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.

Bharring wrote:
If "new models" mattered at all, Marines would feel so much pity for Dark Reapers it wouldn't even be funny.

Just being cute man. Space marines got 1 good new model. Repulsors are actually decent because they are functional but still over-costed. I can sympathize with you on all aspect warriors. Still in fine-cast? OMG.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ice_can wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Does anyone else think it's absurd that equal points of well armed company commanders beat a well armed space marine captain in CC? This is clearly proff that they are OP is it not?

I would say less OP just undercosted like most of codex astra BOGOF.

Undercosted and OP mean the exact same thing to me dude.

I would say Alitoc is OP as they realy need a rewrite to be balanced where as most of the guard stuff doesn't need new rules just to pay a fair points cost for what they get. But neither are fun to play against.

Yeah I've been complaining about -1 to hit army traits since the release of the eldar codex. It's problem number 1.

I'd take no invun on my CCs for an additional wound, like what other T3 armies get a la Cadre Fireblade.

It all comes down to people not taking balanced lists these days if you're truly getting miffed about guard company commanders . I get it if a Xenos player, which lacks sniper weapons, complains about the lack of capability to remove buffing characters. And please don't say "but but one guard character is so easy to hide out of LoS" because that guard player has to make the decision to hide that character and not play the game the way he wants. It has an impact. Meanwhile the snipers can do what they please. And scout snipers with camo cloaks are really solid units. I play against space marine armies including them all the time and they are always a hassle to remove, just like any 2+ save units are to guard. Would I really waste battle cannon shots on them? I've had to before to score Maelstrom points, which removed that firepower from bigger threats to my force.

At the end of the day, it's still a guard character. It's quite laughable that anyone is complaining about company commanders and their close combat "prowess." And I play Catachans. They die like dogs the instant they make it into CC.

Ice_can wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Unaware that it was a waste to put decent weapons on units that have 2+ bs 2+ WS....oh yeah...it's not. It's actually a waste NOT to put them there. You guys are just incapable of seeing past your own army. The reality is - that the CC should not even have a 5++ save. That is just more sheer lunacy coming out of the AM codex.

He has a 5++ save or a 5+ save.

What, should he have a 3+ and a 5++?

Truthfully, you are the one incapable of "seeing past" their own army. You dumped points into a CC weapon that has AP-3 against an army where the best saves are not really going to be too intimidated by that since the stuff is already at a fairly high save.

So scions arn't worried by power weapons?

Scions are a 4+ save. All that Power Weapon did was kill a suicide unit that likely already blew its load.

Also power weapons are fairly normal fair for marine HQ's.

They might be normal fare for Marine HQs, but if someone's going to whine about a decked out Marine Captain being more points than a barebones Guard Company Commander, they haven't looked at the Company Commander's options versus role.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Unaware that it was a waste to put decent weapons on units that have 2+ bs 2+ WS....oh yeah...it's not. It's actually a waste NOT to put them there. You guys are just incapable of seeing past your own army. The reality is - that the CC should not even have a 5++ save. That is just more sheer lunacy coming out of the AM codex.

He has a 5++ save or a 5+ save.

What, should he have a 3+ and a 5++?

Well hes in flak armor - I assume he should have a 5+ save with no invulnerable. There's probably more CC than there are space marines in the imperium - if refractor feilds are that common I'm wondering why they don't give them to the astartes - they would make better use of them. Come on man - it's a joke that a CC has a 5++ save.

You have Iron Halos on your Captains. A 3+ save(or in the case of Terminators, 2+) with a 4++.

Kind of like my librarian - hes in power armor so he has a 3+ save - with no invulnerable.

If you want an Invulnerable save, take one in Terminator Armour.

Also, cast Null Zone and that Company Commander has no Invulnerable Save. I mean since you're taking a Librarian anyways...

Terminators are 2+, 5++ not sure where your getting your stats from but they are not correct.

A Company Commander is 5+ or 5++.

Not sure why you're thinking that's related to Terminators. Xenomancers was complaining about Company Commanders having a 5+ Invulnerable Save. They have a 5+ invulnerable or a 5+ standard. I snarked at him about his expectations.

FYI an Iron Halo is 4++ not 3++

Reread the underlined parts.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ice_can wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Does anyone else think it's absurd that equal points of well armed company commanders beat a well armed space marine captain in CC? This is clearly proff that they are OP is it not?

I would say less OP just undercosted like most of codex astra BOGOF.

Undercosted and OP mean the exact same thing to me dude.

I would say Alitoc is OP as they realy need a rewrite to be balanced where as most of the guard stuff doesn't need new rules just to pay a fair points cost for what they get. But neither are fun to play against.

Alaitoc and its -1 to hit by itself wouldn't be a huge issue if it didn't apply to the Flyers as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Colonel Cross wrote:
I'd take no invun on my CCs for an additional wound, like what other T3 armies get a la Cadre Fireblade.

It all comes down to people not taking balanced lists these days if you're truly getting miffed about guard company commanders . I get it if a Xenos player, which lacks sniper weapons, complains about the lack of capability to remove buffing characters. And please don't say "but but one guard character is so easy to hide out of LoS" because that guard player has to make the decision to hide that character and not play the game the way he wants. It has an impact. Meanwhile the snipers can do what they please. And scout snipers with camo cloaks are really solid units. I play against space marine armies including them all the time and they are always a hassle to remove, just like any 2+ save units are to guard. Would I really waste battle cannon shots on them? I've had to before to score Maelstrom points, which removed that firepower from bigger threats to my force.

At the end of the day, it's still a guard character. It's quite laughable that anyone is complaining about company commanders and their close combat "prowess." And I play Catachans. They die like dogs the instant they make it into CC.

It's not the fact that they have "prowess", it's that apparently it is "inefficient" to kill them with stuff kitted for killing Marines.

Or at least that's the impression I'm getting.

"Yeah I've been complaining about -1 to hit army traits since the release of the eldar codex."

Odd. Others have been complaining ever since the -1-to-hit traits came out. Why is it only a problem when your most-hated-faction gets it?

Bharring wrote:
"Yeah I've been complaining about -1 to hit army traits since the release of the eldar codex."

Odd. Others have been complaining ever since the -1-to-hit traits came out. Why is it only a problem when your most-hated-faction gets it?

To be 100% honest on my part:
I still like the -1 to hit trait. I just think with Aeldari it shouldn't have applied to Flyers.

This appears to have gone wat of topic from is a basic guardsmen worth 5ppm. IMHO yes they are.

On the Company comander vrs Captains debate the cheapest company comander is 74 pointa without weapons or 2.5 commanders, add gravis armour etc and the points get even more lopsided as he's 104 without weapons which are fixed and take him to 134 or 4.5 CC.

Alitoc Hemlocks, Rangers, Flyers basically an entire army of -2 to hit was bad game design, especially when you add in -1 to hit strategum and +1 sv pshycic powers.

Ice_can wrote:
This appears to have gone wat of topic from is a basic guardsmen worth 5ppm. IMHO yes they are.

On the Company comander vrs Captains debate the cheapest company comander is 74 pointa without weapons or 2.5 commanders, add gravis armour etc and the points get even more lopsided as he's 104 without weapons which are fixed and take him to 134 or 4.5 CC.

Alitoc Hemlocks, Rangers, Flyers basically an entire army of -2 to hit was bad game design, especially when you add in -1 to hit strategum and +1 sv pshycic powers.

Someone has to be able survive more than two turns against IG. It ain't standard marines.

Ice_can wrote:
This appears to have gone wat of topic from is a basic guardsmen worth 5ppm. IMHO yes they are.

On the Company comander vrs Captains debate the cheapest company comander is 74 pointa without weapons or 2.5 commanders, add gravis armour etc and the points get even more lopsided as he's 104 without weapons which are fixed and take him to 134 or 4.5 CC.

You mean Captain, right?
Company Commanders are 30 pts each.

Alitoc Hemlocks, Rangers, Flyers basically an entire army of -2 to hit was bad game design, especially when you add in -1 to hit strategum and +1 sv pshycic powers.

Literally all that has to happen is Flyers can't benefit from it. Not too fussed by the Rangers getting a benefit, since it's specific to them.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
This appears to have gone wat of topic from is a basic guardsmen worth 5ppm. IMHO yes they are.

On the Company comander vrs Captains debate the cheapest company comander is 74 pointa without weapons or 2.5 commanders, add gravis armour etc and the points get even more lopsided as he's 104 without weapons which are fixed and take him to 134 or 4.5 CC.

You mean Captain, right?
Company Commanders are 30 pts each.

Alitoc Hemlocks, Rangers, Flyers basically an entire army of -2 to hit was bad game design, especially when you add in -1 to hit strategum and +1 sv pshycic powers.

Literally all that has to happen is Flyers can't benefit from it. Not too fussed by the Rangers getting a benefit, since it's specific to them.

Yeah typo on my part I've got lost as to where this is going as I doubt a Captain is going to be fighting 2.5 company comanders simultaneously.

Personally I would have found it much more balanced if Alitoc got the Always in cover if they don't move bonus rather than -1 to hit

Bharring wrote:
"Yeah I've been complaining about -1 to hit army traits since the release of the eldar codex."

Odd. Others have been complaining ever since the -1-to-hit traits came out. Why is it only a problem when your most-hated-faction gets it?

Well to be honest - The admech players were all playing full mars with cawlbots when the eddition started. Until people figured out stiggies with electric shock priest was the bomb diggity. Also - the -1 to hit trait doesn't affect their vehicles.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Colonel Cross wrote:
I'd take no invun on my CCs for an additional wound, like what other T3 armies get a la Cadre Fireblade.

It all comes down to people not taking balanced lists these days if you're truly getting miffed about guard company commanders . I get it if a Xenos player, which lacks sniper weapons, complains about the lack of capability to remove buffing characters. And please don't say "but but one guard character is so easy to hide out of LoS" because that guard player has to make the decision to hide that character and not play the game the way he wants. It has an impact. Meanwhile the snipers can do what they please. And scout snipers with camo cloaks are really solid units. I play against space marine armies including them all the time and they are always a hassle to remove, just like any 2+ save units are to guard. Would I really waste battle cannon shots on them? I've had to before to score Maelstrom points, which removed that firepower from bigger threats to my force.

At the end of the day, it's still a guard character. It's quite laughable that anyone is complaining about company commanders and their close combat "prowess." And I play Catachans. They die like dogs the instant they make it into CC.

Nah dude - it took me 1 second to break that. You can just hide CC behind hell hounds or LR if they have a ton snipers (which they wont) Snipers are not viable. If they were - we'd see Gman buffing 30 sniper scouts winning tournaments. NOPE.

That's not a perfect solution. The Hellhound blows up on a 4+. So there's danger being close, probably more danger than snipers. If he's behind a Leman Russ, it means he's in the backfield so would probably be hidden anyway. It's not rock paper scissors.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:
"Yeah I've been complaining about -1 to hit army traits since the release of the eldar codex."

Odd. Others have been complaining ever since the -1-to-hit traits came out. Why is it only a problem when your most-hated-faction gets it?

Well to be honest - The admech players were all playing full mars with cawlbots when the eddition started. Until people figured out stiggies with electric shock priest was the bomb diggity. Also - the -1 to hit trait doesn't affect their vehicles.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Colonel Cross wrote:
I'd take no invun on my CCs for an additional wound, like what other T3 armies get a la Cadre Fireblade.

It all comes down to people not taking balanced lists these days if you're truly getting miffed about guard company commanders . I get it if a Xenos player, which lacks sniper weapons, complains about the lack of capability to remove buffing characters. And please don't say "but but one guard character is so easy to hide out of LoS" because that guard player has to make the decision to hide that character and not play the game the way he wants. It has an impact. Meanwhile the snipers can do what they please. And scout snipers with camo cloaks are really solid units. I play against space marine armies including them all the time and they are always a hassle to remove, just like any 2+ save units are to guard. Would I really waste battle cannon shots on them? I've had to before to score Maelstrom points, which removed that firepower from bigger threats to my force.

At the end of the day, it's still a guard character. It's quite laughable that anyone is complaining about company commanders and their close combat "prowess." And I play Catachans. They die like dogs the instant they make it into CC.

Nah dude - it took me 1 second to break that. You can just hide CC behind hell hounds or LR if they have a ton snipers (which they wont) Snipers are not viable. If they were - we'd see Gman buffing 30 sniper scouts winning tournaments. NOPE.

Ad mech dogma traits do effect their vehcles.

 Colonel Cross wrote:
That's not a perfect solution. The Hellhound blows up on a 4+. So there's danger being close, probably more danger than snipers. If he's behind a Leman Russ, it means he's in the backfield so would probably be hidden anyway. It's not rock paper scissors.

Russ punishers aren't in the backfeild. Could easily hide 3-4 CC behind one. Not a dang thing anyone could do about. Heck - any russ can do this - they are wasting points on 20-30 sniper rifle (which is what it takes to reliable kill characters with 4+ wounds) they probably gonna struggle to kill a LR anyways. It would only take 1 turn for your 9 mortars to wipe out all their snipers. Then they are free to move about. It seems like it should work - it just doesn't that's why you never seen snipers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:
"Yeah I've been complaining about -1 to hit army traits since the release of the eldar codex."

Odd. Others have been complaining ever since the -1-to-hit traits came out. Why is it only a problem when your most-hated-faction gets it?

Well to be honest - The admech players were all playing full mars with cawlbots when the eddition started. Until people figured out stiggies with electric shock priest was the bomb diggity. Also - the -1 to hit trait doesn't affect their vehicles.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Colonel Cross wrote:
I'd take no invun on my CCs for an additional wound, like what other T3 armies get a la Cadre Fireblade.

It all comes down to people not taking balanced lists these days if you're truly getting miffed about guard company commanders . I get it if a Xenos player, which lacks sniper weapons, complains about the lack of capability to remove buffing characters. And please don't say "but but one guard character is so easy to hide out of LoS" because that guard player has to make the decision to hide that character and not play the game the way he wants. It has an impact. Meanwhile the snipers can do what they please. And scout snipers with camo cloaks are really solid units. I play against space marine armies including them all the time and they are always a hassle to remove, just like any 2+ save units are to guard. Would I really waste battle cannon shots on them? I've had to before to score Maelstrom points, which removed that firepower from bigger threats to my force.

At the end of the day, it's still a guard character. It's quite laughable that anyone is complaining about company commanders and their close combat "prowess." And I play Catachans. They die like dogs the instant they make it into CC.

Nah dude - it took me 1 second to break that. You can just hide CC behind hell hounds or LR if they have a ton snipers (which they wont) Snipers are not viable. If they were - we'd see Gman buffing 30 sniper scouts winning tournaments. NOPE.

Ad mech dogma traits do effect their vehcles.

Wow - Well the only admech player I play doesn't take stygies vehicals I guess - he wants the cawl buff for them. He takes just a batallion with 40 electropreist it seems. That is crazy though. Not sure why he doesn't just do all stygies.

Except I do see snipers. Tau sniper drones do serious work. And plenty of Marine players in my store use scout snipers.

 Colonel Cross wrote:
Except I do see snipers. Tau sniper drones do serious work. And plenty of Marine players in my store use scout snipers.

Well those marines should be nice autowins for you, then.

 Colonel Cross wrote:
Except I do see snipers. Tau sniper drones do serious work. And plenty of Marine players in my store use scout snipers.

2 of my local SM players play a 5 or 10 man squad with character to buff them and we suggested to place 1 ML for the stratagem, they actually do a lot of damage when playing semi-comp (we are a semi comp group, we dont net list or take insane soup lists, but we try to take the bests units we can and play the best we can within the limits of what we like, like our BA player will play with Smash Captains and infantry, DC and some Armigers, but not IG, SOB player takes SOB with either Shield capts or a Knight, normally not both, DE player takes Ravagers and Coven but not Venom Spam).

They are actually kinda scary, yeah they die a bit quickly, but hiding them in cover and a good deployment can get them to fire for a couple turns and do some seriously damage for scouts.

18 ppm is soul-crushing.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Colonel Cross wrote:
Except I do see snipers. Tau sniper drones do serious work. And plenty of Marine players in my store use scout snipers.

2 of my local SM players play a 5 or 10 man squad with character to buff them and we suggested to place 1 ML for the stratagem, they actually do a lot of damage when playing semi-comp (we are a semi comp group, we dont net list or take insane soup lists, but we try to take the bests units we can and play the best we can within the limits of what we like, like our BA player will play with Smash Captains and infantry, DC and some Armigers, but not IG, SOB player takes SOB with either Shield capts or a Knight, normally not both, DE player takes Ravagers and Coven but not Venom Spam).

They are actually kinda scary, yeah they die a bit quickly, but hiding them in cover and a good deployment can get them to fire for a couple turns and do some seriously damage for scouts.

That's mostly what my local store is like. Though there are some guys who run top of the line lists.

Yeah that mortal wounds Stratagem on a scout heavy bolter is tricky.

Martel, I suppose I should disclose we play Maelstrom or those open war cards. So often times it isn't just about killing things and points efficiency, etc. It's about those random OBJs. I've never played ITC but I know enough about it that it plays like an entirely different game. My games are usually very close, so *shoulder shrug*

We stopped using cards because the card draws were too dominant.

Yeah it can be swingy but I think it keeps the game fresh and we seem to have a lot of fun using them.

 Colonel Cross wrote:
Yeah it can be swingy but I think it keeps the game fresh and we seem to have a lot of fun using them.

For a fun game they are good, but for a competitive setting they can screw one player so bad it's gamebreaking.
ITC does bring in it's own quirks like every giard squad gets a mortor to avoid reaper etc etc, but the new secondary missions should adress that and make it a bit better balanced. But it's hard trying to have a balanced competitive mission pack with codex's dropping and powercreep etc.

 Colonel Cross wrote:
Except I do see snipers. Tau sniper drones do serious work. And plenty of Marine players in my store use scout snipers.

I played a ravengaurd player with my ultras the other day. I ran 2x repuslsors calgar and a lut plus assorted infantry (agressors/hellblasters/intersessors) and a redemptor dread. It's not the most brutal marines list but it is more of a toned down list I use to play against weaker armies. he went first he did practically nothing - put 6 wounds on a repulsor and 4 on another - and killed a few interesessors - where were my 3 characters? hiding being giant repulsors ofc. Now if his 30 sniper scouts had been dev squads. He would have blow both my repulsors up probably - snipers are the biggest joke in the game. It's so easy to counter them I don't know why anyone would bring them.


I practically tabled him the next turn. Killing meq is a complete joke. 18 point scouts? LOL.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Colonel Cross wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Colonel Cross wrote:
Except I do see snipers. Tau sniper drones do serious work. And plenty of Marine players in my store use scout snipers.

2 of my local SM players play a 5 or 10 man squad with character to buff them and we suggested to place 1 ML for the stratagem, they actually do a lot of damage when playing semi-comp (we are a semi comp group, we dont net list or take insane soup lists, but we try to take the bests units we can and play the best we can within the limits of what we like, like our BA player will play with Smash Captains and infantry, DC and some Armigers, but not IG, SOB player takes SOB with either Shield capts or a Knight, normally not both, DE player takes Ravagers and Coven but not Venom Spam).

They are actually kinda scary, yeah they die a bit quickly, but hiding them in cover and a good deployment can get them to fire for a couple turns and do some seriously damage for scouts.

That's mostly what my local store is like. Though there are some guys who run top of the line lists.

Yeah that mortal wounds Stratagem on a scout heavy bolter is tricky.

Martel, I suppose I should disclose we play Maelstrom or those open war cards. So often times it isn't just about killing things and points efficiency, etc. It's about those random OBJs. I've never played ITC but I know enough about it that it plays like an entirely different game. My games are usually very close, so *shoulder shrug*

My ultras will table any marine army in 3 turns. Objectives do not matter in marines vs marines. It's glass vss glass - whoever has more guns wins.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
We stopped using cards because the card draws were too dominant.

We stopped using cards because the game is over in 3-4 turns. Unless you are playing armies that have 4 point models being spammed.

For the last time... Stop comparing guard to SM. SM need buffs, period end of story. It's not fair to compare guard units to units from the second weakest codex this edition (and only second weakest because of the joke that is GK).

Stux wrote:
Bare bones, the SM Captain does an average of 2.16 wounds to the Company Commanders, or 16pts of damage.

In return, 2 Company Commanders do 0.59 wounds, or 9pts of damage.

This doesn't account for the Company Commanders ordering themselves though, as there's nothing that directly helps the Fight Phase. However in the second turn they could Fix Bayonets themselves and Fight twice, which puts their damage output above the Captain in terms of points worth of damage.

Your math is incorrect.

You are correct when you say that a space marine captain armed with a bolt pistol/chainsword does 2.16 wounds to the commanders.

You are also correct when you say that 2 company commanders do 0.59 wounds to the SM captain.

However the SM captain does 16.2 "points" worth of damage to the commanders and the commanders do 8.73 "points" of damage back. I am going to assume you rounded in your favor to make the numbers look better.

You are also incorrect when you say that "Fix Bayonets" makes the commanders fight better than the SM captain. According to my math, even with "Fix Bayonets" active the commanders are only doing 15.39 "points" of damage to the captain.

Even in a scenario where we are comparing guard commanders to SM captains (which we shouldn't because SM sucks right now) the SM captain still comes out on top. I still stand by my statement that Guard commanders are nothing more than orders on a stick and are only meant to act as mobile buffs for infantry... while characters like SM captains are meant to be counter-chargers in the thick of the fighting as well as act as mobile buff bubbles.

I can see company commanders going up to 35 points if you want to be a stickler about it. But they really aren't worth 40.

Ice_can wrote:

The_Real_Chris wrote:
So I am still sensing that all the people with a problem here think they can only have a fair game against guard if they get 60-90 points extra when playing a typical Guard army? That does seem to be well within the margin of error which does seem to suggest that if you are having a problem playing against Guard the problem is probably a bit bigger?

We are just staying on topic which is are Guardsmen worth 5ppm to which the answer is yes.

No one is saying undercosted infantry squads are the only issues with the codex. It's just the one that comes into every game be it vrs guard or imperial soup.

Against pure guard the tanks outperform atleast marine and tau tanks

Against Soup the CP generation is out of control.

But if you try and tackle evrything with a single magic fix, you make the same mistakes GW has for years with the swings being massive and failing to address the underlying issue.

Isn't this the magic fix you are referring to?

If you are talking CP generation that is an issue with increasing the cost of an army by 30 points. That is honestly neither here nor there. It would solve nothing.

If you think th codex has wider problems and getting 60 less points in your army would make no difference to the outcome, again nothing solved.

If it merely makes you feel troops across different armies looked at in various degrees of isolation to synergy with the rest of their rules and units are more balance, but doesn't fix the problems you see, well you would feel better about it but achieve nothing?

The_Real_Chris wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

The_Real_Chris wrote:
So I am still sensing that all the people with a problem here think they can only have a fair game against guard if they get 60-90 points extra when playing a typical Guard army? That does seem to be well within the margin of error which does seem to suggest that if you are having a problem playing against Guard the problem is probably a bit bigger?

We are just staying on topic which is are Guardsmen worth 5ppm to which the answer is yes.

No one is saying undercosted infantry squads are the only issues with the codex. It's just the one that comes into every game be it vrs guard or imperial soup.

Against pure guard the tanks outperform atleast marine and tau tanks

Against Soup the CP generation is out of control.

But if you try and tackle evrything with a single magic fix, you make the same mistakes GW has for years with the swings being massive and failing to address the underlying issue.

Isn't this the magic fix you are referring to?

If you are talking CP generation that is an issue with increasing the cost of an army by 30 points. That is honestly neither here nor there. It would solve nothing.

If you think th codex has wider problems and getting 60 less points in your army would make no difference to the outcome, again nothing solved.

If it merely makes you feel troops across different armies looked at in various degrees of isolation to synergy with the rest of their rules and units are more balance, but doesn't fix the problems you see, well you would feel better about it but achieve nothing?

I can't decide if your trolling or just blind to how undercosted most of the astra Militarum codex is.

Guard Infantry Squad models at 4ppm both buffed and unbuffed beat firewarriors, Skitari, Marines they only loose to alitoc rangers becuase -2 to hit is busted.

At 5ppm they are balanced against FW at 7ppm Rangers at 8ppm
Marines need to come down in points to be balanced against anything else.

That is the context in which Infantry Squad stat guardsmen are clearly worth 5ppm not their current 4ppm cost.

Guard players have used soup as an excuse that guard arn't undercosted.

The maths and gameplay experience of many players say that's wrong mono faction vrs mono faction guard are still a top tier army.


Those other two points are area's of 8th edition that still need fixed. Fixing the infantry squads cost was the topic of the thread and will help balance the game better. It's not the only issue but it is a problem that does need fixed.

Don't forget that you can give a Guard Company Commander Power Armour, a 4++, +1 attack, +1 WS/+1BS, +1 wound and access to combi-weapons and better CC weapons for the low low price of 15 points, if you replace his orders with an aura.

+2 sv, +1 invuln, +1 attack, +1 WS/BS, +1 wound, probably worth 10 pts tops, so yeah, the Guard company commander is probably undercosted by ~5 points. Not a big deal at all, I'd say. In a typical list, that's a difference of 10-20 pts. Guard aren't winning by the margin of the Company Commander alone.

(FYI referring to the Sororitas Canoness here, which has the next closest statline in Imperium to the guard Company Commander, and has a re-rolls 1's aura instead of Orders. She's got Power Armour and a 4++ like a Space Marine Captain, WS 2+ / BS 2+, and 4 attacks, with 5 wounds. T3 S3, LD9 I think. 45 points)

" becuase -2 to hit is busted."

Or necessary vs IG.

Ice_can wrote:
I can't decide if your trolling or just blind to how undercosted most of the astra Militarum codex is.

Guard Infantry Squad models at 4ppm both buffed and unbuffed beat firewarriors, Skitari, Marines they only loose to alitoc rangers because -2 to hit is busted.

At 5ppm they are balanced against FW at 7ppm Rangers at 8ppm
Marines need to come down in points to be balanced against anything else.

That is the context in which Infantry Squad stat guardsmen are clearly worth 5ppm not their current 4ppm cost.

Guard players have used soup as an excuse that guard aren’t undercosted.

The maths and gameplay experience of many players say that's wrong mono faction vrs mono faction guard are still a top tier army.


Those other two points are area's of 8th edition that still need fixed. Fixing the infantry squads cost was the topic of the thread and will help balance the game better. It's not the only issue but it is a problem that does need fixed.

Honestly not trolling. Just a point about how it seems a lot of people think this is a critical issue from reading this thread, when in reality it is a minor one if at the end of the day it is a 30-90 point change to most guard armies.

So you say mono guard (leaving soup aside) is a top tier army. I assume by top tier being an issue it is higher than top tier and unbalanced. I think it is a strong army - I am fairly naff at 40k and yet placed 6th at a reasonably large weekend tourney and didn't get higher because versus a knight army I didn't go first and they got the shadowsword before it got them. Anytime I played a good player I didn't do that well, anytime I played a good player with bad dice it was a slaughter. All this with me only vaguely understanding how the objective cards worked and often forgetting about them...

I think having the issue in isolation makes it look odd to me. You deal with things in isolation if they are a key issue or problem and for the number of points under discussion they honestly aren't. If it was presented in the context of other problems - i.e. the Guard codex is overpowered because of x,y,z. taking the troop selection first guardsmen should be a point more because... It would make more sense to me.

Personally, as I floated several dozen pages previously I think the practice of naked squads to meet minimums is wrong. I would want to see the base cost of a squad be 55 points, but the cost of the vox be 1 point, all the special weapon costs dropped by a point and heavy weapon costs dropped by 5. These changes would cascade across the army so base costs everywhere would increase, but the cost of fully tooled up armies wouldn't. That example of 9 squads to max CPs for other toys now costs the army 135 and you are better off giving them gear and making them part of your plan.

It would appear from my experience the problem isn't well equipped guard armies but ones that min max. They would also be more interesting to play with as well as less numerous and have more firepower which normally means easier to balance.

I did some calculating with equal points of IG vs Tau Firewarriors; with winning equals wiping the other out.
With IG at 4pts; 14 IG vs 8 Tau. Both starting in rapidfire range; If IG go first IG win on round 3; If Tau go first IG win on round 5.
With IG at 5pts; 14 IG vs 10 Tau. Both starting in rapidfire range; If IG go first IG win on round 4; If Tau go first Tau win on round 5.
With IG at 6pts; 14 IG vs 12 Tau. Both starting in rapidfire range; If IG go first IG win on round 7; If Tau go first IG win on round 4.

So if Tau Firewarriors are the benchmark. IG should be about 5pts. I also did some calculations like I did in the SM thread; and Tau are 133% more durable than guard vs lasguns and 133% more firepower than guard vs guard. So basically 133% better than guard. 5 x 133% = 6.65, so 5pt IG and 7pt FW seem to work.

It's a huge issue chris.

an IG battalion is currently around 50 points under-costed. If infantry are worth 5ppm and a CC is worth 40.

In an imperial knights list - that is kinda of like upgrading a warden to a crusader - were talking about a titan super weapon levels of under-costed. If you mutiply that across a whole 2000 point army - it's the equal of 10 titan super weapons.

OFC that is just an analogy. The fact is 50 points off an IG battalion is probably one of the more egregious points imbalances in the game right now because it literally affects every imperial army and in turn makes fixing all the other imbalances seem unnecessary. As you can just spam imperial guard against their undercosted stuff and come out on top 50% of the time.

The game needs balance. It needs it now. People are actually starting to play sigmar at my shop...I am one of them.