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.

 Hoyt wrote:

 morganfreeman wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:


Whilst we are here the Earthshaker cannon on the Basilisk needs to be able to fire directly again. Or at least reduce the minimal range down to 12". 36" - otherwise known as half the length ways board - is way to far for a minimal range. And drop the price on them too.

Wait, earthshakers can't fire directly? Where's that rule? o.O

Read the Barrage rules in the rulebook, it states barrage can fire indirectly as long as its beyond minimum range, or fire directly normally

Yeah, I'm well aware. Which is why I was scratching my head at what I quoted - a flate statement of the Basilisk being unable to direct fire and a need to reduce the min range to compensate.

 master of ordinance wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 sumi808 wrote:
make guard vehicles BS4 (tank commander bs5 and pask bs6)

No.

If anything IG stats are TOO good. BS3 across the board, except specialists and characters.

Even better if Guardsmen go to WS2.

Keep us at BS3 base, but allow us to purchase Veteran Crew's as an upgrade to make them BS4. 10 points should cover it.

10 pts is far too cheap for how rare BS4 should be in a Guard army.

Consider that BS4 = +33% direct fire efficiency, then a 150-pt Tank should pay at least +50 pts for BS4.

I'd be OK if Pask were made non-unique. Pay Pask points for +1 BS.

There's more to a unit than its gun.

A 33% price increase is ridiculous.

I disagree that BS4 should be "rare" in Guard forces.

They're not PDFs. BS3 should be what you see for PDFs(trained, but not highly skilled)--and BS4 should be Guard squads.

When the 6th edition Codex came out, I was horrified. While most of the units I used were still there, what we really lost was that ability to make an army that felt thematically different from other IG armies. I wanted those regimental doctrines that were rumored before the book came out, and I wanted all those special characters that we lost.

I've really just stopped caring about new codex releases. I just built my own, and while I'm still playtesting and modifying it, I'm finally playing with the army which I've wanted to play for such a long time. I'm trying to encourage my brother and friends to make their own codexes. Why should we pay 60 bucks each time they release another one of these books only to get dissapointed when they remove long-held units and beloved characters. I hardly want formations, I don't ever even play competitively.

If anyone wants to see the changes I made, heres the document. It's really rough, but I've had more fun playing this army than playing necrons or anything else.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/141WrF8qfNv2GZO4BRZKw_IU_EQr6aVuoobvZEk37M38/edit?usp=sharing

 Kanluwen wrote:
I disagree that BS4 should be "rare" in Guard forces.

They're not PDFs. BS3 should be what you see for PDFs(trained, but not highly skilled)--and BS4 should be Guard squads.

This is actually incorrect. The Conscript profile is BS2, and it can be reasonably assumed that your bog standard PDF (basically like a National Guard, or Special Police Force equivalent) is what this is meant to represent.

BS 3 should be reserved for actual Guardsmen which are supposed to be "the best of the best" from any given planet or sector.

BS 4 (or any 4 stat) in 40K is generally reserved for the extremely well trained or experienced.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 sumi808 wrote:
make guard vehicles BS4 (tank commander bs5 and pask bs6)

No.

If anything IG stats are TOO good. BS3 across the board, except specialists and characters.

Even better if Guardsmen go to WS2.

Keep us at BS3 base, but allow us to purchase Veteran Crew's as an upgrade to make them BS4. 10 points should cover it.

10 pts is far too cheap for how rare BS4 should be in a Guard army.

Consider that BS4 = +33% direct fire efficiency, then a 150-pt Tank should pay at least +50 pts for BS4.

I'd be OK if Pask were made non-unique. Pay Pask points for +1 BS.

50 points for +1BS on a tank, are you have a laugh or have you just gone completely insane. Its not like the Leman Russ is particularly strong right now. Its an average tank and 150 points is only netting you AV14/13/10, a Battlecannon, a Heavy Bolter, BS3 and 3HP. Veteran squads pay 10 points to be +1BS. A tank should not have to pay much more than that if it should have to pay more than 10 at all, and 50 is just a joke. 200 points... That nets SM players an AV14/14/14 4HP BS4 2 TL Lascannon, 1TL Heavy Bolter 12 man capacity tank. Is a BS4 Leman Russ really worth as much as a fething Landraider?!
No it is not. 160 points, yes. 165 points, maybe. 200 points.... Are you off your meds?!

10pts for +1BS is probably too cheap. I'd say more like +20pts for "Veteran Tank crews" which give +1BS, but can only be taken on vehicles in a Tank Commander Squadron. At least then you can have a squadron of Vanquishers that are all BS4.

 GoonBandito wrote:
10pts for +1BS is probably too cheap. I'd say more like +20pts for "Veteran Tank crews" which give +1BS, but can only be taken on vehicles in a Tank Commander Squadron. At least then you can have a squadron of Vanquishers that are all BS4.

You'd have to make it different for each vehicle type.

Increasing the BS on the Hellhound family or arty isn't doing much. Same goes for blast variants of Russes.

Chimera get affected more, as would certain Russes and flyers.

If simplicity is the name of the game, 10pts is probably the most fair. Its big investment for a bunch of Chimeras, and perhaps a little cheap for the likes of Punishers, but useless on many other Guard vehicles.

 ultimentra wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
I disagree that BS4 should be "rare" in Guard forces.

They're not PDFs. BS3 should be what you see for PDFs(trained, but not highly skilled)--and BS4 should be Guard squads.

This is actually incorrect. The Conscript profile is BS2, and it can be reasonably assumed that your bog standard PDF (basically like a National Guard, or Special Police Force equivalent) is what this is meant to represent.

BS 3 should be reserved for actual Guardsmen which are supposed to be "the best of the best" from any given planet or sector.

Conscripts are not the same as PDFs, so suggesting that their profile is representative is a bit much. And no, the 'bog standard PDF' is not 'like a National Guard or Special Police Force equivalent'. It's a standing army for a planet, intended to stave off raids from small forces or small uprisings.

The PDF is also meant to slow down any invading force that is beyond their means or weaken them for the Imperium's reprisal.

Conscripts are something different entirely. They're untrained or untested masses given guns and sent to the front lines. One could make an argument that a Cadian Whiteshield unit(traditionally represented by "Conscript Squads") wouldn't be BS2 but rather BS3 given that we're talking about teenagers who have been engaged in live fire exercises and constant training since the age of 6. Conscripts are basically the Imperium's version of Cultists.

To clarify a bit more though, I feel like BS3 would be worthless with Guard. Lasguns aren't so powerful that they should be hamstrung by a lowered Ballistic Skill. They're already Rapid Fire weapons, meaning that they require you to get into Rapid Fire range to get the most out of your weapons.

Lasguns go to Salvo 2/4 and S3 AP4 or 5? Yeah, okay maybe BS3 would be better as a mitigating factor.

 morganfreeman wrote:

 Hoyt wrote:

 morganfreeman wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:


Whilst we are here the Earthshaker cannon on the Basilisk needs to be able to fire directly again. Or at least reduce the minimal range down to 12". 36" - otherwise known as half the length ways board - is way to far for a minimal range. And drop the price on them too.

Wait, earthshakers can't fire directly? Where's that rule? o.O

Read the Barrage rules in the rulebook, it states barrage can fire indirectly as long as its beyond minimum range, or fire directly normally

Yeah, I'm well aware. Which is why I was scratching my head at what I quoted - a flate statement of the Basilisk being unable to direct fire and a need to reduce the min range to compensate.

Just clarifying for the person you quoted, I dunno why people keep claiming you can't fire directly with a Bassie.





As for tanks and BS 4, I think 15 pts for an upgrade to it is reasonable, Tau and Eldar got it, why shouldn't the masters of armoured warfare get it too?

1. Rough riders released as models or removed. They're pointless as they are.

2. Some sort of motorcycle unit would be cool and give added mobility to the IG. Perhaps they could fight like dragoons, that is, use the bikes to get around and for cover when standing still (5+ cs), but not being able to fight from them?

3. +1 T for heavy weapon squads.

4. Bayonets for 5 points for whole squad, giving them S4 when charging. Could be a regimental doctrine. Which neeeds to be put back in!

5. Power fists should not cost 25 points for a T3 S3 model.

6. Lumbering behemoth back for LR.

7. Regiment wide rules. Whats the point in having vostroyan and catachans if they're all the same anyway? It annoys the crap out of me that these has been retconned like so much else. I also loved the chapter doctrines that was in 4th(?).

8. Possibility for medic for every squad.

9. Baneblades will probably be in the main codex. Would at least give us a more standard LoW.

10. Commisars should be W2 like they used to be.

11. Lord Commisars are too expencive. 50 would be a better price.

12. CCSs are too expencive. Really like the advisors though.

Id like to see something like how sm can upgrade the captain to have a bike with horses instead. But make horses more useful with extra wound or toughnes. Then iif your warlord is on a horse makes rough riders troops or allows vets to take the upgrade to make a really mobile force. I don't particularly want to charge, I just want a way to get about the field more.

On a slightly interesting note it's now showing "Ork Bestsellers", "Meks", and "Astra Militarum Bestsellers" on the main Warhammer 40,000 page for GW.

 Blacksails wrote:

 GoonBandito wrote:
10pts for +1BS is probably too cheap. I'd say more like +20pts for "Veteran Tank crews" which give +1BS, but can only be taken on vehicles in a Tank Commander Squadron. At least then you can have a squadron of Vanquishers that are all BS4.

You'd have to make it different for each vehicle type.

But why?

I pay the same for a Plasma gun whether its being used by a regular guardsman or a veteran.

MarsNZ wrote:


But why?

I pay the same for a Plasma gun whether its being used by a regular guardsman or a veteran.

Which, theoretically, also doesn't make sense. A plasma gun is more effective on vets for two/three important reasons. The first is the BS boost which makes the weapon directly more effective, the second is the carrying cost and number of guns per unit, which greatly favours the vets, and the kind of third reason is the total cost in bringing the same number of plasma guns to bear.

Now, this is where it gets fuzzy in balance, because everything should have a role, and vets having the role of special weapon monkeys works, compared to platoons which can bring mass heavy and special weapons while being durable through number of wounds.

Its the same reason a power fist isn't worth 25pts on a Guard model even though its what marines pay. A much more reasonable price would be 15pts for much of the same reasons I listed above.

With 40k's granularity (or lack thereof), its really not worth it for wargear price changes within the codex, but if this were more like an RPG on a D20 or D100 system, then it would make sense to bump the cost of plasma on vets a little higher than the cost on base guardsmen.

With something like a vet crew, simplicity wise, a flat 10-15pts upgrade in the armoury section would be reasonable. If we were to get nitty-gritty, then arty should be paying less than a Punisher due to how BS affects those two weapons.

Guard had 10 point power weapons and 15 point fists in the previous book, but I guess power blobs were just too hardcore.

Nah, it comes down to Robin Cruddace and his "streamlining" ideas.

If he can't copy/paste it, it's too complex!

The same thing that will fix Tactical marines. A drastic improvement to the basic troop type and basic trooper weapon.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Nah, it comes down to Robin Cruddace and his "streamlining" ideas.

If he can't copy/paste it, it's too complex!

Robin Cruddace wrote the (superior) 5th edition book as well. Hell, I'd rather use the 5th edition book than the 6th edition book considering how little was changed and most for the worse.

 Quintinus wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Nah, it comes down to Robin Cruddace and his "streamlining" ideas.

If he can't copy/paste it, it's too complex!

Robin Cruddace wrote the (superior) 5th edition book as well. Hell, I'd rather use the 5th edition book than the 6th edition book considering how little was changed and most for the worse.

Cruddace was claimed as "lead writer" on that, but it was one of the first books with his name alone on it--and I've heard through the grape vine for years that it really was more of a Ward book.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Quintinus wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Nah, it comes down to Robin Cruddace and his "streamlining" ideas.

If he can't copy/paste it, it's too complex!

Robin Cruddace wrote the (superior) 5th edition book as well. Hell, I'd rather use the 5th edition book than the 6th edition book considering how little was changed and most for the worse.

Cruddace was claimed as "lead writer" on that, but it was one of the first books with his name alone on it--and I've heard through the grape vine for years that it really was more of a Ward book.

Yeah, my best friend's former roomate's ex gf's ex bf was a black shirt. Heard the same thing from him.

In other words, anything to back that up other than just "through the grapevine"?

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Quintinus wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Nah, it comes down to Robin Cruddace and his "streamlining" ideas.

If he can't copy/paste it, it's too complex!

Robin Cruddace wrote the (superior) 5th edition book as well. Hell, I'd rather use the 5th edition book than the 6th edition book considering how little was changed and most for the worse.

Cruddace was claimed as "lead writer" on that, but it was one of the first books with his name alone on it--and I've heard through the grape vine for years that it really was more of a Ward book.

*Chokes* you mean there is a chance that Matt Ward, the Fluff Slayer, one of the most hated writers may actually have done something good?!
Hell, we need to bring 5th back. Less complicated special rules and vehicles that where actually effective. Leman Russ felt like heavy tanks, not crappy MC's that have all the vulnerabilities and none of the advantages of being MC's.

 master of ordinance wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Quintinus wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Nah, it comes down to Robin Cruddace and his "streamlining" ideas.

If he can't copy/paste it, it's too complex!

Robin Cruddace wrote the (superior) 5th edition book as well. Hell, I'd rather use the 5th edition book than the 6th edition book considering how little was changed and most for the worse.

Cruddace was claimed as "lead writer" on that, but it was one of the first books with his name alone on it--and I've heard through the grape vine for years that it really was more of a Ward book.

*Chokes* you mean there is a chance that Matt Ward, the Fluff Slayer, one of the most hated writers may actually have done something good?!
Hell, we need to bring 5th back. Less complicated special rules and vehicles that where actually effective. Leman Russ felt like heavy tanks, not crappy MC's that have all the vulnerabilities and none of the advantages of being MC's.

The funny thing is, I'd believe that Mat Ward wrote it because the book was actually pretty fun to play once you got the hang of it. IMO Mat Ward was the best rules writer Games Workshop has had for a long while. He's the whole reason why all of the cool Rogue Trader and 2nd edition stuff like rad grenades, hallucinogen grenades, and other stuff came back. Was his stuff powerful? Sure, but I'd blame the other writers for not being on his level.

His background may have been childish at times, like with Draigo, but at least it was something new and caused discussion. For every Draigo there was something cool like Sanguinor anyway.

If you like Battle Focus, you can thank Ward for that as well. I'm sure he was responsible for a lot of things in the 6th edition Eldar book as well.

 Quintinus wrote:

The funny thing is, I'd believe that Mat Ward wrote it because the book was actually pretty fun to play once you got the hang of it. IMO Mat Ward was the best rules writer Games Workshop has had for a long while. He's the whole reason why all of the cool Rogue Trader and 2nd edition stuff like rad grenades, hallucinogen grenades, and other stuff came back. Was his stuff powerful? Sure, but I'd blame the other writers for not being on his level.

I would posit that when everything else is the problem...it usually isn't

His background may have been childish at times, like with Draigo, but at least it was something new and caused discussion. For every Draigo there was something cool like Sanguinor anyway.

Not everyone like the Sanguinor either, a lot of people thought that entire concept was terrible...

If you like Battle Focus, you can thank Ward for that as well. I'm sure he was responsible for a lot of things in the 6th edition Eldar book as well.

The one Phil Kelly & Adam Troke wrote? Where Ward isn't listed in any of the credits at all?

That Ward created battle focus is a rumor I've heard consistently over the years. Despite not being tla credited writer, Ward was the lead designer on the writing team and apparently contributed a fair amount to the design of many of the 6e codices.

 Blacksails wrote:

MarsNZ wrote:


But why?

I pay the same for a Plasma gun whether its being used by a regular guardsman or a veteran.

Which, theoretically, also doesn't make sense. A plasma gun is more effective on vets for two/three important reasons. The first is the BS boost which makes the weapon directly more effective, the second is the carrying cost and number of guns per unit, which greatly favours the vets, and the kind of third reason is the total cost in bringing the same number of plasma guns to bear.

Now, this is where it gets fuzzy in balance, because everything should have a role, and vets having the role of special weapon monkeys works, compared to platoons which can bring mass heavy and special weapons while being durable through number of wounds.

Its the same reason a power fist isn't worth 25pts on a Guard model even though its what marines pay. A much more reasonable price would be 15pts for much of the same reasons I listed above.

With 40k's granularity (or lack thereof), its really not worth it for wargear price changes within the codex, but if this were more like an RPG on a D20 or D100 system, then it would make sense to bump the cost of plasma on vets a little higher than the cost on base guardsmen.

With something like a vet crew, simplicity wise, a flat 10-15pts upgrade in the armoury section would be reasonable. If we were to get nitty-gritty, then arty should be paying less than a Punisher due to how BS affects those two weapons.

I actually couldn't agree more. My point is that I don't want another one of my armies to be the Guinea Pig for another general GW mess-around with balance.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Quintinus wrote:

The funny thing is, I'd believe that Mat Ward wrote it because the book was actually pretty fun to play once you got the hang of it. IMO Mat Ward was the best rules writer Games Workshop has had for a long while. He's the whole reason why all of the cool Rogue Trader and 2nd edition stuff like rad grenades, hallucinogen grenades, and other stuff came back. Was his stuff powerful? Sure, but I'd blame the other writers for not being on his level.

I would posit that when everything else is the problem...it usually isn't

Let's look at the other writers for 5th-6th edition.
Phil Kelly, who is an absolutely poor rules writer. His power levels vary far too much, from unkillable falcons to good-for-3-months Chaos Marines to unlimited-range Serpentshield spam. Most tend to be slightly higher on power level and dominate tournaments but have poor staying power and the worst internal balance of any author
Robin Cruddace, power levels are all over the place. Imperial Guard are extremely good, while Tyranids are horrible until formations come out for them
Jeremy Vetock, power levels are all over the place. Beginning to see a trend here? Writes the underpowered mess Dark Angels, while also managing to whip up the Tau codex (which I admittedly quite like)

Then Mat Ward, whose books were consistently high power level. But hey, he never did anything that was appalling such as 2++ rerollable invulnerable saves, 2 points for 6++ Mark of Tzeentch. 3++ stormshields were powerful but they actually made terminators worthwhile. Grey Knights were extremely good, 6th edition toned them down while making Necrons (for a short time) king of the pile, and still managed to compete very well. Keep in mind, I'm only focusing on 40k here.

His background may have been childish at times, like with Draigo, but at least it was something new and caused discussion. For every Draigo there was something cool like Sanguinor anyway.

Not everyone like the Sanguinor either, a lot of people thought that entire concept was terrible...

 Quintinus wrote:

Let's look at the other writers for 5th-6th edition.
Phil Kelly, who is an absolutely poor rules writer. His power levels vary far too much, from unkillable falcons to good-for-3-months Chaos Marines to unlimited-range Serpentshield spam. Most tend to be slightly higher on power level and dominate tournaments but have poor staying power and the worst internal balance of any author
Robin Cruddace, power levels are all over the place. Imperial Guard are extremely good, while Tyranids are horrible until formations come out for them
Jeremy Vetock, power levels are all over the place. Beginning to see a trend here? Writes the underpowered mess Dark Angels, while also managing to whip up the Tau codex (which I admittedly quite like)

Then Mat Ward, whose books were consistently high power level. But hey, he never did anything that was appalling such as 2++ rerollable invulnerable saves

Neither did anyone else really until after 5th edition, and they shortly stopped attributing authorship within like 8 or 9 months IIRC after 6E came out on codex books IIRC and Ward wasn't listed as author on anything after 5E.

2 points for 6++ Mark of Tzeentch. 3++ stormshields were powerful but they actually made terminators worthwhile. Grey Knights were extremely good, 6th edition toned them down while making Necrons (for a short time) king of the pile, and still managed to compete very well. Keep in mind, I'm only focusing on 40k here.

And he did that in large part by giving lots of factions everything and the kitchen sink. Look at the 5E blood angels book. They went from an army that was largely codex-adherent in nature with a focus on speed and close combat, to suddenly being the chapter that could field the most psykers (aside from GK's), field the most walkers, field the most heavy armor, got Fast on everything *and* still kept (and enhanced) its speed/assault bonuses.

Similarly, C:SM came out in 2008, it made every other SM book rather pointless to play in comparison, and every SM army I saw was "Vulkan+Hammernaters+tons of Melta" until Kelly's Space Wolves came out. I literally didn't see an SM army without Vulkan (and I think Hammernators too but I could be wrong there) for a full year.

I'm not saying any of GW's writers were perfect, they have never been, and your criticisms of the others are quite valid, but it's hard to say that Ward was so much better and the problems were all with everyone else.

The concept of an Imperial warp demon is FAR more interesting and original than anything Phil Kelly has ever come up with. Robin Cruddace made some cool characters too at least.

That's certainly the first time I've ever heard of the Sanguinor descried as such. Potentially a cool concept in theory, but really failed in the execution for many. Much like many tried to spin Draigo's tale into a tragic sisyphean one after the 2010 GK book, but wasn't exactly terribly what the average reader would have gotten from reading his fluff entry.

What did Phil Kelly do? Create wolfy mcwolfwolferson riding a wolf with his wolf claws?

Much like Ward's renaming of Dreadnought Close Combat Weapons to Blood Fists for no reason, and sillyness like Bloodstrike missiles, or the very name "Sanguinor"? Effectively "thing-that-color-of-blood", the same way a tormetor would be a "thing-that-torments"?

It was mentioned at a Games Day iirc, I'll see about finding it.

First time I've heard that. It's hard to ascribe specific mechanics like that to someone though when they're not mentioned in any credits or as an author. Not saying it's impossible, but never seen any proof or even heard rumor of it before today.