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.

Martel732 wrote:
Morale doesn't matter to IG infantry because it doesn't matter if t they live or die; there are always more infantry to be had because they cost nothing.

So where are those guard lists dominating tournaments outside of your FLGS? None made top 8 at LVO or Caledonian Uprising. That indicates to me Guard are about where they should be right now. Good, but not crushing everything.

RogueApiary wrote:

 Wolfblade wrote:

ThePorcupine wrote:
People upset that guard have "cost-efficient" infantry compared to marines don't let out a peep when you point out guard don't have an equivalent of devastating 1st turn charge units like blood angels or tyranids (or any worthwhile combat units in general), or mass -1 to hit like chaos or eldar do, or a primarch, or an amazing flyer like the hemlock, or amazing psykers, or the insane durability with feel-no-pain like death guard, or the amazing buff stacking of marines with captains, ancients, and the rowboat.

Yes, guard has very cheap chaff infantry and artillery. Congrats. You found what an army is good at. Every army is particularly good at something and not great at other things.

Guard's strengths aren't really even good enough to have them compete at top level. Why do you want to bring them down even lower.

Yeah, they just have that devastating first turn shooting AND the ability to totally bubble wrap everything important from assault.

But no good assault CLEARLY means they're bottom tier. They also only have the cheapest psykers around, and free orders.

Just about everyone can get devastating turn one shooting. Ever go up against three Leviathans with double butcher cannons? Say goodbye to anything in range of those.

You know what the Guard don't have? Meaningful mobility. Sure, I can 'move move move' a squad an average of 19" onto an objective. But that squad is dead the following turn and I'll have to do it again to score that again in a progressive points mission. I can only do that so many times before my screen is compromised or I run out of infantry.

Cheapest Psykers are fixed if you've played the beta rules. Also, nobody is saying they're bottom tier, but they're not the juggernaut they were when 8th launched and it'd be nice if people started catching on to that and moved onto the next offender. Two pure guard lists made it to top 25 at LVO and zero made top 8. Five of the top 8 were Alaitoc/Ynnari.

I went 3-3 there with the prototypical Guard gun line of dudes, tanks, and artillery. Two of my three losses we're to RG and DA. Granted, if those went to six turns, I'd have tabled both of them, but their mobility gave them the lead on points they needed to win.

Also, will you guys quit it with the morale doesn't matter to infantry squads bs? It definitely matters. Try deliberately shooting for causing 6-8 casualties across multiple squads and watch what happens after the Guard player burns 3 CP trying to save the first two. At the worst case, in ITC, you've set yourself up for a easy DBTC secondary and EoR kill point primary the next turn.

I'm not saying "All of guard is busted" (or saying they're the most broken army currently, that goes to eldar reaper spam), but that guardsmen going to 5ppm isn't the end of the world that some guard players think it is. Guardsmen are the best troop hands down. They're cheap bubble wrap that have great damage output per point, especially when compared to any other troop.

I like how every counterargument is: "we already got nerfed", " we didn't totally dominate this one tournament" or "Dark Reapers are OP". Oh and for some reason 7th edition is also an excuse...

5ppm Guard infantry is fine if commisssars are fixed. I’d prefer roll 2 dice for morale and take lowest with NO cost of a casualty model but even an optional reroll with no casualty cost is fine.

The forced movement in ITC does punish guard and evennout the competitive curve abit, butit also affects other armies aswell.
If your not playing ITC guard are so OP its embarrassing, but sometimes you can learn something new that may help in a closer game. They should be balanced for normal games not just ITC rules.

The other thing you have to consider is that while you may suck at close combat , you have the number of bodies to make sure nothing but your bubble wrap gets charged.

Eldar are always going to feature at tornaments as they combine high damage output and fast movement. Their specialist units suit ITC mission design.
Also just because they need balanced and for soul bursting to go die forevermore doesn't mean their isn't issues in other codex's

Ice_can wrote:
Guard Infantry squad with mortar 45 points = 8 lasguns and mortar at 12-24, sarge is out of range
Kills 2 guards men not moving or 1.85 moving
Kills .74 marines not moving or .64 moving
21 to 24 points to kill a 4.5ppm guardsman, 20% return
61 to 70 pointa to kill a 13ppm marine, 20% return

5 tacticals 65 points 5 bolters moving and static damageis the same.
Kills 1.5 guards men or .56 marines.
Or 44 points of marines to kill a guard 4.5ppm smuck, 10% return
117 points of marines to kill a 13ppm marine, 11% return

Guard IS are twice as efficent at killing guard and Marines as marines.
Even with guard at 5ppm and marines at 12ppm guard are still more cost effective than a tac squad.

Bit of a nit pick, but wouldn't it be 7 lasguns, 1 mortar team, and 1 sergeant? A Heavy Weapons Team in an Infantry Squad turns two guardsmen into one team. It only changes it to .68 and .58, but accurate numbers do matter.



So...is there any actual solid rumor yet or are we on page 30 something based on nothing?

The heavy weapon team is listed as having a mortar and lasgun and 8th edition you can fire every weapon hence the heavy weapon team can fire both. (No books to hand to check this)

 Otto von Bludd wrote:

I think this is what people demanding nerfs (at least those who are demanding them for the perceived good of the game and not out of an apparent irrational hatred for Guard) are missing. Solo Guard lists are indeed right on the borderline between being competitive or not. I dare say they are in a pretty good place, not too weak, not too strong. There is nothing wrong with Guard having good, versatile, cost effective infantry. That's nearly the WHOLE POINT of the faction and the theme it's built around. If the true balance issue is soup, which it is, then address that particular issue and don't keep driving solo Guard back into 7th edition.

I don't believe I'm missing this. I agree that Imperial soup is a big part of why Infantry are a problem. I would like GW to get rid of soup. But I don't think this is likely to happen. And so in the game that people are currently playing, and probably will be playing for a very long time, no one should care how well single-codex Guard lists do any more than people care how well pure Kroot lists do. You can artificially restrict your list-building if you like, for any reason you like, but surely when we're talking about balancing the game the expectation is that we're at least trying to balance the best lists possible. And Infantry have consistently been an important component of some of the strongest lists around. They show up everywhere -- I don't think that one tournament is the end-all be-all, but they made up about 1/4 of the 2nd place LVO list, and just about half of it was a pure Guard detachment. I'm happy if their ubiquity is fixed, however that's fixed, but I feel like you probably shouldn't hope for a huge overhaul to the keyword or detachment system in the March FAQ. If GW agrees with even you that there's a problem here, surely the fix they're going to prefer is nerfing Infantry.

I'd also note that solo Guard lists being "right on the borderline between being competitive or not" would put their codex very near the top of the heap. The meta is currently dominated by soup. The only codices that seem to be competitive as solo affairs would be Eldar, on the strength of Dark Reapers (though note that this is still presumably weaker than Eldar + Ynnari), and maybe Tyranids, and both of these have much weaker soup options than Guard and so probably should be stronger as solo lists.

RogueApiary wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Morale doesn't matter to IG infantry because it doesn't matter if t they live or die; there are always more infantry to be had because they cost nothing.

So where are those guard lists dominating tournaments outside of your FLGS? None made top 8 at LVO or Caledonian Uprising. That indicates to me Guard are about where they should be right now. Good, but not crushing everything.

They will be back it after dark reapers are adjusted.

As a guard player, I never understood why GW dropped guardsmen from 5 ppm to 4 ppm while making them better in the first place. IG definitely needed some love in the edition switch, but I can't think of a single unit in the codex that didn't get better and there were points drops nearly across the board. That was always too much and a correction was always coming.

As for how it plays on the table top, I doubt it will drastically effect things, which is as much an argument against the change as it is for it.

Pretty much all of my 2,000 point lists entail 90-100 bodies on the ground and 10-15 tanks/walkers, and I generally pay little over 500 points for the troops. That's also with me kitting them up far more than I did in editions past. So now that'll be 550-600 points. Not a huge change. I never stopped using conscripts when they got their points bump and it didn't slow me down because they could still perform the jobs I gave to them, while just being slightly less undercosted.

The thing is, it also doesn't really alter the viability of guard spamming tactics in soup lists, which I think is what the points change was intended to address.

GW has to understand that their basic 8th game design highly favors hordes, and it's no coincidence that the newer armies are getting new chaff units to go with their expensive elite units -- tzaangors, poxwalkers, etc. Non-IG Imperial armies really have nothing similar, other than adding in guardsmen, which isn't exactly against the fluff.

My personal is that the original sin of the IG changes in 8th were doing away with the platoon structure. It kept conscripts from being spammed and forced you to seriously commit to footguard if that's the direction you were going. It was also fluffy and guard players liked it, while making it difficult for other Imperial armies to just ally in tons of cheap chaff.

Dionysodorus wrote:

I don't believe I'm missing this. I agree that Imperial soup is a big part of why Infantry are a problem. I would like GW to get rid of soup. But I don't think this is likely to happen. And so in the game that people are currently playing, and probably will be playing for a very long time, no one should care how well single-codex Guard lists do any more than people care how well pure Kroot lists do.

You do realize that you can't actually make a "pure Kroot list", right? You still have to take something Tau in the HQ slot.
This is a ridiculous comparison, but you likely knew that when writing it.

You can artificially restrict your list-building if you like, for any reason you like, but surely when we're talking about balancing the game the expectation is that we're at least trying to balance the best lists possible. And Infantry have consistently been an important component of some of the strongest lists around. They show up everywhere -- I don't think that one tournament is the end-all be-all, but they made up about 1/4 of the 2nd place LVO list, and just about half of it was a pure Guard detachment. I'm happy if their ubiquity is fixed, however that's fixed, but I feel like you probably shouldn't hope for a huge overhaul to the keyword or detachment system in the March FAQ. If GW agrees with even you that there's a problem here, surely the fix they're going to prefer is nerfing Infantry.

"Just about half" of a list being a "pure Guard detachment" does not equal a pure Guard list.

How is this difficult for people to understand? If you have ANYTHING that isn't from their Codex, it isn't "pure Guard".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:

RogueApiary wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Morale doesn't matter to IG infantry because it doesn't matter if t they live or die; there are always more infantry to be had because they cost nothing.

So where are those guard lists dominating tournaments outside of your FLGS? None made top 8 at LVO or Caledonian Uprising. That indicates to me Guard are about where they should be right now. Good, but not crushing everything.

They will be back it after dark reapers are adjusted.

Unless that adjustment is removing Alaitoc benefits from everything other than Guardians and Wraithlords, it won't matter.

But you know this. You just keep pretending that Dark Reapers being balanced to not ignore every single to Hit penalty means that Guard will somehow swarm back.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 Otto von Bludd wrote:

I think this is what people demanding nerfs (at least those who are demanding them for the perceived good of the game and not out of an apparent irrational hatred for Guard) are missing. Solo Guard lists are indeed right on the borderline between being competitive or not. I dare say they are in a pretty good place, not too weak, not too strong. There is nothing wrong with Guard having good, versatile, cost effective infantry. That's nearly the WHOLE POINT of the faction and the theme it's built around. If the true balance issue is soup, which it is, then address that particular issue and don't keep driving solo Guard back into 7th edition.

I don't believe I'm missing this. I agree that Imperial soup is a big part of why Infantry are a problem. I would like GW to get rid of soup. But I don't think this is likely to happen. And so in the game that people are currently playing, and probably will be playing for a very long time, no one should care how well single-codex Guard lists do any more than people care how well pure Kroot lists do. You can artificially restrict your list-building if you like, for any reason you like, but surely when we're talking about balancing the game the expectation is that we're at least trying to balance the best lists possible. And Infantry have consistently been an important component of some of the strongest lists around. They show up everywhere -- I don't think that one tournament is the end-all be-all, but they made up about 1/4 of the 2nd place LVO list, and just about half of it was a pure Guard detachment. I'm happy if their ubiquity is fixed, however that's fixed, but I feel like you probably shouldn't hope for a huge overhaul to the keyword or detachment system in the March FAQ. If GW agrees with even you that there's a problem here, surely the fix they're going to prefer is nerfing Infantry.

I'd also note that solo Guard lists being "right on the borderline between being competitive or not" would put their codex very near the top of the heap. The meta is currently dominated by soup. The only codices that seem to be competitive as solo affairs would be Eldar, on the strength of Dark Reapers (though note that this is still presumably weaker than Eldar + Ynnari), and maybe Tyranids, and both of these have much weaker soup options than Guard and so probably should be stronger as solo lists.

GW doesn't need to get rid of soup to address the problems with it, there are a multitude of things they could do to penalize soup lists and further encourage mono faction lists. So speculating about nerfing Guard because "GW won't get rid of soup" is promoting a "fix" based on a premise which, while it may be true, isn't relevant to the discussion.

There isn't anything wrong with Guard being near the top of the heap either. I don't see why that is an issue. If Guard was the undisputed king of the heap, like they were for a time earlier in 8th, there would be a clear balance issue, but if they are simply "near the top" I don't see a problem.

How is people saying that pure guard armies are barely competitive when after Craftworld Eldar they are the most competitive single-faction out there?

Only BA and Tyranids compare with them, and Tau-Commander Spam and SoB armies are nearly their competitive power level.

Yeah, competitive tournaments are reign by Soup (Aeldari Soup, Chaos and Imperial ones), but that doesn't mean IG are "barely competitive". And I'm not saying this because "omg nerf guard OP they are destroying everything", but is just wrong to say that they aren't competitive.

I'm not so sure BA compare, since the reliable measures we got from tournaments showed that they didn't hit any real competition.

BA are really, really average. I'll take it, but let's not go nuts here.

 TheNightWillEnd wrote:
As a guard player, I never understood why GW dropped guardsmen from 5 ppm to 4 ppm while making them better in the first place. IG definitely needed some love in the edition switch, but I can't think of a single unit in the codex that didn't get better and there were points drops nearly across the board.

If we're looking at 7E to 8E, stuff that didn't get better or got notably more expensive: Chimera, Vanquisher, Deathstrike, Hydra, Wyvern, Rough Riders (dropped entirely), Both kinds of Sentinels (base costs the same, weapons are more expensive), Exterminator, and Veterans (no longer troops, lost Doctrine options like Carapace).

My personal is that the original sin of the IG changes in 8th were doing away with the platoon structure. It kept conscripts from being spammed and forced you to seriously commit to footguard if that's the direction you were going. It was also fluffy and guard players liked it, while making it difficult for other Imperial armies to just ally in tons of cheap chaff.

The changes to the platoon structure and breaking up of command squads definitely created some issues, and allows for easy detachment spamming. You used to have to buy whole command squads, not just officers, and couldn't fill slots with cheap individual heavy weapons squads.

 Galas wrote:
How is people saying that pure guard armies are barely competitive when after Craftworld Eldar they are the most competitive single-faction out there?

Only BA and Tyranids compare with them, and Tau-Commander Spam and SoB armies are nearly their competitive power level.

Yeah, competitive tournaments are reign by Soup (Aeldari Soup, Chaos and Imperial ones), but that doesn't mean IG are "barely competitive". And I'm not saying this because "omg nerf guard OP they are destroying everything", but is just wrong to say that they aren't competitive.

It's the same sort of mental gymnastics that the New England Patriots do every season to believe themselves to be the disrespected underdog. Because if you acknowledge you're got one of the best codexes and you still lose, what does that say about you as a player?

It is important for this conversion to acknowledge that there are several ways to play Guard. Some are a lot less powerful than full on tournament Guard, but it is still possible for Guard to absorb 5ppm Infantry (which is still unconfirmed ) and stay competitive. Because the real strength of the codex is the many powerful options.

Well, I'd like to remind you of an AM at the 2000 pt level with
1x Baneblade
4x LRBT
3x30 Conscripts
2x5 Ratlings
and whatnot.
This list is hard to defeat whether or not AM will get a nerf (at the pt level).

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, I'd like to remind you of an AM at the 2000 pt level with
1x Baneblade
4x LRBT
3x30 Conscripts
2x5 Ratlings
and whatnot.
This list is hard to defeat whether or not AM will get a nerf (at the pt level).

Lol, what? You do 15 casualties to each Conscript blob and watch 2/3rds of them run as you can only save one blob with the 2 CP strat and the 1 CP strat will not be able to change the fact they're losing a minimum of 12 models from morale.

The Ratlings get pushed into your own deployment zone by scouts/nurglings/rangers which can go first, so that's 90 points wasted on garbage right there

The only thing scary there are the 4x LRBT and the baneblade, but once the Conscripts bolt you can lock up the LRBT's CC easily and any good list should be able to bracket a superheavy at range.

12 ravenguard aggressors, some scouts, and a couple fliers/units of jump pack troops could wreck that list no problem assuming they got first turn. If they can hide their Aggressors out of LOS they stand a good chance of wrecking it second turn as well.

Assuming first turn is a terrible assumption.

Martel732 wrote:
Assuming first turn is a terrible assumption.

Still can win with second turn given the right terrain ie a single large ruins in the board center. As long as the aggressors can get in range of the conscripts in the above list before getting shot off the board, they can make the holes needed for the deepstrikers to tie up the LRBT's. At which point, it's whatever ranged component you have vs a baneblade that is already hitting on 5's, and after suffering 13 wounds hits on 6's.

ThePorcupine wrote:
People upset that guard have "cost-efficient" infantry compared to marines don't let out a peep when you point out guard don't have an equivalent of devastating 1st turn charge units like blood angels or tyranids (or any worthwhile combat units in general), or mass -1 to hit like chaos or eldar do, or a primarch, or an amazing flyer like the hemlock, or amazing psykers, or the insane durability with feel-no-pain like death guard, or the amazing buff stacking of marines with captains, ancients, and the rowboat.

Yes, guard has very cheap chaff infantry and artillery. Congrats. You found what an army is good at. Every army is particularly good at something and not great at other things.

Guard's strengths aren't really even good enough to have them compete at top level. Why do you want to bring them down even lower.

IG have the best shooting/gunline abilities in the game, hands down. They may not have "devastating 1st turn charge units like tyranids" - but you know what they DO have? The IMPERIUM faction keyword.

Which makes me really glad you brought up Blood Angels as one of your arguments - because you know, IG and BA can't ally or anything.... oh, wait, they can. So, IG gets the best gunline, and can ALSO have "devastating 1st turn charge units like Blood Angels".

Tyranids can't gunline like IG can, plain and simple. If you think they can - I'd love to hear arguments and see some lists. [But since thats not how arguments work, I'll also work up some lists and numbers as to why they're not as good at gunlining.] The Termagaunt, while having a similar statline and price, has half the range AND firepower of a Guardsman - additionally, while they may be immune to morale, they also require a multipoint beasty that can be shot down within 12" of them - or they suffer -1 to hit//can only shoot the nearest target.

Let me ask you - would you ever make that trade for your Guardsman? Losing half range, firepower, and requiring a nearby officer (synapse), but in exhange you gain morale immunity? Oh wait, you'd also have to give up orders...

And speaking of other factions and their -1 to hit, Disgusting Resilience, and other such traits; they pay for those traits, by having their base trooper be 2-4x as expensive (8-16ppm), versus the 4ppm of a guardsman. And on top of that, the IG traits aren't even bad - one turns Guardsman into Firewarriors (Voystron), another is amazing for d6 tanks and artillery (Catachan), another lets you infiltrate tanks (Tallarn), and all the others which escape my head at the moment.

Thoughts?

Guard may not be the best at everything - no army is. But they have access to IMPERIUM, which means you can build army lists that ARE good at everything.

And just so we're clear what we're talking about here - we're NOT asking for Guard to get nerfed into kingdom come; all we're asking for is the overtuned units to get brought down to a more reasonable and balanced level, something we do with EVERY faction.

fe40k wrote:
Guard may not be the best at everything - no army is. But they have access to IMPERIUM, which means you can build army lists that ARE good at everything.

You have that backwards. IMPERIUM has access to GUARD. If you actually look at the imperium lists that placed high at LVO, it's mostly some marine faction with a sprinkle of guard infantry, not the other way around. These are NOT guard lists. They're mostly marine lists.

fe40k wrote:
And just so we're clear what we're talking about here - we're NOT asking for Guard to get nerfed into kingdom come; all we're asking for is the overtuned units to get brought down to a more reasonable and balanced level, something we do with EVERY faction.

You might not think you're talking about nerfing guard, but that's exactly what you'll be doing. In the past with some obvious balance issues like conscripts, Guard were dominating the tournament scene. Then conscripts and commissars got nerfed into the ground and guard no longer dominated tournaments. That's good. They still placed occasionally, and that's fine, but you're hitting them again in one of the few advantages they have left. Will you hurt imperial soup if you nerf infantry squads? Yeah probably. But what's even more likely to happen is you'll never see another guard list place well in the tournament scene.

You can't just look at it in a vacuum of "well infantry squads are so much better point for point than basic troops of other armies, therefore nerf infantry squads" without looking at the big picture of how well each army performs as a whole. Guard armies are NOT overperforming by any stretch. For how ball-bustingly incredible everyone makes the guard codex out to be, there's scant few guard lists actually placing well at tournaments.

People are mad at imperial soup lists (for some reason), and want to take it out on the smallest part of that imperial soup.

Oh my god is this argument still ongoing?

First off - it's a rumour and secondly - if it's true it makes perfect sense - you can't have Conscripts the exact same price as Infantry because they are objectively worse. Infantry must be made more expensive for the Conscript change to make any sense.

Both units were undercosted and it's possible even with 4ppm Conscripts and 5ppm Infantry they still are.

I'm amazed that once everyone gets on the same page and goes "well I guess 5ppm is fine" someone new comes along to flip the table and start the mess over again.

"I guess 5ppm infantry is fine. I'm okay never seeing guard place in tournaments again."

"never again" may be hyperbolic, but to reiterate, guard is NOT overpowerforming in competitions. And people want to knock them down a peg because they're mad at soup lists.

I'd be fine with 5ppm infantry if you made troop transports significantly cheaper or something. Buff veterans, ratlings, psykers, chimeras, hydras, deathstrikes, voxes, medics, multilasers.

I mean so is there going to be like a 30 page thread for every faction? So far we got marines and guard, I assume Eldar will be next complaining about how they have to pay more for stuff even though it's still less than everyone else

ThePorcupine wrote:
"I guess 5ppm infantry is fine. I'm okay never seeing guard place in tournaments again."

"never again" may be hyperbolic, but to reiterate, guard is NOT overpowerforming in competitions. And people want to knock them down a peg because they're mad at soup lists.

I'd be fine with 5ppm infantry if you made troop transports significantly cheaper or something. Buff veterans, ratlings, psykers, chimeras, hydras, deathstrikes, voxes, medics, multilasers.

As previously discussed over MANY PAGES: 5ppm re-balances Infantry Squads into line with Conscripts and Veterans. MANY Guard players have said it doesn't even do anything to hurt the army.

So yeah, hyperbole all the way.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 fraser1191 wrote:
I mean so is there going to be like a 30 page thread for every faction? So far we got marines and guard, I assume Eldar will be next complaining about how they have to pay more for stuff even though it's still less than everyone else

Sisters don't need a page, we just show up to gripe all over everyone else's threads.

Do those of you who are upset about this possible change think it's going to happen in a vacuum?

Do you not think it's possible there will be a change in Commissars to make them useful?

Do you really think that Dark Reapers, Shining Spears and the Ynnari exploit will be left alone? How about Captain Smashguinius?

We should be falling to the floor in praise that GW is actually updating the rules quickly to reflect results of tournaments and based off of player feedback. We have never had this before, this is new and it is fantastic.

IF (and it's a big if) the nerfs go too far, remember and take solace in the fact that GW can fix their mistakes far, far quicker than ever before and it's likely (based off of previous actions) that they will. I hope this maybe helps put some of your minds at rest.

Guard will be fine and lets not forget this is a game and we should have fun. If you feel the nerf is too much (if it's true, that is) just talk to your friends in your group and see if you can play pre nerf points or something.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
As previously discussed over MANY PAGES: 5ppm re-balances Infantry Squads into line with Conscripts and Veterans. MANY Guard players have said it doesn't even do anything to hurt the army. So yeah, hyperbole all the way.

Many have said it doesn't do anything to hurt their army. Many have said otherwise. Factually what it will do is cost every guard list between 60 and 120 extra points. You can look at how Guard is doing in the competitive setting right now with 4 point infantry and gauge it from there. They're not going to improve. This isn't a matter of opinion. If you have 10 dollars and take away 2 dollars, you have less money. You are not better off. You're not breaking even.

The degree to which guard will be worse off we'll see of course. Guard was super strong when it first came out because most other armies were index only. With each new codex guard becomes less and less impressive comparatively and guard's "bag of tricks" becomes smaller and smaller. Conscript blobs and morale invulnerability got cut. Outflanking 3 units of vehicles got cut. Replenishing valhallan troops got cut. Cheap psykers got cut. Vehicles taking cover got cut. Guard doesn't really have tricks to make them competitive.