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.

I have heard a lot of people say that Imperial Guard are a broken army. What does that mean?

Unbalanced - this could mean that codex or certain units cost less that some would think they should cost or there might be issues with min/max builds or spamming.

I didn't think of was considered broken anymore as it is a relatively old codex and not current with 6th edition.

Orkwarboss456 wrote:
I have heard a lot of people say that Imperial Guard are a broken army. What does that mean?

I think that normally means they've been tabled by leafblower guard with vendetta support...

(soo many big guns on tanks - if guard get first turn, its not unheard of for people to set their army up, get shot and lose most of the army and concede in one turn)

But this doesn't work as well now in 6th.

There are two facets of a broken codex. It is externally imbalanced against the rest of the game (examples include WHFB 7th ed. Daemon book and Grey Knights in 5th) or is it internally imbalanced, leading to practically every netlist consisting of the same 5 or 6 units spammed over and over again as they are the new hotness with duff units simply being ignored or simply in a perhaps futile attempt to remain competitive. Examples of this are WHFB 7th O&G book, 4th ed. CSM codex, 5th ed. Space Wolves (to a certain extent, depends on who you talk to) and Imperial Guard. See the infamous 5th ed. "Leafblower lists" or "meltavet spam" to see what people we're referring to with IG being internally unbalanced.

Orkwarboss456 wrote:
I have heard a lot of people say that Imperial Guard are a broken army. What does that mean?

It usually means someone has just lost a battle to the codex in question...

It can mean a codex is woefully overpowered, underpowered, or internally imbalanced. The IG codex suffers mostly from being internally imbalanced. Some options are very powerful and undercosted while others are dreadfully terrible. This leads to most armies looking the same as it is hard to justify bringing sub-par units when there is such a gap between them and the good stuff.

Most codices could be argued to have some of these problems at least to some degree, but there are always a few worse culprits than the rest.

 marv335 wrote:

Orkwarboss456 wrote:
I have heard a lot of people say that Imperial Guard are a broken army. What does that mean?

It usually means someone has just lost a battle to the codex in question...

Yep lol and chances are it means he is a bit of an arse too !!

 Rayvon wrote:

 marv335 wrote:

Orkwarboss456 wrote:
I have heard a lot of people say that Imperial Guard are a broken army. What does that mean?

It usually means someone has just lost a battle to the codex in question...

Yep lol and chances are it means he is a bit of an arse too !!

Not always - I've known people refer to things as OP/broken because they literally have no idea how to fight the army across the table from them - whether its inexperience or the other guy cheating. Or someone having a golden game against them - that game where you just don't roll a 1 or 2 on any saves etc.

Familiarity helps whining - If you know how to make it bleed, you can kill it

 PredaKhaine wrote:

 Rayvon wrote:

 marv335 wrote:

Orkwarboss456 wrote:
I have heard a lot of people say that Imperial Guard are a broken army. What does that mean?

It usually means someone has just lost a battle to the codex in question...

Yep lol and chances are it means he is a bit of an arse too !!

Not always - I've known people refer to things as OP/broken because they literally have no idea how to fight the army across the table from them - whether its inexperience or the other guy cheating. Or someone having a golden game against them - that game where you just don't roll a 1 or 2 on any saves etc.

Familiarity helps whining - If you know how to make it bleed, you can kill it

I don't follow. I think that if they say it because they have no idea how to fight it, that's pretty much the same as having been beaten.

The term "broken" is most common amongst casually competitive players, meaning players that play to win, but aren't very dedicated. The balance between and within codices is not great (although much better than even three years ago), and there will always be bad match ups, but instances of truly broken armies are much rarer than most people think.

 Polonius wrote:

 PredaKhaine wrote:

 Rayvon wrote:

 marv335 wrote:

Orkwarboss456 wrote:
I have heard a lot of people say that Imperial Guard are a broken army. What does that mean?

It usually means someone has just lost a battle to the codex in question...

Yep lol and chances are it means he is a bit of an arse too !!

Not always - I've known people refer to things as OP/broken because they literally have no idea how to fight the army across the table from them - whether its inexperience or the other guy cheating. Or someone having a golden game against them - that game where you just don't roll a 1 or 2 on any saves etc.

Familiarity helps whining - If you know how to make it bleed, you can kill it

I don't follow. I think that if they say it because they have no idea how to fight it, that's pretty much the same as having been beaten.

The term "broken" is most common amongst casually competitive players, meaning players that play to win, but aren't very dedicated. The balance between and within codices is not great (although much better than even three years ago), and there will always be bad match ups, but instances of truly broken armies are much rarer than most people think.

As an example - I've run wraithguard with conceal, invisibilty and fortune, so 2+ re-rollable coversave in the open. It got called overpowered and broken - regardless of the fact it crumbles against ap3 cover ignoring weaponry. If you have't got cover ignoring weapons and you have literally no way of getting ap3 into them, you could just ignore them and play round them - they only have a 12" range.

But because I managed to play to their strengths in that game, they became 'that broken unit' with the 'broken' weapons.
It didn't help that my nightwings in that game didn't fail a 2+ evade either. They then became 'those broken fliers' even though literally any gun on the table could hurt them (av10).
I then got told my 4th ed eldar were broken (in 6th)

 PredaKhaine wrote:

As an example - I've run wraithguard with conceal, invisibilty and fortune, so 2+ re-rollable coversave in the open. It got called overpowered and broken - regardless of the fact it crumbles against ap3 cover ignoring weaponry. If you have't got cover ignoring weapons and you have literally no way of getting ap3 into them, you could just ignore them and play round them - they only have a 12" range.

But because I managed to play to their strengths in that game, they became 'that broken unit' with the 'broken' weapons.
It didn't help that my nightwings in that game didn't fail a 2+ evade either. They then became 'those broken fliers' even though literally any gun on the table could hurt them (av10).
I then got told my 4th ed eldar were broken (in 6th)

Well, the codex wasn't broken, but you did indeed find a glitch.

Nobody envisioned that concealed wraithguard could gain shrouding and stealth. That combo doesn't make the codex broken, but it's an exploit, a glitch. Not illegal or even unsporting, but don't pretend it's not an unexpected benefit.

there's little reason to be a sore loser, but I think it's wise to recognize when you've got a hot dice streak and a glictched death star.

I think "broken codex" means that it's something GW produced in the last five years or so.

 Polonius wrote:

 PredaKhaine wrote:

 Rayvon wrote:

 marv335 wrote:

Orkwarboss456 wrote:
I have heard a lot of people say that Imperial Guard are a broken army. What does that mean?

It usually means someone has just lost a battle to the codex in question...

Yep lol and chances are it means he is a bit of an arse too !!

I don't follow. I think that if they say it because they have no idea how to fight it, that's pretty much the same as having been beaten.

The term "broken" is most common amongst casually competitive players, meaning players that play to win, but aren't very dedicated. The balance between and within codices is not great (although much better than even three years ago), and there will always be bad match ups, but instances of truly broken armies are much rarer than most people think.

Lol - I've just realised I got your question wrong. My first post was meant to say just because someone called something broken, doesn't mean they are an arse

 Polonius wrote:

 PredaKhaine wrote:

As an example - I've run wraithguard with conceal, invisibilty and fortune, so 2+ re-rollable coversave in the open. It got called overpowered and broken - regardless of the fact it crumbles against ap3 cover ignoring weaponry. If you have't got cover ignoring weapons and you have literally no way of getting ap3 into them, you could just ignore them and play round them - they only have a 12" range.

But because I managed to play to their strengths in that game, they became 'that broken unit' with the 'broken' weapons.
It didn't help that my nightwings in that game didn't fail a 2+ evade either. They then became 'those broken fliers' even though literally any gun on the table could hurt them (av10).
I then got told my 4th ed eldar were broken (in 6th)

Well, the codex wasn't broken, but you did indeed find a glitch.

Nobody envisioned that concealed wraithguard could gain shrouding and stealth. That combo doesn't make the codex broken, but it's an exploit, a glitch. Not illegal or even unsporting, but don't pretend it's not an unexpected benefit.

there's little reason to be a sore loser, but I think it's wise to recognize when you've got a hot dice streak and a glictched death star.

The Eldar version is still miles behind what Daemons of Tzeentch can pull, effectively having rather easy access to a kick-arse Greater Daemon with S8/ap2 attacks OR and entire unit of 2++/re-roll 1's invuln saves...
There literally is no viable counter to that other than, "prey the Daemon player flubs their Ld10 psychic tests and/or Grimorie rolls."

Even killing the bearer of the Grimorie isn't exactly a simple matter as it'll either be on a DP, or a Tzherald likely riding a Disc and hiding amidst a bunch of 2 wound models or a boatload of Pinkies.


Most books can build some truly broken combos that will suck the fun out of any game - especially for your opponent. Overall though we thankfully don't too many instances of outright game-ruining armies like 5th's Grey Knights or 2nd ed Eldar.

Though occasionally an older book may inadvertently gain a massive power boost/debuff simply through an edition change:
- Warriors of Chaos for example became absolutely ridiculous in 8th due to having 6pts Marauders of Khorne w/great weapons. It was pretty much just a giant brick of super cheap Core troops who mashed most anything they faced!
- By comparison, look at how sucktastic Vampire Counts became once 8th dropped - they literally got hamfisted into using 1 specific build in order to win games, any deviation from 'The One List' just ended in massive tears for the VC player...)

The Space Wolf codex during 2nd edition was fairly busted from what I recall. It's my favourite edition, so that's where my best memories lie. But Space Wolves were borked. As if Space Marines weren't already tough enough, they cranked them up for Space Wolves with only marginal points increase. You either got slaughtered in hand to hand or shredded by missiles spam, IIRC.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
The Space Wolf codex during 2nd edition was fairly busted from what I recall. It's my favourite edition, so that's where my best memories lie. But Space Wolves were borked. As if Space Marines weren't already tough enough, they cranked them up for Space Wolves with only marginal points increase. You either got slaughtered in hand to hand or shredded by missiles spam, IIRC.

Space Wolves have honestly always been 'a step above' any other loyalist marine codex outside of GK's dominating the last year and a bit of 5th...

They've always been basically 'Space Marines +1', but people keep insisting that it's only the current 5th ed book that's given the army a bad name. From what a few of my buddies have told me, they were THE loyalist marine army in 2nd. They were effectively 'loyalist CSMs' in 3rd and they were still 'Codex Marines + CSMs for added kicks' in 5th.

Basically, they've always been a very strong army no matter what the current edition... Guess what? They're always going to be amazing considering you're getting all the benefits of being a loyalist marine, (including the added firepower), coupled with the style of play of the more aggressive CSM's.

Broken means that the player in question just lost to it

People who think this need to realize that GW are human and make subtle or sometimes enormous feth-ups with their codex rules just like anyone else would.

Broken official content is still broken, and the fact that Ward Cruddace or one of those other troglodytes they pay to produce the content made it doesn't automatically fix this fact.

-Dakka

To be honest it was blood angels in 3rd with supercharged rhino rush.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But yeah space wolves have been better than vanilla throught most of 40k

Welsh_Furey wrote:
To be honest it was blood angels in 3rd with supercharged rhino rush.

I routinely do poorly in winning GW games with a couple of notable exceptions.

In 3rd ed, my vanilla marines regularly got tabled. Killed to the last man, in fact.
I played Troops heavy while others in the meta min-maxxed their stuff.

In frustration, I bought the Blood Angels addition codex and fielded the exact same models in an army using BA rules.
My first game, I crushed my regular opponent who played Space Wolves at the time.

In Mordheim, I was able to destroy virtually anyone I played against by fielding a giant-rat heavy Skaven warband.

Those are examples of 'broken' army lists/codexes. If I can win with 'em without trying, there's something amiss

 Dakkamite wrote:

Broken means that the player in question just lost to it

People who think this need to realize that GW are human and make subtle or sometimes enormous feth-ups with their codex rules just like anyone else would.

Broken official content is still broken, and the fact that Ward Cruddace or one of those other troglodytes they pay to produce the content made it doesn't automatically fix this fact.

-Dakka

It'd probably work if they actually fixed the stuff with updates.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
The Space Wolf codex during 2nd edition was fairly busted from what I recall. It's my favourite edition, so that's where my best memories lie. But Space Wolves were borked. As if Space Marines weren't already tough enough, they cranked them up for Space Wolves with only marginal points increase. You either got slaughtered in hand to hand or shredded by missiles spam, IIRC.

I remember that SW was the only one that could field 3 terminators in a squad with 3 heavy weapons, good times
(or was it 3rd)

 PredaKhaine wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

 PredaKhaine wrote:

 Rayvon wrote:

 marv335 wrote:

Orkwarboss456 wrote:
I have heard a lot of people say that Imperial Guard are a broken army. What does that mean?

It usually means someone has just lost a battle to the codex in question...

Yep lol and chances are it means he is a bit of an arse too !!

Not always - I've known people refer to things as OP/broken because they literally have no idea how to fight the army across the table from them - whether its inexperience or the other guy cheating. Or someone having a golden game against them - that game where you just don't roll a 1 or 2 on any saves etc.

Familiarity helps whining - If you know how to make it bleed, you can kill it

I don't follow. I think that if they say it because they have no idea how to fight it, that's pretty much the same as having been beaten.

The term "broken" is most common amongst casually competitive players, meaning players that play to win, but aren't very dedicated. The balance between and within codices is not great (although much better than even three years ago), and there will always be bad match ups, but instances of truly broken armies are much rarer than most people think.

As an example - I've run wraithguard with conceal, invisibilty and fortune, so 2+ re-rollable coversave in the open. It got called overpowered and broken - regardless of the fact it crumbles against ap3 cover ignoring weaponry. If you have't got cover ignoring weapons and you have literally no way of getting ap3 into them, you could just ignore them and play round them - they only have a 12" range.

But because I managed to play to their strengths in that game, they became 'that broken unit' with the 'broken' weapons.
It didn't help that my nightwings in that game didn't fail a 2+ evade either. They then became 'those broken fliers' even though literally any gun on the table could hurt them (av10).
I then got told my 4th ed eldar were broken (in 6th)

eh that wraiths thing does sound broken, and stupid and a good example of gak game design.

kb305 wrote:
eh that wraiths thing does sound broken, and stupid and a good example of gak game design.

Or, just a lot of points in one unit.

It was only possible in 6th, while still using the 4th ed codex before the new release.

The wraithguard were about 400 points and you also needed 2 farseers - one for fortune and the other (normally eldrad) spamming hallucination. So it was something like 760+ points. For that, you got a 2+ re-reollable cover save.
Heldrakes and blastmasters remove models from it by the fist full, so did LR redeemers and Baal predators. The unit had a 12" range. Hammernators just removed it once they got to cc. In fact anything tough in cc did.
It has only a cover save - no invulnerables bar the characters
So in a 2k game, more than a third of the army and both characters were in a unit which couldn't attack for 2 thirds of the game.
To beat it, You could either bring ap3 cover ignoring weapons, kill everything else on the board or just ignore it as it wouldn't normally do a whole lot.
The only way people lost to that army was if they thought they had to deal with the squad through shooting - if they just ignored it, it didn't normally do that much.

I'd say a broken codex is one with a large percentage of OP units.

 sing your life wrote:
I'd say a broken codex is one with a large percentage of OP units.

Only problem with that is Allies, which I knew GW weren't going to bother balancing, it was a terrible idea from the get go and now we have Chaos running around with 4 heldrakes.

 Ravenous D wrote:

 sing your life wrote:
I'd say a broken codex is one with a large percentage of OP units.

Only problem with that is Allies, which I knew GW weren't going to bother balancing, it was a terrible idea from the get go and now we have Chaos running around with 4 heldrakes.

Only because you can have the expansion books ally with their parent codex. Another thing to add to the list of stupid ideas from Lenton. Well, in for a penny and all that....

Lots have changed in 6th, but it seems like the accusations for a broken codex can be far and wide.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Ravenous D wrote:

 sing your life wrote:
I'd say a broken codex is one with a large percentage of OP units.

Only problem with that is Allies, which I knew GW weren't going to bother balancing, it was a terrible idea from the get go and now we have Chaos running around with 4 heldrakes.

Only because you can have the expansion books ally with their parent codex. Another thing to add to the list of stupid ideas from Lenton. Well, in for a penny and all that....

Not to mention crazy ass tau armies with (now cheaper) drop pod marines as buddies, jesus that wasn't a pretty game to watch.

Orkwarboss456 wrote:
I have heard a lot of people say that Imperial Guard are a broken army. What does that mean?

Its really not about being broken, its about having one or two units that can really mess up your opponent. There is almost no good reason to take a valk because vendettas are probably one of the best, cheapest and hardest hitting flyers currently in the game