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.

w1zard wrote:
Two lovers may go to extreme lengths to save another despite breaking orders or something, not to mention if one of them gets promoted and gets into an authority position over the other. Plus all the drama associated with scorned advances, a man or woman bouncing between lovers, etc. It is a dumpster fire waiting to happen.

And why you think this would not happen in a single-gender regiment?

 Crimson wrote:

w1zard wrote:
Two lovers may go to extreme lengths to save another despite breaking orders or something, not to mention if one of them gets promoted and gets into an authority position over the other. Plus all the drama associated with scorned advances, a man or woman bouncing between lovers, etc. It is a dumpster fire waiting to happen.

And why you think this would not happen in a single-gender regiment?

It does, just to a far lesser extent then a mixed sex regiment because even GENEROUS estimates put gay+bisexual people at ~15% of the population. It is easier to control at that point.

w1zard wrote:
You are aware that a large percentage of men/women retire from the guard after long years of service aren't you. Not everyone is slated to die a glorious death on the battlefield.

Propaganda myths to inspire heroic sacrifice. The majority of guardsmen die in combat, most of them very quickly. This is, after all, the faction where "send in the next wave" is a key strategy.

You are aware that most equipment is capable of being used by both genders right? Allocating an all-female or all-male regiment lasguns and flak armor makes no difference. All I'm saying is that male and female regiments are probably separate to keep the commissars from blowing their own brains out in frustration. Battlefield morale plays a huge part in how a regiment performs on the field both IRL and I would imagine in 40k.

The point is that the guardsmen themselves are inventory items. The Imperium's bureaucracy does not keep track of their gender or names or homeworld or anything like that. They are simply an inventory item to be maintained, one among many that is provided to a war. Case of 500,000 guardsmen, case of 500 lasgun power cells, it's all just inventory totals. Maintaining separate male and female regiments means maintaining two separate inventory items: guardsman (male) and guardsman (female). Why put the scribe servitors through all that extra work for such a superficial detail? After all, the scribe servitors are barely flesh creatures anyway, far removed from any concept of gender. Would the bureaucracy even understand that humans come in two varieties, or would they regard such a concept as utterly bizarre, like claiming that a power cell for a lasgun is male?

And morale is not an issue. Remember, this is not the real world of 2018, where we have a secular society that cares about the individual. This is the Imperium, where every guardsman knows that the surest way to avoid hell is honorable death in service to the Emperor. And for most guardsmen being granted an opportunity to die in battle is immensely better than working as a factory slave deep in a hive city where entire generations are born and die in the same factory. To fail and run from combat is to reject the Emperor's gift and to throw away eternity by His side in favor of eternal damnation.

Which just proves my original point that some people won't be happy unless there are female sculpts and not just head swaps, which is why GW will never do it. Forcing people to buy multiple boxes if they want a unisex regiment is not a good business practice.

And yet this is exactly what GW is doing with other product lines, so your claim that they never would does not seem to be dealing with reality.

(Also, forcing people to buy multiple boxes is great business practice in GW's business model. Why do you think they keep selling you units where you have to buy multiple kits to buy enough plasma guns to equip the entire squad?)

 Peregrine wrote:
(Also, forcing people to buy multiple boxes is great business practice in GW's business model. Why do you think they keep selling you units where you have to buy multiple kits to buy enough plasma guns to equip the entire squad?)

Our disagreements about 40k lore aside... Forcing people who want an all-male regiment or all-female regiment to buy double the boxes will spark a huge fan backlash from both groups. It's never going to happen, I'd be willing to bet my right testicle on it. It's too risky a business move with too much of a potential for blowback. The most we will ever see is female headswaps for male bodies, or more realistically an all-female line. MAYBE there might be a mixed sex guerrilla irregular model line or something but it will be separate from the main IG line.

The imperium does keep track of gender on a regimental level. Most mixed units are combined units, made of battlefield survivors.

Most are male, but they get whatever role they're trained for, regardless of gender. (10/1 male to female regiment). Most regiments are single gender to reduce the unwanted results of fraternization, though some regiments just dose the food of female regiments with contraceptives.

There are some equipment differences, and while life is cheap for a guardsman, a regiment can be expected to stick around for awhile, which means the Guard has to deal with various long term issues, which does include the occasional pregnancy. How that's dealt with depends on the regiment.

As for models. I'm in favor of making it depend on the regiment. Make male and female cadians (separate sprues), mixed valhallans (as an example), a male only regiment, and a female only regiment. If you're going to make multiple regiments (hopefully!), and don't want to change the fluff, then this would satisfy most people (who aren't opposed to any females in their plastic game).

 Mmmpi wrote:
The imperium does keep track of gender on a regimental level. Most mixed units are combined units, made of battlefield survivors.

Most are male, but they get whatever role they're trained for, regardless of gender. (10/1 male to female regiment). Most regiments are single gender to reduce the unwanted results of fraternization, though some regiments just dose the food of female regiments with contraceptives.

There are some equipment differences, and while life is cheap for a guardsman, a regiment can be expected to stick around for awhile, which means the Guard has to deal with various long term issues, which does include the occasional pregnancy. How that's dealt with depends on the regiment.

As for models. I'm in favor of making it depend on the regiment. Make male and female cadians (separate sprues), mixed valhallans (as an example), a male only regiment, and a female only regiment. If you're going to make multiple regiments (hopefully!), and don't want to change the fluff, then this would satisfy most people (who aren't opposed to any females in their plastic game).

Agreed on all points.

@w1zard
FOr GW's products, unless it's a unit that's specifically mono-gendered (space marines, brides of khaine) then they tend to set it up a 1/5, or 1/4 ratio women/men. See eldar guardians for example.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, Peregrine is right in how little the Imperium cares. The only reason they bother to keep track of gender at all is because of the slight differences in equipment and the results of fraternization. Also, PDF's are more likely to be mixed, and while most are trash, there are enough exceptions that you could make an 'elite PDF regiment' and have it fit in the general fluff just fine.

w1zard wrote:
Forcing people who want an all-male regiment or all-female regiment to buy double the boxes will spark a huge fan backlash from both groups.

As opposed to forcing the people who want an all-female regiment to buy nothing, because the product doesn't exist? This is really an improvement over having to buy two boxes?

And, again, GW is already doing this with other factions and none of this outrage has happened. Your theories do not match reality.

I think if they went with the Eldar model of having 1 in every 4 or 5 be female, it wouldn't take long for people to accept it as the norm and get over it. There'd be neckbeards whining about the canon for a while, but come on, this is a science fantasy setting! We can have mixed gender and it not be a big deal.

 Peregrine wrote:

w1zard wrote:
Its the simple matter of having men and women in close proximity to each other. It's human nature that romantic relationships will form, and they will find ways to "entertain" themselves in their downtime. This is not ideal because these kind of entanglements damage battlefield efficiency. Pregnant women can't fight and are out of action for nine months.

You're assuming that a guardsman is expected to survive for nine months. They aren't. Expected time from deployment to death is a few minutes, maybe a day or two for the luckiest veterans. Pregnant women don't suffer any effects until long after a guardsman is expected to be dead. And TBH, would it even matter? The Imperial Guard is run on the principle of "we have more bodies than you have bullets, we win". A pregnant woman can force the enemy to spend a bullet just as well as a man, all that matters is sheer numbers.

Even assuming that this mortality rate is accurate once the guardsmen reach the field of battle, this doesn't account for the long months in transit to the campaign zones. If we're looking at a 50/50 split for a mixed regiment, it is entirely possible that a significant portion of that group will be pregnant even before ever reaching a point where they are deployed.

I for one wholeheartedly support the despairing Commissars handing out 'The Emperor Protects' condoms and giving rousing speeches on safe-sex practices to avoid combat inefficiency. Failure to adhere to these regulations will result in the termination of the fetus, along with the guardswoman carrying it.

Probably

 vaklor4 wrote:

dkoz wrote:
There are already female models in the guard boxes. Just like modern real soldiers once their wearing armor and a helmet you can't tell the difference between them and the joe next to them. Also how does anyone know how any of those guardspeople identify maybe a bunch of them identify as female.

Except lots of countries are providing different uniforms for female soldiers based on comfort to the female form, including more space for the breasts >_> That is a real thing, not just some style deal. Sorry to break it to people, but boobs actually need room to breath. I know seeing boobs much less feeling or having them on Dakka Dakka is rare, but squishing them inside of armor or restictive clothing gets super uncomfortable after awhile.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Actually if there would be Female models for guard i'd imagine there would be an interesting case to be made for an Slaaneshi traitor guard. Granted it depends on the models and their looks but anyways.
Of course only for science.

I think Khorne is the only true Chaos God for the IG...What other army kills off their own troops so frequently?

Allready got that covered though, there however can never be enough heresy! So additional cannonfodder for the meatgrinder is appreciated, even if it is cannonfodder from the god of extremeist taste.
Remember Khorne does not care from where the blood flows, only that it does.

Additionally your "Kharn, the motherlands Proletariot" is now something i want to model, preferentially with a Commissarhat.

 Peregrine wrote:

w1zard wrote:
Forcing people who want an all-male regiment or all-female regiment to buy double the boxes will spark a huge fan backlash from both groups.

As opposed to forcing the people who want an all-female regiment to buy nothing, because the product doesn't exist? This is really an improvement over having to buy two boxes?

Or just making an all-female cadian box to make everyone happy.

People who want mixed regiments can mix and match to their heart's content in whatever ratio they desire.

 Peregrine wrote:
And, again, GW is already doing this with other factions and none of this outrage has happened. Your theories do not match reality.

Because other factions such as Eldar are explicitly stated to be mixed sex at all levels of society. So nobody cares as it fits the fluff. Most IG regiments (90+%) are single sex outfits with only some oddball regiments and the scratch regiments made up of survivors being mixed sex, and even then only in the most dire of circumstances.

well that was fun.


there's a topic.

stick to it.

w1zard wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

w1zard wrote:
Forcing people who want an all-male regiment or all-female regiment to buy double the boxes will spark a huge fan backlash from both groups.

As opposed to forcing the people who want an all-female regiment to buy nothing, because the product doesn't exist? This is really an improvement over having to buy two boxes?

Or just making an all-female cadian box to make everyone happy.

People who want mixed regiments can mix and match to their heart's content in whatever ratio they desire.

Probably the best suggestion.
Depending on Fluff and desperation in the sector etc. Would also allow for nice narrative scenarios, etc.

w1zard wrote:
Or just making an all-female cadian box to make everyone happy.

People who want mixed regiments can mix and match to their heart's content in whatever ratio they desire.

That is unrealistic, given GW's limited support for any faction that isn't space marines. I would much rather have a Cadian box with a 50/50 split and another faction or two with a similar split instead of two different Cadian boxes. Plus, your proposal doesn't give everyone what they want. If I want to have a mixed squad of Cadians I have to buy one box of each, instead of buying a single mixed-gender box. In fact, your idea makes very little sense as anything but pandering to the people who hate the idea of women in their entertainment.

And, again, we have seen the examples with GW's other product lines: mixed-gender boxes, zero controversy.

 Peregrine wrote:
That is unrealistic, given GW's limited support for any faction that isn't space marines. I would much rather have a Cadian box with a 50/50 split and another faction or two with a similar split instead of two different Cadian boxes. Plus, your proposal doesn't give everyone what they want. If I want to have a mixed squad of Cadians I have to buy one box of each, instead of buying a single mixed-gender box. In fact, your idea makes very little sense as anything but pandering to the people who hate the idea of women in their entertainment.

What about someone who wants to make an all-female regiment? Assuming that there is a 50/50 sex split in an infantry box, you are forcing someone who wants an all-female or all-male regiment to buy 5 models they aren't going to use. As opposed to someone who wants to have a mixed infantry regiment with seperate sex boxes... sure they have to buy 2 boxes, but they can use all 20 models. Sorry, but having a seperate all-female box seems like a much better solution for all parties involved.

 Peregrine wrote:
And, again, we have seen the examples with GW's other product lines: mixed-gender boxes, zero controversy.

w1zard wrote:
Because other factions such as Eldar are explicitly stated to be mixed sex at all levels of society. So nobody cares as it fits the fluff. Most IG regiments (90+%) are single sex outfits with only some oddball regiments and the scratch regiments made up of survivors being mixed sex, and even then only in the most dire of circumstances.

Fluff can and will be changed as needed.

And, again, having separate boxes is not realistic. GW does not provide non-marine product lines with that much support, and they have already established that they introduce mixed-gender units with a single mixed-gender kit. And if GW did do two separate boxes it would probably come at the cost of not introducing a non-Cadian regiment box, which is not acceptable.

For reals, a mixed gender IG sprue is not a big deal. Anything from heads swaps to boob-flak would just be normal the next time a sprue is made.

I like Warmachine. To me, I'd like to see women in less pin-up gear, but that's me. I recently bought the old Khador box, and you can see Sorcha's butt through a heavy coat. That's a sculptor's prerogative, but seems silly to me.

I'm all for increased presence of women in 40k armies. I still remember being disappointed a little when I went from old-Dark Eldar to Cadians when they first came out, and noticing there were no women on the sprues. I had expected at least 1/5, and a 1:1 ratio would have been absolutely fine by me. Birth rate and recruitment rate are equal... that can only happen if both genders are being put into service.

And not to ruin the surprise for anyone, but you're only getting new recruits if you have some mixed gender elements. Probably lots of them if you want to keep recruitment rates high.

Hopefully the next regiment to be released will have options for women on the sprue.

 Peregrine wrote:
Fluff can and will be changed as needed.

Sure, when something doesn't convenience you or doesn't fit your narrative, just change it... That never backfires at all...

 Peregrine wrote:
And, again, having separate boxes is not realistic. GW does not provide non-marine product lines with that much support, and they have already established that they introduce mixed-gender units with a single mixed-gender kit. And if GW did do two separate boxes it would probably come at the cost of not introducing a non-Cadian regiment box, which is not acceptable.

Maybe to you.

I think a far better solution to the "multiple regiments" issue is having cadians be the "base" and having "upgrade" boxes for the other regiments like catachans, valhallans, etc...

 greatbigtree wrote:
For reals, a mixed gender IG sprue is not a big deal. Anything from heads swaps to boob-flak would just be normal the next time a sprue is made.

I like Warmachine. To me, I'd like to see women in less pin-up gear, but that's me. I recently bought the old Khador box, and you can see Sorcha's butt through a heavy coat. That's a sculptor's prerogative, but seems silly to me.

I'm all for increased presence of women in 40k armies. I still remember being disappointed a little when I went from old-Dark Eldar to Cadians when they first came out, and noticing there were no women on the sprues. I had expected at least 1/5, and a 1:1 ratio would have been absolutely fine by me. Birth rate and recruitment rate are equal... that can only happen if both genders are being put into service.

Hopefully the next regiment to be released will have options for women on the sprue.

Even in Cadian regiments, most are separated by gender.

So just a question for both Peregrine and anyone else. Why a 1:5 ratio for women:men. Doesn't that make an all-female regiment that much harder to collect? If we want to be fair shouldn't we have a 50/50 split between women and men?

Given Cadia's destruction and the slow reworking of most lines I do not think the future guard army will be Cadian orientated.

That's a while off still however IMO,

Gotta redo the marines as Primaris first presumably.

w1zard wrote:
Most IG regiments (90+%) are single sex outfits with only some oddball regiments and the scratch regiments made up of survivors being mixed sex, and even then only in the most dire of circumstances.

Source? My Asta Militarum codex makes no mention of such.

I edited my post while you were quoting. If birth rate and recruitment rate are equal, how do you get new recruits without mixed gender groups?

 Crimson wrote:

w1zard wrote:
Most IG regiments (90+%) are single sex outfits with only some oddball regiments and the scratch regiments made up of survivors being mixed sex, and even then only in the most dire of circumstances.

Source? My Asta Militarum codex makes no mention of such.

Ciaphas Cain and Gaunt's Ghost novels mention it quite often.

 greatbigtree wrote:
I edited my post while you were quoting. If birth rate and recruitment rate are equal, how do you get new recruits without mixed gender groups?

R&R leave .

w1zard wrote:

Ciaphas Cain and Gaunt's Ghost novels mention it quite often.

Right. That is just Black Library nonsense. Black Library authors think that Librarians can jump on orbit and cut space ships in twain with force swords. BL novels are not even consistent with themselves. There is no mention of such gender limits in codices or rulebooks.

I've seen it a few times, most recently in the Cain novels. It's stated that only 10% of regiments are all women, mixed regiments are extremely rare, and the rest are all male.

That's not counting combined regiments, where two damaged units are merged into one (in fluff only the Valhallens and Voystrians are known for sending replacements, the rest just make new regiments.)

w1zard wrote:

So just a question for both Peregrine and anyone else. Why a 1:5 ratio for women:men. Doesn't that make an all-female regiment that much harder to collect? If we want to be fair shouldn't we have a 50/50 split between women and men?

I think 1:5 is only getting mentioned because of the comparison to the Eldar sprues.

I'd be totally fine with 50/50 personally!

 Crimson wrote:

w1zard wrote:

Ciaphas Cain and Gaunt's Ghost novels mention it quite often.

Right. That is just Black Library nonsense. Black Library authors think that Librarians can jump on orbit and cut space ships in twain with force swords. BL novels are not even consistent with themselves. There is no mention of such gender limits in codices or rulebooks.

Gaunt's Ghosts and Ciaphas Cain are the two most popular novel series that portray Guard in the 40k setting. Apart from the Last Chancer's series and a few popular one-off novels like Fifteen Hours, they make up the bulk of the IG lore for 40k. You cannot just ignore them.

If you want to ignore every BL novel and only consider the codex canon, you have very little lore to work with.

w1zard wrote:


So just a question for both Peregrine and anyone else. Why a 1:5 ratio for women:men. Doesn't that make an all-female regiment that much harder to collect? If we want to be fair shouldn't we have a 50/50 split between women and men?

One to five is what other factions have. Not that it's ideal. Eldar guardians and I think Kabal warriors are 1/4.

 Mmmpi wrote:

w1zard wrote:


So just a question for both Peregrine and anyone else. Why a 1:5 ratio for women:men. Doesn't that make an all-female regiment that much harder to collect? If we want to be fair shouldn't we have a 50/50 split between women and men?

One to five is what other factions have. Not that it's ideal. Eldar guardians and I think Kabal warriors are 1/4.

Sure, which is why I was suggesting a full female cadian box and a full male cadian box. That way, people who want single sex regiments are happy (male or female), and people who want mixed sex regiments at whatever ratio they desire are happy as well. Granted, it is more work for GW, but if female guardswomen are introduced into the product line, that is how I think it should be done IMO.