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.

Typically-Wardian, I'm just going to repeat what I said on the other thread:

 vipoid wrote:

But it doesn't matter, does it? Your mind is already made up, and you have no intention of letting the facts sway you.

You started a thread asking how people could possibly think IG were underpowered. Many people took the time to reply and gave you many, many reasons why IG are demonstrably underpowered. You ignored all of them. Because that wasn't what the thread was about. You had no intention of ever actually listening - you just wanted conformation of your own personal bias against IG. When you failed to get it because your bias was just that - unfounded bias, you instead resorted to non-arguments to try and justify your bias, insisting that everyone else must just be wrong and you are the only person who can see the truth.

I see no point whatsoever in trying to argue with you because you have demonstrated that you simply won't listen. You will remain in a state of denial until reality itself alters to fit your baseless beliefs.

 vipoid wrote:
Typically-Wardian, I'm just going to repeat what I said on the other thread:

 vipoid wrote:

But it doesn't matter, does it? Your mind is already made up, and you have no intention of letting the facts sway you.

You started a thread asking how people could possibly think IG were underpowered. Many people took the time to reply and gave you many, many reasons why IG are demonstrably underpowered. You ignored all of them. Because that wasn't what the thread was about. You had no intention of ever actually listening - you just wanted conformation of your own personal bias against IG. When you failed to get it because your bias was just that - unfounded bias, you instead resorted to non-arguments to try and justify your bias, insisting that everyone else must just be wrong and you are the only person who can see the truth.

I see no point whatsoever in trying to argue with you because you have demonstrated that you simply won't listen. You will remain in a state of denial until reality itself alters to fit your baseless beliefs.

And again, exalted

I can either reply with anecdotal evidence (how, for instance, the one psyker who has the power could like in my last game be targeted by large blast barrages, causing him to take a couple dozen Look Out Sir tests and knock him out after just one successful cast) or I could respond with some simple math (such as wgat fraction of the blob can be removed with a simple, common flamer drop pod unt even with the 4++) but you're gonna listen to either of those. You've somehow got it in your head that there's no possible way that any army could ever cause 100 wounds to a T3 unit, and far be it from me to tell you that you're wrong.

Akiasura wrote:

Experiment 626 wrote:
@Akiasura: Don't forget that the Slaany Herald that always comes with those Seekers can forcibly challenge out the most problematic character in the IG deathblob. Such as the specific Psyker w/Forewarning, and reliably butcher him. (6A base at WS7/Initiative crazy & ap2)

That's what really makes the Seeker unit an auto-hard counter to the blob, as its accompanying Herald is one of the only models in the game capable of reliably singling out a specific enemy character, who has no way to avoid the challenge.

Yeah, I didn't want to include any support units despite the fact that, outside of necrons, stacking buffs is what makes the best codexes...well the best. Dexes like IG and Chaos Marines are filled with Skornergy.

Honestly I don't think the herald is needed, though he does seal the deal.
Does the power go away once the psyker is dead or would they still benefit from it? I know in 6th the blob losing their save giving person was catastrophic and happened immediately but I believe it's worded now that the buff would stay in place. Not sure though.

If you're going to take Seekers, then the Herald is pretty much 100% mandatory. Sure she's not really needed against Guardsmen - even the 600pts deathblob, but against pretty much everything else in the game that's more than 5 Tactical Marines, you really need that Exalted Locus boost. Otherwise, all you are is a bunch of really fast Wyches with Rending.
Plus the Locus is key for keeping the Herald nearly untouchable, as you can ensure that she stays locked into easily winnable challenges against basic Sergeant equivalents, or else can pick out those few critical supporters such as the Divination Psyker or Priest or whatever.

And no, the unit doesn't auto lose their 4++ from Forewarning until the beginning of their next player turn. So that initial round where the Psyker bites it, they still have the 4++. After that Assault phase though, it's lights out!

Actually, if/when you see any kind of super character intensive deathstar unit with Daemons, it's fun to take the Doomstone from the Hellforged Artifacts.
Every non-Daemon character involved in the same combat as the bearer gets to take a Ld test. If failed, they get nuked with -D6 Ld for the rest of the game - if a model is reduced to 0Ld, it's simply removed from the game! Works wonders against deathstars that are build around lots of Ld8 and worse characters. (I used to take it to explode those annoying JetSeerstars in 6th)

It's not so hot against Marine deathstars mind, but even then, you're still forcing a bucket load of Ld checks, and some are bound to fail.

Now if only the Lore of Slaanesh had a proper Ld nuking power like it should...

These two are obviously some kind of troll tag team. They simply refuse to listen to any logic or multitude of examples given by the large majority of everyone else, be it mathhammer or the fact that an IG army hasn't won a single tournament in emperor knows how long.

These guys are a lost cause, and all the banter is simply feeding their agenda. Lock this thread already.

T-W has even put up a troll thread. Pretty much admits he's a troll.

You mean the thread that got locked in under 10 minutes? Ah yes good times.

He got 7 pages of IG trolling, so I'm guessing he's calling it a win. I ignored him a while back, and now I'm dropping out of this thread. You might want to stop feeding him, too.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Well if he named the Thunderfire, you'd have even less ground to stand on.

Also good that you admitted that you're trolling.

/smh


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:

Typically-Wardian wrote:
He is. Jancoran has shown you guys how the IG can be competitive, and you lot just ignore it and keep saying that none of it matters.

No, he didn't.

He gave us a ludicrously expensive melee unit with pitiful survivability, pitiful shooting and no way to realistically reach combat. Or even survive.

Except you'e wrong on all those counts. Other thaneverything you just said, you have a point. It's exceedingly tough to kill, demonstrably. That's not a claim you can refute because its actually been demonstrated in real games instead of just OpinionHammer on a forum. . Shooting isn't its primary puprose though it does do that very accurately and to deadly effect when its asked to. So. Demonstrably survivable CAPABLE of shooting and not overly dedicated ot that task in most games..

It doesnt bother me much that there is anti-IG sentiment. I see the same thing for Sisters of Battle. I can't help but chuckle, but it happens all the time. I also won all three games at todays tournament which was cool, using Chaos Marines. I'll be attending tomorrow's tournament with Adepta Sororitas.


Here's a querstion for those who may play IG on a regular basis: What would you say are the top Five units in the IG Codex?

My favorites?

Vendetta: impressive beast of a sky shark and no slouch against ground targets. that it's a tranport i s just too much gravy. Compare it to other 170 point planes and its hard to find one that's as good for the same points.
Punisher: In its role as an anti-personnel war machine, it's got it where it counts: High STR, high rate of fire and with Pask, a truly impressive suppression fire weapon.
Demolition Veterans: able to parachute in and bring some devastating firepower to a grouping, or lie in wait for the big mean nasties to make their presence known. I admire their payload and with the simple expedient of a guardian Angel with better armor attached, or evev two, they can plague an enemy in a seriously damaging way for a couple of turns or more.
Yarrick: I don't use him much for various reasons, but he is a fairly great character for what you get. He gives orders which is huge, and he has fortitude. He's a good force multiplier. He really isn't exorbitantly priced (though he flirts at the border I'd say and it wouldnt be hard to find someone to argue that point)
Deathstrike Missile Launcher: absolutely terrifying answer to all your enemy liquidation needs. Its the thing that goes bump in the night and God save you should it manage to pull the trigger. It is this war machines victims fpr whom the bells toll.

Those are the top gems I think there are in the Astra Militarum Codex.

You hear that, guys? He won a tournament at his LGS where everything is super casual using Chaos Space Marines!

We are all clearly wrong on our assessment of the AM Codex, when he's the only one defending it. Time to pack it up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also people disparage Sisters because the model range sucks, the army is expensive (due to the first point, kinda) and the codex is ENTIRELY mono build. Then again you probably discovered the secret to Repentia and we're just too stupid and need to L2P.

Jancoran, you didn't include Wyverns? They are one of the few good units in the book.

 Jancoran wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Well if he named the Thunderfire, you'd have even less ground to stand on.

Also good that you admitted that you're trolling.

/smh


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:

Typically-Wardian wrote:
He is. Jancoran has shown you guys how the IG can be competitive, and you lot just ignore it and keep saying that none of it matters.

No, he didn't.

He gave us a ludicrously expensive melee unit with pitiful survivability, pitiful shooting and no way to realistically reach combat. Or even survive.

Except you'e wrong on all those counts. Other thaneverything you just said, you have a point. It's exceedingly tough to kill, demonstrably. That's not a claim you can refute because its actually been demonstrated in real games instead of just OpinionHammer on a forum. . Shooting isn't its primary puprose though it does do that very accurately and to deadly effect when its asked to. So. Demonstrably survivable CAPABLE of shooting and not overly dedicated ot that task in most games..

It doesnt bother me much that there is anti-IG sentiment. I see the same thing for Sisters of Battle. I can't help but chuckle, but it happens all the time. I also won all three games at todays tournament which was cool, using Chaos Marines.

What did you play against, and what sort of house rules were in effect?

I mean, I've won my share of games with IG and CSM at multiple 7E events, even going undefeated at a couple of them, but these were relatively small tournaments and I never had to face top tier lists, or for that matter, in most cases, top tier opponents (with no disrespect meant to any of those I played against, they just weren't the ultra competitive top tier gamer types). When you're playing in pools like that, it's relatively easy to be a big fish.

When you look at larger events however, things like NOVA, BAO, Adepticon, etc, you don't see CSM's or IG winning or placing anything near the top, particularly as anything but small allied contingents to a more powerful list (and even that is increasingly rare)

Here's a querstion for those who may play IG on a regular basis: What would you say are the top Five units in the IG Codex?

My favorites?

Vendetta: impressive beast of a sky shark and no slouch against ground targets. that it's a tranport i s just too much gravy. Compare it to other 170 point planes and its hard to find one that's as good for the same points.
Punisher: In its role as an anti-personnel war machine, it's got it where it counts: High STR, high rate of fire and with Pask, a truly impressive suppression fire weapon.
Demolition Veterans: able to parachute in and bring some devastating firepower to a grouping, or lie in wait for the big mean nasties to make their presence known. I admire their payload and with the simple expedient of a guardian Angel with better armor attached, or evev two, they can plague an enemy in a seriously damaging way for a couple of turns or more.
Yarrick: I don't use him much for various reasons, but he is a fairly great character for what you get. He gives orders which is huge, and he has fortitude. He's a good force multiplier. He really isn't exorbitantly priced (though he flirts at the border I'd say and it wouldnt be hard to find someone to argue that point)
Deathstrike Missile Launcher: absolutely terrifying answer to all your enemy liquidation needs. Its the thing that goes bump in the night and God save you should it manage to pull the trigger. It is this war machines victims fpr whom the bells toll.

Those are the top gems I think there are in the Astra Militarum Codex.

I personally don't think any of these would be on my list. Here's my thinking as to why.

Vendettas are "OK'. They were amazing in 5E when they could start on the board and just let loose with that turn 1 alpha strike, but having to sit in reserve they're very "ho-hum". I mean, yes, relative to most other Flyers, they're pretty good, though most flyers are also pretty naff, particularly next to FMC's. Not terrible, but not amazing either, at least in my experience.

The Punisher is "ok", but it's not really a gem. On average, against a perfect target like say, Orks in the open, it'll average 8-9 kills if they're within that optimal 24" range, or about 48-54pts worth of dead Orks. Not terrible, but certainly not worthy of gem status either. If they're even getting 5+ cover however, the effectiveness plummets dramatically. Adding in Pask upps the killy power, but also drastically increases the cost, as you then *must* buy another tank as well in addition to Pask. What the Punisher is really good for isn't anti-personnel or mowing down hordes of muppets, there really are better tools for that. It's also not really a "high Str" unit either, S5 is at the upper range of small arms and the very bottom of anti-infantry heavy weapons. What the Punisher's best role really is, is as a finisher. 3+sv MC sitting there with one wound left? 2 or 3 Marines survived everything else thrown at them? 5 Grots left on an objective? That's where the Punisher really finds its best purpose, is in ensuring the removal of those "almost dead" units that you just really need gone and really just need a ton of dice to ensure they fail enough of *something* to just finally go away.

The Deathstrike is hardly impressive anymore. You don't know when it gets to fire, it only gets to shoot once, and it can't fire on the first turn, and there are plenty of other units that bring similar firepower at this point. Sure they cost more, but they're also way more survivable, can fire turn 1, and can fire more than once. There's a reason you basically never see Deathstrikes.I mean, yeah, S10 AP1 No Cover 10" blast looks sweet on paper. But it's so easy for an opponent to neutralize or mitigate it, particularly if not taken in multiples (and I don't think I've ever actually seen them taken in multiples in a list). It has a huge *potential* killing power relative to its cost, but it's actual *average* damage output is actually very low as a result of an opponent having the opportunity to neutralize it before it can do anything and its random firing point, and if the thing made it to turn 2 but didn't get to fire, it almost certainly won't live to turn 3 against a competent opponent running a functional army. I also don't think I've ever seen one in a serious tournament list...ever, in 6 years, precisely for the above reasons.

Yarrick has the problem of not only being expensive, but, if not put in a Blob, relatively easy to destroy. He doesn't have an attached command squad, and he's not doing much for a Chimeltavet squad. In artillery-park armies he's got some better utility, but outside of that he's really ridiculously expensive.

If an opponent has read your army list, Demo vets will never really get a chance to "lie in wait" for anything unless your opponent has completely forgotten about them, they'll be specifically targeted for removal, and aren't particularly hard to remove. They have some utility in a Valkyrie, but that's a minimum 215pt investment for a single pieplate. Can be fun, but unless an opponent just has no idea what they're equipped with (in which case they didn't properly read the army list or you're trying to pull a trick on them that'll only ever work once), they're really not useful defensively, and offensively there's just usually better ways to get pieplates.


For me, my gems are

Wyverns. Very cheap, utterly expendable, and put out muppet-mowing firepower that a Punisher could only wish it had.
Company Command Squads - BS4, Senior Officer Orders, and 4x Special Weapons. Always great units.

I think personally that's where I'd call it in terms of "gems", there are other, functional things, but not really any really super "standout" performers.

In terms of top "functional" units however, to complete a top 5, I'd add these three.

Leman Russ Exterminator - These can be set up such that they can be functional and valuable against literally any opposition, they'll always have *something* to do (unlike say, a Vanquisher against a Green Tide, a Punisher against Knights, or a Demolisher against a nid FMC-spam list). They may not excel at any one role, but they can at least be functional in any role, and very good in a couple. With HB sponsons and a hull lascannon, it's not outrageously expensive, but can put at least *some* hurt out on anything in the game, can do so from across the board, and is actually pretty great at popping transports and killing lighter flyers.

Leman Russ Eradicator - Better than a Hellhound at the Hellhounds dedicated role for basically the same price, but with AV14 and double the range to make up for less speed.

Blob platoons - can be made to do a lot of different shennanigans, can often take enormous amounts of punishment, they're just expensive and largely rather slow, and it's really easy to tie up lots of firepower and upgrades in this unit that will end up having mutually exclusive roles.

 Jancoran wrote:
It's exceedingly tough to kill, demonstrably.

Except people have already showed you just how easy it is to kill.

 Jancoran wrote:
That's not a claim you can refute because its actually been demonstrated in real games instead of just OpinionHammer on a forum.

I don't even know how to respond to a statement this fallacious and idiotic, so I'll just add some more facepalms:




Also:

http://www.3plusplus.net/2011/01/fallacies-i-use-it-and-it-works-for-me/

You list Deathstrike missiles as a "gem"? You...wot mate? I don't think I've ever seen them take out their points, ever. Your opponent needs to play really stupidly to not take him out and/or deploy in such a way that 1 blast can't take out 170 points of guys.

Why use that for strength 10 AP1 ignores cover when you could have A) a manticore for more reliable strength 10, B) an eradicator for more reliable ignores cover, or C) a Demolisher/battlecannon/whatever for more reliable low ap? Heck if I really, REALLY wanted low ap ignored over blasts id just do the baneblade variant that does that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You list Deathstrike missiles as a "gem"? You...wot mate? I don't think I've ever seen them take out their points, ever. Your opponent needs to play really stupidly to not take him out and/or deploy in such a way that 1 blast can't take out 170 points of guys.

Why use that for strength 10 AP1 ignores cover when you could have A) a manticore for more reliable strength 10, B) an eradicator for more reliable ignores cover, or C) a Demolisher/battlecannon/whatever for more reliable low ap? Heck if I really, REALLY wanted low ap ignored over blasts id just do the baneblade variant that does that.

I'm beginning to wonder if Jancoran is Typically-Wardian's alternate account.

 vipoid wrote:
I'm beginning to wonder if Jancoran is Typically-Wardian's alternate account.

I've been thinking the exact same thing.

Although the Deathstrike missile comment gave me a giggle xD

The way I see it, the biggest problem that the Imperial Guard have, besides being designed for two editions previous, is a distinct lack of mobility and cost-effective firepower. Sure, they have transports, but they're either overpriced or ineffective. The same goes with their tanks. Off the top of my head, here are some of the things that need changing for IG:

Reduce the cost of all Leman Russ variants. The cheapest should be around 120 points, with the vanilla LRBT being 140. Bring back Lumbering Behemoth to let all variants fire Ordnance weapons without having to snapfire other weapons.

Reduce the cost of the Chimera to 55 points. The only reason the cost was increased was to nerf veterans in Chimeras. The Guard need their mobility back, and so the nerf should be undone.

Reduce the cost of the Taurox to 45 points, give people a reason to take it.

Reduce the cost of the Valkyrie to 115 points, make its missiles no longer Ordnance. The Vendetta was rightly given a cost increase, but the Valkyrie needs to be cheaper to provide more mobility.

Reduce the cost of the Basilisk to 100 points. Artillery is one of the only things the guard have going for them.

Increase the cost of the Wyvern to 80-85 points. I hate those things as someone who plays a lot of infantry. The fact that one of them costs as much as a Venom or Razorback is just insulting.

Add some formations, rework orders and thier platoon structure for more flexibility, and IG suddenly start to look decent.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You hear that, guys? He won a tournament at his LGS where everything is super casual using Chaos Space Marines!

We are all clearly wrong on our assessment of the AM Codex, when he's the only one defending it. Time to pack it up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also people disparage Sisters because the model range sucks, the army is expensive (due to the first point, kinda) and the codex is ENTIRELY mono build. Then again you probably discovered the secret to Repentia and we're just too stupid and need to L2P.

Actually I did it out of state. Not locally. How many tournies did you win Best General at this weekend? Me? I won two, at two different places, out of state. So spare me. Oh yeah. And the second? Yeah I won the second one with Sisters of Battle. I have earned my chops many times so do not condescend to me, friend. While youre busy talking, I'm actually doing it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frozocrone wrote:
Jancoran, you didn't include Wyverns? They are one of the few good units in the book.

Wyverns are pretty awesome.

 Jancoran wrote:
How many tournies did you win Best General at this weekend? Me? I won two, at two different places, out of state.

He won four.

And that claim would be just as credible as yours.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
How many tournies did you win Best General at this weekend? Me? I won two, at two different places, out of state.

He won four.

And that claim would be just as credible as yours.

And yet, there I was, undefeated with these armies you "cannot win" with. The War Convocation player at Rainy Day Games can tell you all about his game against Sisters of Battle. Just dial up facebook. Sisters for the win.

EDIT: Oh and Damon Scythe (an employee) who is on that page, also can speak to the Night Lords wins. So. Just saying.

 Jancoran wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
How many tournies did you win Best General at this weekend? Me? I won two, at two different places, out of state.

He won four.

And that claim would be just as credible as yours.

And yet, there I was, undefeated with these armies you "cannot win" with. The War Convocation player at Rainy Day Games can tell you all about his game against Sisters of Battle. Just dial up facebook. Sisters for the win.

EDIT: Oh and Damon Scythe (an employee) who is on that page, also can speak to the Night Lords wins. So. Just saying.

Sorry. I'm going to have to call bull .

In order for you to have even a *modicum* of 'credibility' here, you're going to need to do a few things, because your last couple of posts have been eye-roll worthy at best, and I'll note that's all they're worth.

First, post your exact lists used to 'win' these mythical tournaments.

Second, post the exact lists you opponents used. (Not off your memory here, I'm talking about exactly what they played).

Third, include any and every house rule used by the T.O. as well as missions played.

Fourth, give date, time, location (address), and contact information for the store/location these mythical 'tournaments' occurred at this weekend so that a neutral third party can contact each of them and ask said T.O.'s if your list is accurate, if the games played were accurate, and if your list was the overall winner of one or both of these tournaments. I'm not asking for an internet handle, I'm asking for names and phone numbers for two different specific T.O.'s to verify you're not just bumping your gums here.

If you can provide the above information and it checks out, then good on you. I don't foresee that being the case, however.

Keep on blustering, bud, because I play Guard (Vostroyan Firstborn) and against a moderately competent opponent playing any of the newer codexes such as Necrons, Eldar, Dark Angels, Space Marines, or Tau, it's an uphill battle from the start. Not saying a win can't be had with Guard, far from it, I get wins semi-regularly with them, but it takes a fair amount of luck and more often than not a fair amount of bad luck for my opponent to eke out a victory in a tournament setting with mono Guard, and I say that as someone who's been playing Guard almost exclusively for the better part of 6+ years now.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

 Red__Thirst wrote:

I play Guard (Vostroyan Firstborn) and against a moderately competent opponent playing any of the newer codexes such as Necrons, Eldar, Dark Angels, Space Marines, or Tau, it's an uphill battle from the start. Not saying a win can't be had with Guard, far from it, I get wins semi-regularly with them, but it takes a fair amount of luck and more often than not a fair amount of bad luck for my opponent to eke out a victory in a tournament setting with mono Guard, and I say that as someone who's been playing Guard almost exclusively for the better part of 6+ years now.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

Sorry to hear that you're struggling.

In order to diagnose why Ill need your exact list and that of every opponent that defeated you.


Absurd request? I agree. Asking you that won't help you. Answering it wont help me.

Let me know if things turn around for you. I hope they do.

Jancoran, his request really wasn't absurd.

You can't have it both ways. If you're going to use these tournaments you apparently won to prove your point, then you have to be prepared to answer questions about them.

Moreover, are you familiar with the term 'burden of proof'?

it means that if you make a statement - e.g. that you won one or more tournaments - then the burden is on *you* to prove that those statements are true.

If you choose not to provide proof, fine. But, bear in mind that your statements are considered untrue until you can prove otherwise.

 Jancoran wrote:



Sorry to hear that you're struggling.

In order to diagnose why Ill need your exact list and that of every opponent that defeated you.


Absurd request? I agree. Asking you that won't help you. Answering it wont help me.

Let me know if things turn around for you. I hope they do.

Let's try again kiddo.

I'm not struggling. I do pretty well all told, but by-and-large the entire Guard army/Codex is struggling. It's a sub-par book written at the twilight of 6th edition and has fairly poor internal balance on top of being 1.5 editions behind the curve (Post new-school Necrons).

It's not an absurd request. I can claim I've won multiple Grand Tournaments and am a vetted tournament organizer with multiple tournaments I've run over the course of two years. In order for me to *PROVE* that claim, I would need to provide evidence. Example: Contact Van's Comics and Cards, located on Highway 51 in Ridgeland, MS (google it to get the store's number) and ask him if he's had a guy by the name of Drew (Me) run Warhammer 40,000 tournaments in his store in the past. Van (the store's owner) will tell you that I in fact have done so on more than one occasion in the past during 5th edition. (He has moved locations since 6th and no longer has space to host tournaments, sadly).

I can also claim I own a real life bolter shell I won at the Memphis, TN Games Workshop Battle bunker on the weekend of August 28th, 2004 on Friday at the first of three tournaments held that weekend, one on each day. Each of these tournaments granted the winner a real life scale replica of a .75 caliber bolter shell. Guess what?





And before you claim those are conjured up from a google search, I suggest you look at my Blood Angels gallery to see the same keyboard in the background and left hand holding my recently completed miniatures.

That, boys and girls, is how we offer evidence to back up a claim on the internet.

You're full of it, Jancoran, and unless you can provide evidence as I have above to back up your claims, you're just making yourself look like a giant, tea-totaling idiot.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

Me gusta.

The individual records of tournament players are moot, they are statistically negligible when weighed against the sum total of games player with Imperial Guard armies.

The Imperial Guard codex is considered underpowered because it loses more than it wins. Like all averages some people are on the top side of that while others are on the bottom side.

We have our good units, we have our bad units. Other armies have better. IG fall short because our best units best combat a type of army and units that just aren't used as much in this edition.

 vipoid wrote:
Jancoran, his request really wasn't absurd.

You can't have it both ways. If you're going to use these tournaments you apparently won to prove your point, then you have to be prepared to answer questions about them.

Moreover, are you familiar with the term 'burden of proof'?

it means that if you make a statement - e.g. that you won one or more tournaments - then the burden is on *you* to prove that those statements are true.

If you choose not to provide proof, fine. But, bear in mind that your statements are considered untrue until you can prove otherwise.

YesI am prety familiar with the term. But Im not the one questioning the right to have an opinion. THAT person can doubt freely butI I dont owe them to be more than honest. But I have delivered, offering you an easy way to contact people who would know. So do it if you care. . And if you dont, good.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 aka_mythos wrote:
The individual records of tournament players are moot, they are statistically negligible when weighed against the sum total of games player with Imperial Guard armies.

The Imperial Guard codex is considered underpowered because it loses more than it wins. Like all averages some people are on the top side of that while others are on the bottom side.

We have our good units, we have our bad units. Other armies have better. IG fall short because our best units best combat a type of army and units that just aren't used as much in this edition.

Not QUITe. To be more accurate the PLAYER may or may not lose more often than they win. You think its the list? The codex? And not at all the guy in the mirror?

No. Codex's don't make you lose. That's just a whiny crutch.

Still waiting for you to formulate a reply there Jancoran. I see you're online.

I've got all night, please, regale us with the information to prove your otherwise baseless claims.

Please.

No. Seriously. I legitimately want to know where these so called tournaments were, and how many people participated in them.



Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

P.S. ....Seriously.

Edit: OH splendid, he replied while I was typing this out. Let's see what he said.

 Red__Thirst wrote:

Let's try again kiddo.

It is a shame you choose to condescend again. I'm not your kiddo.

That aside, I just don't owe it to you. I'm sorry. I can share ideas and you can choose what to do next. I'm not the one who needs the help. instead of considering possibilities, you try to make it about me. but it isn't. Never was. This was about a Codex you say is decrepit and that causes you great struggle.

I dont think it's the codex. Like all things, it's whats being done WITH IT, and while I am on record s saying an update would be nice, I find the cries of poverty to be nothing more than sour grapes.

So if you're struggling, I really hope that turns around for you. Until then, just play something else I guess.

Jancoran, do you sincerely believe the IG codex is on the same power level as Eldar, Crons, and Marines (and others I missed)?