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.

Guardians remain the worst Troop in the game. Nothing changed there. The only change was their once or fewer per game shooting attack now MAY kill something. In exchange, they still cost too much.

Daston wrote:
As the title says, what are your thoughts?

First off bs 4? So these militia are just as accuate as avengers? Guys that have dedicated their life at ranged combat, well they must be crap at thier job if farmer bob can shoot just as well.

I know how things like this are kind of annoying, but most of us have gotten over the differences between lore and game crunch by now. It''s just like how imperial guard vets have the same ballistic skill as space marine sternguard.

I don't play Eldar.

Guardians are fine.... as mentioned before - they are quite fragile and have ridiculously short range.

They have a cool weapon effect come into play when you roll a 6. By the time you make it within range, you'll have hardly any guardians left to roll dice for.

Remulus wrote:
I know how things like this are kind of annoying, but most of us have gotten over the differences between lore and game crunch by now. It''s just like how imperial guard vets have the same ballistic skill as space marine sternguard.

And Sisters of Battle as well. But as I've said before, there's not much you can do with 0-10 stats in a d6 based game. Two models having the same stat number doesn't tell us much about how good they are compared to each other. Marines and SoB both have power armor with auto-senses and weapon links, the veteran guardsman might have access to some sort of targeting system but it's not certain. The difference (which we're not seeing) is the units in PA can shoot as accurately from the hip, or holding a bolter in one hand, or even shooting around a corner without sticking their heads out. The veteran is probably as good as he is because he sensibly lies down to aim? The SoB carry heavy weapons alone but are still only as strong as guardsmen who usually take two men to man a heavy weapon.

There's a lot of factors the stats just don't represent. One unit is this good by nature, another has expensive equipment, the third might boost himself with low-level psychic powers. Speaking of which most eldar are psychic, just not in enough degree to use it for flashy combat manuevers. But their armors, weapons and equipment are usually psychically attuned and serve an eldar much better than they would a human if he could even make it work.

The previous Eldar Codex gave no value to Guardians other than to provide a screen for heavy weapons. I essentially quit 40k over this and didn’t come back until the new Dark Eldar.

I'm extremely happy with their boost in the new codex.

Lioness wrote:
The previous Eldar Codex gave no value to Guardians other than to provide a screen for heavy weapons. I essentially quit 40k over this and didn’t come back until the new Dark Eldar.

I'm extremely happy with their boost in the new codex.

That seems like an odd thing to quit 40k over, not gonna lie.

 Brother SRM wrote:

Lioness wrote:
The previous Eldar Codex gave no value to Guardians other than to provide a screen for heavy weapons. I essentially quit 40k over this and didn’t come back until the new Dark Eldar.

I'm extremely happy with their boost in the new codex.

That seems like an odd thing to quit 40k over, not gonna lie.

I had a Guardian heavy army (former Ulthwe Strike Force) so I needed to buy like 4 heavy weapons to make the army legal again and I realised that even if I spent that money then I wouldn't suddenly be having fun, quite the opposite in fact and switching armies was an unsatisfactory solution.

I think "I'm not having fun" is a pretty logical reason to take a long break from any game system, I focused on Warhammer for a few years and enjoyed that instead.

The problem is that we are dealing with 1 number difference. An average eldar is at least a good of shot as an average IG vet. 200-700 years old probably meant a bit more than basic schooling in firing a weapon. However, they probably arent as good as a space marine. The same way a vet is not as good as a space marine. However, there is no way to draw a line between the two without making complicated rules. Therefore, WS4 BS4. I would have like defenders to get WS3 BS4 and storms to get WS4 BS3, but i cant change the codex. Better question: would black guardians now be WS5? Seems quite silly.

 DarknessEternal wrote:
Guardians remain the worst Troop in the game. Nothing changed there. The only change was their once or fewer per game shooting attack now MAY kill something. In exchange, they still cost too much.

BT Marines in an edition that favours shooty stuff that kills Marines, Thousand Sons and (especially) Penal Legion laugh at that statement.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:
Guardians remain the worst Troop in the game. Nothing changed there. The only change was their once or fewer per game shooting attack now MAY kill something. In exchange, they still cost too much.

BT Marines in an edition that favours shooty stuff that kills Marines, Thousand Sons and (especially) Penal Legion laugh at that statement.

All three of those things are better than Guardians objectively. At the very worst, they can lay on an objective while still participating in the game with their double ranged weapons.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:
Guardians remain the worst Troop in the game. Nothing changed there. The only change was their once or fewer per game shooting attack now MAY kill something. In exchange, they still cost too much.

BT Marines in an edition that favours shooty stuff that kills Marines, Thousand Sons and (especially) Penal Legion laugh at that statement.

All three of those things are better than Guardians objectively. At the very worst, they can lay on an objective while still participating in the game with their double ranged weapons.

Guardians get Heavy weapons and, crucially, don't cost 16+ points per model (or, in the case of Penal Legion, suck at everything). In cover you'll be almost as survivable as a Marine (T3 vs T4) but you'll outnumber them 2 to 1. If you really think it's worthwhile to have 16/22 PPMMarines as objective campers shooting (AP3) bolters at stuff we'll just have to agree to disagree, especially seeing as the Templars are guaranteed to run off the objective in one direction or another if you kill one.

In fact, charging straight in, 10 guardians will barely lose to 5 Tactical Marines with Bolters IF THE MARINES GET TURN ADVANTAGE. The Guardians have 10 points more invested in them, but in a vacuum and simply pushing them forward (which I think we can all agree is doing it wrong) the Guardians wipe the Marines out. Combine that with better objective camping and I'd rather have Guardians as Troops every day.

Guardians are what they should have been. Like so much in the NEW codex's, they are making the armies be like you'd expect them and then doing the points for them instead of trying to shoehorn the stats to the points. I love it. So many things in the Tau and Eldar codex just WORK they way they should, the way you'd envision them. the crazy cost of some of the models from a points perspective (both high and low) have been fixed. Warwalkers were way too cheap in the old codex while Guardians just made no sense given their ages and likely experience. Even warrior painters have seen a few more wars than most Ig are ever likely to imagine.

So the Guardian weapons are supposed to shred you apart. awesome! Now they feel like a hail of very possibly lethal shurikens instead of just weak sauce lame STATS.

Guardians totally should have been a part of Eldar armies given their dying race status but who took them ever? Now you might.

Only if one subscribes to the classic elf-trap that fantasy systems so often do. There really isn't much in 40k lore to state such with any degree of certainty. They may have much more or may not, either way the Eldar discard their old selves completely to immerse themselves totally in what they engage in now.

Frankly, it's about time they weren't terrible. When Third Edition established a lot of the stat and point "norms" that seem to have persisted across through to 6th edition, Guardians were hands down the worst troop choice in the game. They're finally a viable option. And, if you get within 12" of a full squad of Guardians, because you didn't shoot at them once, then you deserve what you get.

In the fullness of time, the Wave Serpent may prove to be a slightly different story.

GW is good at tweaking their rules so that units cycle through being good and bad. Third Edition, it was Wraithlords, Howling Banshees, Dark Reapers, and Star Cannons. Then Seer Councils got awesome and vehicles got a little better. Fire Dragons and Wraithguard became popular later, etc... now Warp Spiders are useful again.

It's what they do. Some things get slightly better, some things get slightly worse every edition. Guardians are just finally not the worst. Ever.

I'm having a hard time understanding where the OP is coming from.

Does he think that people are going to be taking hordes of Guardians now? Will almost every Tau and Dark Eldar list include two big squads of Guardians?

That's a little hard to believe. Plenty of Eldar players are going to prefer Jetbikes or Dire Avengers or Wraithguard. Tau with Eldar allies are probably still going to be mostly interested in Jetbikes for scoring purposes. Lots of players aren't even going to max out their Troops slots - many players seem to think Heavy Support and Fast Attack have more valuable options. So does the OP think that the new Eldar codex is absurdly overpowered such that Guardians are still way too good even though they're only competitive with the other choices?

As someone that runs guardians (3 squads in my tournament lists), i'm certainly not finding them to be overpowered. I ran 3 squads in tournament lists just prior to the new codex, and the differences are enough to make guardians good, and subtle enough to still make them feel like the same unit.

Guardians still die like nobodies business. They're as survivable as a guardsmen. They don't get a save against BOLTERS.

Anyone complaining about them should think about that for a second. I imagine anyone complaing about them plays with one of those T4 3+ armies

The only reason there seems to be such a disparity with the different unit types that all have BS4 is because we're only on a d6 system. So we only have so much variety that there can be. The only way to better represent it would to go up to a d10 or d20 system where you can get more granular. That way you'd really be able to represent that in terms of BS it would probably go IG/Tau<Guardian><Space Marine><Aspect Warrior/Space Marine Vet etc.

The stat that bothers me much more than BS4 on Guardians is Ld8 on Warlocks. Their fluff is that these guys are Seers who were Aspect Warriors before. Aspect Warriors are Ld9. Seers are Ld9/10... what?>

Belly wrote:
As someone that runs guardians (3 squads in my tournament lists), i'm certainly not finding them to be overpowered. I ran 3 squads in tournament lists just prior to the new codex, and the differences are enough to make guardians good, and subtle enough to still make them feel like the same unit.

Guardians still die like nobodies business. They're as survivable as a guardsmen. They don't get a save against BOLTERS.

Anyone complaining about them should think about that for a second. I imagine anyone complaing about them plays with one of those T4 3+ armies

They also outnumber said T4 3+ infantry and will win in a shootout, but don't let that get in your way.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

They also outnumber said T4 3+ infantry and will win in a shootout, but don't let that get in your way.

From <12'' away? Even when marines still get their 3+ against 2/3 wounds against them?

This whole thing is just a bunch of butt-hurt marine players complaining that an Eldar troops choice is viable again, and that sometimes they take away their precious 3+. Please, my guardians get an armour save against CC attacks, and lasguns... That's pretty much it, and I do just fine

Why should an eldar unit be viable , some armies don't even have one good troop choice?

The only problem with guardians is that they can ride in serpents. It makes all their bad sides like short range, low T, low save unimportant.

Except it makes them expensive and reduces their firepower to that of the serpent. Essentially reducing them to the 'min-sized squad in transport' role.

Hardly the hallmark of a viable troop choice.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

They also outnumber said T4 3+ infantry and will win in a shootout, but don't let that get in your way.

You said this earlier, but I'm not seeing it.

Let's use a simple expected casualties model. If the squads are starting at opposite board edges and moving towards each other, at some point the 5 marines are going to be able to shoot at 24". This is expected to kill 2.22 guardians. Almost every time, no guardians will be able to shoot in their next turn because they'd need a very good fleet roll and may have lost models from the front. The guardians move forward as far as they can, and then the marines get to decide whether to fall back to try to gain another turn or to step forward and double tap. If they double tap, that's another 4.44 guardians dead. The remaining 3.33 guardians fire and kill 1.23 marines. The remaining marines kill all of the remaining guardians. 3.77 marines are still alive, out of 5 to begin with. The guardians should have charged after firing, but the marines still win.

Or let's do a better job with the casualty model. I can simulate the scenario described above - marines shoot 3 times before the guardians shoot twice and charge - 100,000 times. I don't have a Marine codex - I assume the sergeant has 2 attacks. The guardians get wiped out over 80% of the time. The marines survive with 4 or 5 men left nearly 50% of the time. And we've completely ignored morale.

I can also do one much more favorable to the guardians. Suppose for some reason the marines don't get a 24" shot off, so they only get two shots each before the guardians shoot and charge. The guardians get wiped out 55% of the time.

And, again, that took no consideration of morale. If the full guardian squad loses 3 models, which is expected when 5 marines double tap them, they have to take a morale test on Ld 8, which fails 28% of the time. If they fail, they're probably not shooting next turn, and if they do shoot they'll be firing snap shots. The marines might likewise fail a test, but they have ATSKNF so it doesn't matter, and actually the distance is helpful.

So Guardians win when they magically appear inside their 12" range and get the first shot off. They lose pretty badly otherwise. They can kind of do a decent job - or at least die with dignity - when the marines only double tap them first before the guardians get to shoot, provided they don't fail morale.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Obviously a Serpent can deliver them close enough, but the Serpent is more expensive than the squad it's transporting. Even if we're assuming no other units are involved, which is advantageous for the longer-ranged marines since concentrating firepower is going to preferentially kill closer guardians, you've got to give the marines another 140 points worth of stuff if you want to be fair.

 Shandara wrote:
Except it makes them expensive and reduces their firepower to that of the serpent. Essentially reducing them to the 'min-sized squad in transport' role.

Hardly the hallmark of a viable troop choice.

My gunline of 20 BS4, pseudo-fearless, pseudo-twin-linked, power-armoured boltguns supports this message. New Guardians are just fine.

Belly wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

They also outnumber said T4 3+ infantry and will win in a shootout, but don't let that get in your way.

From <12'' away? Even when marines still get their 3+ against 2/3 wounds against them?

Turns out my math, while right mathematically, was off due to faulty reasoning. But please, stuff your "u mad bro?" attitude. You don't see people posting garbage like "this is just Eldar players trying to justify their OP-brokenhaxx unit rofllollmao", so why are you? If you're going to compare Guardians to Marines on the Marines terms the Marines will win, although not by a lot. Guess who benefits more from cover of the two?

pantsonhead wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

They also outnumber said T4 3+ infantry and will win in a shootout, but don't let that get in your way.

You said this earlier, but I'm not seeing it.

I fethed up, sorry about that.

For the record, I'd still rather have Guardians than BT Marines, Thousand Sons or Penal Legion as Troops. Guardians are cheap enough that you can take a bunch of them, park them in cover on objectives and then just fire away with your Weapons Platform. None of the above examples (Guardians included) are very killy, but at least the Guardians have some bodies to hold objectives with, and at least they're not guaranteed to run off their objective if they take a casualty. Power Armour's fine and dandy until you realize that everyone is gearing up to kill Power Armour, there's such a thing as Heldrakes or Riptides and Guardians are only 9 PPM as opposed to 16+ PPM (again, discounting the Penal Legion, who are utter bull).

Contrast the Guardians with 7 Dire Avengers for essentially the same cost.

The Avengers' extra range and 4+ save are huge deals. In the scenario where the squads start off on opposite sides of a large barren table, the Avengers get to fire after only one Marine volley, and can Battle Focus back such that the Marines can never step forward and double tap. The 7 Avengers win more than 90% of the time. The Avengers win more than 75% of the time even when the Marines start at 12" and get to double tap (the Avengers step back to 18" to fire, then Battle Focus even farther away).




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

For the record, I'd still rather have Guardians than BT Marines, Thousand Sons or Penal Legion as Troops. Guardians are cheap enough that you can take a bunch of them, park them in cover on objectives and then just fire away with your Weapons Platform. None of the above examples (Guardians included) are very killy, but at least the Guardians have some bodies to hold objectives with, and at least they're not guaranteed to run off their objective if they take a casualty. Power Armour's fine and dandy until you realize that everyone is gearing up to kill Power Armour, there's such a thing as Heldrakes or Riptides and Guardians are only 9 PPM as opposed to 16+ PPM (again, discounting the Penal Legion, who are utter bull).

I think this is basically true for BT or Chaos players. I'm not sure it's true for Eldar. Obviously it depends on the list, but almost every Eldar list is going to already have a bunch of really tempting targets for anything that can kill Marines. S6/S7 is a threat to expensive Eldar vehicles. AP3 hurts Wraithguard, Jetbikes, and some of the most popular aspects other than Avengers. And Eldar 3+ saves tend to be much more expensive per model than other 3+ saves, due to every model having a special weapon. Nobody's going to shoot AP3 at 16 PPM 3+ saves when there are Fire Dragons or Dark Reapers or Wraithguard running around, and nobody's going to shoot S6 at a squad with bolters when there are War Walkers on the field.

Edit: Also, Jetbikes and Guardians having fleet, in addition to the general bias of Eldar units towards offense over defense, gives Eldar much less need for something to babysit an objective. Eldar want to be moving to objectives only at the end of the game, not setting up camp on top of them. A bunch of Guardians holed up somewhere taking potshots with a scatter laser is a big waste of points. You should have just taken an extra War Walker and a small Jetbike squad.

TWELVE INCH RANGE

Mellowlicious wrote:
TWELVE INCH RANGE

9 PPM MEATSHIELDS FOR HEAVY WEAPONS IN COVER

pantsonhead wrote:
Contrast the Guardians with 7 Dire Avengers for essentially the same cost.

The Avengers' extra range and 4+ save are huge deals. In the scenario where the squads start off on opposite sides of a large barren table, the Avengers get to fire after only one Marine volley, and can Battle Focus back such that the Marines can never step forward and double tap. The 7 Avengers win more than 90% of the time. The Avengers win more than 75% of the time even when the Marines start at 12" and get to double tap (the Avengers step back to 18" to fire, then Battle Focus even farther away).




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

For the record, I'd still rather have Guardians than BT Marines, Thousand Sons or Penal Legion as Troops. Guardians are cheap enough that you can take a bunch of them, park them in cover on objectives and then just fire away with your Weapons Platform. None of the above examples (Guardians included) are very killy, but at least the Guardians have some bodies to hold objectives with, and at least they're not guaranteed to run off their objective if they take a casualty. Power Armour's fine and dandy until you realize that everyone is gearing up to kill Power Armour, there's such a thing as Heldrakes or Riptides and Guardians are only 9 PPM as opposed to 16+ PPM (again, discounting the Penal Legion, who are utter bull).

I think this is basically true for BT or Chaos players. I'm not sure it's true for Eldar. Obviously it depends on the list, but almost every Eldar list is going to already have a bunch of really tempting targets for anything that can kill Marines. S6/S7 is a threat to expensive Eldar vehicles. AP3 hurts Wraithguard, Jetbikes, and some of the most popular aspects other than Avengers. And Eldar 3+ saves tend to be much more expensive per model than other 3+ saves, due to every model having a special weapon. Nobody's going to shoot AP3 at 16 PPM 3+ saves when there are Fire Dragons or Dark Reapers or Wraithguard running around, and nobody's going to shoot S6 at a squad with bolters when there are War Walkers on the field.

Edit: Also, Jetbikes and Guardians having fleet, in addition to the general bias of Eldar units towards offense over defense, gives Eldar much less need for something to babysit an objective. Eldar want to be moving to objectives only at the end of the game, not setting up camp on top of them. A bunch of Guardians holed up somewhere taking potshots with a scatter laser is a big waste of points. You should have just taken an extra War Walker and a small Jetbike squad.

I agree completely that there's better Troops in the Eldar Codex (Jetbikes anyone?), but Guardians are absolutely not the "worst troops choice in the game".

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Belly wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

They also outnumber said T4 3+ infantry and will win in a shootout, but don't let that get in your way.

From <12'' away? Even when marines still get their 3+ against 2/3 wounds against them?

Turns out my math, while right mathematically, was off due to faulty reasoning. But please, stuff your "u mad bro?" attitude. You don't see people posting garbage like "this is just Eldar players trying to justify their OP-brokenhaxx unit rofllollmao", so why are you? If you're going to compare Guardians to Marines on the Marines terms the Marines will win, although not by a lot. Guess who benefits more from cover of the two?

Please, it's not a matter of "u mad bro?" It's more a case of me being completely unwilling to listen to crying Marine players who are upset they lose their precious 3+ sometimes.

A 10 man squad with a platform costs 110. That's quite a few points to be 'parked in cover on objectives' when they do nothing but fire a weapons platform. And those guardian bodies to hold objectives are only T3 5+ bodies. And guardians do run off objectives, often. Ld8 isn't great, and they don't get ATSKNF to completely ignore the morale system. All those things that are geared up to kill power armour? They kill guardians too, faster even, due to a lower toughness.

Indeed, that's a ridiculous waste of points for one heavy weapon. I can't imagine any Eldar players bothering with that, there are simply better ways to get heavy weapons.

Belly wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Belly wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

They also outnumber said T4 3+ infantry and will win in a shootout, but don't let that get in your way.

From <12'' away? Even when marines still get their 3+ against 2/3 wounds against them?

Turns out my math, while right mathematically, was off due to faulty reasoning. But please, stuff your "u mad bro?" attitude. You don't see people posting garbage like "this is just Eldar players trying to justify their OP-brokenhaxx unit rofllollmao", so why are you? If you're going to compare Guardians to Marines on the Marines terms the Marines will win, although not by a lot. Guess who benefits more from cover of the two?

Please, it's not a matter of "u mad bro?" It's more a case of me being completely unwilling to listen to crying Marine players who are upset they lose their precious 3+ sometimes.

A 10 man squad with a platform costs 110. That's quite a few points to be 'parked in cover on objectives' when they do nothing but fire a weapons platform. And those guardian bodies to hold objectives are only T3 5+ bodies. And guardians do run off objectives, often. Ld8 isn't great, and they don't get ATSKNF to completely ignore the morale system. All those things that are geared up to kill power armour? They kill guardians too, faster even, due to a lower toughness.

I pay 101 points for 5 bodies with a Lascannon and a Plasma Gun whose only job is to fire heavy weapons. They don't get free saves against small-arms by standing in a ruin and are half as many bodies as your Guardians. Sure, Guardians die faster to low-strength AP3 than Marines, but Plasma, Baleflamers, Riptides, D-scythes and any AP3 weapon with S6+ (i.e. the vast majority) are much more powerful against Marines than against Guardians. You lose a 9 PPM model on a 2+, I lose a 16 PPM model on a 2+. Each individual Marine lives longer against small-arms fire, which is counterbalanced by you getting 10 bodies as opposed to 5 and by you actually getting you use cover to, effectively, get "free" saves. So no, Guardians aren't more vulnerable to AP3 or better weaponry than Marines.

Regarding the Morale system, if I run off the table my ATSKNF isn't going to matter. If I run forward due to Righteous Zeal (I'm also Ld8, so yeah...) I can't move back unless I'm fine with firing Snap Shots with my Heavy Weapon (and if I'm on the second floor of a building it'll probably mean I won't have very good LoS to anything). So please, tell me all about how I "ignore" the morale system.

If you're completely unwilling to listen to the other side in a discussion without insulting them, why are you on a discussion board in the first place? That seems rather counterproductive to me.

 shamikebab wrote:
Indeed, that's a ridiculous waste of points for one heavy weapon. I can't imagine any Eldar players bothering with that, there are simply better ways to get heavy weapons.

Considering that's one of the best uses of the only Troops Choice in the Black Templars Codex you might get why I'm rather annoyed at people implying that I'm just a QQing Marine player that can't play without my "precious 3+ save"...