How could they fix the Astra militarum with a new codex?

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.

**Kanluwen**

Furyou Miko wrote:
The only problem I have with the Astra Militarum name is that it shortens to AM, so we have to call the real AM the AdMech all the time.

Good thing the two AdMech books are Cult Mechanicus(CM) and Skitarii

vipoid wrote:Protect it against what exactly? Were they afraid some other company was going to make a competing IG codex?

There has never been concern about "competing" codices, but there were concerns raised over the ability for companies to make parts or kits utilizing the name of the faction.

**Vaktathi**

vipoid wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

As opposed to all the Space Marine books now saying "Adeptus Astartes"?

No, those are equally pretentious.

It's also one thing for the SM stuff to be pretentious, that's part of their whole schtick. They're always written with a degree of pretentiousness in their fluff. It's just not really as appropriate for the IG.

**Kanluwen**

Vaktathi wrote:
vipoid wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

As opposed to all the Space Marine books now saying "Adeptus Astartes"?

No, those are equally pretentious.
It's also one thing for the SM stuff to be pretentious, that's part of their whole schtick. They're always written with a degree of pretentiousness in their fluff. It's just not really as appropriate for the IG.

Honestly, it really is.

"Astra Militarum" is just as easy to accept as the High Gothic, Lords of Terra nomenclature for the Imperial Guard as "Adeptus Astartes" is for the Space Marines.

The fact that people got their knickers in such a twist over a name change that effectively doesn't matter is mind-boggling to me.

**Lord Corellia**

Kanluwen wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
vipoid wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

As opposed to all the Space Marine books now saying "Adeptus Astartes"?

No, those are equally pretentious.
It's also one thing for the SM stuff to be pretentious, that's part of their whole schtick. They're always written with a degree of pretentiousness in their fluff. It's just not really as appropriate for the IG.

Honestly, it really is.

"Astra Militarum" is just as easy to accept as the High Gothic, Lords of Terra nomenclature for the Imperial Guard as "Adeptus Astartes" is for the Space Marines.

The fact that people got their knickers in such a twist over a name change that effectively doesn't matter is mind-boggling to me.

"Adeptus Astartes" has been a pseudonym for Space Marines for a long time though. I don't recall ever hearing the name "Astra Militarium" until the book came out...

It just falls under the whole thing of GW not remembering to have fun with their own game and taking it, and themselves, far too seriously.

**Vaktathi**

Not sure what to say, be boggled I guess

.

A lot of people just don't find it appropriate to the faction. It came out of nowhere, while other factions also had longstanding Faux-latin going back to RT or 2E, the Imperial Guard itself was never referred to that way.

It sounds significantly sillier to me at least than any of the other faux-latin names, and, possibly even more critically, its introduction felt extremely hamfisted and forced.

I mean, they could have at least have gone with existing background material and gone with something like "Legions Munitorum" or something like that.

**Engine of War**

More Tanks.

Bring back ALL cut artillery (Medusa, Colossus, Gryphon). Keep Wyvern. Basilisk is obviously a main stay.

Integrate Forge World Leman Russ variants. (Annihilator, Conqueror, Laser Destroyer, Thunderer, etc).

Allow for 30k Leman Russ variants but have a rule similar to the 30k Knights where you can only have a maximum of 1 or 2 due to sheer rarity. ( I think the rule goes like you can only have 1 per squad of 3. Like every 2 more common tanks there can be 1 30k tank. I can't remember the rule exactly)

Hydra gets Interceptor, Skyfire, Auto Targeting Computer (ignores jink saves and the like, if I remember the rule right). Also the ability to fire at ground targets with normal BS.

Death Strike is a ST D strike with the biggest blast possible.

A full squadron of Basiliks (3 units) can unleash a St 9 ap 3 no cover, 10 inch blast. If even one of the trio of basilisks cannot fire (shaken, stunned, dead, etc) then you cannot fire the blast. Only Basilisks of the same squadron can fire it.

Reduce Tempestus Points. across the board. AP3 is nice and all but isn't quite enough for SM grade points cost.

Make the Taruox worth while. Not sure how, maybe make it Fast or something standard. I dunno...

Fuse the Tempestus and IG books.

FW aircraft (vulture, lightning, avenger, thunderbolt, etc) are added. Valk and Vendetta are fused back together and is just a points conversion rather than separate vehicles.

A malcador or Macharuis can be taken as a Heavy support option. Only a single malcador per HS spot and only 1 Macharius (non-LOW) can be taken per FOC.
Baneblades are still LOW due to sheer size and firepower. Macharius has much less firepower than a Baneblade.

Allow Rough Riders to hit at ST 8 and/or additional special weapons. Also make them move much faster. perhaps if they move in a straight line they can move additional inches so perhaps they can get to places they need to be. With several ST 8 hits (less than the Iron striders) they could possibly do damage to armor and infantry. They could be more jack of trades master of none than the Ironstrider.

hmmmm.

Im sure there are several things to reduce the price or change things around.

**JohnHwangDD**

Why are so many IG players afraid of giving IG their Baneblades, Shadowswords and other variants?

None of them are broken in the slightest, especially at current points.

Are people afraid that IG might be able to use them to do something cool?

**vipoid**

Lord Corellia wrote:

"Adeptus Astartes" has been a pseudonym for Space Marines for a long time though. I don't recall ever hearing the name "Astra Militarium" until the book came out...

It just falls under the whole thing of GW not remembering to have fun with their own game and taking it, and themselves, far too seriously.

The other thing is that AM doesn't seem to fit with anything inside the IG book - in terms of fluff, names of vehicles, names of officers etc.

JohnHwangDD wrote:
Why are so many IG players afraid of giving IG their Baneblades, Shadowswords and other variants?

Because those things belong in Apocalypse?

**gmaleron**

vipoid wrote:
Lord Corellia wrote:
Why are so many IG players afraid of giving IG their Baneblades, Shadowswords and other variants?

Because those things belong in Apocalypse?

They are already available in 40k as a LoW choice so they don't belong in Apocalypse anymore, especially with how the games changed.

**vipoid**

gmaleron wrote:
vipoid wrote:
Lord Corellia wrote:
Why are so many IG players afraid of giving IG their Baneblades, Shadowswords and other variants?

Because those things belong in Apocalypse?

They are already available in 40k as a LoW choice so they don't belong in Apocalypse anymore, especially with how the games changed.

Excuse me while I contact the Oxford English Dictionary and notify them that 'belong' has now been redefined to mean 'ham-handedly shoehorned in'.

**Commissar Benny**

Vaktathi wrote:
snip

Probably the best summary I have seen to date Vaktathi. Thanks for putting that together. Its crazy how long so many of these issues have carried over from codex to codex over the years & still haven't been addressed.

Like, when the heck are we ever going to get some viable elite choices? My Steel Legion stormtroopers have been collecting dust forever now because I refuse to pay SM point costs for guardsman equivalent models. Considering stormtroopers are supposed to be the best of the best (Minus SM/SoB), why is their Ld as low as normal Guardsman Sgt? Why are they not capable of capturing points?

Why does GW insist on making rough riders so damn terrible? Units with basically 0 survivability & a 1 time use AP3 power lance is terrible for their cost. If they made their power lances AP2 I could at the very least justify taking them to counter charge termies/mega-armored nobs in melee.

Chimera/taurox either need some big points reductions or some better survivability. Cannot justify their current point cost.

Pretty much all of the IG HQ heroes are drastically overpriced.

**tilarium**

Biggest things for me (that I didn't see mentioned already):

Individual or two man sniper units. Ratlings don't cut it.
A unit like Schaffers Last Chancers, where we can split it into smaller sub-units. (This is how I used to get my snipers).
Bring back different officers like before (junior, senior, heroic)
Bring back more options for RR and stop forcing me to take those damned lances! I want to use my shotgun riders again.

**Anpu42**

tilarium wrote:
Biggest things for me (that I didn't see mentioned already):

Individual or two man sniper units. Ratlings don't cut it.
A unit like Schaffers Last Chancers, where we can split it into smaller sub-units. (This is how I used to get my snipers).
Bring back different officers like before (junior, senior, heroic)
Bring back more options for RR and stop forcing me to take those damned lances! I want to use my shotgun riders again.

Or twin Las Pistols.

**JohnHwangDD**

vipoid wrote:
JohnHwangDD wrote:
Why are so many IG players afraid of giving IG their Baneblades, Shadowswords and other variants?

Because those things belong in Apocalypse?

Apocalypse is now 40k, so they belong in regular 40k games.

If you don't want to field them, that's your business, but stop blocking those of us who own them and want to play them against Knights and the coming tide of GCs.

As for 11-pt Rough Riders, I think it's good to compare them with a 5-pt Hormaguant, to ask whether they are more than 2x as good. The answer is no. Yes, they RR's generally out-stat Hormas by dint of more wargear, but not as much as the points might lead one to believe. I3 is much worse than I5, and lacking Synapse doesn't address the Ld issue. Current stats are probably worth 7 points, max 8.

**vipoid**

Please see my above comment.

**Dakkamite**

Just ally in death korps of krieg if you want good rough riders. HQ + Troop tax and then like six units in the allied fast attack slot. These monsters have 2W and FNP for a modest price increase - 2W is the minimum for a non-transported assault unit IMO

**JohnHwangDD**

W1 is fine, if the unit is cheap enough. Thought exercise - if RRs were only 3-4 pts per model, would people take them? Wouldn't that level of cheapness make them automatically good?

**Blacksails**

JohnHwangDD wrote:
W1 is fine, if the unit is cheap enough. Thought exercise - if RRs were only 3-4 pts per model, would people take them? Wouldn't that level of cheapness make them automatically good?

Not really. It just makes them cheap, but still fails to address the real reason no one takes them.

They have no role. No purpose. No raison d'etre. Currently, they're expensive, fast Guardsmen with a one shot melee weapon and the potential for two special weapons at BS3. They're ideally suited for dealing with MEQ, but the codex is filled to the brim with anti-meq weaponry, and MEQ isn't exactly difficult to kill these days anyways given the gradual power creep that minimizes armour utility.

The lances are one shot, so your squad is almost suicidal in that they have to kill their target/damage it greatly so that it doesn't hurt them in return. They don't have enough punch against 2+ saves, lack the strength to deal with MCs, don't have enough attacks for hordes, and lack any sort of durability to stay in a fight, coupled with middling leadership and few ways to buff them reasonably within the codex through an attached mounted character.

Rough riders suck (and would continue to suck at 3-4ppm) because they don't do anything in the codex not already done three times over in more synergistic packages.

Rough riders need a combination of a few things;

-Durability: If they're going to be even remotely assault oriented, they need something more than T3 5+; 2W is reasonable, and so would T4 for the mount, and/or a FnP or Invuln save, all of which have appeared in some combination on some sort of RR variant.

-Firepower: Either assault or shooting, they need to be tooled to do something effectively. I'd love for them to be either an assault variant, or shooty variant, where you either get lances (infinite uses, but only on charge) and pistol + ccw and hit and run, or lasrifles/carbines and three special weapon slots, so that they're more like vets, but on horses.

-Cost: A price reduction would help them a lot in combination with other boosts. Paying 7-8ppm for a mounted Guardsmen is much more reasonable.

-Squad size and slot: As a part of their role, they'd also need some help in basic army construction. Having a 10-man squad size max in the FA slot with no other formation (outside of DKOK) to boost them really hurts. Turning them into mounted platoons with a mounted command squad and mounted commissars and priests would allows them to be a more expensive, but more mobile Guard platoon, similar to other codices with their bike variants.

TL;DR: A severe points reduction alone just makes them cheap Guard with no benefits of being cheap Guard (heavy weapon Ob Sec campers with leadership and other buffs via IC/Chars. Make RR either an elite durable assault unit, or turn them into mounted Guard platoon.

**JohnHwangDD**

My understanding is that RR are more for theme than anything else. At 3 pts, RR gain durability and impact via sheer horde volume.

As far as changes go, I'm OK with a T4 or W2 "fix", but I'm not sure that making them marginally harder to kill makes that much difference. The Power Lances should work on every charge, and they should continue to have broad Special Weapons access. I agree that 8 pts would be fair if modified as above. I don't want them to be forced into a platoon where I'm required to take 5+10+10 minimum to field any; however, I would be OK with a RR Formation if/when the RRs get converted to plastic.

Note that most of this argument also goes with Ratlings and Ogryns. Which is fine, as these are all non-Core auxiliaries.

**Kanluwen**

Rough Riders aren't even for "theme". They're just holdouts.

When the most recent Guard book dropped, they were still available from the webstores. They aren't anymore--and I really hope they don't come back.

**vipoid**

A part of me would like to see motorcycle-riding RRs - though perhaps shooty-focussed rather than melee-focussed.

And it has nothing whatsoever to do with my dubious theme army.

(Hail Hydra!)

**Blacksails**

How you model RRs is up to you, and the rules would work fine as them being on horses or motorcycles. I plan on my RRs eventually being on bikes when Vic releases her take on them.

I'd like for some sort of fast, non vehicle mounted infantry option. Most every faction has access to some sort of 'mounted' version, whether on normal bikes or jet bikes, and I feel Guard could benefit from that type of unit if it was properly implemented.

**vipoid**

Blacksails wrote:
How you model RRs is up to you, and the rules would work fine as them being on horses or motorcycles. I plan on my RRs eventually being on bikes when Vic releases her take on them.

I'm aware of that - but that doesn't help if I want a shooting focus.

**Blacksails**

vipoid wrote:

I'm aware of that - but that doesn't help if I want a shooting focus.

Oh, I agree. I'd love for a variant with a bunch of carbines and an extra special weapon slot.

Extra bonus to make them vets with BS4.

*Drool*

**JohnHwangDD**

RRs can take 2 Specials from 5 dudes - that's not a bad ratio.

A 65-pt min-size RR unit with 2 GLs can probably lob grenades all game long, and very likely earn its points back with interest.

**Vaktathi**

I'd love to see a bike mounted IG unit. I'm not a huge fan of the idea of Cavalry in a game with automatic weapons anyway for most things (daemons and stuff you can kinda give a pass on for being supernatural in the first place).

Bike mounted units have a lot of potential.

**TheSilo**

Blacksails wrote:
vipoid wrote:

I'm aware of that - but that doesn't help if I want a shooting focus.

Oh, I agree. I'd love for a variant with a bunch of carbines and an extra special weapon slot.

Extra bonus to make them vets with BS4.

*Drool*

Or make them a doctrine upgrade that you apply to veterans.

**Blacksails**

JohnHwangDD wrote:
RRs can take 2 Specials from 5 dudes - that's not a bad ratio.

A 65-pt min-size RR unit with 2 GLs can probably lob grenades all game long, and very likely earn its points back with interest.

The same unit is a stiff breeze away from dying, and two grenade shots are hardly killing a single marine per round.

Again, this comes back to the fact they have no defined purpose. They're expensive Guardsmen that hit a little harder in assault against the same targets the book already excels at killing at range where you don't have to worry about the enemy's assault phase.

At least 2x melta can go tank hunting, but BS3 keeps you pretty limited in that regard.

**Kanluwen**

Vaktathi wrote:
I'd love to see a bike mounted IG unit. I'm not a huge fan of the idea of Cavalry in a game with automatic weapons anyway for most things (daemons and stuff you can kinda give a pass on for being supernatural in the first place).

Bike mounted units have a lot of potential.

They have as much "potential" as cavalry that isn't Daemons.

Which is to say, none unless they're Astartes or Eldar.

**Vaktathi**

Kanluwen wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
I'd love to see a bike mounted IG unit. I'm not a huge fan of the idea of Cavalry in a game with automatic weapons anyway for most things (daemons and stuff you can kinda give a pass on for being supernatural in the first place).

Bike mounted units have a lot of potential.

They have as much "potential" as cavalry that isn't Daemons.

Which is to say, none unless they're Astartes or Eldar.

Bikes at least get higher T, relentless shooting, Jink, and aren't slowed (but can be hurt by) terrain, and generally have higher armor saves. Far more benefits than "cavalry" get, particularly for a place in a shooty army like IG. I think they'd work a whole lot better in the context of the army than a "cavalry" type unit would. Something like a C&C Nod bike (armored crotch rocket with TOW missiles on the sides) could be very cool.

That said, in general, the "Bike" rules really are 40k's way of portraying "knight" type armored cavalry much more than actual "cavalry" units are.