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.

We’ve studied the Astra Militarum codex. And, to be honest, we are a little bit shocked. Instead of the whole review, we could just say: take whatever you want and just play it – it will be competitive. Really. It may be the best Imperial Guard codex ever, and it’s definitely the best codex in 8th edition.

This army is very thoughtful, solid, and all its parts really interact well. Mostly – because of the units and play styles diversity, typical for this army. Mostly – because of the new orders system. Now you don’t need to pass any tests to issue an order – you just pick a unit and issue it. And those orders let you adjust units to almost every situation – close combat or shooting. (more likely, shooting) The fact that now you are not limited in the number of characters able to issue orders, lets you effectively improve all the required parts of the army. And don’t forget about the orders, unique to each regiment.

Yes, now you have regiments! Now Tallarns really differ from Kadians. After the Mechanicus codex we were really afraid that the difference again will be fictions and the real choice will be between the only couple of variants. However, all the doctrines here are not only competitive, but they also don’t correlate with the existing archetypes. For example – all space marines books suggested us «quick», «shooting» «fighting» «sneaky» armies. Here the conditions of the doctrines are not so straight. For example, Cadians re-roll 1-s if they didn’t move (and re-roll everything under the order to re-roll 1-s), Tempestus can get an additional shot at the short range, and Steel Legion has increased rapid fire range. Everything affects shooting but in different ways.

Of course, infantry army concept looks more powerful. It perfectly fits into the 8th edition dominating trend of multiple cheap units. However, there are a lot of ideas to use tanks. Now it’s easier to take super heavy vehicles, and almost all the guns are much more effective. The fact that the tanks are not affected by the orders, is covered by the great stratagems. And you’ll definitely have a lot of command points since it’s really easy to make a lot of detachments with those cheap and useful infantry units.

The main disadvantage of this codex is not in the codex but in the miniatures to it. You have rules for different regiments, but you don’t have proper miniatures for those regiments. It’s quite hard to hunt old and weird-looking upgrade packs and sets. And even they don’t let you completely recreate an appearance of, for example, Tallarn. There’s an example of gene cult hybrids box – GW could solve this issue by using such elegant upgrades combined with the standard cadian squad. And there are a lot of other old ugly and rare miniatures. By the way, now there are no cavalry and vendettas in the codex…

So, now it’s time for those who were collecting the Guard thoughtfully and meticulously to take all the units from our collection and try as many different combinations as possible. Sure, not all of them are equally strong, but the main advantage of this codex is that there’s no dominant archetype. It’s an army, indeed. So, guardsmen, prepare your lasguns and be ready to die for the Emperor!

Find out more in our blog: https://warzone40k.com/astra-militarum-codex-review

 Teena Hancock wrote:
We’ve studied the Astra Militarum codex. And, to be honest, we are a little bit shocked. Instead of the whole review, we could just say: take whatever you want and just play it – it will be competitive. Really. It may be the best Imperial Guard codex ever, and it’s definitely the best codex in 8th edition.

No. It's not. It's the most powerful codex in 8th edition. That doesn't mean it's 'Good', let alone 'The best'. A broken, hugely overpowered codex will always be bad for the game, especially when it makes the gap between good armies and bad armies even wider than it already was.

Waaaghpower wrote:

 Teena Hancock wrote:
We’ve studied the Astra Militarum codex. And, to be honest, we are a little bit shocked. Instead of the whole review, we could just say: take whatever you want and just play it – it will be competitive. Really. It may be the best Imperial Guard codex ever, and it’s definitely the best codex in 8th edition.

No. It's not. It's the most powerful codex in 8th edition. That doesn't mean it's 'Good', let alone 'The best'. A broken, hugely overpowered codex will always be bad for the game, especially when it makes the gap between good armies and bad armies even wider than it already was.

Let's have this discussion here too shall we? I'll start.

"I'm sorry your codex doesn't have as many options to be competitive as hours. I wish it did. But rather than bringing a codex with interesting options and good internal balance down, we should instead seek to elevate all other codices to also have good internal balance and interesting options."

Okay, your turn.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

 Teena Hancock wrote:
We’ve studied the Astra Militarum codex. And, to be honest, we are a little bit shocked. Instead of the whole review, we could just say: take whatever you want and just play it – it will be competitive. Really. It may be the best Imperial Guard codex ever, and it’s definitely the best codex in 8th edition.

No. It's not. It's the most powerful codex in 8th edition. That doesn't mean it's 'Good', let alone 'The best'. A broken, hugely overpowered codex will always be bad for the game, especially when it makes the gap between good armies and bad armies even wider than it already was.

Let's have this discussion here too shall we? I'll start.

"I'm sorry your codex doesn't have as many options to be competitive as hours. I wish it did. But rather than bringing a codex with interesting options and good internal balance down, we should instead seek to elevate all other codices to also have good internal balance and interesting options."

Okay, your turn.

You can have good internal balance, that's fine. But as has been pointed out elsewhere, 8th edition is super bloody, and Imperial Guard are easily the strongest army in terms of blowing stuff up in one turn. If everyone were as strong as IG, every game would come down to 'Who gets turn 1?'
IG can keep its internal balance. It doesn't need the ability to reliably one-shot whole armies down to a pittance.

That's an...interesting review. I agree the internal balance is pretty good (though Chimera vs Taurox is still bizarrely skewed) and the doctrines are all pretty interesting and more or less equal with one another.

However, to write a review of the Codex and not mention the glaring problems with it suggests either a lack of in-depth thinking on the matter or bias. The AM Codex is widely seen as being seriously overpowered compared to other Codices and certainly compared to most Index lists. I would expect any serious review of the book to at least mention that.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

 Teena Hancock wrote:
We’ve studied the Astra Militarum codex. And, to be honest, we are a little bit shocked. Instead of the whole review, we could just say: take whatever you want and just play it – it will be competitive. Really. It may be the best Imperial Guard codex ever, and it’s definitely the best codex in 8th edition.

No. It's not. It's the most powerful codex in 8th edition. That doesn't mean it's 'Good', let alone 'The best'. A broken, hugely overpowered codex will always be bad for the game, especially when it makes the gap between good armies and bad armies even wider than it already was.

Let's have this discussion here too shall we? I'll start.

"I'm sorry your codex doesn't have as many options to be competitive as hours. I wish it did. But rather than bringing a codex with interesting options and good internal balance down, we should instead seek to elevate all other codices to also have good internal balance and interesting options."

Okay, your turn.

Strength is measured relative to the field.

Buffing everyone else is equivalent to nerfing guard, except buffing requires updating hundreds of units across multiple different books, whereas nerfing guard takes adjusting points on like 10-20 problematic units.

 Marmatag wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

 Teena Hancock wrote:
We’ve studied the Astra Militarum codex. And, to be honest, we are a little bit shocked. Instead of the whole review, we could just say: take whatever you want and just play it – it will be competitive. Really. It may be the best Imperial Guard codex ever, and it’s definitely the best codex in 8th edition.

No. It's not. It's the most powerful codex in 8th edition. That doesn't mean it's 'Good', let alone 'The best'. A broken, hugely overpowered codex will always be bad for the game, especially when it makes the gap between good armies and bad armies even wider than it already was.

Let's have this discussion here too shall we? I'll start.

"I'm sorry your codex doesn't have as many options to be competitive as hours. I wish it did. But rather than bringing a codex with interesting options and good internal balance down, we should instead seek to elevate all other codices to also have good internal balance and interesting options."

Okay, your turn.

Strength is measured relative to the field.

Buffing everyone else is equivalent to nerfing guard, except buffing requires updating hundreds of units across multiple different books, whereas nerfing guard takes adjusting points on like 10-20 problematic units.

Not unless you either make everything ludicrously cheap or increase durability. You're advocating for flooding the board with an insane number of models, or creating impossinly durable deathstars who can weather that level of shooting.
In other words, you're advocating for late 7th edition.

I'm not actually sure adjusting points will change much.

Guard still dominated with the index when they were much more expensive.

I personally think that 8th Edition values high amounts of low quality shooting more than anything else, and the Guard are supposed to be the army that "does this."

Either you turn the Guard away from the "high amounts of low quality shots" army, in which case they're tau (low amounts of high quality shooting) but with more melee support or they're just... a melee army, kinda.

Does that make sense? The paradigm favored by 8th is a ton of bullets, and the number of bullets matters more than the capability of the bullets. Tau are already a low-number-of-really-good-bullets army, so Guard are supposed to be the opposite, but it nestles too neatly into the 8th ed. meta.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I'm not actually sure adjusting points will change much.

Guard still dominated with the index when they were much more expensive.

I personally think that 8th Edition values high amounts of low quality shooting more than anything else, and the Guard are supposed to be the army that "does this."

Either you turn the Guard away from the "high amounts of low quality shots" army, in which case they're tau (low amounts of high quality shooting) but with more melee support or they're just... a melee army, kinda.

Does that make sense? The paradigm favored by 8th is a ton of bullets, and the number of bullets matters more than the capability of the bullets. Tau are already a low-number-of-really-good-bullets army, so Guard are supposed to be the opposite, but it nestles too neatly into the 8th ed. meta.

I'd mostly agree, with the addition that IG also have the cheapest, most durable screens, more tactical flexibility than any other army thanks to having Orders and Strategems that can deal with effectively any threat, and more high-strength fire as well thanks to the buffs to Russes as Baneblade variants.

Waaaghpower wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I'm not actually sure adjusting points will change much.

Guard still dominated with the index when they were much more expensive.

I personally think that 8th Edition values high amounts of low quality shooting more than anything else, and the Guard are supposed to be the army that "does this."

Either you turn the Guard away from the "high amounts of low quality shots" army, in which case they're tau (low amounts of high quality shooting) but with more melee support or they're just... a melee army, kinda.

Does that make sense? The paradigm favored by 8th is a ton of bullets, and the number of bullets matters more than the capability of the bullets. Tau are already a low-number-of-really-good-bullets army, so Guard are supposed to be the opposite, but it nestles too neatly into the 8th ed. meta.

I'd mostly agree, with the addition that IG also have the cheapest, most durable screens, more tactical flexibility than any other army thanks to having Orders and Strategems that can deal with effectively any threat, and more high-strength fire as well thanks to the buffs to Russes as Baneblade variants.

The screens thing is absolutely right.

The tactical flexibility thing is kind of ... well, after the new codex it's right as well. I would hope other codices gain the same level of flexibility, though. I wouldn't want fewer tactics in the game.

The high strength fire thing is true... but not really what is good this edition. I don't think the Russ and Baneblade cannon buffs are what will carry the guard. I think it will always be the PBI and artillery this edition. I think the buffs to Russes / Baneblades made them adequate substitutes for Artillery, but if you unbuffed them then people would just bring the artillery, if they wanted to win. Again, the internal balance is now good, so we should strive to the same high standards for the other codexes rather than just make this one destabilize and come apart down to only 1 or 2 competitive builds again.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I'm not actually sure adjusting points will change much.

Guard still dominated with the index when they were much more expensive.

I personally think that 8th Edition values high amounts of low quality shooting more than anything else, and the Guard are supposed to be the army that "does this."

Either you turn the Guard away from the "high amounts of low quality shots" army, in which case they're tau (low amounts of high quality shooting) but with more melee support or they're just... a melee army, kinda.

Does that make sense? The paradigm favored by 8th is a ton of bullets, and the number of bullets matters more than the capability of the bullets. Tau are already a low-number-of-really-good-bullets army, so Guard are supposed to be the opposite, but it nestles too neatly into the 8th ed. meta.

I'd mostly agree, with the addition that IG also have the cheapest, most durable screens, more tactical flexibility than any other army thanks to having Orders and Strategems that can deal with effectively any threat, and more high-strength fire as well thanks to the buffs to Russes as Baneblade variants.

The screens thing is absolutely right.

The tactical flexibility thing is kind of ... well, after the new codex it's right as well. I would hope other codices gain the same level of flexibility, though. I wouldn't want fewer tactics in the game.

The high strength fire thing is true... but not really what is good this edition. I don't think the Russ and Baneblade cannon buffs are what will carry the guard. I think it will always be the PBI and artillery this edition. I think the buffs to Russes / Baneblades made them adequate substitutes for Artillery, but if you unbuffed them then people would just bring the artillery, if they wanted to win. Again, the internal balance is now good, so we should strive to the same high standards for the other codexes rather than just make this one destabilize and come apart down to only 1 or 2 competitive builds again.

Depends on the Russ variant. Executioners can put out a simply ridiculous number of shots - 49 S5 rounds in a turn. Assuming you've got a tank commander firing, that's some-odd 38 S5 hits for around 200pts, which is vastly more than any equivilant army can put out.

Waaaghpower wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I'm not actually sure adjusting points will change much.

Guard still dominated with the index when they were much more expensive.

I personally think that 8th Edition values high amounts of low quality shooting more than anything else, and the Guard are supposed to be the army that "does this."

Either you turn the Guard away from the "high amounts of low quality shots" army, in which case they're tau (low amounts of high quality shooting) but with more melee support or they're just... a melee army, kinda.

Does that make sense? The paradigm favored by 8th is a ton of bullets, and the number of bullets matters more than the capability of the bullets. Tau are already a low-number-of-really-good-bullets army, so Guard are supposed to be the opposite, but it nestles too neatly into the 8th ed. meta.

I'd mostly agree, with the addition that IG also have the cheapest, most durable screens, more tactical flexibility than any other army thanks to having Orders and Strategems that can deal with effectively any threat, and more high-strength fire as well thanks to the buffs to Russes as Baneblade variants.

The screens thing is absolutely right.

The tactical flexibility thing is kind of ... well, after the new codex it's right as well. I would hope other codices gain the same level of flexibility, though. I wouldn't want fewer tactics in the game.

The high strength fire thing is true... but not really what is good this edition. I don't think the Russ and Baneblade cannon buffs are what will carry the guard. I think it will always be the PBI and artillery this edition. I think the buffs to Russes / Baneblades made them adequate substitutes for Artillery, but if you unbuffed them then people would just bring the artillery, if they wanted to win. Again, the internal balance is now good, so we should strive to the same high standards for the other codexes rather than just make this one destabilize and come apart down to only 1 or 2 competitive builds again.

Depends on the Russ variant. Executioners can put out a simply ridiculous number of shots - 49 S5 rounds in a turn. Assuming you've got a tank commander firing, that's some-odd 38 S5 hits for around 200pts, which is vastly more than any equivilant army can put out.

That's the Punisher...

But you're making my point for me.

Strength 5, AP0 shots are low quality, and -1 AP on heavy bolters doesn't make it high quality. Str 5 AP 0 are the basic guns of the troops in the Tau (the high-quality, low-quantity shooting army) army list. For IG, it's on a main battle tank - but in MASSIVE quantity.

That sort of playstyle is exactly what 8th made good.

8th is the Quantity > Quality edition, in the shooting meta. Guard happen to be the only Quantity Shooting army.