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.

 vipoid wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Yeeeeeeeah...no. Don't just look at Codex: Space Marines.

Why not, they keep looking at us and wanting what we have.

And not just us - they're stealing stuff from SoB, too...

Aye, I saw.

Mind you, did you see the Rhino armour thread? Barely a page in and they where calling for buffs, two and they where wishlisting for a way to repair the HP as well as immobilised results and for an upgrade that would let them increase the armour on their tanks, capping out at 14 of course because they dont want to be OP.
And they where wanting the survivability and firepower of an MBT on an APC

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Yoyoyo wrote:
Er. The desired effect is that all LR variants are encouraged to be used in close support as your spearhead, while being vulnerable to infantry who can target the weaker rear armour. Aren't we all in agreement here?

Not really. I'd spearhead with my Thunderers (count-as Demolishers) as close support and linebreakers, and often do. For these, 14/13/11 makes a big difference over 14/13/10.

My Destroyer-style basic Russes are more fire support, and could easily play as Vanquishers (or actual Destroyers) on the back line. 14/12/10 would be acceptable, and 14/13/10 is ace. The 72" guns can play differently from 24" guns.

If I had Exterminators, 14/13/10 is fine for the 48" gun. I'm OK with Punishers and Executioners using the Demolisher 14/13/11 profile, but, as above, I wouldn't be upset to have the 24" Demolisher and Punisher at 14/13/12.

What about a 'send in the next wave' for tanks if taken in a full squadron?

 master of ordinance wrote:

stripeydave wrote:
I quite fancy a "Company" formation similar to the Marine Demi-Company. Bonuses depend on company type.
Take 1 CCS, 3 platoons plus some extra stuff as tax (HWS/SWS/Commies etc).
Extra bonuses based on type chosen.

Something like free Chimeras for armoured fist, free carapace armour for heavy infantry, free fortifications for shield company...

Alternatively/additionally some bonus special rules...

I'd buy that for a dollar.

Free tanks for all, or free upgrades to all vehicles *drools*

No. Free upgrades and free models is BS and only hurts the game. Remove it from those who have it instead of adding more.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 master of ordinance wrote:
Mind you, did you see the Rhino armour thread? Barely a page in and they where calling for buffs, two and they where wishlisting for a way to repair the HP as well as immobilised results and for an upgrade that would let them increase the armour on their tanks, capping out at 14 of course because they dont want to be OP.
And they where wanting the survivability and firepower of an MBT on an APC

Given that everyone suggested to pay appropriate points for that upgrade, while you want free units and upgrades, I am having an extremely difficult time seeing you as the victim.

 Ashiraya wrote:

No. Free upgrades and free models is BS and only hurts the game. Remove it from those who have it instead of adding more.

email that idea to GW and see what their response is. We'll wait.

 vipoid wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

No. Free upgrades and free models is BS and only hurts the game. Remove it from those who have it instead of adding more.

email that idea to GW and see what their response is. We'll wait.

"I don't realize that this is a purely hypothetical discussion and absolutely none of the suggested changes made in this thread are likely to happen."

E-mail any of these ideas to GW and see what their response is. I'll wait.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

No. Free upgrades and free models is BS and only hurts the game. Remove it from those who have it instead of adding more.

email that idea to GW and see what their response is. We'll wait.

"I don't realize that this is a purely hypothetical discussion and absolutely none of the suggested changes made in this thread are likely to happen."

E-mail any of these ideas to GW and see what their response is. I'll wait.

So... it's fine for him to call BS on other people's hypothetical ideas for the next IG book, but not for me to call BS on his idea that would involve GW errataing stuff out of previous books?

It's fine to point out that adding more broken gak into the game just to fulfill a fanboy fantasy and spite another faction is stupid and if implemented would actually make the game worse. "Well that probably won't happen in real life" is a poor counter-argument when this entire thread is about suggesting things that probably won't happen in real life.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
It's fine to point out that adding more broken gak into the game just to fulfill a fanboy fantasy and spite another faction is stupid and if implemented would actually make the game worse. "Well that probably won't happen in real life" is a poor counter-argument when this entire thread is about suggesting things that probably won't happen in real life.

Ah, another Space Marine player appears. Whats the matter? Worried that you might actually have to think when you face the Imperial Guard? Worried that we might end up with the same tier formations and choices as you?

 BlaxicanX wrote:
It's fine to point out that adding more broken gak into the game just to fulfill a fanboy fantasy and spite another faction is stupid and if implemented would actually make the game worse.

So, IG should just be stuck behind everyone else in terms of power level just to satisfy all the marine fanboys who think that only they deserve to be the best?

 BlaxicanX wrote:
"Well that probably won't happen in real life" is a poor counter-argument when this entire thread is about suggesting things that probably won't happen in real life.

Except that it *needs* to happen in real life to make his argument reasonable. That's the whole problem.

Shall we also discuss how a meteorite hitting GW headquarters should affect the new IG book?

 Ashiraya wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 master of ordinance wrote:
Mind you, did you see the Rhino armour thread? Barely a page in and they where calling for buffs, two and they where wishlisting for a way to repair the HP as well as immobilised results and for an upgrade that would let them increase the armour on their tanks, capping out at 14 of course because they dont want to be OP.
And they where wanting the survivability and firepower of an MBT on an APC

Given that everyone suggested to pay appropriate points for that upgrade, while you want free units and upgrades, I am having an extremely difficult time seeing you as the victim.

Appropriate points? Sure. FFS, why the hell dont you just give them Battlecannons and the like as well? You might as well, they would be faster Leman Russ at a far cheaper cost with the upgrades that your lot where proposing. The Rhino is amazing as it is. The Space Marines are not about tanks.
You have a Medium Tank, an APC and a light IFV.
Stop. Trying. To. Make. Them. All. In. To. Heavy. Tanks.
That. Is. The. Realm. Of. The. Imperial Guard.

 vipoid wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

No. Free upgrades and free models is BS and only hurts the game. Remove it from those who have it instead of adding more.

email that idea to GW and see what their response is. We'll wait.

Email absolutely any suggestion ITT to them and see what their response is. We'll wait.

Seriously, guys, arguing for removing broken gak from the game (from armies that are NOT your army, no less) instead of handing it out like candy is not trying to smack down on your faction.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:
Except that it *needs* to happen in real life to make his argument reasonable. That's the whole problem.

Shall we also discuss how a meteorite hitting GW headquarters should affect the new IG book?

Anything in this thread needs to happen as well to make it reasonable, but in all likelihood, none of it will.

This is not a news and rumour thread. If I read my own posts correctly, I never said my solution was more likely to happen - only that it would have a better result.

Plus, I am no man.

 master of ordinance wrote:
Ah, another Space Marine player appears. Whats the matter? Worried that you might actually have to think when you face the Imperial Guard? Worried that we might end up with the same tier formations and choices as you?

Look at my signature, then feel stupid.

 vipoid wrote:
So, IG should just be stuck behind everyone else in terms of power level just to satisfy all the marine fanboys who think that only they deserve to be the best?

Thinking that adding more broken gak into the game is the only way to improve the IG says more about your lack of imagination than it does anything about my motives.

Except that it *needs* to happen in real life to make his argument reasonable. That's the whole problem.

And it likely won't. And none of the good suggestions made in this thread that *need* to happen will likely happen, as well.

Should this thread just not exist then, since absolutely nothing presented within it is likely to happen?

If any faction in the game should get 'free' stuff, Imperial Guard should be one of the top candidates, certainly more than Space Marines anyway. Their entire strategy revolves around throwing more men and vehicles at the enemy than they can handle.

No faction in the game should get free stuff in a game revolving around points."Other factions have it" is a poor justification.

The thing is almost every 7th Edition codex has a heap of free stuff - all those free rules you get for taking the unique Formations and Detachments. Free Transports in a Gladius Strike Force is not out of line compared to a Decurion or Mechanicus War Convocation or Craftworld Warhost. It's just the way the game is now.

And I would think free stuff would be far more fitting for the Guard as opposed to flashy formation rules. There's nothing fancy about the Imperial Guard - just an overwhelming application of brute force firepower.

Give them something like infantry squads or conscripts free, then, if they absolutely have to continue the broken train instead of fixing it. Something that it makes sense that they throw in masses at the enemy without anyone really caring.

This is 40k. Russes are expensive, soldiers are not.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
No faction in the game should get free stuff in a game revolving around points."Other factions have it" is a poor justification.

Agreed. GW was actually going towards the right way with the first part of the 7th ed. codices in toning things down until they did a heel-face turn and outright changed the design paradigm again with Necrons and Eldar. The idea that if "everyone is overpowered then it will be balanced" is fallacious in the extreme since they'll effectively keep one-upping one another with increasingly crazy things in order to match one another (as you can see with GW's unimaginative use of giving free stuff for Mechanicus and Marines since they lack the race/weapon mechanics of the Eldar/Crons).

Free Conscripts would be perfectly fitting (also considering Guard basically had semi-free Conscripts in the last book anyway with Chenkov).

I would not want to see free Russ's, and I'm not sure anyone was advocating that either, but possibly something like reduced cost/free Sponsons or other upgrades for Russ' when taken as part of a new formation would be cool.

 Ashiraya wrote:

Seriously, guys, arguing for removing broken gak from the game (from armies that are NOT your army, no less) instead of handing it out like candy is not trying to smack down on your faction.

Anything in this thread needs to happen as well to make it reasonable, but in all likelihood, none of it will.

I think you're missing the point.

Yes, it would be better if all the free stuff and other broken stuff was removed and nerfed, respectively. However, my point is that you can't just base a forthcoming book on that happening. There's no point making IG really weak, when all the other broken books are going to be keeping all their broken stuff. Which, let's face it, they are.

To put it another way, it would be the equivalent of saying that 40k needs to be rebuilt from the ground up, so we should base the new IG book on an entirely new 40k system.

No. Just as we need to wait for said 40k system to materialise before building books around it, so too do we need to wait for all the 7.5 books to get nerfed before building books around that happening. Besides, if all the free stuff gets removed in the future, that'll include any free stuff IG gets, so what does it matter?

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Thinking that adding more broken gak into the game is the only way to improve the IG says more about your lack of imagination than it does anything about my motives.

Project much?

I have never once said that adding broken stuff to IG would be the only way to improve it.

*ALL* I did was question the logic behind IG not getting similar stuff to AM, because of a pipe dream that GW will instead remove all the broken stuff from other books.

 Grimskul wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
No faction in the game should get free stuff in a game revolving around points."Other factions have it" is a poor justification.

Agreed. GW was actually going towards the right way with the first part of the 7th ed. codices in toning things down until they did a heel-face turn and outright changed the design paradigm again with Necrons and Eldar. The idea that if "everyone is overpowered then it will be balanced" is fallacious in the extreme since they'll effectively keep one-upping one another with increasingly crazy things in order to match one another (as you can see with GW's unimaginative use of giving free stuff for Mechanicus and Marines since they lack the race/weapon mechanics of the Eldar/Crons).

You see the thing is I agree with you here. There should be a lot less of this broken jun flying around. Boosting the power level makes the big scary thing seem normal which in turn lessens their impact. Where once a baneblade brought out an "OHGODKILLITWITHFIRE" reaction in my opponent these days it tends to be more of a "Oh, a Baneblade... Meh" kind of reaction. And as the power level rises the old dependables of the basic core troops are left behind in the dust.
The game needs toning down. Formations need removing.

But as that is never going to happen the IG need to be brought back up to the level of the SM.

I think the most important thing for the IG book is to fix the internal balance, not necessarily the external. I'd much rather have a book with a wide variety of mostly equally balanced selections that are all a little underwhelming competitively, than have a book with one or two broken combinations that can compete with the top dogs, but still suffers from having useless dead weight units.

 Grimskul wrote:

Agreed. GW was actually going towards the right way with the first part of the 7th ed. codices in toning things down until they did a heel-face turn and outright changed the design paradigm again with Necrons and Eldar. The idea that if "everyone is overpowered then it will be balanced" is fallacious in the extreme since they'll effectively keep one-upping one another with increasingly crazy things in order to match one another (as you can see with GW's unimaginative use of giving free stuff for Mechanicus and Marines since they lack the race/weapon mechanics of the Eldar/Crons).

The problem is, whilst the overall power level of the pre-Necron books was better, the internal balance was absolutely appalling. Worse still, most of those books lost a great deal of flavour - meaning that many of them just aren't fun to play. I mean, take the DE book - it has what is quite possibly the worst HQ selection in the entire game, it has 2 troop choices and one of them is so bad as to be unusable. Hellions and Wracks are FA and Elite units (respectively), which don't even match up to most other armies' troop choices, their wargear section is the equivalent of someone drinking ink and then throwing it up on the pages. And, let's not even get into the new pfp table - which is about as exciting as watching an Archon fill out his taxes. "Aha, now that my archon has completed form 145B, my army gets FNP6+. By next turn, he'll have got it signed in triplicate, and I'll get FNP 5+!"

Anyway, my point is that even if 7.5 hadn't happened, let's not kid ourselves into thinking that the pre-Necron books were somehow the pinnacle of good design. Frankly, I think they were actually far worse overall than the 7.5 ones. Yes, they had better external balance, but they just sacrificed far too much to get it; and didn't even back it up with good internal balance. They were just a flavourless mess. The 7.5 books at least had pretty good internal balance, and kept most or all of their flavour.

It's just unfortunate that they took 40k in such a bad direction with regard to balance.

 Blacksails wrote:
I think the most important thing for the IG book is to fix the internal balance, not necessarily the external. I'd much rather have a book with a wide variety of mostly equally balanced selections that are all a little underwhelming competitively, than have a book with one or two broken combinations that can compete with the top dogs, but still suffers from having useless dead weight units.

The thing is though, I find that codex strength is pretty important with regard to internal balance.

A codex might be well-balanced (with units being pretty close to one another in value), but if it's weak then the differences between units gets more and more important because, when you're starting on the back-foot, every point counts.

In contrast, a stronger codex with poorer balance may still see a greater diversity of units used, simply because (outside of tournaments) there isn't the pressing need to get every last drop of value out of your points.

 vipoid wrote:

The thing is though, I find that codex strength is pretty important with regard to internal balance.

A codex might be well-balanced (with units being pretty close to one another in value), but if it's weak then the differences between units gets more and more important because, when you're starting on the back-foot, every point counts.

In contrast, a stronger codex with poorer balance may still see a greater diversity of units used, simply because (outside of tournaments) there isn't the pressing need to get every last drop of value out of your points.

I see what you're saying, but a codex with a handful of super strong units/formations is still just a codex with a handful of super strong units. Every unit that doesn't fall into that category is inferior, and thus only used when you don't need to play that hard, or just want to use those units because they look dope as fething hell yo.

A codex that is weaker externally but balanced internally means that the difference in the perfect ideal, optimal build isn't terribly large compared to a casual list that's more concerned with building to a specific theme or other restrictions. Outside of competitive play, a better balanced internally book also suits narrative/scenario/campaign gaming better, and as a bonus side effect, will likely endear you to other gamers, knowing that even your hardest list is well within reason to play against.

Plus, I really truly hate the idea of furthering the power creep, despite it being the simplest and easiest option.

 Blacksails wrote:

I see what you're saying, but a codex with a handful of super strong units/formations is still just a codex with a handful of super strong units. Every unit that doesn't fall into that category is inferior, and thus only used when you don't need to play that hard, or just want to use those units because they look dope as fething hell yo.

Oh, I get what you mean. And, yeah, I'd like our codex to be internally balanced too (especially given its track record...).

My point was simply that you also need to address external balance - as weaker books tend to exaggerate the differences between units.

Incidentally, I wonder if anything can even be done at this point to salvage IG infantry armies.

 vipoid wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

I see what you're saying, but a codex with a handful of super strong units/formations is still just a codex with a handful of super strong units. Every unit that doesn't fall into that category is inferior, and thus only used when you don't need to play that hard, or just want to use those units because they look dope as fething hell yo.

Oh, I get what you mean. And, yeah, I'd like our codex to be internally balanced too (especially given its track record...).

My point was simply that you also need to address external balance - as weaker books tend to exaggerate the differences between units.

Incidentally, I wonder if anything can even be done at this point to salvage IG infantry armies.

Nerf the power bloom?

 vipoid wrote:

Oh, I get what you mean. And, yeah, I'd like our codex to be internally balanced too (especially given its track record...).

My point was simply that you also need to address external balance - as weaker books tend to exaggerate the differences between units.

Incidentally, I wonder if anything can even be done at this point to salvage IG infantry armies.

Nothing can really be done short of a reset button at this point. Any change you'd make to dial something back would be met by another issue that would also have to be dialed back.

Bringing back lumbering behemoth and adding split fire would help Russes for starters.

Make WYVERNS (brokenly cheap - 4!!! twin linked. shred. ignores cover. barrage. blasts per turn as well as a heavy bolter and front armour 12) more points/ model

Make the weak Scions less expensive in points - once killed a whole 600 point force with 3 veterans and one marine as the total casualties.

 Scion of the Emperor wrote:
Make WYVERNS (brokenly cheap - 4!!! twin linked. shred. ignores cover. barrage. blasts per turn as well as a heavy bolter and front armour 12) more points/ model

Make the weak Scions less expensive in points - once killed a whole 600 point force with 3 veterans and one marine as the total casualties.

Wyverns are not overpriced. Not compared to Wraithguard/knights, Necrons, Tau and Space Marines in general.

Well, Wyverns do outcompete most of our other anti-infantry units (though as much because our other units are crap as because of the wyverns being too strong).

It's certainly hard to call them OP - especially when they're useless/ineffective against most of the really OP units currently in the game.

But, I feel the real problem with wyverns is that they're a bad element for the game in general. It's so good at its job that it makes infantry even less desirable than they already are.

And now I'm just remembering that the thunderfire cannon also exists. Sigh.