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.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I don't think anyone said "conscripts are fine."

I think people are usually willing to give nerfs to conscripts one way or another; for example, I am okay with removing orders.

What those of us "defending" Conscripts were defending against was not "nerf conscripts" but rather "Nerf conscripts so hard they're back to uselessness."

Another nerf I'd be okay with, for example, is making them 1 per 2 infantry squads, like they used to be. Another is making them lose D6 instead of 1 for the Summary Execution ability.

But more than 1 of those nerfs at a time is ridiculous imo.

Or Summary Execution kills one guy and gives the unit Ld10 for the morale check. I think casualties should scale with losses, and just giving a different number to the execution doesn't do that. It just makes a random number of guys die. Could have lost 20 and only lose one on morale, or could have lost 3 and lose 6 on morale. A more linear change feels more sensible to me.

 Purifier wrote:

 ross-128 wrote:
Commissars have always had Summary Execution though. Just before it stopped the whole squad from running off the table instead of a handful of extra models.

There was one edition where commissars were upgrades to infantry squads instead of ICs, but in that edition priests granted Fearless so there was functionally no difference (except the priest didn't blam a model to do it).

There are only three things that have changed about conscripts:
1: they were pulled out of platoons
2: a 5+ save got a little harder to remove
3: they gained the ability to hurt T6+

Of those, two apply to every other infantry model in the game. Other than that they're the same as they've always been.

You realise that the game is completely different, right? Many many things that used to be able to wipe squads are now dealing multiple damage instead. Wiping squads is slightly harder and is mitigated with morale allowing you to wipe larger squads. Commissars are stopping that. End result is that even if the conscriots had the exact same of everything, they are now better. You can't just compare their stats in the old game to their stats in the new.

In previous editions, one morale check would basically delete an entire conscript squad if they were unsupported. With their LD they would break and never rally. Commissars (or priests, in 5th) have always been what prevented that. The reason this never happened is nobody ever deployed an unsupported conscript squad.

So commissars aren't doing anything new. Making conscripts unsupportable would break them the other way because they were never designed to function without support.

Conscripts at 4 ppm and normal guard infantry at 5ppm are still as good or better than what most armies have access to.

Conscripts would trade damage for staying power compared to cultists and beat termagaunts in both staying power and firepower.

It's just a bit silly we've had people try to argue conscripts are doing their screening job properly right now, rather than being obviously too good at it.

Edit: for everyone claiming that commissars aren't doing anything new, you are right they aren't. They are doing what they always have in an edition where almost every army has had there morale rules weakened, nerfed, or occasionally removed. That's kinda an issue.

SilverAlien wrote:
Conscripts at 4 ppm and normal guard infantry at 5ppm are still as good or better than what most armies have access to.

Conscripts would trade damage for staying power compared to cultists and beat termagaunts in both staying power and firepower.

It's just a bit silly we've had people try to argue conscripts are doing their screening job properly right now, rather than being obviously too good at it.

Edit: for everyone claiming that commissars aren't doing anything new, you are right they aren't. They are doing what they always have in an edition where almost every army has had there morale rules weakened, nerfed, or occasionally removed. That's kinda an issue.

Upping points across the board for IG is an adequate solution, provided we see what Regiment rules they will get. But without Regiment rules, I don't think they're worth 5ppm.

 ross-128 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 ross-128 wrote:
Commissars have always had Summary Execution though. Just before it stopped the whole squad from running off the table instead of a handful of extra models.

There was one edition where commissars were upgrades to infantry squads instead of ICs, but in that edition priests granted Fearless so there was functionally no difference (except the priest didn't blam a model to do it).

There are only three things that have changed about conscripts:
1: they were pulled out of platoons
2: a 5+ save got a little harder to remove
3: they gained the ability to hurt T6+

Of those, two apply to every other infantry model in the game. Other than that they're the same as they've always been.

You realise that the game is completely different, right? Many many things that used to be able to wipe squads are now dealing multiple damage instead. Wiping squads is slightly harder and is mitigated with morale allowing you to wipe larger squads. Commissars are stopping that. End result is that even if the conscriots had the exact same of everything, they are now better. You can't just compare their stats in the old game to their stats in the new.

In previous editions, one morale check would basically delete an entire conscript squad if they were unsupported. With their LD they would break and never rally. Commissars (or priests, in 5th) have always been what prevented that. The reason this never happened is nobody ever deployed an unsupported conscript squad.

So commissars aren't doing anything new. Making conscripts unsupportable would break them the other way because they were never designed to function without support.

No, but you were able to kill the squad more easily with mass template weapons among other things. So you didn't need to make them run. You do need to make them run now, because doing things that used to do 2D6 wounds now do 2D6 damage, which kills one conscript.

SilverAlien wrote:
Conscripts at 4 ppm and normal guard infantry at 5ppm are still as good or better than what most armies have access to.

Conscripts would trade damage for staying power compared to cultists and beat termagaunts in both staying power and firepower.

It's just a bit silly we've had people try to argue conscripts are doing their screening job properly right now, rather than being obviously too good at it.

Edit: for everyone claiming that commissars aren't doing anything new, you are right they aren't. They are doing what they always have in an edition where almost every army has had there morale rules weakened, nerfed, or occasionally removed. That's kinda an issue.

Every army except Tyranids or Orks.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

SilverAlien wrote:
Conscripts at 4 ppm and normal guard infantry at 5ppm are still as good or better than what most armies have access to.

Conscripts would trade damage for staying power compared to cultists and beat termagaunts in both staying power and firepower.

It's just a bit silly we've had people try to argue conscripts are doing their screening job properly right now, rather than being obviously too good at it.

Edit: for everyone claiming that commissars aren't doing anything new, you are right they aren't. They are doing what they always have in an edition where almost every army has had there morale rules weakened, nerfed, or occasionally removed. That's kinda an issue.

Every army except Tyranids or Orks.

5 Man Space Marine Squads also rather immune to morale. Necrons seem to have it good to.

 Freddy Kruger wrote:


Scions need a small points increase to avoid spam. 2 PPM sounds like a decent start.

They need to pay more for the weapons because of BS 3+. The problem is not the scion, is the cheap plasma.

Orks amusingly got their morale back after not having it, and they aren't particularly tough models for their price. Ditto with tyranids, pricier HQs and more fragile units. Ork boyz are ballpark same durability yet cost twice as much while termagaunts are a point more for less durability.

They are actually balanced for lack of morale casualties by being exceptionally flimsy.

I'm also going to ignore that someone just said morale rules aren't an issue for necrons right now, because it's too early for me to be able to form a civil response to such an utterly ignorant statement.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Upping points across the board for IG is an adequate solution, provided we see what Regiment rules they will get. But without Regiment rules, I don't think they're worth 5ppm.

Are you serious?

As stated many times, if conscripts were not eligible for the moral abilities of the commissars, they would be completely manageable.
I'd even go so far as doubling the amount of casualties suffered from failed moral on them to represent their undisciplined nature.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Upping points across the board for IG is an adequate solution, provided we see what Regiment rules they will get. But without Regiment rules, I don't think they're worth 5ppm.

Are you serious?

Name the guard infantry unit that isn't better than equivalently priced units in other armies. Legitimately curious. I've got ogryns... and that's really about it.

 FrozenDwarf wrote:
Maxing the amount of conscripts to 20 per unit and change the summary execution to NOT work on conscripts would be mutch better then giving them a point increase.

Iike it has been said, if conscripts goes up in points, regular guard has to allso and they cant as they are in the perfect spot right now.

as for scions and taurox, deffo increase the point cost so that some of the other stuff can actualy be used when they get a point cost reduction.

As someone that is getting back into the game from 4th edition - I find this sort of min-maxing across codex's really unappealing - and it has got to make it practically impossible to balance, especially for Imperial forces. But even the eldar lists with a combination of craftworld and dark eldar just seems .... wrong.

For casual play, it's obviously up to whatever players agree with. But for matched play I feel like you should only be able to utilize one codex (along with any units specifically called out that can be taken from other lists of course).

SilverAlien wrote:

Name the guard infantry unit that isn't better than equivalently priced units in other armies. Legitimately curious. I've got ogryns... and that's really about it.

If you mean infantry only, I COULD see - in this case I took the quote out of its context. But as stated, is not that simple. In case of the scions, is the weapon cost that is too low for BS3+. Unless you want them to cost as much as marines for way less S, T and whatnot.

Concerning vehicles, you should tell me instead how a Russ or a Chimera are undercosted.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SideshowLucifer wrote:
As stated many times, if conscripts were not eligible for the moral abilities of the commissars, they would be completely manageable.

So what's the point of taking them?

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I don't think anyone said "conscripts are fine."

I think people are usually willing to give nerfs to conscripts one way or another; for example, I am okay with removing orders.

What those of us "defending" Conscripts were defending against was not "nerf conscripts" but rather "Nerf conscripts so hard they're back to uselessness."

Another nerf I'd be okay with, for example, is making them 1 per 2 infantry squads, like they used to be. Another is making them lose D6 instead of 1 for the Summary Execution ability.

But more than 1 of those nerfs at a time is ridiculous imo.

This.

Pretty much every discussion about Conscripts breaks down into two separate (but often intermingled) arguments between:

- People who want to balance Conscripts but can't decide which specific aspect to nerf, and so they argue whether to nerf Orders or their synergy with Commissars.
- People who want to nerf Conscripts to the point they never see the unit on the table ever again, and so they argue with people who want to see the unit balanced but remain actually fieldable.

GhostRecon wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I don't think anyone said "conscripts are fine."

I think people are usually willing to give nerfs to conscripts one way or another; for example, I am okay with removing orders.

What those of us "defending" Conscripts were defending against was not "nerf conscripts" but rather "Nerf conscripts so hard they're back to uselessness."

Another nerf I'd be okay with, for example, is making them 1 per 2 infantry squads, like they used to be. Another is making them lose D6 instead of 1 for the Summary Execution ability.

But more than 1 of those nerfs at a time is ridiculous imo.

This.

Pretty much every discussion about Conscripts breaks down into two separate (but often intermingled) arguments between:

- People who want to balance Conscripts but can't decide which specific aspect to nerf, and so they argue whether to nerf Orders or their synergy with Commissars.
- People who want to nerf Conscripts to the point they never see the unit on the table ever again, and so they argue with people who want to see the unit balanced but remain actually fieldable.

This.

Also, don't forget the people who want to nerf the entire IG codex for the sheer hell of it.


Anyway, regarding Conscripts, I have a few suggestions for possible nerfs:
- Reduce squad size.
- Prevent them from receiving Orders.
- Make Commissars reduce Ld casualties to 1d6 instead of 1.
- Make them a non-FoC choice. Instead of being troops, you can take one unit of Conscripts for every 2 Infantry Squads you take (the Conscripts don't take up a FoC space). This would make them less efficient, would prevent them being taken to fulfil min troop choices in a Battalion/Brigade and means that they can't get Objective Secured.

 vipoid wrote:

GhostRecon wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I don't think anyone said "conscripts are fine."

I think people are usually willing to give nerfs to conscripts one way or another; for example, I am okay with removing orders.

What those of us "defending" Conscripts were defending against was not "nerf conscripts" but rather "Nerf conscripts so hard they're back to uselessness."

Another nerf I'd be okay with, for example, is making them 1 per 2 infantry squads, like they used to be. Another is making them lose D6 instead of 1 for the Summary Execution ability.

But more than 1 of those nerfs at a time is ridiculous imo.

This.

Pretty much every discussion about Conscripts breaks down into two separate (but often intermingled) arguments between:

- People who want to balance Conscripts but can't decide which specific aspect to nerf, and so they argue whether to nerf Orders or their synergy with Commissars.
- People who want to nerf Conscripts to the point they never see the unit on the table ever again, and so they argue with people who want to see the unit balanced but remain actually fieldable.

This.

Also, don't forget the people who want to nerf the entire IG codex for the sheer hell of it.

Yeah, but that's always been the case when an army is powerful. It's almost always diehard loyalist Space Marine players who kick and scream at the audacity of any other army being powerful. Apparently CSMs still need to pay for 3.5 being so powerful, as I'm sure we'll never hear the end of whining about Eldar, Tau and now Imperial Guard for another ten years or so because they had their moment in the sun over (loyal) power armour.

There's something about them not being able to receive Orders that just feels... off to me. Like, the image of them being gibbering morons who can't understand the concept of pouring fire onto a specific target seems pretty silly to me.

I like the idea of a special rule where Conscripts - and only Conscripts - need to have 1d3-6 rolled for Summary Execution, rather than the single model. Perhaps it could also scale down as the unit gets weaker (20+ models you roll a 1d6, -19 you roll a 1d3, -10 you just remove the one as normal, etc). It doesn't make Commissars useless, but it makes the blobs more manageable if you manage to whittle them down. I get the feeling Games Workshop, in their infinite inability to diagnose a problem, will just nerf the entire codex across the board in a typical swing and miss though. Or at least Commissars will be nerfed into uselessness and Priests take back over.

Bringing back templates would solve the issue.

I think the most elegant solution for Conscripts, which doesn't required modifying any other rules, would be to cap them at 20 men per squad.

That allows them to do classic conscript things reasonably well, and in squadrons they can all enjoy a single Commissar's buff, but they lose a lot of efficiency on orders, and it becomes easier to kill a specific squad.

It also eliminates the fairly silly spectacle of huge conscript mobs.

SilverAlien wrote:
Conscripts at 4 ppm and normal guard infantry at 5ppm are still as good or better than what most armies have access to.

Conscripts would trade damage for staying power compared to cultists and beat termagaunts in both staying power and firepower.

It's just a bit silly we've had people try to argue conscripts are doing their screening job properly right now, rather than being obviously too good at it.

Edit: for everyone claiming that commissars aren't doing anything new, you are right they aren't. They are doing what they always have in an edition where almost every army has had there morale rules weakened, nerfed, or occasionally removed. That's kinda an issue.

Don't forget that Orders are automatic now.

 Arbitrator wrote:
It's almost always diehard loyalist Space Marine players who kick and scream at the audacity of any other army being powerful.

Could you quote that in this thread? Because the only one I can find here that says everything should get points cost increases is Unit, and he's first of all doing it with the caveat that it depends on everything getting good abilities, and second of all he's an AM player.

What is it with so many posts on this forum being about what babies the people that play X faction is? I see pissing and moaning from every single faction. I can't even begin to understand the bias you must view the world with to completely ignore every other whiner, while honing in on SM players.

 Purifier wrote:
Could you quote that in this thread?

I don't think I've seen it in this thread (yet ), but in one of the other Conscript threads there was at least one SM player who basically said that IG should only exist to serve as a whipping-boy for Marine armies.

To be clear, I'm not saying that all (or even most) SM players are like this - just that it does happen.

I shot a 400-pt blob of Noise Marines at conscripts with Prescience, the most shooty unit in all of Chaos, all featuring sonic blasters for triple shots that ignore cover.

Killed half the squad. Next turn killed the other half. Had morale been a thing, the entire squad would have died turn 1.

Those conscripts only cost half the points of my Noise Marines.

It's kind of a problem when objective secured guys can outlast any form of shooting your army can muster point for point. The only unit that can outkill Noise Marines are the Khorne Berzerkers and that's only in close combat with plenty of opportunity to shoot them off the board.

Drowned in bodies is the Imperial Guard thing and it's presently much too effective since in the few turns the game lasts you won't even kill all the conscripts, much less the rest of his tanks and artillery, the stuff that actually threatens your forces. If you fail to kill the conscripts, they just park on objectives and win by Da Rulez.

 Arkaine wrote:
I shot a 400-pt blob of Noise Marines at conscripts with Prescience, the most shooty unit in all of Chaos, all featuring sonic blasters for triple shots that ignore cover.

Killed half the squad. Next turn killed the other half. Had morale been a thing, the entire squad would have died turn 1.

Those conscripts only cost half the points of my Noise Marines.

It's kind of a problem when objective secured guys can outlast any form of shooting your army can muster point for point. The only unit that can outkill Noise Marines are the Khorne Berzerkers and that's only in close combat with plenty of opportunity to shoot them off the board.

Drowned in bodies is the Imperial Guard thing and it's presently much too effective since in the few turns the game lasts you won't even kill all the conscripts, much less the rest of his tanks and artillery, the stuff that actually threatens your forces. If you fail to kill the conscripts, they just park on objectives and win by Da Rulez.

See I hear about stuff like this, and I wonder why people think it is bad.

Why should every unit in the game be able to 1-turn delete what it is designed to do? I mean, a 3-lascannon HWS is a dedicated AT-unit in AM, why can't it one-shot a Rhino off the board?

Yes, things can still have roles within an army (anti-infantry, anti-tank, high mobility, whatever), but that doesn't mean they should simply get a free "I delete the unit as long as it is the one I counter" card they can play every turn.

Conscripts, even after the nerf, should take at least one shooting phase to shift, because if they take less than one shooting phase to shift, then they are useless as a screen.

 Arbitrator wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

GhostRecon wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I don't think anyone said "conscripts are fine."

I think people are usually willing to give nerfs to conscripts one way or another; for example, I am okay with removing orders.

What those of us "defending" Conscripts were defending against was not "nerf conscripts" but rather "Nerf conscripts so hard they're back to uselessness."

Another nerf I'd be okay with, for example, is making them 1 per 2 infantry squads, like they used to be. Another is making them lose D6 instead of 1 for the Summary Execution ability.

But more than 1 of those nerfs at a time is ridiculous imo.

This.

Pretty much every discussion about Conscripts breaks down into two separate (but often intermingled) arguments between:

- People who want to balance Conscripts but can't decide which specific aspect to nerf, and so they argue whether to nerf Orders or their synergy with Commissars.
- People who want to nerf Conscripts to the point they never see the unit on the table ever again, and so they argue with people who want to see the unit balanced but remain actually fieldable.

This.

Also, don't forget the people who want to nerf the entire IG codex for the sheer hell of it.

Yeah, but that's always been the case when an army is powerful. It's almost always diehard loyalist Space Marine players who kick and scream at the audacity of any other army being powerful. Apparently CSMs still need to pay for 3.5 being so powerful, as I'm sure we'll never hear the end of whining about Eldar, Tau and now Imperial Guard for another ten years or so because they had their moment in the sun over (loyal) power armour.

There's something about them not being able to receive Orders that just feels... off to me. Like, the image of them being gibbering morons who can't understand the concept of pouring fire onto a specific target seems pretty silly to me.

I like the idea of a special rule where Conscripts - and only Conscripts - need to have 1d3-6 rolled for Summary Execution, rather than the single model. Perhaps it could also scale down as the unit gets weaker (20+ models you roll a 1d6, -19 you roll a 1d3, -10 you just remove the one as normal, etc). It doesn't make Commissars useless, but it makes the blobs more manageable if you manage to whittle them down. I get the feeling Games Workshop, in their infinite inability to diagnose a problem, will just nerf the entire codex across the board in a typical swing and miss though. Or at least Commissars will be nerfed into uselessness and Priests take back over.

Not sure why it seems off to you.

Concscripts were conscripted to fight, they haven't been trained through the rigors of the imperialism war machine. They should not have access to orders like other AM units.

The fix to conscripts is simple. They cannot receive orders, and commisaers go up in cost significantly.

I'll go with what i've said before, as a criticism of 8th edition in general:

1. No model, costing less than 6 points, should get a save. For their points, Orks should be the most survivable in terms of cheap, high casualty infantry. Therefore, Orks should be a benchmark for being the *best* at being a wall of bodies. Brimstone horrors, Conscripts, and anything less than 6 points should not get a save, period, based on 8th edition internal balance. Orks should set the bar here.

2. Smite in its base form is simply too strong. Instead of d3/d6, it should be 1damage, and on 11+, d3. Magnus should be d3/d6. Anything that costs less than 60 points should NOT have full strength smite, if they insist on keeping smite in its current form. Sorry, that's just too strong. And that applies to *every* army.

3. Update the cost of plasma and other weapons to be properly costed. I'm sorry but even with that, Hot-shot guns are pretty damn good, they'd have to be adjusted. I would also increase the cost of drones.

4. Alter character rules so they cannot be targeted ONLY if there is a non-character unit closer. As opposed to one character screening for another.

5. Ban forgeworld completely from matched play. I know people disagree, because unit X isn't overpowered, but they have too many strong units for competitive play.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Arkaine wrote:
I shot a 400-pt blob of Noise Marines at conscripts with Prescience, the most shooty unit in all of Chaos, all featuring sonic blasters for triple shots that ignore cover.

Killed half the squad. Next turn killed the other half. Had morale been a thing, the entire squad would have died turn 1.

Those conscripts only cost half the points of my Noise Marines.

It's kind of a problem when objective secured guys can outlast any form of shooting your army can muster point for point. The only unit that can outkill Noise Marines are the Khorne Berzerkers and that's only in close combat with plenty of opportunity to shoot them off the board.

Drowned in bodies is the Imperial Guard thing and it's presently much too effective since in the few turns the game lasts you won't even kill all the conscripts, much less the rest of his tanks and artillery, the stuff that actually threatens your forces. If you fail to kill the conscripts, they just park on objectives and win by Da Rulez.

See I hear about stuff like this, and I wonder why people think it is bad.

Why should every unit in the game be able to 1-turn delete what it is designed to do? I mean, a 3-lascannon HWS is a dedicated AT-unit in AM, why can't it one-shot a Rhino off the board?

Yes, things can still have roles within an army (anti-infantry, anti-tank, high mobility, whatever), but that doesn't mean they should simply get a free "I delete the unit as long as it is the one I counter" card they can play every turn.

Conscripts, even after the nerf, should take at least one shooting phase to shift, because if they take less than one shooting phase to shift, then they are useless as a screen.

The issue is that guard artillery can 1 turn delete units, and if it takes more than 1 turn to kill a single conscript squad (say it takes 2.) then anyone taking say 3 conscript units becomes functionally invulnerable for the entire game to any close range combat. I would argue that say half an armies worth of offense (at peak efficiency for a designed task) should be able to delete a unit that costs under 200 points

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Why should every unit in the game be able to 1-turn delete what it is designed to do? I mean, a 3-lascannon HWS is some of the best anti-tank in AM, why can't it one-shot a Rhino off the board?

I didn't say anything about it should be able to 1-turn delete anything. My twice the cost elite unit was firing at a unit it was HIGHLY EFFICIENT against, the BEST IN MY FACTION at killing, yet could only kill 1/4 of its point cost. For the same cost as my Noise Marines, you can field two 50-man conscript blobs and it would take this elite unit FOUR TURNS of shooting to erradicate them all in a 5-7 turn game. Assuming you don't shoot back.

That's the issue... even with my Sorcerer backing me up, cutting my misses in half, it wasn't enough to matter. I have literally no better unit to use for the task either. Meanwhile, if you drop Magnus on the board, my Obliterators can wipe him out in 1 or 2 turns. See that Baneblade you brought? It took 12 wounds the turn they arrived. I can spend some CP to shoot again and finish it off. Tanks die to melta or lascannon spam, even if it takes 2-3 turns or 2-3 units. Heck, anti-tank tends to be CHEAPER than the tanks because counter units would be kind of absurd if they cost you more than what they were countering.

Conscripts don't have much in the way of counters and it's mostly due to that Commissar negating their losses. Killing him is all but impossible since deep strikes don't work this edition, can't shoot him directly except with my non-existant snipers (can we borrow the Vindicare?), and the psychic powers that can target freely only have a small chance of actually doing the job, assuming he's not behind a building where you can't see him.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Conscripts, even after the nerf, should take at least one shooting phase to shift, because if they take less than one shooting phase to shift, then they are useless as a screen.

Currently they take four turns to shift. If I use my elite units named the Conscript Crushers. If I used my similar cost conscript squad, the Cultists, they'd just be sitting there all day flailing at each other until I was forced to take more morale than they do and lose to attrition.

Coupled with their ability to receive free Stratagem effects without CP expenditure in the form of Orders, Conscripts are the most bargain units in the game with plenty of advantages and staying power.

They definitely shouldn't have ObSec... :/

SilverAlien wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Upping points across the board for IG is an adequate solution, provided we see what Regiment rules they will get. But without Regiment rules, I don't think they're worth 5ppm.

Are you serious?

Name the guard infantry unit that isn't better than equivalently priced units in other armies. Legitimately curious. I've got ogryns... and that's really about it.

Name a Guard character unit that IS better than an equivalently priced unit in other armies. Guard have good, cheap infantry because we don't have access to gak like Magnus or the Yncarne. FFS, Marines have a better MAIN BATTLE TANK than we do.