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.

 Ailaros wrote:
Also, thanks for not bringing respawning conscripts which are way cheaper and way better at the same job.

Except they're not. They're far easier to rout off the table (can't attach ICs to em, as the unit gets removed and the IC is a member of the unit), if I go second (and it wouldn't be a bad idea) I just have to throw a few shots over there, you fail a morale test and poof - the objective is neutral again.

And if your heldrakes are playing with the platoon they aren't killing higher value targets that are a threat. So... okay.

So essentially the argument against IG + MEQ power blob is that the players at Adepticon are not very good?

Okay

 Ailaros wrote:
Penal legion?

You're paying 7 points for a guardsmen that can't take any upgrades whatsoever. Their only special ability is randomly determined, and are mutually exclusive with each other (so you can't plan what their role is at all), and they synergize with basically nothing in the codex.

Anything you could possibly want them for, you can do better with infantry platoons.

They're one of the worst units in the game, much less one of the best troops choices.

Except that I don't want them to synergize with anything in their codex. I want them to be able to have purchased a single troops unit so that I can gain access to the Heavy Support section of their Codex, and I don't want to pay an arm and a leg to do it. Yes, Veterans are technically cheaper, but by the time you add any options to them to make them worthwhile, they become more expensive.

As an all around troops choice? Not so great. For a specific, defined strategy? Much more valuable than people give them credit for, in my opinion. Which is, of course, just my opinion. (And yes, I am aware that pretty much no one agrees with me, so I'm not too broken up about being the minority in the "Penal Legion Fan Club." )

Arguments from authority are not automatically a fallacy. And in this case im simply using results from a "competitive" event to back up the claim that blobs are in fact a good troop choice. I can name other successful competitive players who use them to good effect, but i'm sure you'll turn your nose up to those as well.

If you want to debunk the claim that blobs are good you are going to have to do better than listing units that aren't particularly good vs. blobs. There are good weapons (manticores, griffons, sms), but most weapons often seen fielded aren't particularly good vs. them. The army generally revered as best in the game, Necrons, don't have good ways to remove Guardsmen. Tesla destructors being AP- means they dont take out enough Guardsmen to make a big impact. Heldrakes also are very popular and also don't do enough damage to blobs.

Templates in general, while better than most weaponry, aren't THAT great vs blobs because a meticulous player can space out to minimize damage. Proper spacing nets 4 hits on flamers, 5 on large blasts and 2 on small. Unless they ignore cover they grant a chance for saves. Fast template units must do large amounts of damage or else they'll be staring down a whole bunch of lasguns, which when buffed tear up infantry.

Find me a more survivable troop choice per point outside of Tervigons, I don't think there are many. MEQs and Terminators simply aren't what they once were. I'd rather have a large number of cheap models than smaller amounts of expensive ones.

Now since you are a Guard player i'm sure you'll bring up MechVets, which are good but not as great as in 5th. Vehicles, like it or not, have more drawbacks than they once did. And considering you must disembark to capture objectives, I wouldnt rely too heavily on 10 man squads to stay alive.

Blobs might not be the best, but they're certainly more viable than you give them credit for. If they really aren't, I'd love to be convinced otherwise as it is always good to replace bad beliefs with better ones.

Also not to mention that at Adepticon you have to bring TAC lists, so not everyone will have to tools to take out a blob or horde army as easily as someone at a gaming store who knows who they are fighting and might know your tendencies as to what you bring.

 Ailaros wrote:

LValx wrote:Tony winning a couple dice games against high level competition, sure let's brush it off. I'd trust those results more than I trust the advice of a player who has some wonky perceptions about the game though.

really.

I suppose horde armies would be tough to beat if you dismiss those things which are good against them. I only wish the opponents around where I play did that, then I could go back to playing foot guard again.

rigeld2 wrote:Sure. Concentrate fire on that one platoon.

Thanks.

If you spend hundreds of points on a scoring unit that gets wiped off the board by some bale flamers and loses you a home objective, then you're welcome. Thank you for bringing something that costs hundreds of points and has no killing power.

Also, thanks for not bringing respawning conscripts which are way cheaper and way better at the same job.

Skysheild landing pad gives a 4++ invo. Several of the DA characters can also give out 4++ invos to units. If your worried about losing guys to weapons that ignore cover throw in some of thise options and turn your massive blob in a massive squad of wyches that can save vs Ranged & Close Combat. If you add in a primaris psyker as well and roll for biomancy that squad can get some real benifits and will become a tank of a unit to kill.

Infantry Squads alone are quite average. They work best with good supporting options. Eg. Cover, moral boosters, etc.

Facts and ideas stand or fall on their own merit, independent of the person who says them. Once you bring in idiosyncrasy, you bring in fallacy.

And no amount of evidence is going to convince someone hell-bent on throwing out data as anomalous because it doesn't match their pre-existing point of view. If you really can't figure out how to kill guardsmen, then you lack creativity, as every codex has plenty of options. Plus, if guardsmen were really so godly, then, to use your appeal ad populum, all you would have seen was foot guard lists since their current codex has come out. You haven't. Meanwhile 6th edition came by and made foot guard categorically worse with changes in rules to cover and wound allocation amongst many, many others. Just throwing a 200 point space marine character in the blob doesn't change this fact.

In any case, the burden of proof is on those who think that guardsmen are awesome, not those who are skeptical thereof.

And if all you wanted was a 10-man squad to fill a troops choice, then take veterans instead. They cost the same as penal legion, but you can shed a couple of points on them to give them upgrades to make them actually worth taking.

 Ailaros wrote:
Facts and ideas stand or fall on their own merit, independent of the person who says them. Once you bring in idiosyncrasy, you bring in fallacy.

You're missing the point. It's not a claim that person X has said Y therefore Y, it's a claim that person X has used list Y in competitive tournaments and won. I know you (foolishly) believe that luck is all that matters in 40k and it's just a game of dice, but in reality you don't win consistently by playing bad lists with no skill. Therefore if a list/unit is consistently winning then it's a strong argument that it's an effective list/unit.

If you really can't figure out how to kill guardsmen, then you lack creativity, as every codex has plenty of options.

Every codex has options. But can every codex bring enough of them in a TAC list, or are you just assuming that everyone tailors against blob IG?

Plus, if guardsmen were really so godly, then, to use your appeal ad populum, all you would have seen was foot guard lists since their current codex has come out.

Let me get this straight: a unit isn't good unless it's the only thing anyone is using? Do you realize how insane this is?

Thanks Peregrine for that assist!

Anyway, it is difficult to objectively prove anything when it comes to discussing the goodness and badness of units. I did what I could to provide some reasoning as to why I believe large Guard squads are good, I think I made my point pretty well.

You say the blob got worse but you are ignoring the buffs they received and they are numerous. Ability to gain ATSKNF, access to prescience, psychic shenanigans, overwatch, power axes and challenges, changes to objective handling and CC with vehicles. Those are just a few and i'm sure we could come up with others. Cover may have been nerfed but that affected everyone, so I don't consider it too big of a nerf and if you want to mitigate it take an aegis (doesnt penalize Lasguns either).

You also are making me seem like someone who has a personal investment in this issue. I don't play with a blob, I probably won't. But having played against them, I cannot deny their effectiveness. I'm looking at this as objectively as I can and I think you are wrong. The blob might not be the best, but I definitely think they are in the upper tier.

Uh... so are we now comparing troops factoring in allied combinations? I'll chip in but, that widens the lane a lot.

I've fought against IG platoons with attached Rune Priests. Thankfully I always use Chees-- Eldrad :p The rest of the work was done by throwig pie-plates at them. They can be tough.

Maybe the tier-list of troops should first be resolved in a vaccum, then FOC modified troops in a vaccum (e.g Draigo's Paladins, Baron's Hellions, etc...)

A few people winning a few dice games with practically no variables controlled for does not make good data. Not in the slightest. It doesn't matter who is playing them, or in how big of a convention center.

Furthermore, any army list that can't kill a few dozen guardsmen, isn't a take all comer's list.

Blobs did get some buffs, but they're nothing compared to what they lost. ATSKNF, for example, doesn't stop the guardsmen from just getting shot off the board, and psychic shenannigans doesn't cover for the fact that you have to put your best short ranged weapons the furthest from where they're most useful thanks to the new wound allocation rules. Add in the loss of by-unit cover and of properly hidden upgrades, and all blobs can really do is hide somewhere deep in cover and hope that their opponents haven't brought template weapons or artillery, or a high volume of fire, or any of MANY things that can take apart guardsmen.

They lost mobility, durability and killing power. The fact that power axes give +1S or that they auto-rally after they fall back is mere window dressing on a bad product.

Also, Guardsmen can be used in more than just blobs. They can be used well as bubble wrap in a gunline style army where veterans are too expensive/not numerous enough and wont run off the board when sneezed at like conscripts would AND can pack a punch with heavy weapons and orders.

And you've literally just convinced me to ignore tactica posts from you.

Especially since you're arguing for Conscriots with SITNW as a viable alternative - because they'll get shot off the board significantly easier, will do worse if I decide to assault them instead, and get none of the benefits a blob does while keeping all of the cons.

Literally the only benefit is that they can come back - which isn't always a good thing.

I don't get why people are ignoring the fact that conscripts come back.

When you kill a few conscripts, they get charged back up to full strength and get to teleport to anywhere in your deployment zone on your next turn.

It would be rather silly to take conscripts without send in the next wave, I agree, but it would also be silly to use a land raider to transport scouts or to take sternguard without combi-weapons...

 Ailaros wrote:
A few people winning a few dice games with practically no variables controlled for does not make good data. Not in the slightest. It doesn't matter who is playing them, or in how big of a convention center.

So if that's not good data then what does that make your own personal experiences? Will you consistently apply your rule and admit that all of the games you've played are irrelevant?

Furthermore, any army list that can't kill a few dozen guardsmen, isn't a take all comer's list.

1) It's potentially more than a few dozen. You can easily take 100+ guardsmen, 200+ if you're willing to focus completely on blobs.

2) There's more than just blobs in your list. Yes, most lists can kill 50 guardsmen in 2+ cover, but that means focusing on the blobs instead of shooting the rest of your list (which will be killing enemy scoring units, removing the best anti-horde units, etc).

ATSKNF, for example, doesn't stop the guardsmen from just getting shot off the board

No, but 30-50 models with 2+ cover and a 97% chance of passing a morale test does a pretty good job of stopping them from getting shot off the board. And if that's not durable enough I really have to ask what IS durable enough? Because by that ridiculously high standard I doubt you can come up with a single "good" scoring unit in any codex.

and psychic shenannigans doesn't cover for the fact that you have to put your best short ranged weapons the furthest from where they're most useful thanks to the new wound allocation rules.

You know what that means? Blobs are now about scoring and lascannons, not melta delivery. Fortunately you have plenty of other good options for melta/plasma delivery, so you can use blob melta in a defensive role.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ailaros wrote:
I don't get why people are ignoring the fact that conscripts come back.

Because:

1) They don't come back immediately.

2) They arguably don't come back at all if the unit is wiped out rather than voluntarily removed from play to respawn.

3) The respawning ability costs a lot of points. Combined with their complete lack of offensive threat it's easy to ignore them until late in the game when they don't have time to respawn enough times to justify buying the respawn ability instead of buying more guardsmen.

When you kill a few conscripts, they get charged back up to full strength and get to teleport to anywhere in your deployment zone on your next turn.

Which means spending a turn off the table. On turn 6 are you really going to voluntarily remove the unit and hope that the game doesn't end before you get to respawn them?

I can't seriously believe that anyone could think IG blobs are bad. There's a reason that they place consistently well in tournaments. Tony Kopach won NOVA with a guard blob and just came second at Adepticon. I mean, apart from Grey Hunters, is there actually a better troops choice in the game? They provide the horde part for marine armies and tarpit almost anything you need, whilst eating a hugely disproportionate amount of shooting (55 men with tools to kill any unit for 360 points is just insane). Who cares if you lose 25 guys when the unit is only designed to be a wall anyway?

 Ailaros wrote:
I don't get why people are ignoring the fact that conscripts come back.

When you kill a few conscripts, they get charged back up to full strength and get to teleport to anywhere in your deployment zone on your next turn.

It would be rather silly to take conscripts without send in the next wave, I agree, but it would also be silly to use a land raider to transport scouts or to take sternguard without combi-weapons...

I'm not ignoring it - I've mentioned it multiple times.
You're exaggerating the usefulness of it. Remember, you have to deal with the fact that they're Conscriots first.
Also, as Peregrine brought up, it's debateable if they can come back if the entire unit is destroyed (like... If they run off the table)

 LValx wrote:
Templates in general, while better than most weaponry, aren't THAT great vs blobs because a meticulous player can space out to minimize damage. Proper spacing nets 4 hits on flamers, 5 on large blasts and 2 on small.

That's assuming there's space to actually spread out. The typical IG parking lot is filled with heavy metal, isn't it? Artillery that leaves room for a blob is itself cramped together where one large blast or Doomscythe Deathray can hit 2-3 tanks.

Granted a blob camping an objective can spread out a bit better than a 30-ork boyz mob that's trying to reach the opponents. Those seem to to disappear just fine when a 10 strong SoB squad (flamer, heavy flamer) and Celestine with two twin handflamer Seraphim comes at them from different directions. It's only 7 templates and a few score bolter shots, but works pretty well.

Peregrine wrote:So if that's not good data then what does that make your own personal experiences?

Not data. I don't need to rely on personal anecdotes or those of others to make arguments on what is plainly obvious from reading the rules.

Peregrine wrote:There's more than just blobs in your list. Yes, most lists can kill 50 guardsmen in 2+ cover, but that means focusing on the blobs instead of shooting the rest of your list (which will be killing enemy scoring units, removing the best anti-horde units, etc).

Either your blobs are an important target, and they're getting attacked, or they're not an important target, so why did you bother bringing them if they're so useless?

If you assume an opponent who is capable of building a balanced list and playing at least semi-competently, then they'll be able to put the right weapon on the right targets. The right weapons targeting guardsmen means dead guardsmen.

Peregrine wrote: 30-50 models with 2+ cover and a 97% chance of passing a morale test does a pretty good job of stopping them from getting shot off the board.

High leadership doesn't help dead models.

Plus, leadership hasn't been the weakness of blobs in a long time. A single 35-point commissar is good enough to sort that out.

Peregrine wrote:Blobs are now about scoring and lascannons, not melta delivery. Fortunately you have plenty of other good options for melta/plasma delivery, so you can use blob melta in a defensive role.

A 40-man blob squad with a commissar, a full contingency of power axes, and maxed out on lascannons with a space marine special character and an aegis EASILY costs over 600 points. For 5 usually twin-linked lascannons. If all you wanted was 4 lascannon hits a turn and a scoring unit, your beloved vendettas with veterans does virtually the same job at a third the price, and is much more mobile.

Spending that many points for that small amount of firepower from an imperial guard unit is absurd, especially if you're allying them in, and can take advantage of much better stuff from the rest of the codex. 600 points for something that's a few well-placed bale flamers or inferno cannons (amongst many, many other things) away from being mauled to the point where even non-anti-horde specialists can easily handle them isn't a good buy.

 Ailaros wrote:

Peregrine wrote:So if that's not good data then what does that make your own personal experiences?

Not data. I don't need to rely on personal anecdotes or those of others to make arguments on what is plainly obvious from reading the rules.

Peregrine wrote:There's more than just blobs in your list. Yes, most lists can kill 50 guardsmen in 2+ cover, but that means focusing on the blobs instead of shooting the rest of your list (which will be killing enemy scoring units, removing the best anti-horde units, etc).

Either your blobs are an important target, and they're getting attacked, or they're not an important target, so why did you bother bringing them if they're so useless?

Because if you build your list correctly your opponent will have more threats than guns. In that instance many people shoot the immediate threats first. You do realize your opponent doesn't get to fire every gun at every unit, right? Opportunity cost is a thing.
Making the blob a threat but difficult to kill off means everything in your army lives longer.
Stop pretending that a blob is trivial to wipe out but Conscripts will live forever.

 Ailaros wrote:
Either your blobs are an important target, and they're getting attacked, or they're not an important target, so why did you bother bringing them if they're so useless?

Do I really need to explain the concept of target saturation to you? A good list ensures that everything is a threat (in its own way) and an important target so that your opponent can't possibly engage all threats at once. For example, spending bolters on killing a blob in 2+ cover means not spending those bolters on killing the plasma vets my Vendetta just delivered to the devastator squad that is your only source of AA capable of engaging my Vulture that is currently blowing away your scoring units. In a real game the decisions are a lot more complex than "shoot the blob" or "not shoot the blob".

If all you wanted was 4 lascannon hits a turn and a scoring unit, your beloved vendettas with veterans does virtually the same job at a third the price, and is much more mobile.

Again you're missing the point. The purpose of a blob isn't maximum point-efficient firepower, it's scoring. The lascannons/power axes (one or both) give it something to do while scoring. And scoring is a role a small 10-man squad with short-range guns has a lot of trouble with.

But I suppose my experiences with mech vets are just anecdotes, not data, and we should all ignore them in favor of looking at theoretical calculations about how veterans are great objective holders.

Peregrine wrote:A good list ensures that everything is a threat (in its own way) and an important target so that your opponent can't possibly engage all threats at once.

rigeld2 wrote:Because if you build your list correctly your opponent will have more threats than guns.

If your opponent builds his list correctly, he'll have more guns than your threats.

Plus, if you're allying guard, it's rather unlikely that you're going to have much of anything that has saturation with the blob. If you're playing just foot guard, then, while you multiply the strengths, you also multiply the weaknesses. Given that the weaknesses outstrip the strengths, this means that your list gets weaker the more you practice target saturation, not stronger.

rigeld2 wrote:Stop pretending that a blob is trivial to wipe out but Conscripts will live forever.

Let me know when you figure out what "respawning" means.

Peregrine wrote: The purpose of a blob isn't maximum point-efficient firepower, it's scoring.

Which other things do better, or cheaper, or both.

Peregrine wrote:But I suppose my experiences with mech vets are just anecdotes, not data, and we should all ignore them in favor of looking at theoretical calculations about how veterans are great objective holders.

If only anecdotal evidence lead to objective truth. Alas...

I guess if veterans are such bad objective holders, then I guess most imperial guard players who bring them must just lose most of their games. Furthermore, I guess nobody should bother with vendettas anymore, if the scoring units they drop off aren't going to be reliable enough to get the job done.

Oh well, I guess foot guard is the only way to play guard nowadays. After all, your anecdotes say so.

 Ailaros wrote:

Peregrine wrote:A good list ensures that everything is a threat (in its own way) and an important target so that your opponent can't possibly engage all threats at once.

rigeld2 wrote:Because if you build your list correctly your opponent will have more threats than guns.

If your opponent builds his list correctly, he'll have more guns than your threats.

Yes, every TAC will destroy a high target saturation list. Every time, npnp.

Plus, if you're allying guard, it's rather unlikely that you're going to have much of anything that has saturation with the blob. If you're playing just foot guard, then, while you multiply the strengths, you also multiply the weaknesses. Given that the weaknesses outstrip the strengths, this means that your list gets weaker the more you practice target saturation, not stronger.

Not true at all - but whatever floats your boat.

rigeld2 wrote:Stop pretending that a blob is trivial to wipe out but Conscripts will live forever.

Let me know when you figure out what "respawning" means.

I've addressed that. So has Peregrine. You keep ignoring it, but its been addressed.

Peregrine wrote: The purpose of a blob isn't maximum point-efficient firepower, it's scoring.

Which other things do better, or cheaper, or both.

Nope.

I guess if veterans are such bad objective holders, then I guess most imperial guard players who bring them must just lose most of their games. Furthermore, I guess nobody should bother with vendettas anymore, if the scoring units they drop off aren't going to be reliable enough to get the job done.

They are bad as stationary backfield objective holders. Vets and blobs do not fill the same role.

Before we go any further I'd like to point out that to take conscripts you need to take a Platoon which includes Infantry Squads. A platoon can also take Sabre's. So for me an IG Infantry Platoon would rank number 1 on the list just for the amount of options it can take. No other codex has a troops choice that can hold several objectives at the same time.

Brandt, Kopach, Gonyo and some others i've seen or played have just ran blobs with nothing but power axes and some krak grenades or melta bombs. I think that works pretty well. It can push midfield pretty quickly and makes great use of FRFSRF. It also makes it really, really cheap while maintaining some offensive capabilities (though less versatile). With proper support it can be quite a pain. The allied combinations help them, but i've tested it without the marine IC and still found it to be powerful.

You can field 2 and some marines with lots of shooting support.

In 40k we don't have collected statistics across the entirety of the player base. We don't have in depth metrics to evaluate a range situations and control for variables. We have personal anecdotes, basic mathematical analysis (mathhammer), and major GT results. Personal anecdotes are near useless, and mathhammer only gives a small picture of what a unit can do (too isolate, doesn't account for unit synergy, board placement, value in scoring, etc)

Major GT results obviously are not perfect. They are a small sample size, and we have to assume that the top players there are all of similar skill level. That said, it's not perfect, but it is at least good enough to say that a Power Blob with MEQ is an above average Troops unit. Tony Kopach alone, with repeated success in GTs abusing the same concept (Njal, Khan, whatever, the concept is the same. Multiple positive benefits across 50 bodies), shows that they are viable. You cannot say IG blobs suck, because they are performing in the closest thing to a pro circuit this game has.

This isn't a WoW situation, where only one choice is categorically the best. In 40k, there are multiple ways to go about fielding an army that are all 'correct.' Depending on the army you play, the way in which you play it, and the opponents you expect to face, you can see a huge variability in the mileage you get out of each troop choice. There's no reason for us to try and force everyone else to agree with our opinions. Personally, the reason I enjoy threads like this is because I want to see what other people see in units I don't look at, or use.

 Ailaros wrote:
If your opponent builds his list correctly, he'll have more guns than your threats.

You have got to be kidding. Do you honestly think that all you have to do is "build your list correctly" and you'll have more than enough firepower to simultaneously counter every single threat on the table, or are you just arguing for the sake of arguing?

Let me know when you figure out what "respawning" means.

Please stop ignoring the major drawbacks to the respawning conscript plan. Simply saying "respawning" doesn't make them go away.

I guess if veterans are such bad objective holders, then I guess most imperial guard players who bring them must just lose most of their games.

Let me make this nice and simple: veterans are great at melta/plasma delivery, decent at scoring objectives late in the game once most threats have been killed, and terrible at holding objectives against a determined effort to take them. This means that an all-veteran list will be great at killing stuff, but struggle to hold objectives with its fragile troops. It can obviously still win through a maximum-firepower approach of killing enemy scoring units and dropping the last surviving vets on an objective for a 1-0 win, but it's not really hard to see how people could want a more reliable plan to supplement those vets.

Furthermore, I guess nobody should bother with vendettas anymore, if the scoring units they drop off aren't going to be reliable enough to get the job done.

Vendettas alone aren't reliable enough. It's really not that complicated: Vendettas kill stuff and deliver late-game scoring units, platoons hold your "home" objectives. This isn't a black and white situation where you're only allowed to take one type of unit in your list.

I would love to see you guys fight it out in person. It would get over 1000000+ hits on youtube.

Psst,,,,

the conscripts arrive automatically, but from the board edge - not anywhere in the controlling players zone as previously listed