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 personally like the firestorm redoubt with a ammo dump upgrade, a tad expensive but sticking HWT in there and a few on top as seen it make its points back, plus folks are terrified of dual the quad icarus lascannons for some reason.

GrafWattenburg wrote:
Lately my Chaos Warband has been fighting a lot of uphill battles and decided they need a break, thus it has fallen upon the Severian Insurgent Army to carry the fight against those still loyal to the corpse-throne. I've just thrown together a 1750 list with models I have available or can borrow, but I hope I'll manage to get a few wins in.

A few things though:

Maybe I've missed it, but I can't find anything in the core rulebook about the character with the highest LD having to be the Warlord, does this mean I can run Pask with a CCS?

I know everyone is raving about Wyverns but I don't have the money for the models, so I'm stuck with my Thudd Guns. They don't have ignore cover and shred, but they are S5 AP5. As far as I see they can recieve orders, is this correct? I think you can also put an IC in with them, right? If so, an Inquisitor with a Psyocculum would be very fun to ruin a daemon/GK player's day.

Which fortifications do you use, if any? I personally lean heavily towards the Aegis Defence line for my guard, while I love the Imperial Bunker for some of my CSM lists. I would be interested in hearing what others have tried and how it has worked.

1 - It's in the codex, under Chain of Command I think, either right before the unit descriptions or after them.

2 - Don't think there's an orders restriction, but I think there might be a restriction on what units from what book you can include/order. Double check the orders rule and make sure it doesn't say "Astra Militarum codex" or something like that, otherwise you'll be fine issuing orders.

3 - Aegis sometimes, bunkers are good too with some HWT's and a Primaris for some Divination love and LD9.

 Frankenberry wrote:


1 - It's in the codex, under Chain of Command I think, either right before the unit descriptions or after them.

2 - Don't think there's an orders restriction, but I think there might be a restriction on what units from what book you can include/order. Double check the orders rule and make sure it doesn't say "Astra Militarum codex" or something like that, otherwise you'll be fine issuing orders.

3 - Aegis sometimes, bunkers are good too with some HWT's and a Primaris for some Divination love and LD9.

1. Chain of Command is the Commissar special rule preventing them from being the warlord if any unit has the Senior Officer rule. Senior Officer just states that a model can issue up to two orders per turn, and under Voice of Command it just describes how orders are issued, could you please provide a page where it is stated that I ca't have Pask as my Warlord if I also have a CCS?

2. Darn, you are right about that, it does say from Codex: Astra Militarum :( Oh well, thanks for pointing it out.

Av 14 seems a lot harder to Crack in 7th
Here's my steel host formation list I've been having success with.
Single cad. Steel host formation counting as allies

1850
Ig
Command tank squad
Paskisher mm Las
Exterminator mm las
Exterminator mm las

Vets 2x melta 1x flamer Chimera
Vets 2x melta 1x flamer Chimera

Hydra

Steel host
Command tanks squad
Vanquisher las
Vanquisher las

Executioner Las plasma Sponson

Executioner Las plasma Sponson

Eradicator hb sponsons hb

Hydra

All tanks have preferred enemy.
No gets hots while steel host Command is alive

 Frankenberry wrote:

GrafWattenburg wrote:
Lately my Chaos Warband has been fighting a lot of uphill battles and decided they need a break, thus it has fallen upon the Severian Insurgent Army to carry the fight against those still loyal to the corpse-throne. I've just thrown together a 1750 list with models I have available or can borrow, but I hope I'll manage to get a few wins in.

A few things though:

Maybe I've missed it, but I can't find anything in the core rulebook about the character with the highest LD having to be the Warlord, does this mean I can run Pask with a CCS?

I know everyone is raving about Wyverns but I don't have the money for the models, so I'm stuck with my Thudd Guns. They don't have ignore cover and shred, but they are S5 AP5. As far as I see they can recieve orders, is this correct? I think you can also put an IC in with them, right? If so, an Inquisitor with a Psyocculum would be very fun to ruin a daemon/GK player's day.

Which fortifications do you use, if any? I personally lean heavily towards the Aegis Defence line for my guard, while I love the Imperial Bunker for some of my CSM lists. I would be interested in hearing what others have tried and how it has worked.

1 - It's in the codex, under Chain of Command I think, either right before the unit descriptions or after them.

2 - Don't think there's an orders restriction, but I think there might be a restriction on what units from what book you can include/order. Double check the orders rule and make sure it doesn't say "Astra Militarum codex" or something like that, otherwise you'll be fine issuing orders.

3 - Aegis sometimes, bunkers are good too with some HWT's and a Primaris for some Divination love and LD9.

There's no rule that your warlord has to have the highest ld, the BRB says that any character can be your warlord.

“When choosing your army, you must nominate one model to be your Warlord. Unless specified otherwise, this must be a character model. If you do not have any character models in your army, then select any other model in your army to be the Warlord. The model you choose as your Warlord also determines your Primary Detachment.
” - Excerpt From: Games Workshop. “Warhammer 40,000 (Interactive Edition).” Games Workshop, 2014. iBooks. https://itun.es/us/kNVz0.l

The chain of command rule is a specific restriction on Lord Commissars, which says that they cannot be your warlord if you have a senior officer in the army. However, this rule doesn't apply to any other characters in the army. So oddly, a regular commissar could be your warlord, while still taking a CCS, but a lord commissar can't. It's such a bizarre restriction. But as written you can have a tank commander as your warlord and still take a CCS with a senior officer. You could make an ogryn bone 'ead your warlord according to the rules, just for some reason not a Lord Commissar, who must obey the chain of command.

“To issue an order, declare the order your officer is attempting to issue and select a single friendly non-vehicle unit from Codex: Astra Militarum that is within 12" of the officer – this can be the officer’s own unit if you wish. We call this unit the ‘ordered unit’. ” - Excerpt From: Games Workshop. “CODEX: ASTRA MILITARUM (Enhanced Edition).” Games Workshop, 2014. iBooks. https://itun.es/us/tOV7Y.l

I have soured on divination. It's just too hard to get enough power dice to reliably cast prescience, and the results have been lackluster. Unless I'm fielding full tank squads or basilisk batteries, prescience is meh. And the other spells aren't useful on primaris psykers, getting a buff on overwatch with lasguns is meh. I much prefer the biomancy buffs, particularly on blob squads.

 Frankenberry wrote:

2. Darn, you are right about that, it does say from Codex: Astra Militarum :( Oh well, thanks for pointing it out.

However, the Imperial Armour 1 volume 2 entry for thudd guns says:

"A Field Artillery Battery is a Heavy Support choice for a Codex Imperial Guard army".

So if the unit is a choice within the codex and it's not a vehicle I don't see a problem with issuing it orders.

The real abuse of this can come with the the basilisk gun carriages. Cover ignoring ordnance at S9 is pretty deadly.

There's no rule that your warlord has to have the highest ld, the BRB says that any character can be your warlord.

“When choosing your army, you must nominate one model to be your Warlord. Unless specified otherwise, this must be a character model. If you do not have any character models in your army, then select any other model in your army to be the Warlord. The model you choose as your Warlord also determines your Primary Detachment.
” - Excerpt From: Games Workshop. “Warhammer 40,000 (Interactive Edition).” Games Workshop, 2014. iBooks. https://itun.es/us/kNVz0.l

That's interesting, so I could take Pask as my warlord and also run Yarrick with a blob.

 Nashole211 wrote:
So i had my first game yesterday played Tau at 1500 points. My list was roughly:

Pask
Vanquisher
MM/LAS

Plasmaquitioner
Plasma Sponsons

Eradicator
HB sponsons

2x Vets with 2x melta and chimera
4+ Armor

3x vets with senteries
Las cannon
3x Sniper

3x Priests (they stayed in cover with the Senterie vets)

Valkerie

Wyvern

It was actually a pretty lack luster game, he didnt really have anything to pop aromr 14 and only had one round of shooting on side armor of the Plasmaquitioner. He only took of one hull point off it and I did another to myself. I just lumbered forward slowly whittling away at his army each turn. He finally called it at turn 4 when he relaised he had nothing to pop armor. Pask didnt have much to shoot at and when he did my buddy was able to make his cover saves. I want to try the list again because it seems to have potential, just needs a few tweaks.

I would scratch the priest for more points. His assault bonuses are waisted on a sit and shoot unit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Awestrn wrote:
Av 14 seems a lot harder to Crack in 7th
Here's my steel host formation list I've been having success with.
Single cad. Steel host formation counting as allies

1850
Ig
Command tank squad
Paskisher mm Las
Exterminator mm las
Exterminator mm las

Vets 2x melta 1x flamer Chimera
Vets 2x melta 1x flamer Chimera

Hydra

Steel host
Command tanks squad
Vanquisher las
Vanquisher las

Executioner Las plasma Sponson

Executioner Las plasma Sponson

Eradicator hb sponsons hb

Hydra

All tanks have preferred enemy.
No gets hots while steel host Command is alive

How many points is this? I actually really like the list a lot lol.

bogalubov wrote:
...

The real abuse of this can come with the the basilisk gun carriages. Cover ignoring ordnance at S9 is pretty deadly.

The Master of Ordinance can do this without getting into forgeworld stuff. They aren't accurate without servo skulls, but you'll want those anyways if you're playing an artillery heavy list that doesn't want to see things getting close to you. Keep in mind that with six skulls you can extend the coverage of the skulls such that it overlaps your opponent's deployment zone, while still covering the entire centre of the board.

 Nashole211 wrote:

There's no rule that your warlord has to have the highest ld, the BRB says that any character can be your warlord.

“When choosing your army, you must nominate one model to be your Warlord. Unless specified otherwise, this must be a character model. If you do not have any character models in your army, then select any other model in your army to be the Warlord. The model you choose as your Warlord also determines your Primary Detachment.
” - Excerpt From: Games Workshop. “Warhammer 40,000 (Interactive Edition).” Games Workshop, 2014. iBooks. https://itun.es/us/kNVz0.l

That's interesting, so I could take Pask as my warlord and also run Yarrick with a blob.

Yes you could have pask or a tank commander as your warlord.

GrafWattenburg wrote:

 Frankenberry wrote:


1 - It's in the codex, under Chain of Command I think, either right before the unit descriptions or after them.

2 - Don't think there's an orders restriction, but I think there might be a restriction on what units from what book you can include/order. Double check the orders rule and make sure it doesn't say "Astra Militarum codex" or something like that, otherwise you'll be fine issuing orders.

3 - Aegis sometimes, bunkers are good too with some HWT's and a Primaris for some Divination love and LD9.

1. Chain of Command is the Commissar special rule preventing them from being the warlord if any unit has the Senior Officer rule. Senior Officer just states that a model can issue up to two orders per turn, and under Voice of Command it just describes how orders are issued, could you please provide a page where it is stated that I ca't have Pask as my Warlord if I also have a CCS?

2. Darn, you are right about that, it does say from Codex: Astra Militarum :( Oh well, thanks for pointing it out.

Was completely wrong on #1, there is no rule saying you have to concede the Warlord spot to a higher LD HQ, must've confused that with the Commissar one. Whoops!

bogalubov wrote:

 Frankenberry wrote:

2. Darn, you are right about that, it does say from Codex: Astra Militarum :( Oh well, thanks for pointing it out.

However, the Imperial Armour 1 volume 2 entry for thudd guns says:

"A Field Artillery Battery is a Heavy Support choice for a Codex Imperial Guard army".

So if the unit is a choice within the codex and it's not a vehicle I don't see a problem with issuing it orders.

The real abuse of this can come with the the basilisk gun carriages. Cover ignoring ordnance at S9 is pretty deadly.

There is no Codex: Imperial Guard anymore, at least not in 7th, so this doesn't work.

 Frankenberry wrote:

GrafWattenburg wrote:

 Frankenberry wrote:

2. Darn, you are right about that, it does say from Codex: Astra Militarum :( Oh well, thanks for pointing it out.

However, the Imperial Armour 1 volume 2 entry for thudd guns says:

"A Field Artillery Battery is a Heavy Support choice for a Codex Imperial Guard army".

So if the unit is a choice within the codex and it's not a vehicle I don't see a problem with issuing it orders.

The real abuse of this can come with the the basilisk gun carriages. Cover ignoring ordnance at S9 is pretty deadly.

There is no Codex: Imperial Guard anymore, at least not in 7th, so this doesn't work.

Only the worst, most detestable kind of WAAC fethwit would even try to make a point of that one, so I would not worry about it.

Tankboy,
Thanks its 1850.

 Mr.Omega wrote:

 Frankenberry wrote:

GrafWattenburg wrote:

 Frankenberry wrote:

2. Darn, you are right about that, it does say from Codex: Astra Militarum :( Oh well, thanks for pointing it out.

However, the Imperial Armour 1 volume 2 entry for thudd guns says:

"A Field Artillery Battery is a Heavy Support choice for a Codex Imperial Guard army".

So if the unit is a choice within the codex and it's not a vehicle I don't see a problem with issuing it orders.

The real abuse of this can come with the the basilisk gun carriages. Cover ignoring ordnance at S9 is pretty deadly.

There is no Codex: Imperial Guard anymore, at least not in 7th, so this doesn't work.

Only the worst, most detestable kind of WAAC fethwit would even try to make a point of that one, so I would not worry about it.

That was pleasant, thanks.

Anyhow, I brought this up purely because I've encountered tournament organizers and various other referee's who do not allow things like this.

 Frankenberry wrote:

That was pleasant, thanks.

Anyhow, I brought this up purely because I've encountered tournament organizers and various other referee's who do not allow things like this.

I was replying to a poster using thudd guns, so his area allows FW.

If your area is not cool with a different approach will be necessary. However I don't anticipate too many tournament organizers that will allow FW units but now allow you to take Imperial units because Codex: Imperial Guard no longer exists.

I've had lots of success with 2 exterminators + MM + LC due to the fact that they can pop anything for 160 pts . I've ran them with the plasmacutioner and somehow just preferred the exterminator to the plasma death ball.

Since I play small games, the tendency for opponents to bring enough AT is quite rare but that could just be the players in my area. This is my 1k list which should be changed to the list below it soon.

1k
HQ
Pask + Vanq + LC (Yes I know it's extremely inefficient to run pask without overloading his tank with guns but I like to play with what I have XD without proxying if able)

Buddy executioner + PC

Troops
Vets + Chimera + ML
Vets + Chimera + ML

Heavy
Exterminator + MM + LC
Exterminator + MM + LC

How I plan to update it in the future
HQ
Vanquisher + MM + LC
Vanquisher + MM + LC

Troops
Vets + Chimera
Vets + Chimera

Heavy support
Exterminator + MM + LC
Exterminator + MM + LC
Wyvern or Hydra depending on how I feel, (obviously Wyvern I think )

Would just drown the enemy in buttloads of AP1-2 guns at 1k points forcing cover. I somehow think that 20 pts for MM sponsons is wayy better than 20 points for 2 meltas on squishy bodies but that is just me.

What do you guys think?

I would agree the multi melta sponsons are better on a russ than guardsmen.

Mainly because 2 MM's on a durable av14 vehicle will probably last longer than guardsmen with melta guns. The meltas are obviously shorter than the MM's, which makes it risky for infantry to go out and harm something with them. Russes (aside from the punisher) are much better at sitting back being surrounded by infantry and other vehicles so the enemy would be smart to come to you or be blasted off the board with the guards mainy big guns, and once they do come close the multi meltas will just add to the tanks ap2 fire power.

PC's aren't a bad option but for dedicated anti tank MM's are preferred. But if you're running lascannon blobs then maybe the PC's on the vanquisher would be better.

bogalubov wrote:

 Frankenberry wrote:

That was pleasant, thanks.

Anyhow, I brought this up purely because I've encountered tournament organizers and various other referee's who do not allow things like this.

I was replying to a poster using thudd guns, so his area allows FW.

If your area is not cool with a different approach will be necessary. However I don't anticipate too many tournament organizers that will allow FW units but now allow you to take Imperial units because Codex: Imperial Guard no longer exists.

Oh I completely agree, I've never considered FW IG to be any different than GW's IG (AM), I was merely playing the devil's advocate.

@meaples: Like the list a lot, might run it myself next game I get.

 tankboy145 wrote:
I would agree the multi melta sponsons are better on a russ than guardsmen.

Mainly because 2 MM's on a durable av14 vehicle will probably last longer than guardsmen with melta guns. The meltas are obviously shorter than the MM's, which makes it risky for infantry to go out and harm something with them. Russes (aside from the punisher) are much better at sitting back being surrounded by infantry and other vehicles so the enemy would be smart to come to you or be blasted off the board with the guards mainy big guns, and once they do come close the multi meltas will just add to the tanks ap2 fire power.

PC's aren't a bad option but for dedicated anti tank MM's are preferred. But if you're running lascannon blobs then maybe the PC's on the vanquisher would be better.

If the Guardsmen are in a transport, you just have to get it close enough and drop them out. With up to 3 Meltas in a 6-man squad, that's quite easy to get in range. The problem is keeping their transport alive ling enough. Valk/Vend?
As for the sponsons, one good Pen and both MMs are out of action.

bogalubov wrote:

 Frankenberry wrote:

2. Darn, you are right about that, it does say from Codex: Astra Militarum :( Oh well, thanks for pointing it out.

However, the Imperial Armour 1 volume 2 entry for thudd guns says:
"A Field Artillery Battery is a Heavy Support choice for a Codex Imperial Guard army".
So if the unit is a choice within the codex and it's not a vehicle I don't see a problem with issuing it orders.
The real abuse of this can come with the the basilisk gun carriages. Cover ignoring ordnance at S9 is pretty deadly.

I just spoke to the TO of the next tournament I'll attend, and he told me I could go ahead and read "Codex: Imperial Guard" from FW-stuff as "Codex: Astra Militarum", anything else would be a pretty big nerf to the guard; everyone else getting their FW stuff but not us due to a name change. I don't have the points for a CCS or Yarrick so I won't be getting the Ignore Cover orders though, not sure if it's worth investing in either. I knew I was allowed to bring the Thudd Guns, but I was just unsure about how the orders would work with the wording, but it seems like I can indeed order my thudd guns around

@Skinnereal - True that the MM sponsons on the Russ will make it a bigger target and a lucky pen could still knock it out clean.

However, with the new vehicle rules in 7th ed, Russes should be able to take a little more fire and are less likely to blow up to lucky hits which may or may not be worth the risk.

When I look at it, the 20 pts is better spent on MM sponsons (if able) compared to the 20 pts spent on the vet meltas due to the extra threat range and the ability to fully utilise the tank's shooting phase. While it is true that the infantry with meltas will be less of a primary threat compared to the russ, the wasted lasgun shots could be used elsewhere to down enemy light infantry or something else. Understandably, lasguns are the worst at doing anything but at least the infantry doesn't have to fire at a 3:7 ratio at a single large target. (This is always debatable however due to the high density of anti heavy infantry weapons available to the vets)

Also, the fact that you don't have heavy AT on your infantry would allow you to be more aggressive in your objective capturing because the opponent has to waste shots to shoot your objective scoring units compared to the russes. At best, I would try to run Demo vets instead of the usual plasma/melta/special wep vets because their roles will be much more defined.

I would still take my rant with a bucket of salt due to the fact that everyone has different tactics with their units but I am slowly moving away from the conventional plasma/melta vets because russes are cheap and we should have moar!

Keeping AM infantry cheap and cheerful seems the way to go for this new codex IMO XD


Automatically Appended Next Post:
On a side note, has anyone here run the infamous AM/IG blob? I was never a blob player so making a blob list is quite new to me. Would strapping 1 pt krak nades on them and send them running like maniacs with a priest head on to the enemy meet with good success?

What do I take in terms of support to deal with crazy stupid heroes that don't die, high toughness but non-MC monsters and AV14 all rounders? Has anyone found an ideal number of squads to combine so it doesn't become too cumbersome to move/ capture stuff?

Are there any obvious pitfalls with blob lists and what allies best suit them?

 Skinnereal wrote:

 tankboy145 wrote:
I would agree the multi melta sponsons are better on a russ than guardsmen.

Mainly because 2 MM's on a durable av14 vehicle will probably last longer than guardsmen with melta guns. The meltas are obviously shorter than the MM's, which makes it risky for infantry to go out and harm something with them. Russes (aside from the punisher) are much better at sitting back being surrounded by infantry and other vehicles so the enemy would be smart to come to you or be blasted off the board with the guards mainy big guns, and once they do come close the multi meltas will just add to the tanks ap2 fire power.

PC's aren't a bad option but for dedicated anti tank MM's are preferred. But if you're running lascannon blobs then maybe the PC's on the vanquisher would be better.

If the Guardsmen are in a transport, you just have to get it close enough and drop them out. With up to 3 Meltas in a 6-man squad, that's quite easy to get in range. The problem is keeping their transport alive ling enough. Valk/Vend?
As for the sponsons, one good Pen and both MMs are out of action.

Actually the hard part with melta vets is getting them in range. The chimera has side 10 armor and if you don't cruise up the board 12" and try to get close enough turn 2 then your opponent will pick off your chimeras. Then to get the melta bonus you need to be in 6" range. Not to mention guardsmen die so easily. And guard charging the opponent isn't exactly a good thing as you sacrifice fire power to charge across the board to get gunned up more.

Where as with the russ you can sit back and do damage and continuously fire down range and as the enemy gets closer your fire power gets stronger with the more weapons you can fire.

And of course a lucky pen with take out the russ but that is extremely hard to do against av14 which the enemy also needs ap1-2 just do blow it up. But on another note the enemy can use any weapon in the game and gun down a fragile guard squad. Also once their transport dies almost half the squad will die.

meaples wrote:
@Skinnereal - True that the MM sponsons on the Russ will make it a bigger target and a lucky pen could still knock it out clean.

However, with the new vehicle rules in 7th ed, Russes should be able to take a little more fire and are less likely to blow up to lucky hits which may or may not be worth the risk.

When I look at it, the 20 pts is better spent on MM sponsons (if able) compared to the 20 pts spent on the vet meltas due to the extra threat range and the ability to fully utilise the tank's shooting phase. While it is true that the infantry with meltas will be less of a primary threat compared to the russ, the wasted lasgun shots could be used elsewhere to down enemy light infantry or something else. Understandably, lasguns are the worst at doing anything but at least the infantry doesn't have to fire at a 3:7 ratio at a single large target. (This is always debatable however due to the high density of anti heavy infantry weapons available to the vets)

Also, the fact that you don't have heavy AT on your infantry would allow you to be more aggressive in your objective capturing because the opponent has to waste shots to shoot your objective scoring units compared to the russes. At best, I would try to run Demo vets instead of the usual plasma/melta/special wep vets because their roles will be much more defined.

I would still take my rant with a bucket of salt due to the fact that everyone has different tactics with their units but I am slowly moving away from the conventional plasma/melta vets because russes are cheap and we should have moar!

Keeping AM infantry cheap and cheerful seems the way to go for this new codex IMO XD


Automatically Appended Next Post:
On a side note, has anyone here run the infamous AM/IG blob? I was never a blob player so making a blob list is quite new to me. Would strapping 1 pt krak nades on them and send them running like maniacs with a priest head on to the enemy meet with good success?

What do I take in terms of support to deal with crazy stupid heroes that don't die, high toughness but non-MC monsters and AV14 all rounders? Has anyone found an ideal number of squads to combine so it doesn't become too cumbersome to move/ capture stuff?

Are there any obvious pitfalls with blob lists and what allies best suit them?

As far as the blobs go, I've never run them with the intention of anti-tank duties so I can't really say. I mean I'm sure if you throw enough grenades you could do it, but I think you can give the sergeants melta bombs (could be wrong here as I never bother). My blobs are generally a commissar with a PW for those unwieldy guys, a priest to buff the whole thing into insanity, sergeants with power axes, and meltas (one per 'squad' for a total of four, generally). With 36 las rifles, power axes for 2+ers, commissar to kill really scary stuff, and a priest the blob turns into a rolling ball of death.

So, first big tournament in 7th is over. Bay Area Open. Well, the good news is, that Guard is still quite a popular army. The bad news is, that our army had the worst win rate in the whole tournament (just under 30%).

There is article about the results on "torrent of fire" site, but I can only say that the future is not looking good for Guard...

We will see how the ETC and ESC turn out, but I would not expect much.

I doubt that is a good representation of guards potential. Considering the ETC team took two blob guard lists I doubt guard are as bad as people are making out.

I think guards biggest problem is that they are great allies, to the point where it is hard to justify making them your main.

Leth, you are right. One tournament is not a good enough to make a statement like "guard is the worst", but it is enough to presume guard will not perform good over next tournaments and it is enought to say that guard is among the worst armies SO FAR.

This game is full of random things which could be the reason for good or bad outcome in one tournament, but not this bad. There were 9 guard players, they battled in 5 rounds. And they lost and lost and kept losing...I dont think this is only the result of bad luck. This clearly means that guard is outperformed by codices like eldar, tau, daemons, necrons or space marines and it also means we should not expect much from IG results in ETC as well.

btw. Only two players from over a hundred took guard as an ally. I dont think its such a good ally after all.

Was there any actual reason they where losing?

Id love to see a breakdown of there games.

 Desubot wrote:


Id love to see a breakdown of there games.

Me to, but since we did not see any article of that kind to this day, we will probably not see it at all.

One of the things which has been mentioned is that guard is too slow - BAO used combined eternal war with maelstrom of war missions and a lot of those missions require mobility and MSU. Guard is anything but mobile....

 Lothar wrote:
Leth, you are right. One tournament is not a good enough to make a statement like "guard is the worst", but it is enough to presume guard will not perform good over next tournaments and it is enought to say that guard is among the worst armies SO FAR.

This game is full of random things which could be the reason for good or bad outcome in one tournament, but not this bad. There were 9 guard players, they battled in 5 rounds. And they lost and lost and kept losing...I dont think this is only the result of bad luck. This clearly means that guard is outperformed by codices like eldar, tau, daemons, necrons or space marines and it also means we should not expect much from IG results in ETC as well.

btw. Only two players from over a hundred took guard as an ally. I dont think its such a good ally after all.

I could also argue that Team America took one guard main and one allied guard.

In addition almost every team has a blob guard on it.

I think guard are very strong and I have done pretty well with them as my allies(dont have enough kriegers to run them as main......yet). However I think that as with everything imperial you need to take advantage of your allies to be a strong competitor.

Keep in mind that IG was the last codex released before the tourney. I'm not ready to freak out just yet.

That said, our mediocre elites and fast attack slots are going to be major liabilities in 7th. We don't have the hard punching units to assassinate enemy warlords or blunt an enemy assault. And the 10 rear armor on Leman Russes is a huge liability against assault units, my entire tank commander squad goes up in smoke to krak or melta assaults (bye 300+ points).

However, with the new vehicle damage table, I think chimeras and cheap armored sentinels will play well in mass hull point lists. It's easy for an enemy to bust a single leman russ squad, but it's much harder to deal with a horde of AV 12. And even when they wreck my chimeras, my vets pop out with a heavy flamer and plasma guns to decimate the offending unit.