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 wrote:
Maybe the Lightning works in Fast Attack(it's an interceptor not a ground support vehicle), but the Avenger and Thunderbolt both definitely are HS.

They are Supersonic, how much faster do you want?

I don't think FA is designated by the weapons on the unit; it's really more it's role on the battlefield.

AA like the Hydra is a lynchpin. AA like the Lightning is a knife you stick in your enemy without warning.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
There is nothing wrong with the Vendetta being a 3 TL Lascannon Flyer in the gunship role. Nothing at all.

If that's the case -- let's remove the transport capacity and give it both Strafing Run and Vector Dancer. Maybe if we feel crazy we even find some way to get Tank Hunter onto it. Adjust costing to match. THAT'S a gunship.

Any value we lose as a transport, we find a way to return to the Valk. Maybe it starts at Capacity 6 and we can buy an transport upgrade.

FYI I'm talking about thematic design and intuitive use to the player. Costing and such come later.

I have no problem with the Vendetta losing Transport in favor of something more combat oriented. That's why I suggest something like the Vulture chassis.

I do have a problem with the Valk losing Transport for how HUGE it is. Valk should be Transport 12, because it's got a HUGE cargo area - bigger than the Chimera, in fact.

If the Vendetta stays on the Valk chassis, I could see it dropping to Transport 6.

Ah, that's a good point.

Some kind of minimum capacity transport for Elites would be good but you're 100% right that the Valk model doesn't really look the part.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I have no problem with the Vendetta losing Transport in favor of something more combat oriented. That's why I suggest something like the Vulture chassis.

The Vulture chassis is nothing like the Valkyrie chassis. I'm building one right now and I will basically have enough parts left over to build a wrecked Valkyrie as scenery.

The only parts used are the wings and tail boom assembly.
I cannot emphasize this enough. The Vulture would require its own kit--and there's nothing, currently, in the Imperial Navy line-up that matches its look.

I do have a problem with the Valk losing Transport for how HUGE it is. Valk should be Transport 12, because it's got a HUGE cargo area - bigger than the Chimera, in fact.

If the Vendetta stays on the Valk chassis, I could see it dropping to Transport 6.

The Vendetta already is 6.

That's too many.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Yoyoyo wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Maybe the Lightning works in Fast Attack(it's an interceptor not a ground support vehicle), but the Avenger and Thunderbolt both definitely are HS.

They are Supersonic, how much faster do you want?

I don't think FA is designated by the weapons on the unit; it's really more it's role on the battlefield.

AA like the Hydra is a lynchpin. AA like the Lightning is a knife you stick in your enemy without warning.

What I "want" is for you to understand that the reason they're in "Heavy Support" is that the Avenger and Thunderbolt fill the role of flying tanks.

The Lightning was strictly an Interceptor, but it looks like they've retconned that in favor of making the "Strike" variant the only one that exists. In any regards, it's the speediest of the lot and fits better into Fast Attack--which is where the Vulture Gunship gets placed for the Armoured Battlegroup list.

But truly, if we're wishlisting and want to see Imperial Navy stuff make it into the main book?
Marauder and Marauder Destroyer.

"Flying Tank" is a description. Not a role. That's not an explanation at all.

Fast Attack can provide surprise and concentration of force by rapidly shifting where our focal point is on the battlefield. They tend to do their damage by using mobility to target weak points or vulnerabilities.

Heavy Support tends to provide your greatest source of both firepower and/or armour but nowhere near the mobility of a FA unit. They have the capability to smash directly through strong points with brute force. Targeting vulnerabilities is not strictly necessary.

You can want anything, but if you want to convince me of your point, you need to give me a better explanation than "Flying Tank" and considering that truth self-evident!

Yoyoyo wrote:
"Flying Tank" is a description. Not a role. That's not an explanation at all.

And neither is saying "Supersonic=Fast Attack".

Fast Attack can provide surprise and concentration of force by rapidly shifting where our focal point is on the battlefield. They tend to do their damage by using mobility to target weak points or vulnerabilities.

And that fits the Lightning to a tee.

Heavy Support tends to provide your greatest source of both firepower and/or armour but nowhere near the mobility of a FA unit. They have the capability to smash directly through strong points with brute force. Targeting vulnerabilities is not strictly necessary.

Thunderbolts come standard with two twin-linked autocannon, twin-linked lascannon, and can be upgraded to carry 4x Hellstrike Missiles, 6x Tactical Bombs, or 6x Skystrike Missiles.
Avengers come with one hull-mounted Avenger Bolt Cannon, two wing-mounted Lascannon, and a Defensive Heavy Stubber. They can be upgraded with two additional wing-mounted hardpoints that can carry any one of the following options 6x Tactical Bombs, 2x Hellstrike Missiles, 2x Hellfury Missiles, 2x Missile Launchers, 2x Autocannon, or 2x Multi-Lasers
Both of these fighters come standard with Armoured Cockpits, and the Avenger has the "Strafing Run" special rule.

Do you know what the Lightning comes with?
A long-barreled Autocannon and one set of twin-linked Lascannon. It can then replace its long-barreled Autocannon with either 2x Hellstrike Missiles or 2x Tactical Bombs and the Strafing Run special rule.

You can want anything, but if you want to convince me of your point, you need to give me a better explanation than "Flying Tank" and considering that truth self-evident!

I don't "need to give a better explanation" to you. The Thunderbolt is meant to be a 40kization of the Republic P-47 "Thunderbolt" flown by the Allied forces during the Second World War. Don't believe me? Look up the P-47 and check out its usage. You'll see that it matches how FW has described the Thunderbolt almost 1:1.

If FW wanted them to be Fast Attack, they would be. They're not though--because FW doesn't think they belong there.
Fast Attack is where the VTOL stuff goes in the Armoured Battlegroup list for IA1v2.0, which means the Vulture Gunship.

If we wanted to slavisly refer to FW/GW as an infallible authority, this thread wouldn't even exist.

And yes, you do need to give a better explanation if you want to convince me.

As I said, I don't think weaponry defines the role of the unit. I consider mobility and durability a lot more indicative of where a unit belongs.

If you think otherwise, we will have to agree to disagree.

Yoyoyo wrote:
Ah, that's a good point.

Some kind of minimum capacity transport for Elites would be good but you're 100% right that the Valk model doesn't really look the part.

Ogryns are Elites, and they count double. A unit of 5 would require Transport 10, Transport 12 with a 6th Ogryn or Commissar added. I think they should have the option to ride in a Valk.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
That may not be their prime directive, no, but the armored sentinel is one of the most cost-effective tarpits in the game. It costs half as much as a dreadnought despite having the same front AV, which means as a walker that any melee unit lacking the capability of denting AV12 is screwed.

Are you sure you're not thinking of 5th? Because that was the last time that statement held true.

In 5th, walkers were only hit by grenades on 6s, and glancing hits did virtually nothing. So, you needed a S7+ melee weapon.

Nowadays, marines can throw Krak Grenades. They hit it on 3s, and it takes just 2 6s to destroy it (and that's assuming it was on full HPs before it entered combat).

Sorry, but this tactic just doesn't hold water these days.

I should clarify, I meant a more economical transport in addition to the Valkyrie. There's no effect on Ogryns. The idea was to make air transport for 5-6 man Scion squads less expensive.

Given you'd need an entirely new model, I don't think the idea's worth chasing until the core IG units are 100% solid.

Anyways, I am gonna think a bit about tanks assaulting objectives and come back with some ideas.

 TheSilo wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
As a question, what 'real' HQ choices would you like to see?

Honestly curious here, as I'm far from an expert on IG fluff, so I don't know what else they could add.

I'll pick up the question, because I think it's an interesting one. This is one of the problems that commissars have always had, they were strictly limited by the number of CCS and PCS squads that you took. This prevents you from choosing between offensive order buffs and defensive morale buffs, instead you need to take CCS/PCS before you can take commissars, so rather than a tactical choice it's an extra tax/expense just to get commissars. Even if you take a Lord Commissar, your # of commissars is still strictly limited and the units they're allowed to join is also limited.

The tank commander was a good idea, but it was done halfway. Several factions in the game have HQ choices that really bring flavor to the army and open up other tactical options and IG should have the same sort of thing to reflect the vast variety of IG regiments throughout the galaxy a la the old regimental doctrines system. While IG are not known to be flexible within a particular army, they are varied throughout the galaxy.

Command Squads (traditional structure): bring orders, synergize with infantry through buffs.

Tank Commanders (armored corps/mech): enable players to take tanks and sentinels as troops and/or issue orders to vehicles

Lord Commissar (commissariat detachment): allows IC commissars, each one has aura of discipline and summary executes units within 6" that fail leadership. Make infantry much more implacable and disciplined.

Tempestor Prime Command Squad (Tempestus detachment): allow Scions as troop choices, also no ridiculously overpriced book with 5 units.

Some or all of these would really allow IG commanders to field more tactically varied armies without going to the allies table.

Really like these idea's for expanding the HQ's would allow for a lot of options for play styles. Sadly I doubt they'll go along this vein as they seem to be going against FOC altering characters, at best we might get it via formations such as an armoured corps. I like the idea of rolling in objective secured scions into the codex via the command squad as it makes them a little more useful by giving the guard away to grab objectives in the enemy's backfield.
It's been mentioned before but making the scions hot-shot lasguns assault 2 would go some way to making them worth their points by allowing them to put some volume of fire down if the scatter dice don't like you. I know a lot of people would be against boosting their stats as it blurs the line between them and marines but I quite like the idea of making them bully boy units by boosting them up to D-99 standards; deep strike into cover, let loose a hail of fire, hopefully next turn pick on a depleted squad to shoot, assault and hopefully snatch an objective from. They're not going to be able to beat CC orientating units and will still require some thought in their use so that they don't get wiped out immediately but would give them a purpose besides suicide melta and differentiates them more from veterans. Would probably require a points increase to balance but I think it would be fairly small as most folk seem to consider them over priced.

As an aside been considering some ideas for expanding the MT codex, one of the ideas I've had is for veterans in their elite slots that have been traumatised/shaped by their experiences which have new skill set to survive. My thinking was along to mainlines, ultra-paranoid veterans that have had their senses so sharpened and are so jacked up on adrenalin that the can respond quickly to threats, gaining interceptor and improved over watch (at BS or BS2) but wondering if maybe these could make an upgrade for a command squad as specialised "close protection" for the commander.
The other line I was thinking was that some veterans go the other way and end up ultra aggressive, the key to their survival being "be quick or be dead" gaining furious charge and (this rule is probably too much with the introduction of skyhammer and scions being so squishy so less able to tar pit) the ability to charge from deepstrike, this one probably wouldn't be us useful for a standard guard command squad, unless Straken decides to go parachuting.
Sorry I know this was more wish listing than something the guard needs but figured the close protection one was kind of relevant and flavourful n wanted to test the water for the ideas.


The transports seem a point of some contention, I do feel that using orders (mentioned earlier in thread) could go someway to making them more useful after the price hike/fire point change; but I do think that they are too similar and the Taurox lacking reasons for taking it over the chimera. How would people feel about making the chimera the slower well armoured fire support transport (along the lines of a warrior APC) keep its expensive points cost but increase the side armour to 12 to match vehicles with similar chassis and make them more bolter resistant, maybe jack them up to 70 pts (I'm not brilliant at judging points cost, focusing more on defining roles and giving everything a purpose) this would make it more expensive but more likely to get units there and provide them more fire power.
The Taurox, make it a fast vehicle for slightly more mobility and match its capacity to 12 to match the chimera. Now this goes against the change to fast a bit (the only difference being a large flat out move) but take the weapons off to drop its price to the 30-35pt range giving the guard a cheap mobile option, while I'm wish listing, give it the option for wheels and maybe allow the back to be open topped to make its look like a transport truck/half track, would look cool as feth and gives ogryn something to jump out of, Orkz may get a little jealous though.

 BlaxicanX wrote:


Imperial Guard don't need snowflake rules that allow them to escape or avoid melee- if a guardsmen unit gets caught in melee it deserves to die; that's the price you pay for having one of the cheapest troops choices in the game.

If you don't want your important units in melee then use the tools already available in the codex to prevent that from happening- historically this means tarpitting. Ogryns, sentinels and blobs are all designed to intercept and tie-up enemy units long enough for your damage-dealers to get the job done; conscripts and sentinels do this fairly well while ogryns do not, but that isn't especially hard to fix.

Ogryns cost waaaaayyyyyy too much, Sentinels, even armoured ones, suffer a terminal existence failure if they get in to close combat with anything nastier than Grots and Blobs will have died LONG before you get into assault.... Or some specialist assault troops hit them and they vanish in a red mist.

Dark Angels overwatch on a 5+

Tau get supporting fire

Marines Just roflstomp Guardsmen

Orks WANT to get into CC

The same with Blood Angels

Necrons go down.... And get right back up again

Eldar? You either cant get close enough (Scat bikes) or cant hurt them (Wraithguard).

We need some form of survival, after all even the dedicated CC armies (Orks and Blood Angels) can also throw inordinate levels of firepower downrange. Hell, sometimes they can even out gun the Guard.
We need some way to make assaulting us hard to do. Overwatch and D6+3" movement AWAY from the assaulting unit(s) is fair. It gives us a chance to avoid being locked down and wiped out and makes assaulting the Guard actually difficult. It makes it risky. It means you have to move in close to be able to get in to them.
Combine this with supporting fire from nearby sections and you have an army that can compete in close quarters IF they are deployed correctly. Supporting fire would only have an 8" to 12" range, so you would have to keep sections close together and prevent HWS from providing 'Supporting Fire' from across the board.

I'm not sure about the movement idea. To me, that seems more like something Eldar/Dark Eldar should have.

I think a more powerful overwatch would be the way to go, and/or something like Tau get - where they can overwatch with nearby squads. I mean, considering we're the army that can take platoons as single troop choices, it seems reasonable that our units should be able to support one another.

 vipoid wrote:
I'm not sure about the movement idea. To me, that seems more like something Eldar/Dark Eldar should have.

I think a more powerful overwatch would be the way to go, and/or something like Tau get - where they can overwatch with nearby squads. I mean, considering we're the army that can take platoons as single troop choices, it seems reasonable that our units should be able to support one another.

How about an order that lets them over watch at like full BS if they dont shoot previously (like if you are in the position to shoot but they are out of RF range) call it like "on my mark"

Would that order be worth it, do you think?

 vipoid wrote:
Would that order be worth it, do you think?

dunno just spit balling.

Hmm, I think you'd be losing out with that order, tbh. I mean, let's say you have 20 men out of RF range.

If you use that order, and the enemy assaults you, then you'll have 40 shots against them.

But, if you use FRFSRF, you'll have 36 shots at full BS (no shots for the sergeants), and then a further 40 BS1 shots if they assault you. So, you're averaging more hits (~42), and also get those 36 shots regardless of what the enemy does on his turn.


What if the order let them shoot normally, and then overwatch at full BS with lasguns and laspistols?

 vipoid wrote:
Hmm, I think you'd be losing out with that order, tbh. I mean, let's say you have 20 men out of RF range.

If you use that order, and the enemy assaults you, then you'll have 40 shots against them.

But, if you use FRFSRF, you'll have 36 shots at full BS (no shots for the sergeants), and then a further 40 BS1 shots if they assault you. So, you're averaging more hits (~42), and also get those 36 shots regardless of what the enemy does on his turn.


What if the order let them shoot normally, and then overwatch at full BS with lasguns and laspistols?

Something like that might be cool too.
Another option might be something like "Hold your ground" that is more a support order. say the unit gets a +1 to cover as well and gets to make overwatch at a + or full. but cannot move the next turn. (edited because going to ground would be kinda bad)

Makes them more objective holdy fi ya know what i mean.

Yoyoyo wrote:
I should clarify, I meant a more economical transport in addition to the Valkyrie. There's no effect on Ogryns. The idea was to make air transport for 5-6 man Scion squads less expensive.

Given you'd need an entirely new model, I don't think the idea's worth chasing until the core IG units are 100% solid.

IMO, the Chimera is/should be the mass production "budget" Transport. The problem is that it's overcosted and overloaded with Amphibious and Lasgun Arrays instead of AV11+ on the sides. Respec it at AV12/11/10 Transport 10, and cut the points down and we're in business.

A "budget" Valk for non-IG Stormtroopers is a problem the Stormtrooper Codex can deal with separate from the IG Codex. I don't even believe Stormies belong in C:IG any more than we should have AdMech bundled into C:IG.

I don't think IG need more new models - they have enough already. I'd rather the stuff I own be good enough, than to have to buy more stuff on top of what I own. And I own plenty!

 vipoid wrote:
Hmm, I think you'd be losing out with that order, tbh. I mean, let's say you have 20 men out of RF range.

Which is why I've been arguing for a long time that the Lasgun shouldn't be Rapid Fire but instead should be Assault.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Yoyoyo wrote:
I should clarify, I meant a more economical transport in addition to the Valkyrie. There's no effect on Ogryns. The idea was to make air transport for 5-6 man Scion squads less expensive.

Given you'd need an entirely new model, I don't think the idea's worth chasing until the core IG units are 100% solid.

IMO, the Chimera is/should be the mass production "budget" Transport. The problem is that it's overcosted and overloaded with Amphibious and Lasgun Arrays instead of AV11+ on the sides. Respec it at AV12/11/10 Transport 10, and cut the points down and we're in business.

Which is why the Chimera should come standard with the Armoured Track Guard and Anti-Grenade Mesh upgrades from the Armoured Battlegroup list.
Armoured Track Guard gives you a 4+ save against any Immobilised Results on the vehicle damage table and Anti-Grenade Mesh gives you a 5+ save against any damage inflicted by any type of grenades, including Melta Bombs.

Additionally, all Guard tanks should be a minimum of 4-5 Hull Points.

A "budget" Valk for non-IG Stormtroopers is a problem the Stormtrooper Codex can deal with separate from the IG Codex. I don't even believe Stormies belong in C:IG any more than we should have AdMech bundled into C:IG.

Stormtroopers present a quandry. You've got effectively two different types of Stormtroopers in the 40k universe. You have the Stormtroopers from the Schola Progenium, who do special missions and then you have the Grenadiers for certain planets.

Grenadiers are Stormtroopers minus the "special missions" profiles. They're trained to the same level, equipped to the same level, and motivated to the same level.

I don't think IG need more new models - they have enough already. I'd rather the stuff I own be good enough, than to have to buy more stuff on top of what I own. And I own plenty!

I own plenty as well, but it really wouldn't hurt to remove some of the chaff(Rough Riders and Ratlings) and add some new units in their place.

You know what John? I totally agree with you. It's fun to get carried away dreaming up changes but not all of them are going to fit.

Discarding ideas is a fundamental part of brainstorming solutions.

 vipoid wrote:
I mean, considering we're the army that can take platoons as single troop choices, it seems reasonable that our units should be able to support one another.

I actually came to this conclusion myself on page 30 and learned that reworking "Combined Squads" solves both the Overwatch and CC vulnerability issues. I won't go over old ground but here's the link if you're curious.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/870/651867.page#8050341

Rough rider models!!! Also put back all the epic artillery that was in 5th ( or 4th can't remember)

Shed_pon3 wrote:
Rough rider models!!!

Yeah, RRs need to be "fixed" one way or another. Right now, they're an appendix entry for old timers back in 2E/3E, and they're terrible. Being non-core auxiliaries like Psykers, Ratlings & Ogryns, they probably should move to Elite as they're recosted (downward).

Recosted and made useful..

As suggested before, Ws4, T4, special weapon options.

Rough riders in platoons, toughness 4 and an upgrade for CCS that makes Rough rider platoons troops. I want my mass cavalry charge. Hell just give them a price cut by 2pt so the full squad is 100pt seems fair for +1 toughness and extra mobility.

Platoon structure:
1 mounted PCC
2-5 rough rider squads
No heavy weapon squads or spec weapon squads as it doesn't fit the theme.

Also HAMMER OF WRATH AND DOUBLE INITIATIVE ON FIRST CHARGE!

 The Deathless Host wrote:
Rough riders in platoons, toughness 4 and an upgrade for CCS that makes Rough rider platoons troops. I want my mass cavalry charge. Hell just give them a price cut by 2pt so the full squad is 100pt seems fair for +1 toughness and extra mobility.

Platoon structure:
1 mounted PCC
2-5 rough rider squads
No heavy weapon squads or spec weapon squads as it doesn't fit the theme.

Also HAMMER OF WRATH AND DOUBLE INITIATIVE ON FIRST CHARGE!

OK, that's a RR Formation of 3+ RR squads:
- 1 squad has the Sgt upgraded to a Lt., and
- all squads gain Hammer of Wrath when charging

Note that price-wise, even at T4, they need to be cheaper than ASMs, or, if given fancy sticks, cheaper than Warp Talons (both of which are sub-par units in the SM & CSM lists)...

I'm onto Tanks for the moment. Without major threats taking precendence on the assault, RR can't slip under the enemy target priority, and as a Skirmisher/Counter-assault unit RR won't have much value advancing by themselves. Str and T buffs will help but ideally the RR are not getting shot at in the first place.

Major issues with Tanks at present:

- Limited weapons utility outside optimum role
- Squadron "overspill" from weapons that inflict >3HP
- Vulnerable rear facing at AV10 penalises midfield play
- Limits HS slots in competition with artillery and air defense if not squadroned
- Little thematic synergy with Infantry
- Too much dependence on the Pask HQ; no redundancy is a huge vulnerability

Fixes:

- Increase targeting flexibility through main gun changes (ie. Vanquisher Cannon gains Instant Death in addition to Armourbane) and improved secondary/tertiary weaponry (Hull, Pintle, Sponson)
- Create a "Combat Squads" analogue to break up tank squadrons during deployment
- Increase LR chassis to rear AV11 to normalize all tanks with the Punisher/Demolisher
- Offer bonuses acting as a force multipler to Infantry when operating in close support, and vice-versa
- Alternate methods to buff LR variants will reduce Pask's relative value

Since artillery already fills the role of long-range fire support in most cases, the idea is making Tanks the go-to option for seizing objectives and breaking up resistance so the Infantry can mop up. They can sit in the backfield if needed. It just shouldn't be optimal to do so in most cases.

I'm not getting to meta issues yet like drop pods, D-Weapons and Gauss/Grav; that's going to have to come next.

LRBT Squadron Rule:

Wide-Area Control These tank's crews have been trained to operate with eachother over extended distances

These tanks may each operate as individual units, whilst only taking up one FoC slot. Any effects that affect an entire unit may only affect a single targetted vehicle in this squadron, unless specifically stated otherwise.

I don't think the basic LRBT needs AV11+ Rear - that's for the midfield, short range tanks like the Demolishers. And besides, didn't they get armor upgrades to AV13 Side?? Whether they take Sponsons or not? 14/13 is really good. I'd rather be 14/13/10 than 14/12/11.

@Selym. That's perfect.

@John. The idea of tanks is that they can operate to the front. If not, you get into the issue of duplicate roles with pure fire support like artillery.

That's the reasoning behind the AV11 change, and it's probably GW's logic as well with the Demolisher and Punisher.