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 haven't seen constant nerd rage filling every thread constantly about it, which is normally how I get my news about what the community thinks of things in 40k.

Rather than kneejerking and trying to assess the matter as the codex dropped, I wanted to give myself a few months of testing it. I find it lackluster. Points are maneuvered around such that some things got stupidly expensive, while others got a little cheaper. A bunch of new gimmicks added. Half the options of the old codex removed.

I'm a little jaded, as the premise of my army was invalidated with the removal of Al'rahem, but I think I'd rather play in the old codex than this one. Do people honestly like the it? Has it been doing well?

It's pretty decent. It isn't the shining jewel that is Codex Imperial Guard 5th edition.

GW might add back some of the things the Codex lost in 6th with supplements and Forge World Books.

By GW standards count yourself lucky you could play SOB or play Blood Angels.

If you want to bring back something there's always homebrew.

It certainly lost some flavor by losing Al Rahem, Chenkov, Khan, penal legion, and the various artillery pieces. For all the worry over the loss of the medusa, griffon, etc. everyone seems to have gotten over that. Those units were useful, but ultimately redundant.

Veterans and doctrines became much more accessible, we now have much easier access to psykers, commissars, and priests. Scions are a much better choice than storm troopers because they're so much cheaper. Conscripts are dirt cheap and a ton of fun. Wyverns are a pain to use but are extremely undercosted.

There are some scratch-your-head moments, like the complete nerf to Sgt Harker without any drop in points, rough riders completely unchanged, wyrdvanes and primaris psykers with no special options or wargear. It's hard to justify the hellhound now that the eradicator is the same price, and the Devil Dog/Bane Wolf just aren't worth the points. The taurox is the weirdest addition, a 50 point model that costs $50...? Twin-linked autocannon is nice, and free dozer blade, but I already have four chimeras and they do their job just fine.

I'll admit that the army feels a bit more vanilla in this edition, without the characters, penal legions, or the specialist artillery. On the other hand we can now run serious armored companies, and despite what folks say I think all the Leman Russ variants are great choices. I field demolishers every game and never regret it. The LRBT prolly could've used a 10 point drop, but nbd. I expect we'll probably see some data slates or codices along the lines of Militarum Tempestus or the old Catachan codex.

Powerful (Especially as a member of Codex: Imperium) but extremely bland.

daedalus wrote:Points are maneuvered around such that some things got stupidly expensive,

Other than fliers (which were stupidly cheap), what got stupidly expensive? Everything I've used got cheaper or stayed the same, like most of the codex.

daedalus wrote:while others got a little cheaper.

Or a lot, in the case of russes and HQ advisers of various sorts.

daedalus wrote: Half the options of the old codex removed.

Half? Half?

There were an awful lot of options in the old codex. Penal Legion, Colossus, and Medusa is only half if there were 6 things in the codex before. Most of the loss was in special characters, and not all of them were really played at all (khan and bastonne, for example).

Yes, the loss of al'rahem and to a lesser extent chenkov were real losses, but that's two real losses. Out of nearly 40 units. Meanwhile, they added a new type of ogryn, and tank commanders, and a new transport.

daedalus wrote:I'm a little jaded, as the premise of my army was invalidated with the removal of Al'rahem

If that's your main problem, then keep playing him anyways. If you feel guilty about it, then just add a bunch of points as a premium. I can't imagine that anyone would complain if you spent 100 points on a single guardsman.

In any case, I wouldn't judge the entire codex by just them getting rid of one special character you liked.

It was a bit of a sideways move. Some character was lost but the power level increased a little. Still too many WTF moments in it though. I love how sentinels are viable now.

People didn't complain about the AM codex like they did with the Tyranids codex because it was handled a lot better.

The Tyranid codex went from bad to worse with its new codex, it's only saving grace being the dataslates released thereafter,. Tthe Guard went sideways instead of up or down, losing a bunch of options no one really ever used in a competitive setting anyway and receiving a nerf to the Vandetta, whilst gaining prescience everywhere, better tanks (with tank commands and super-Pask), and cheaper everything.

my forest world army does not use tracked vehicles so i can only use sentinels and valkyries as vehicles for my fluff.

I NEED outflank or the infiltrate warlord traits unless i want to run a 100% aircav list.

al raheim would have been so useful for me, but now i need to rely on the dice in order for my fluffy army to be viable.

The new style of Codex since Tyranids and through Orks it seems is to strip them down to very vanilla releases; very cut and dry. Tyranids is still lackluster and lost major ways to play. Imperial Guard lost a ton of flavor (and my favorite special character) but remains good, from my view point. Orks lost a lot of different ways to play and got some really dumb changes (Gaz as a LOW, no invulns in close combat, no FOC tricks, etc.).

Basically assume you're going to get a really bland book and extra spice may come down the road in the form of a $15 ~ $50 add-on.

It seems bland but decent is the best an army can get.

Which is weird when you consider how utterly amazing the Tau, Eldar, Daemons and Space Marine codices were.

At this point, I've basically given up on trying to see any real pattern with the codices. Their quality seems to be a crap shoot.

 Ailaros wrote:

daedalus wrote:Points are maneuvered around such that some things got stupidly expensive,

Other than fliers (which were stupidly cheap), what got stupidly expensive? Everything I've used got cheaper or stayed the same, like most of the codex.

Chimeras also got a hike. 10 points isn't much, but on something that's a staple to an army, it's adds up quickly. Granted, vets got cheaper, but it hurt mech platoons quite a bit. In an age of "everything" (Space Marines) getting cheaper, it's a little disheartening to see the same list you used to play become too expensive to use at the same point level. I feel like the fact that they're more expensive with dubious improvements makes hybrid even harder to justify than it used to be.

daedalus wrote:while others got a little cheaper.

Or a lot, in the case of russes and HQ advisers of various sorts.

Russes got cheaper, and being a treadhead, it feels weird to say, but I don't feel like they alone carry an army. Unbound armies of nothing but tanks are somewhat fun though.

I suppose, yes, the vendetta was the thing I was tapdancing around actually complaining about. It was too good in 5th, admittedly, but with it not being able to start on the table, I think 170 is too much of a kneejerk, especially with the reduced transport capacity. I think 150 would have been reasonable.

daedalus wrote: Half the options of the old codex removed.

Half? Half?

There were an awful lot of options in the old codex. Penal Legion, Colossus, and Medusa is only half if there were 6 things in the codex before. Most of the loss was in special characters, and not all of them were really played at all (khan and bastonne, for example).

Yes, the loss of al'rahem and to a lesser extent chenkov were real losses, but that's two real losses. Out of nearly 40 units. Meanwhile, they added a new type of ogryn, and tank commanders, and a new transport.

The griffon was removed as well, and the hydra may as well not be in the army anymore. I do exaggerate though. But what of the new things added was actually useful? I mean, there's the mortar tank everyone raves about, but infantry isn't really anything I recall having an issue killing. I see Bulgryn being an interesting shield for foot guard, but can anyone actually afford the points to bring them? Other than that, removing good options and adding dubious ones is not really an improvement. Tempestus are kind of cool, but the fact that you have to take a minimum of two squads of them is annoying, and they don't get their cool special abilities anymore.

daedalus wrote:I'm a little jaded, as the premise of my army was invalidated with the removal of Al'rahem

If that's your main problem, then keep playing him anyways. If you feel guilty about it, then just add a bunch of points as a premium. I can't imagine that anyone would complain if you spent 100 points on a single guardsman.

In any case, I wouldn't judge the entire codex by just them getting rid of one special character you liked.

That's an interesting thought, and I'm sure the guys I play with at my apartment would go for it, but I don't see the idea going far in the league I play in. At any rate, I don't like having one of the major ways I would like to play handcuffed to my opponents whimsy.

I mean, I'm not jumping out there and saying "OMG IG ARE USELESS!". It seems like it's probably as good of a codex as it was before, but I look at the treatment that SM/Tau/Eldar got, and I can't help but feel a little let down. Most of the advisers seem like you really need a foot list to make sense of them, since priests don't make sense inside a vehicle and you can't have psykers bless things inside a vehicle. Mech took a heavy hit in that regard. Also, unless I'm critically misunderstanding the cover rules, you don't really get it unless you're obscured or in ruins. That is, area terrain doesn't really exist anymore, and that was a lot of what we play on. Maybe I need to make more terrain. I feel like foot gunlines got hurt because of that. Some of those complaints are about the rules, not the codex, but since the codex was clearly made with some idea of 7th coming, I feel they should be lumped together.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I just made the list I played earlier today per the 5th edition costs, and the 7th edition version is about 70 points cheaper. Not a massive leap, but not terrible either.

The points aren't all of it though. It's just lackluster in options and flavor.

daedalus wrote: I look at the treatment that SM/Tau/Eldar got, and I can't help but feel a little let down.

Oh, come on, did you REALLY want guard to be filled with overpowered cheese? I would much rather get a side-grade than to have to deal with what tau players have to put up with.

I like the new codex a lot. I play full infantry with no armor and the new codex made this build so much better.

1) Orders are beast. With Creed, you have 33.3% chance of getting a 4th order. All re-rollable. Potentially getting 4 units with Ignores Cover (which is the best order IMO, most of the time for gunline shooting).
2) Gunline Vets got 10 point cheaper, and have access to doctrines for a lot less. That means that for 125 pts you get a vet squad with 3 plasma guns, 1 AC and a 3+ cover save behind ADL, that has Ignores Cover almost every turn.
3) 50 Fearless Conscripts for 175 pts? Sign me up. Priests at 25 pts make your 150 pt conscript blob zealot. Or throw a commissar or inquisitor if you want them stubborn instead.
4) Power blobs got the biggest nerf with a 5 pt increase to power axes. But those 25 pts in a 50 man powerblob is easily balanced out with the access to 25 pt priests.

I have to add a "not impressed" vote here. The new things don't make up for the stuff that was removed, the fluff section got shorter, and the best thing that happened was a major nerf to a unit. Sure, the Griffon and characters might not have been the most popular tournament choices, but the Taurox and new Ogryns aren't anything to get excited about either. And the worst part is how random some of the nerfs are. Did plasma pistols, an option that most people already considered too expensive to take in a serious list, really need a cost increase and a limit of one per model? Did GW miss the fact that hardly anyone was using Hydras when they decided to give them a major nerf to go along with the new model? Even if IG win games with the new codex it's just disappointing that we didn't get a better one.

I haven't seen constant nerd rage filling every thread constantly about it, which is normally how I get my news about what the community thinks of things in 40k.

That's because it's not really rage-inspiringly bad. Your title is correct, it's just undewhelming. It wasn't the end of the world like some of the early rumors suggested, but if GW had skipped IG completely and left us with the 5th edition codex for a few more years I don't think many people would have cared. All that really happened is that we got an opportunity to spend another $50 to keep playing.

 Ailaros wrote:

daedalus wrote: I look at the treatment that SM/Tau/Eldar got, and I can't help but feel a little let down.

Oh, come on, did you REALLY want guard to be filled with overpowered cheese? I would much rather get a side-grade than to have to deal with what tau players have to put up with.

Space Marines are filled with overpowered cheese? wut?

Space Marines got a decent codex in a number of ways - imo substantially better than IG. The addition of chapter tactics is pretty huge for customizing your army and something IG were long asking for to replace the doctrine system. The addition of Black Templars into it also improved the quantity and value. Most choices in the SM 'dex are close to average which is a good thing, the IG 'dex still has poor internal balance, though as mentioned the one standout unit (vendetta) was nerfed roughly appropriately. There's still bad units no one wanting to play competitively will take. The removal of IG stuff was unnecessary and the addition unasked for. The fluff was nothing special, if it was changed much at all.

It wasn't *bad* unlike Tyranids, but it should be *good* to warrant a new codex.

A few posters have covered my thoughts on the book already. Bland is a good word. A combination of losing a bunch of characters, arty units, fluff, and some random changes didn't really cut it for me.

I do miss eviscerators on my priests, especially since they did get better.

I don't know, it just doesn't have any soul when I flip through it or make lists.

I'm just waiting for FW to updates its Armoured Company list for 7th.

I heard the codex was a little bland, and they got rid of the Griffon, that was all the info I needed to not buy it. I like my Griffons too much to not use them.

Aye maybe a little underwealmed. I like a lot of what we got - dirt-cheap russes, cheap veterans cheap priests and psychers, better stormtroopers. But there was no fizz there, no excitement. I was really, really hoping for regimental doctrines in the IG book and we didnd't get them...meh. Hopefully we'll get some supplemental love.

I think they made the book vanilla for a reason just like they did with the regular Space Marine codex. A lot of the flavorful chapters: either have their own codexes or have come out in supplements & I can see the Imperial Guard getting the same treatment. A little bland it may be but I personally think being able to take anywhere between x8 to x12 armor 14 tanks, access to fearless infantry thanks to priests and cheaper veterans and doctrines to be a huge bonus. I personally play with Elysian Drop Troops out of a Forgeworld book so this doesn't affect me as much but from what I've seen the Astra Militarum book is quite strong in this edition.

Making the codex bland in order to up-sell supplements is *not* a good thing, though yes I agree that's been a big part of the problem with codices since they started those shenanigans. Also a big part of why many have stopped buying their books.

 gmaleron wrote:
I think they made the book vanilla for a reason just like they did with the regular Space Marine codex. A lot of the flavorful chapters: either have their own codexes or have come out in supplements & I can see the Imperial Guard getting the same treatment. A little bland it may be but I personally think being able to take anywhere between x8 to x12 armor 14 tanks, access to fearless infantry thanks to priests and cheaper veterans and doctrines to be a huge bonus. I personally play with Elysian Drop Troops out of a Forgeworld book so this doesn't affect me as much but from what I've seen the Astra Militarum book is quite strong in this edition.

And yet, we have seen no supplements.
Militarum Tempestus can be billed as one or not, depending on how you take it.

However the thing that really underwhelmed me about AM?
They still have not returned Grenadiers Doctrine to have Hellguns as their weapon instead of Lasguns.

I think the AM get ignored somewhat because they had very little that changed between the 5th and 6th book. It is one of the top books out there, likely able to blow Tau off the table if properly fielded.

Blob squads got even better and are virtually unkillable in CC, meaning the army can pound you to bits on the way in, Sabre Turret anything you have flying around (or just use vendetta) and if you try to get in close, blob squads will shoot you full of plasma then assault you or just let you stumble into them and die.

Only things of real concern are the huge point hike on vendetta (necessary really) and the baffling lack of point reduction for leman russ with battle cannon and demolishers (both pretty garbage choices).

So if by underwhelming you mean more of the same plus a little bit better, then yes.

 Kanluwen wrote:
And yet, we have seen no supplements.
Militarum Tempestus can be billed as one or not, depending on how you take it.

Despite my dislike of the supplements available so far, I've not been moved to buy any of them.
But, the amount of the IG they culled, it's past due for them to be re-released somehow.

I don't even know if I'd buy any of the theoretical supplements they could release to bring back some of the characters/units. I don't want to reward GW for cutting content and re-releasing in a separate book.

I'd consider it if it was a Mordian supplement with a dozen characters/units and dozens of pages of all original, new fluff and artwork. Even then, I probably wouldn't pay what they'd ask for something like that.

 Skinnereal wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
And yet, we have seen no supplements.
Militarum Tempestus can be billed as one or not, depending on how you take it.

Despite my dislike of the supplements available so far, I've not been moved to buy any of them.
But, the amount of the IG they culled, it's past due for them to be re-released somehow.

Was there really that much of value that was culled? I can't find a huge amount that makes me want a supplement.

Given the supplements we've had I'm not sure we really want them tbh. Crimson Slaughter and Black Legion, both of which had what, a warlord table, some new relics and a couple special rules? The SM supplements seemed similar and were for chapters in the SM 'dex already. Supplements would be a golden opportunity to give us something new and great but GW refuses to do it.

If we're going to see supplements, then we're going to see them like Waagh! Ghazghkull.

That means a mandatory Relic table, an optional FOC with special rules, an optional Warlord table, a bunch of Datasheet formations, and new Echoes of War/Altar of War missions.

If we see that, I hope GW doesn't see a dime.