. Try running any of the Tempestus formations without Commissars. You can't do it. You are REQUIRED to take Commissars in the flipping Militarum Tempestus formations.
Do you understand how ridiculous that is?!

Or try running the Ogryn Auxilia formation with just Bullgryn. You can't do it, because the designers of the formation apparently decided that they had to make the Guard formations "inclusive" of old stuff. Additionally, I'm actually a fan of the Ogryn/Bullgryn. If you want to design a "counterattack" unit for the Guard, that is where your focus should be. Not on the dead end that is Rough Riders.

Try running formation of IG troopers without sentinels.

Emperor's Blade Assault Company.

And honestly? Get over the Sentinel requirement. The thing to get irked about is the mandate of 5 "Infantry Squads" with no allowance for the Infantry, Heavy, or Special squads counting towards that requirement.

They had to pull the bundles down at launch and reword them because of that.

Is there formation of just SM assault marines?

Bladewing Assault Brotherhood.
2-4 Assault Squads, 1-3 Vanguard Veterans, Captain/Chaplain with Jump Packs.

So yeah. There is a formation of "just SM Assault Marines".

Funny thing is formations aren't SUPPOSED to have just what players want. That's the trade off you are supposed to pay for otherwise free bonuses.

The point. You missed it.

Commissars are not and should not have been required in the Tempestus Formations. They should have been an option, but not required. Since there is the whole "Tempestus Command Squad" thing.

CplPunishment wrote:
It sounds to me like Kanluwen thinks that codex: Astra Militarum should be codex: Cadians. I can't stress enough that all guard regiments do notoperate with the same tactics and wargear. Even the common lasgun is different from planet to planet.

It sounds to me like he's figured out that trying to fit dudes on horses into an army that fits with laser guns, artillery, and tanks is an amazing stupid concept that's only survived this long due to sheer inertia. I'm sure there was once a regiment that decided to go fight their battles from horseback. Emphasis on "was", because there is no way those stupid sods lived long enough to realize why that's a bad idea.

 Battlegrinder wrote:

CplPunishment wrote:
It sounds to me like Kanluwen thinks that codex: Astra Militarum should be codex: Cadians. I can't stress enough that all guard regiments do notoperate with the same tactics and wargear. Even the common lasgun is different from planet to planet.

It sounds to me like he's figured out that trying to fit dudes on horses into an army that fits with laser guns, artillery, and tanks is an amazing stupid concept that's only survived this long due to sheer inertia. I'm sure there was once a regiment that decided to go fight their battles from horseback. Emphasis on "was", because there is no way those stupid sods lived long enough to realize why that's a bad idea.

I am sorry guys, but I have to agree here. If there where feral/napoleonic/medieval esque regiments then sure, but in the current Guard codex no.
Now, if they actually gave us a diverse codex then that would be something else.

 Battlegrinder wrote:

CplPunishment wrote:
It sounds to me like Kanluwen thinks that codex: Astra Militarum should be codex: Cadians. I can't stress enough that all guard regiments do notoperate with the same tactics and wargear. Even the common lasgun is different from planet to planet.

It sounds to me like he's figured out that trying to fit dudes on horses into an army that fits with laser guns, artillery, and tanks is an amazing stupid concept that's only survived this long due to sheer inertia. I'm sure there was once a regiment that decided to go fight their battles from horseback. Emphasis on "was", because there is no way those stupid sods lived long enough to realize why that's a bad idea.

Death Korps of Krieg are still pretty much around, Tallarn Desert Raiders, and several others.

 Rav1rn wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Rav1rn wrote:
[snip]

... so basically like Only War's regiment creation?

Don't get me wrong, I don't disapprove-- it just ... struck me as VERY similar to how Only War did it.

I didn't know Only War was a thing until I read your comment, but I'm glad to hear the people at FFG took a swing at the IG. I liked a lot of the ideas in the Deatwatch RPG, sounds like I need to pick up some of these books too.

Only War did very similarly to what you described, yeah.

Cadia for example would be, copy-pasted from the pdf itself:
Home World: Fortress World
Commanding Officer: Fixed
Regiment Type: Mechanised Infantry
Doctrines: Close Order Drill, Iron Discipline

While Catachan would be
Home World: Death World
Commanding Officer: Maverick
Regiment Type: Light Infantry
Doctrines: Survivalists (Jungle)

And Elysians would be
Home World: Imperial World
Commanding Officer: Sanguine
Regiment Type: Drop Infantry
Doctrines: Iron Discipline, Demolitions

It is a solid system, and could easily be adopted by a codex.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Death Korps of Krieg are still pretty much around, Tallarn Desert Raiders, and several others.

As far as I know on the DKoK actually uses them in combat, and largely to demonstrate exactly why it's a bad idea to do so (it's kind of in the name).

That's not to say the IG as a whole has no use for horses of any kind. Perhaps they'd see use as a means to get people through places vehicles can't go or for a regiment that lacks them. But they'd be mounted infantry, not cavalry, and mounted infantry ditch the horses and fight on foot (which IIRC is how the Tallarn's use them). They simple do not fit the rest of the IG thematically. I only give a pass to the DKoK because I'm not too familiar with them beyond the fact they're tactics tend to lean toward "suicidal" being the good outcome, and even then I think they're still better know for siege warfare and mechanized units than cavalry.

I'm telling you; make sentinels our cavalry!

Doctrines making a return would also be great. I've tinkered with them before, and that system: regimental type (mechanised, air cav etc), special tactics (sharp shooters, jungle fighters etc) and special equipment (camo gear, carapace armour etc) would be the best way to do it.

 Battlegrinder wrote:

CplPunishment wrote:
It sounds to me like Kanluwen thinks that codex: Astra Militarum should be codex: Cadians. I can't stress enough that all guard regiments do notoperate with the same tactics and wargear. Even the common lasgun is different from planet to planet.

It sounds to me like he's figured out that trying to fit dudes on horses into an army that fits with laser guns, artillery, and tanks is an amazing stupid concept that's only survived this long due to sheer inertia. I'm sure there was once a regiment that decided to go fight their battles from horseback. Emphasis on "was", because there is no way those stupid sods lived long enough to realize why that's a bad idea.

Since when did the 40k universe make any kind of sense? Close Combat is heavily emphasized in a game taking place 38k+ years in the future. I could just as easily ask why a soldier with a laser pistol is also issued a glorified chainsaw. Why is solid-slug ammo still used? 40k isn't supposed to make sense. It's supposed to be off the wall, brutal and awesome. If you can't handle such oddities, perhaps 40k is not the game for you.

I guess the definition of what is awesome is different to everyone.

And just because there are elements I don't like in 40k (melee, orks, god-marines for me) doesn't mean I can't enjoy the rest of the setting

CplPunishment wrote:
Since when did the 40k universe make any kind of sense? Close Combat is heavily emphasized in a game taking place 38k+ years in the future. I could just as easily ask why a soldier with a laser pistol is also issued a glorified chainsaw. Why is solid-slug ammo still used? 40k isn't supposed to make sense. It's supposed to be off the wall, brutal and awesome. If you can't handle such oddities, perhaps 40k is not the game for you.

It's supposed to make sense since forever/2nd edition. You might notice that all those awesome CC units have at least some kind of (sometimes thin) justification for how they're able to pull that off. Inhuman biology, power armor, teleportation to close the distance, ect. Rough riders....do not have that, nor do they have any thematic or stylistic connection to the rest of their army. "It's supposed to be nonsense" isn't a good defense when the vast majority of 40k is in fact not nonsense. It used to be deliberately over the top and exaggerated, but that hasn't been the case since sometime in the 90s. And even then, rough riders still wouldn't have made sense in that context. They're in the game because 40 used to be WHFB in space, not because they ever made any kind of sense as part of 40k.

And IG officers have chainswords for the same reasons officers have always had swords, they're a symbol of rank and status. That doesn't mean they're supposed to actually use them. "Drive me closer, I want to hit them with my sword" is supposed to be joke, not SOP. Projectile weapons are still used because not everyone can make lasguns/in some cases they're logistically easier/volkite weapons are lostech and too expensive even when they were available.

 Bobthehero wrote:
I guess the definition of what is awesome is different to everyone.

And just because there are elements I don't like in 40k (melee, orks, god-marines for me) doesn't mean I can't enjoy the rest of the setting

It's not that they're not awesome, it's that they simply don't work on any level. They don't fill any need in the IG codex, they don't fit the theme of the setting very well (if used in the way the tabletop presents them), and 40k needs to be able to ditch legacy elements that simple don't work anymore (or in some cases that never worked).

 Bobthehero wrote:
I guess the definition of what is awesome is different to everyone.

And just because there are elements I don't like in 40k (melee, orks, god-marines for me) doesn't mean I can't enjoy the rest of the setting

Exactly.

 Battlegrinder wrote:

It's not that they're not awesome, it's that they simply don't work on any level. They don't fill any need in the IG codex, they don't fit the theme of the setting very well (if used in the way the tabletop presents them), and 40k needs to be able to ditch legacy elements that simple don't work anymore (or in some cases that never worked).

Well, Roughriders actually did work on at least one level in previous editions. Keep them in Reserves and they made a good one-shot counter-assault unit because back then, we could still assault on the turn we arrived from Reserves. Yeah, they were useless after that one punch or if they came in too early but that's a chance you take.

I wish they would remove horses from 40k. It's really sad that any players at all are against their removal.m and I hope that doesn't give any codex writer second thoughts.

Honestly I don't care much either way about rough riders, I'm never gonna use them and think they're dumb but whatever-- if people want them they can have them.

I would vastly prefer guard bikers to rough riders if they were an option without having to do a lot of converting, though. Especially if they can be attached to a platoon.

 don_mondo wrote:

 Battlegrinder wrote:

It's not that they're not awesome, it's that they simply don't work on any level. They don't fill any need in the IG codex, they don't fit the theme of the setting very well (if used in the way the tabletop presents them), and 40k needs to be able to ditch legacy elements that simple don't work anymore (or in some cases that never worked).

Well, Roughriders actually did work on at least one level in previous editions. Keep them in Reserves and they made a good one-shot counter-assault unit because back then, we could still assault on the turn we arrived from Reserves. Yeah, they were useless after that one punch or if they came in too early but that's a chance you take.

In fourth edition, it was also a lot easier to screen troops with vehicles or area terrain. Fragile units could be kept hidden, and with Rough Riders long charge range, they could strike where needed.

Another thing to keep in mind is that with the switch to preventing victorious squads from consolidating into a fresh squad (IIRC, this was in 5th) it eliminated the need for counter assault units to, themselves, also be assault units. What I mean is that before, a squad could win in combat, and consolidate into another squad, locking them into combat and precluding shooting. Now, you can use short range shooting units (PCS with four flamers, say?) to hit a unit that just won a combat.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

morgoth wrote:
I wish they would remove horses from 40k. It's really sad that any players at all are against their removal.m and I hope that doesn't give any codex writer second thoughts.

Horses are dumb in a setting with machine guns, but so are swords.

The fact that an ork mob can charge directly at a devastator squad armed with all heavy bolters, and not be shredded instantly, shows that damage in the 40k universe doesn't work like it does in ours. Virtually everything is tougher than it would be, given the in world description of weapons. A heavy stubber is basically a 20th century heavy machine gun, and when shot by trained human soldiers at other trained human soldiers, it will cause, on average, one casualty per turn. A squad that starts outside of it's range that moves and runs until it's within assault range can reach it in four turns (6" move and 3.5" run for three turns, 6" move and a trivial charge). This means that a squad that moves from outside of range, and runs straight towards a heavy machine gun, will lose four squad members, total. That's obviously ludicrous.

In a setting where you can charge directly at heavy machine guns successfully, horses clearly have a place. It wasn't trucks that put horses out of business, it was the machine gun. They're big dumb targets, but since everything is super tough in 40k, they make sense.

 Battlegrinder wrote:

CplPunishment wrote:
Since when did the 40k universe make any kind of sense? Close Combat is heavily emphasized in a game taking place 38k+ years in the future. I could just as easily ask why a soldier with a laser pistol is also issued a glorified chainsaw. Why is solid-slug ammo still used? 40k isn't supposed to make sense. It's supposed to be off the wall, brutal and awesome. If you can't handle such oddities, perhaps 40k is not the game for you.

It's supposed to make sense since forever/2nd edition. You might notice that all those awesome CC units have at least some kind of (sometimes thin) justification for how they're able to pull that off. Inhuman biology, power armor, teleportation to close the distance, ect. Rough riders....do not have that, nor do they have any thematic or stylistic connection to the rest of their army. "It's supposed to be nonsense" isn't a good defense when the vast majority of 40k is in fact not nonsense. It used to be deliberately over the top and exaggerated, but that hasn't been the case since sometime in the 90s. And even then, rough riders still wouldn't have made sense in that context. They're in the game because 40 used to be WHFB in space, not because they ever made any kind of sense as part of 40k.

And IG officers have chainswords for the same reasons officers have always had swords, they're a symbol of rank and status. That doesn't mean they're supposed to actually use them. "Drive me closer, I want to hit them with my sword" is supposed to be joke, not SOP. Projectile weapons are still used because not everyone can make lasguns/in some cases they're logistically easier/volkite weapons are lostech and too expensive even when they were available.

 Bobthehero wrote:
I guess the definition of what is awesome is different to everyone.

And just because there are elements I don't like in 40k (melee, orks, god-marines for me) doesn't mean I can't enjoy the rest of the setting

It's not that they're not awesome, it's that they simply don't work on any level. They don't fill any need in the IG codex, they don't fit the theme of the setting very well (if used in the way the tabletop presents them), and 40k needs to be able to ditch legacy elements that simple don't work anymore (or in some cases that never worked).

Sorry, 40k still requires A LOT of suspension of disbelief, even with their "rationalizations".

Correction: rough riders don't fit thematically with YOUR preferred guard army (though it may shock you to know that there are people who play the same army as you and disagree), but they would fit nicely with Tallarns, praetorians, death corps, Drookian fen guard and more. You probably like vanilla guard. That's fine, but not an excuse to burn the spice rack so that everybody can be forced to see why vanilla is "so good that any other flavor just takes up space that could be moar vanilla". If you want to "make vanilla great again", go for it. But keep in mind that it isnot codex: cadians. It is Codex "Astra Militarum" or "Imperial Guard", and the most appealing thing about the faction has always been that you can really make it feel like your own. It wasn't until homogenization went rampant in 5th/6th that this notion of "there can only be ONE way yo Imperial Guard!" really became common.