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.

 Xenomancers wrote:
This thread makes me think about Bob Saget in half baked.

Essentially - IG have the most inspired codex in the game. Literally every army type is viable with cool and fluffy doctrines and the almost the entire codex is viable rules wise. The rest of the game is envious of how inspired he IG codex is. Holy mother of gak.

Yes, the guard codex is how every codex should be. You should be demanding that quality from GW for every codex.

What I would like to see...

GENERAL NERFS TO GUARD:
-Infantry Squads increasing from 40 points to 50 - really it needs to happen
-SWS increasing from 24 to 30 points (without weapons)
-HWS increasing from 18 points to 21 points (without weapons)
-Price increase on mortars, from 5 points to 7 or 8 points
-Company Commanders increasing from 30 points to 35 points
-Knight Commander Pask increasing from 177 points to 187 or possibly 197 - a BS 2 tank commander shouldn't cost +10 points
-Platoon Commanders increasing from 20 points to 25 points
-The loss of the ability to take bolters (bolt pistols are still ok) - a bolter is a sisters and SM gun, guard shouldn't have it for thematic reasons
-Basilisks increasing from 100 points base to 112
-Manticores increasing from 125 points base to 135
-Price increases for most baneblade models, some are entirely too cheap *cough* shadowsword *cough*

GENERAL BUFFS TO GUARD:
-Tempestus Scion price decrease, losing deepstrike baseline, and getting the option to buy the ability to deepstrike for points as "grav-chutes". - Why would I ever use their transport when I am paying points to deepstrike them as part of their cost?
-Creed getting tactical genius back.
-Tempestor Prime having the ability to take a pistol AND a command rod. Seriously, the fact that you can take a stormtrooper without a gun is laughable.
-Conscripts losing "raw recruits" and going back to accepting orders automatically
-Grenade launchers decreasing from 5 points down to 3
-Missile Launchers decreasing from 20 points down to 17 or 16 - there is no point in taking them when they cost the same as a lascannon
-Veterans becoming troop choices, with the ability to take camo cloaks and snare mines - not sure if they should get carapace armor as they should remain different from scions
-Medkits decreasing from 10 points to 5 points (we have to roll a 4+ and cannot bring back multiwound models, so I think this is fair)
-GUARDSMEN SERGEANTS GETTING LASGUNS HOLY GAK
-Replacing the bolter's empty spot in the armory with the guard shotgun
-Meltagun points decrease from 12/17 to 7/12 for models with BS 4+/3+ respectively
-Commissar summary execution becoming "if you lose a morale test on a unit within 6", automatically remove a model and ignore adding the die roll to the morale test". It is so fething simple, I have no idea why they did it their way. My way will never hurt you, worst case scenario you break even. Enemies can still decimate conscripts with morale shock though.
-Armored and Scout sentinels receiving a rule that allows them to move and shoot their weapons without the -1 heavy weapon penalty.
-Hydras decreasing from 100 points base to 90 points
-Wyvrens decreasing from 85 points base to 75 points - as it stands now you are better off just buying loads of mortar squads, even with my proposed nerfs to HWS and mortars
-Vanquisher cannon getting two shots, or it's single shot getting reroll wounds and 3d3 damage.
-Multilaser decreasing from 10 points to 6 points. - Seriously why is a heavy bolter cheaper when it is superior to a multilaser statistically in almost every way?
-Chimera decreasing in points.
-Valkyries and vendettas decreasing in points.
-Vox casters should give orders unlimited range, not simply add on +12" - I don't know anyone that takes them outside of fluffy reasons

 Xenomancers wrote:

-Price increases for most baneblade models, some are entirely too cheap *cough* shadowsword *cough*

Have you tried to run a baneblade in the modern meta? An unbuffed Castellan will one shot it pretty easy. It's so points inefficient compared to imperial knights.

I agree that Shadowswords are far better than any other baneblade variant, and should cost more. Maybe it gets a smaller points DECREASE. Maybe Shadowsword goes from 420 to about 380 base, and the Baneblade goes down from 420 to 330 base.

Better yet, maybe it could get a 5+ invul so that it has the durability that is being handed out like candy to all other super heavies, and the "Take Cover" strategem gets a 3 CP varient that works on Tanks. Maybe instead of a 5++ it gets T9. Anything to give you a chance for it to Survive going 2nd without having to tallarn ambush.

Here is some math to illustrate my point:

Chimera's getting cheaper or becoming better relative to their cost is one of my biggest want's, would love to be able to run a mechanised platoon without feeling like i'm gimping myself. After that would be vet's moving to the troops slot, them being an elite unit makes them much harder to fit in detachment wise compared to scions. Last wish would be for Sentinels to get heavy bolter's, pretty much everything else in the guard motorpool can get them but they can't, would be a good alternative to the multilaser and autocannon and would make them nice and cheap infantry mulcher's with some durability.

tag8833 wrote:
Have you tried to run a baneblade in the modern meta? An unbuffed Castellan will one shot it pretty easy. It's so points inefficient compared to imperial knights.

Guilty confession time, I haven't played against the new knights codex yet. Is it that bad?

Whenever I take my Shadowsword it wrecks face unless they can take it out first turn.

w1zard wrote:

tag8833 wrote:
Have you tried to run a baneblade in the modern meta? An unbuffed Castellan will one shot it pretty easy. It's so points inefficient compared to imperial knights.

Guilty confession time, I haven't played against the new knights codex yet. Is it that bad?

Whenever I take my Shadowsword it wrecks face unless they can take it out first turn.

Castellan is pretty much custom designed to take out shadowsword and it's kind. Basically it can let shadowsword shoot first and still comes out top. Well not sure basic one but raven one without breaking a sweat. If knight goes first...well then shadowsword just goes "poof" and that's it.

Less awesome against cheap hordes. Not that bad against PA infantry but say ork/tyranid infantry swarm and castellan isn't that hot but give it monsters and tanks and it's jolly good time. Raven castellan can blow marine repulsor and leman russ at the same time with high frequency...

 Vaktathi wrote:
I want Chimeras to be worth taking. I've got 16 of the things and they haven't been worth bothering to put on a table for three editions now.

This. Chimeras got murdered this edition. Yeah their survivability went up but they now suffer -1BS on the move, lost rear firing ports (which is massive), lost amphibious rule, lost command vehicle rule where you now have to spend command points to do what it previously did & to top it off they increased in points.

At their current price point, they just aren't worth taking. Bare minimum, they need a price hike & rear firing ports returned.

 Commissar Benny wrote:
At their current price point, they just aren't worth taking. Bare minimum, they need a price hike & rear firing ports returned.

I agree they aren't worth taking right now, but I'd rather not return to the days of melta/plasma drive-bys.

I think a heavy drop in price, the ability to issue orders out of the hatch without having to use a stratagem, and the ability to cross certain types of impassable terrain should see their return to use.

w1zard wrote:

 Commissar Benny wrote:
At their current price point, they just aren't worth taking. Bare minimum, they need a price hike & rear firing ports returned.

I agree they aren't worth taking right now, but I'd rather not return to the days of melta/plasma drive-bys.

I think a heavy drop in price, the ability to issue orders out of the hatch without having to use a stratagem, and the ability to cross certain types of impassable terrain should see their return to use.

I think your suggestion is reasonable, it would depend entirely on how large the price hike is however. Losing the ability to fire plasma from rear firing ports is massive. Especially with the changes to how disembarking/emarking works now. Chimeras utility has been really neutered. You can no longer pull up next to the enemy with rear hatch facing them, pour out with flame templates in the same turn etc. Most of the neat tricks you could do are no longer possible.

I do like many of your proposed suggestions above. I don't agree with all of them but most are very reasonable & well thought out.

 Commissar Benny wrote:

I think your suggestion is reasonable, it would depend entirely on how large the price hike is however. Losing the ability to fire plasma from rear firing ports is massive. Especially with the changes to how disembarking/emarking works now. Chimeras utility has been really neutered. You can no longer pull up next to the enemy with rear hatch facing them, pour out with flame templates in the same turn etc. Most of the neat tricks you could do are no longer possible.

I do like many of your proposed suggestions above. I don't agree with all of them but most are very reasonable & well thought out.

Thank you. There are some units like auxillia that I do not use so have no comment on. But most of those desired changes come from playing guard a lot in 8th and really getting a feel for the units. Also, having to work around the holes during listbuilding.

Already been mentioned but I would like Chimera's, Hydra's, Wyverns, and Valk's/Vendetta's to be worth taking again, or at least close to it. I mean I'm not a power gamer but I need the models to at least been within the ball park of worth while.

Over all our new codex is good though, we just take an insane amount of heat due to the inclusion of IG in every Imperium soup army as cheap bodies. I know allies are great for GW's bottom line so they won't be going away but it seriously messes up the balance in 40K with the total lack of restrictions in place currently.

 Xenomancers wrote:
This thread makes me think about Bob Saget in half baked.

Essentially - IG have the most inspired codex in the game. Literally every army type is viable with cool and fluffy doctrines and the almost the entire codex is viable rules wise. The rest of the game is envious of how inspired he IG codex is. Holy mother of gak.

Back Xenos! Back to your 5 point guard thread!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Elbows wrote:
Yep, gotta admit Guard are in a stupendously good place...only thing they're lacking are good minis. Tanks are fine, but their infantry models need replacing in a bad way (so fething boring).

With a selection of heads for different regiments - really seen some great Tallarn which are merely a head swap with Cadians.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Heafstaag wrote:
More cavalry options!

Neigh! (Sorry couldn't resist, yep cavalry are great )

Give us quad stubber scout sentinels please. Two stubbers on each side of the cockpit. It be like a walking ball-turret gunner, essentially.

That's a fantastic image and idea! (Goes into thinking how to kitbash it...). Should have a little servitor trailer following them with the ammo...

More artillery options in codex. Wheeled artillery like howitzers, mortars and whatnot.

They would be neat I feel as an additional regiment specific codex, or perhaps a PDF codex...

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:

That's actually part of the reason for my suggestion of Rapiers. They 'fit' the idea of Tempestus a bit better--they're still fairly mobile, can be deployed via Valkyrie and a single operator can do a significant amount with the single platform. Fast Attack could see a Tempestus Sentinel variant; uparmored with a smaller selection of ranged weapons but some indirect fire stuff there too.

Sounds a bit like the old Elysians? Rapier platform is a neat idea, I could use my old Rogue trader ones

Or make the gunny ugly taurus a heavy option and the normal one the transport...

I could see Salamanders making an appearance here though and Veterans getting to start at 5 man squads then go up to 10.

Would be neat making a recon regiment with salamanders, scout teams, etc. etc.

 Kanluwen wrote:
I think it's important to realize that some of the complaints here aren't that the Guard codex is bad but that people would like the book to be viable without soup being a factor.

Asmodios wrote:

The only minor adjustments in points i would do is things like chimeras (which transports in general need another look at this edition) thus not raising the power of the codex but simple diversity in units taken

Yes idea is for Guard fanatics to natter about fun armies and units they would like to see, not to destroy all the bases.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:

I'm just down for Kasrkin/Grenadiers as an option for Veterans. That's all I want man.

Yes, would be cool.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tag8833 wrote:

The_Real_Chris wrote:
Codex's
I would love to see separate codex’s for each regiment - though the margins on this would be tiny for GW, so perhaps more a fan project (wouldn't it be great if GW made tools to support this...). It would be a bit of fun, include certain forgeworld units and options etc.

Please God No! How many books do you want to have to carry around with you to and from the local game store? I don't even think there should be proper codexes. Or rather Codexes are fine, but in addition we should have cards or sheets that go into a 3-ring binder with all of the rules. That way we don't have to carry around so ridiculous many books.

This comment did confuse me - I want to carry one book with my army in. Then I released you are carrying a bunch of codex's for your dinner and this means you have to carry more. As something of a Guard purist (lets be honest, even multiple regiment traits are wrong on the table ) I look forward to ensuring you stagger under the sheer weight of the printed word!!!

tneva82 wrote:

Castellan is pretty much custom designed to take out shadowsword and it's kind. Basically it can let shadowsword shoot first and still comes out top. Well not sure basic one but raven one without breaking a sweat. If knight goes first...well then shadowsword just goes "poof" and that's it.

Less awesome against cheap hordes. Not that bad against PA infantry but say ork/tyranid infantry swarm and castellan isn't that hot but give it monsters and tanks and it's jolly good time. Raven castellan can blow marine repulsor and leman russ at the same time with high frequency...

Shadowsword is supposedly designed to kill things like Castellans. Only since the Castellan is going to rock a 3+ invul vs the shadowsword if it goes 2nd, it's woefully unable to do that. Whoever thought giving knights a 3++ invul was a good idea should get their head examined.

As an Ork player, I think you aren't giving the Castellan its due against orks. My orks stand up much better to a Stormlord than they do to a castellan in practice. Even though it's not the ideal target, the fact that it can pick out anything that threatens it from essentially infinite range, and is almost always very well screened by hoards. Plus the inability for orks to effectively kill it up close.

I've seen tyranids survive Castellans. I've manged to kill 1 once when playing my guard plus blood angels, and I killed one with Tyranids because it wasnt' well screened, but usually the Castellan is going to make it's points back vs an Ork Hoard in my experience. Because it can play agressively, and not be afraid of anything the orks can throw at it.

And that is kinda why I want to see the baneblade buffed up so that the Castellan isn't the undisputed king of the meta. Obviously it needs a nerf too, but even if they make it 850 points like they probably should, it's going to utterly dominate games, and most armies aren't going to be able to handle it. It needs something other than blood angel's captains that it's afraid of, and the baneblade seems like an obvious choice.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Chimeras got murdered this edition.

I would love to field my horde of Chimera - my main problem with them is with their survivability and heavy weaponry they are worth more than the infantry they transport which seems quite contrary to the concept of an infantry transport - that what they are carrying is the key fighting component.

The_Real_Chris wrote:

More artillery options in codex. Wheeled artillery like howitzers, mortars and whatnot.

They would be neat I feel as an additional regiment specific codex, or perhaps a PDF codex...

One issue with this btw is that in 40k scale mechanized vs wheeled is basically irrelevant except wheeled tends to be cheaper...When you don't need the mobility...Well basically you need to pay VERY LITTLE for ability to move.

This comment did confuse me - I want to carry one book with my army in. Then I released you are carrying a bunch of codex's for your dinner and this means you have to carry more. As something of a Guard purist (lets be honest, even multiple regiment traits are wrong on the table ) I look forward to ensuring you stagger under the sheer weight of the printed word!!!

If GW releases multiple guard codexes, one per regiment, you can bet it would be most efficient to combine more than 1=more than 1 book needed.

tneva82 wrote:
Ummm no. Heavy weaponless squads should be allowed but if you do that only idiots would NOT take heavy weapons.

Point taken, I was thinking of stuff like Voxs admittedly for squads, the heavy weapons are more of a thing for vehicles. Stuff like sponsonless Russ still being an option but to encourage the iconic look a bit more.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:

More artillery options in codex. Wheeled artillery like howitzers, mortars and whatnot.

One issue with this btw is that in 40k scale mechanized vs wheeled is basically irrelevant except wheeled tends to be cheaper...When you don't need the mobility...Well basically you need to pay VERY LITTLE for ability to move.

If GW releases multiple guard codexes, one per regiment, you can bet it would be most efficient to combine more than 1=more than 1 book needed.

True - hence why i don't think you can mix the wheeled and non wheeled into the same list, so different codex. I think such codex as you say would have to restrict cross usage, so probably that codex, Imperial agents (inquisitors and other fluffy but not game breaking allies) and fortifications as allies only. Note not touching fortifications currently as they are another more smelly kettle of fish!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Vox-Casters grant a boost to the effectiveness of an Order rather than the range.

What is the rationale for this? I mean radios are basically about range... Indeed I would drop the 18 inch requirement and just say can recieve orders from a similar equipped squad and officer.

Heavy Weapon Squads go to 10 models, allowing for 5 teams per Heavy Weapon Squad. Same rule as Junior Officers and vehicle squadrons--they start off as one big thing but act independently for the remainder of the game. Each HWT should have access to a Vox-Caster.

Do you mean ending up with each base (team) operating as a separate unit? Or multiple heavy weapon squads being part of one unit choice that then operate as separate squads of 3-5 teams post deployment?

Hmm, what would I change if I could revise the guard codex?

Rebalance the heavy weapons. Mortars are super good, so I'd like to see a price bump here, I think you can argue that heavy bolters should be 5pts, Autocannons 10pts, MLs 15pts, and lascannons 20.

Radically rebalance special weapons. BS4+ plasma and melta at 10pts, Flamers at 5pts (at most, but flamers need a game wide rebalancing), snipers stay put, and keep grenade launchers 5pts but finally make them assault 2.

Fix the multi-laser. I wrote a lengthy take down of this garbage weapon, but I think I have a simple solution: make it 5pts, and make it Assault 3. It's now a nice little harassment gun.

Price drop on the Chimera. I think it works fine, it's just too expensive for what it does, especially in a world with Move! Move! Move! Likewise, price drops on other bits of kit that work fine, but cost too much, like the Wyvvern, Banewolf, Ogryns, and medic/standard command squads. (I say create a new "honor guard" squad that cannot take special or heavy weapons, and has a standard, medic, vox, and power weapon option, all with the character keyword)

Buff the hydra. I say make the guns S8 and D3, but anything that makes it actually useful as an anti-air option will be appreciated.

Balance the LRBT main guns. IMO, the battle cannon, executioner, and punisher are fine. The demolisher is okay but overcosted, bring it in line with the others and it's got niche use. The Vanquisher needs to be two shots, S9, Ap-3 2d6 damage, pick the highest. The nova cannon technically has the anti-cover niche, but -1 to hit is the new cover. I'd make it a super long range hellhound. Heavy d6, 48" range, S5 AP1 D1, always hits. Finally, I say make the exterminator Heavy 6.

Give wyrdvanes a purpose. Primaris are general use, and astropaths are support, so I say make Wyrdvances smite machines. Allow them one cast with two dice, but you get an extra dice if the squad is five or more.

Finally, veterans. I say either open up the tool kit, and all vets to become a huge range of things, or include a regiment specific veteran squad for each regiment (minus MT). For example:
Cadians: Kasrkin. Heavy armor and hotshots, but no deepstrike.
Catachan: Catachan Devils: +1 Attack, WS3+
Tallarn: Desert Tigers - Gain +1 to hit and to wound the turn they deploy by Ambush
Vostroyan: Eldest Sons - 4+ saves, Heavy Lasguns (30", rapid fire, S4)
Mordian: Drill Team - May issue themselves one order, in addition to any order given by an officer
Armageddon: Steel Dragoons - While within 6" of a Chimera, they reroll all failed wound rolls, and all rapid fire weapons may shoot one extra shot.
Valhallan: Frost Guard - squad size 10-20, may ignore wounds on a 5+

1. Some encouragement to run huge blob-squads again. The idea of running 20+ men in a squad sounds pretty appealing and would have some tactical advantage in terms of Strategems and Orders, but now we have to spend CP to blob up, and makes us *much* more vulnerable to Morale.

2. Make Comissars great again. Not to the Index level of Morale immunity, but a better way to prevent your guys fleeing would be appreciated. Perhaps "execute D3 squad members to auto-pass" or something along those lines.

3. Conscripts should stay bad but should be cheaper to compensate. Their statlines represent the idea well enough, but at the same price as regular Guardsmen they got shafted hard.

4. Give Veterans something to make them unique, instead of just "Infantry Squad with BS3+ and 3 Special Weapons", bring the Doctrines back or even just let them take Carapace Armour.

5. Lower the points on the Chimera.

6. Vanquisher needs a huge boost, say S9 Ap-3 2D6 damage. Keep it as 1 shot, as you'll be shooting twice most of the time anyway. Exterminator needs more shots, considering that the number of shots it put out stayed the same, when all other TL weapons were doubled.

 Polonius wrote:

Finally, veterans. I say either open up the tool kit, and all vets to become a huge range of things, or include a regiment specific veteran squad for each regiment (minus MT). For example:
Cadians: Kasrkin. Heavy armor and hotshots, but no deepstrike.
Catachan: Catachan Devils: +1 Attack, WS3+
Tallarn: Desert Tigers - Gain +1 to hit and to wound the turn they deploy by Ambush
Vostroyan: Eldest Sons - 4+ saves, Heavy Lasguns (30", rapid fire, S4)
Mordian: Drill Team - May issue themselves one order, in addition to any order given by an officer
Armageddon: Steel Dragoons - While within 6" of a Chimera, they reroll all failed wound rolls, and all rapid fire weapons may shoot one extra shot.
Valhallan: Frost Guard - squad size 10-20, may ignore wounds on a 5+

This is a really, really good system for veterans. But would they become troops or remain elite with these benefits?

I would also advocate changing IS to 5ppm, removing their heavy weapon options, and adding a second special weapon slot, which also includes a heavy stubber/heavy lasgun/regular lasgun version of the hotshot volley gun (so.. volley gun).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Polonius wrote:

Fix the multi-laser. I wrote a lengthy take down of this garbage weapon, but I think I have a simple solution: make it 5pts, and make it Assault 3. It's now a nice little harassment gun.

This would certainly make scout sentinels more than just objective holders and actually make multilasers in some way useful.

 Valkyrie wrote:
1. Some encouragement to run huge blob-squads again. The idea of running 20+ men in a squad sounds pretty appealing and would have some tactical advantage in terms of Strategems and Orders, but now we have to spend CP to blob up, and makes us *much* more vulnerable to Morale.

As opposed to running 20 man squads?

2. Make Comissars great again. Not to the Index level of Morale immunity, but a better way to prevent your guys fleeing would be appreciated. Perhaps "execute D3 squad members to auto-pass" or something along those lines.

Given the number of things out there granting morale immunity, why not just bring it back to it? Declare you're going to execute a model, roll a D6. On a 1 or a 2 your opponent gets to choose the model executed--everything else you pick.

D3 is just nonsense or should be the result of a 1.

3. Conscripts should stay bad but should be cheaper to compensate. Their statlines represent the idea well enough, but at the same price as regular Guardsmen they got shafted hard.

I really can't get behind Conscripts without them getting "Auxilia". I could see differentiating between "Conscripts" and "Whiteshields" though--Conscripts get "Auxilia", Autoguns, or Autopistols/CCWs. Whiteshields get Lasguns, <Regiment>, and the Raw Recruits rule.

tag8833 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

-Price increases for most baneblade models, some are entirely too cheap *cough* shadowsword *cough*

Have you tried to run a baneblade in the modern meta? An unbuffed Castellan will one shot it pretty easy. It's so points inefficient compared to imperial knights.

I agree that Shadowswords are far better than any other baneblade variant, and should cost more. Maybe it gets a smaller points DECREASE. Maybe Shadowsword goes from 420 to about 380 base, and the Baneblade goes down from 420 to 330 base.

Better yet, maybe it could get a 5+ invul so that it has the durability that is being handed out like candy to all other super heavies, and the "Take Cover" strategem gets a 3 CP varient that works on Tanks. Maybe instead of a 5++ it gets T9. Anything to give you a chance for it to Survive going 2nd without having to tallarn ambush.

Here is some math to illustrate my point:

Spoiler:

All math is done unbuffed with an acknowledgement that Knights have superior access to buffs. Baneblades are assumed to have 4 lascannon / heavy bolter sponsons.

Knights shooting at baneblades
Castellan does 30.40 unsaved wounds to a baneblade chasis in one round of shooting. (12pts more than baneblade as equipped above)
Valiant does 26.71 (9pts LESS)
Crusader (RFBC, MG, Stormspear) does 10.91 (49pts LESS)
Crusader (Thermal, MG, Stormspear) does 12.67 (87pts LESS)

Baneblades shooting at T8 knights (5+ Invul)
Shadowsword does 25.62 unsaved wounds to a knight chaises in one round (52 pts less)
Baneblade does 14.17 (0 points different)
Banehammer does 8.77 (52 pts less)
Banesword does 11.83 (52 pts less)
Doomhammer does 11.83 (22 pts less)
Hellhammer does 14.17 (20 pts more)
Stormlord does 10.06 (4 pts less)
Stormsword does 10.49 (52 pts less)

So the Shadowsword is basically twice as good at killing knights as all other variants. It's pretty similar (like 80% as good) at killing small stuff like infantry and bikes, so maybe it should cost the most. Meanwhile Dominus knights are extremely more points efficient at killing baneblades (and other knights) than any of the Baneblade variants. They are also better at killing medium vehicles like rhinos and small stuff, and they are more durable, and have better buffs all for about the same price.

The Stormlord and the Crusader are roughly comparable but the Crusader runs significantly cheaper.

Knights and Baneblades aren't costed on the same scale at all. Either Knights generally need a 20-40% points boost or baneblades need about a 20-40% decrease to be comparable.

I didn't even write that ITT - maybe at some point 6 months ago before IK came out...IDK - this is actually pretty troubling.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:
1. Some encouragement to run huge blob-squads again. The idea of running 20+ men in a squad sounds pretty appealing and would have some tactical advantage in terms of Strategems and Orders, but now we have to spend CP to blob up, and makes us *much* more vulnerable to Morale.

As opposed to running 20 man squads?

Sorry, I don't understand your phrasing. I meant it would be good to simply be able to take more than 10 guys in an Infantry Squad, or allow them to be deployed as one unit before the start of the game.

Kanluwen wrote:

2. Make Comissars great again. Not to the Index level of Morale immunity, but a better way to prevent your guys fleeing would be appreciated. Perhaps "execute D3 squad members to auto-pass" or something along those lines.

Given the number of things out there granting morale immunity, why not just bring it back to it? Declare you're going to execute a model, roll a D6. On a 1 or a 2 your opponent gets to choose the model executed--everything else you pick.

D3 is just nonsense or should be the result of a 1.

Fair point, there are already ways to get morale immunity, bringing Comissars back to Index level may not be so bad.

3. Conscripts should stay bad but should be cheaper to compensate. Their statlines represent the idea well enough, but at the same price as regular Guardsmen they got shafted hard.

I really can't get behind Conscripts without them getting "Auxilia". I could see differentiating between "Conscripts" and "Whiteshields" though--Conscripts get "Auxilia", Autoguns, or Autopistols/CCWs. Whiteshields get Lasguns, <Regiment>, and the Raw Recruits rule.

tag8833 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

-Price increases for most baneblade models, some are entirely too cheap *cough* shadowsword *cough*

Have you tried to run a baneblade in the modern meta? An unbuffed Castellan will one shot it pretty easy. It's so points inefficient compared to imperial knights.

I agree that Shadowswords are far better than any other baneblade variant, and should cost more. Maybe it gets a smaller points DECREASE. Maybe Shadowsword goes from 420 to about 380 base, and the Baneblade goes down from 420 to 330 base.

Better yet, maybe it could get a 5+ invul so that it has the durability that is being handed out like candy to all other super heavies, and the "Take Cover" strategem gets a 3 CP varient that works on Tanks. Maybe instead of a 5++ it gets T9. Anything to give you a chance for it to Survive going 2nd without having to tallarn ambush.

Here is some math to illustrate my point:

Spoiler:

All math is done unbuffed with an acknowledgement that Knights have superior access to buffs. Baneblades are assumed to have 4 lascannon / heavy bolter sponsons.

Knights shooting at baneblades
Castellan does 30.40 unsaved wounds to a baneblade chasis in one round of shooting. (12pts more than baneblade as equipped above)
Valiant does 26.71 (9pts LESS)
Crusader (RFBC, MG, Stormspear) does 10.91 (49pts LESS)
Crusader (Thermal, MG, Stormspear) does 12.67 (87pts LESS)

Baneblades shooting at T8 knights (5+ Invul)
Shadowsword does 25.62 unsaved wounds to a knight chaises in one round (52 pts less)
Baneblade does 14.17 (0 points different)
Banehammer does 8.77 (52 pts less)
Banesword does 11.83 (52 pts less)
Doomhammer does 11.83 (22 pts less)
Hellhammer does 14.17 (20 pts more)
Stormlord does 10.06 (4 pts less)
Stormsword does 10.49 (52 pts less)

So the Shadowsword is basically twice as good at killing knights as all other variants. It's pretty similar (like 80% as good) at killing small stuff like infantry and bikes, so maybe it should cost the most. Meanwhile Dominus knights are extremely more points efficient at killing baneblades (and other knights) than any of the Baneblade variants. They are also better at killing medium vehicles like rhinos and small stuff, and they are more durable, and have better buffs all for about the same price.

The Stormlord and the Crusader are roughly comparable but the Crusader runs significantly cheaper.

Knights and Baneblades aren't costed on the same scale at all. Either Knights generally need a 20-40% points boost or baneblades need about a 20-40% decrease to be comparable.

What are you basing your maths on a no-one runs Melta Guns on knights like seriously a 12 inch assualt weapon you having a laugh if you think thats getting in range of a shadowsword.
Also are you compairing mono knights or souped?

Also what does you points less relate to you havn't explained any of your maths.
Also you say knights have acess to better buffs but Guard LoW can be any regiment and given astropath buffs.

Castallans are probably 50 points undercosted.

The other thing to remember in balance is they will feel unbalanced as to be balanced they need to table an opponent to win as they loose on objectives etc every time.

 Valkyrie wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:
1. Some encouragement to run huge blob-squads again. The idea of running 20+ men in a squad sounds pretty appealing and would have some tactical advantage in terms of Strategems and Orders, but now we have to spend CP to blob up, and makes us *much* more vulnerable to Morale.

As opposed to running 20 man squads?

Sorry, I don't understand your phrasing. I meant it would be good to simply be able to take more than 10 guys in an Infantry Squad, or allow them to be deployed as one unit before the start of the game.

You talk about how we have to spend CP to blob up making us "much more vulnerable to Morale".

I don't see how it would be any different than just taking a 20 man squad. Both would be vulnerable to Morale, it wouldn't do anything super special.

Kanluwen wrote:

2. Make Comissars great again. Not to the Index level of Morale immunity, but a better way to prevent your guys fleeing would be appreciated. Perhaps "execute D3 squad members to auto-pass" or something along those lines.

Given the number of things out there granting morale immunity, why not just bring it back to it? Declare you're going to execute a model, roll a D6. On a 1 or a 2 your opponent gets to choose the model executed--everything else you pick.

D3 is just nonsense or should be the result of a 1.

Fair point, there are already ways to get morale immunity, bringing Comissars back to Index level may not be so bad.

In and of itself, Commissars weren't an issue. Blamming a Guard or a Veteran or a Scion or a HWT--that was a big deal. Blamming a Conscript, which was commonly being taken in addition to a Lord Commissar or Commisar, comparatively meant nothing when souped.

Which is what led to the whole nerfing of Commissars nonsense.

3. Conscripts should stay bad but should be cheaper to compensate. Their statlines represent the idea well enough, but at the same price as regular Guardsmen they got shafted hard.

I really can't get behind Conscripts without them getting "Auxilia". I could see differentiating between "Conscripts" and "Whiteshields" though--Conscripts get "Auxilia", Autoguns, or Autopistols/CCWs. Whiteshields get Lasguns, <Regiment>, and the Raw Recruits rule.

By "Auxilia", do you mean the whole "Can be taken as part of a Regiment but don't get the bonuses" thing? If so that's not a bad idea.

I know it's not. I've suggested it for ages. I was flabberghasted when they added Raw Recruits instead of just making it so they're Auxilia.

Yeah, the "issues" with IG have rarely been about the way that the army works internally, or dare I say, as intended. Giant conscript blob armies and imperial soup are very different beasts than a mono-codex IG army with a single conscript squad.

I'm bracing myself for 5ppm guardsmen, but I hope they fix imperial soup in a different way. I totally get it, even as an IG player: CP batteries with GS and KA are clichéd and annoying. Fun fact: I played in a five round GT, and four of the armies I faced had an IG battalion. Not one was primary guard by points.

Allies have been a chronic fundamental issue for the last 3 editions, doesn't matter if it's guard CP batteries, Taudar, Superfriends, etc, though there appears to be very little will to combat that.

Also, hot-shot volley guns become assault 4.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Allies have been a chronic fundamental issue for the last 3 editions, doesn't matter if it's guard CP batteries, Taudar, Superfriends, etc, though there appears to be very little will to combat that.

Allies/keywords drive sales. It's fundamentally good for GW to have people splashing in different armies, so I doubt it will go away unless tournaments really start to crack down.

There are some elegant solutions to soup that still allow for allies. My favorite is to only allow strategems keyed to your warlord. So, even if you include a CP battery, you can only use your primary strats if you make them your warlord. The CP battery without GS/KA is much less annoying.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:
1. Some encouragement to run huge blob-squads again. The idea of running 20+ men in a squad sounds pretty appealing and would have some tactical advantage in terms of Strategems and Orders, but now we have to spend CP to blob up, and makes us *much* more vulnerable to Morale.

As opposed to running 20 man squads?

Sorry, I don't understand your phrasing. I meant it would be good to simply be able to take more than 10 guys in an Infantry Squad, or allow them to be deployed as one unit before the start of the game.

You talk about how we have to spend CP to blob up making us "much more vulnerable to Morale".

I don't see how it would be any different than just taking a 20 man squad. Both would be vulnerable to Morale, it wouldn't do anything super special.

Kanluwen wrote:

2. Make Comissars great again. Not to the Index level of Morale immunity, but a better way to prevent your guys fleeing would be appreciated. Perhaps "execute D3 squad members to auto-pass" or something along those lines.

Given the number of things out there granting morale immunity, why not just bring it back to it? Declare you're going to execute a model, roll a D6. On a 1 or a 2 your opponent gets to choose the model executed--everything else you pick.

D3 is just nonsense or should be the result of a 1.

Fair point, there are already ways to get morale immunity, bringing Comissars back to Index level may not be so bad.

In and of itself, Commissars weren't an issue. Blamming a Guard or a Veteran or a Scion or a HWT--that was a big deal. Blamming a Conscript, which was commonly being taken in addition to a Lord Commissar or Commisar, comparatively meant nothing when souped.

Which is what led to the whole nerfing of Commissars nonsense.

3. Conscripts should stay bad but should be cheaper to compensate. Their statlines represent the idea well enough, but at the same price as regular Guardsmen they got shafted hard.

I really can't get behind Conscripts without them getting "Auxilia". I could see differentiating between "Conscripts" and "Whiteshields" though--Conscripts get "Auxilia", Autoguns, or Autopistols/CCWs. Whiteshields get Lasguns, <Regiment>, and the Raw Recruits rule.

By "Auxilia", do you mean the whole "Can be taken as part of a Regiment but don't get the bonuses" thing? If so that's not a bad idea.

I know it's not. I've suggested it for ages. I was flabberghasted when they added Raw Recruits instead of just making it so they're Auxilia.

Ah I see, on the first point, I was referring to how you used to be able to take 2-5 squads, and just combine them during deployment, whereas now you have to spend CP. The point about morale was a separate point; the cool idea of "waves upon waves of Guardsmen" is ruined a bit by how devastating morale can be.

 Apple Peel wrote:
Also, hot-shot volley guns become assault 4.

Even if it comes with a price bump, I agree.

Ice_can wrote:

tag8833 wrote:

Here is some math to illustrate my point:

Spoiler:

All math is done unbuffed with an acknowledgement that Knights have superior access to buffs. Baneblades are assumed to have 4 lascannon / heavy bolter sponsons.

Knights shooting at baneblades
Castellan does 30.40 unsaved wounds to a baneblade chasis in one round of shooting. (12pts more than baneblade as equipped above)
Valiant does 26.71 (9pts LESS)
Crusader (RFBC, MG, Stormspear) does 10.91 (49pts LESS)
Crusader (Thermal, MG, Stormspear) does 12.67 (87pts LESS)

Baneblades shooting at T8 knights (5+ Invul)
Shadowsword does 25.62 unsaved wounds to a knight chaises in one round (52 pts less)
Baneblade does 14.17 (0 points different)
Banehammer does 8.77 (52 pts less)
Banesword does 11.83 (52 pts less)
Doomhammer does 11.83 (22 pts less)
Hellhammer does 14.17 (20 pts more)
Stormlord does 10.06 (4 pts less)
Stormsword does 10.49 (52 pts less)

So the Shadowsword is basically twice as good at killing knights as all other variants. It's pretty similar (like 80% as good) at killing small stuff like infantry and bikes, so maybe it should cost the most. Meanwhile Dominus knights are extremely more points efficient at killing baneblades (and other knights) than any of the Baneblade variants. They are also better at killing medium vehicles like rhinos and small stuff, and they are more durable, and have better buffs all for about the same price.

The Stormlord and the Crusader are roughly comparable but the Crusader runs significantly cheaper.

Knights and Baneblades aren't costed on the same scale at all. Either Knights generally need a 20-40% points boost or baneblades need about a 20-40% decrease to be comparable.

What are you basing your maths on a no-one runs Melta Guns on knights like seriously a 12 inch assualt weapon you having a laugh if you think thats getting in range of a shadowsword.

I picked the melta gun because it was the most expensive option. I was doing what I could to compare apples to apples because knights are so much cheaper than baneblades for comparable damage output.

Ice_can wrote:
Also are you compairing mono knights or souped?

The 1st sentence of my section on math: "All math is done unbuffed with an acknowledgement that Knights have superior access to buffs"

Ice_can wrote:
Also what does you points less relate to you havn't explained any of your maths.

The 1st points comparison explains that: 12pts more than baneblade as equipped above

Ice_can wrote:
Also you say knights have acess to better buffs but Guard LoW can be any regiment and given astropath buffs.

Sure. Knights have a good list of regiments as well, and there is definitely a spell if it goes off can get a Baneblade down to a 2+ armor save with no invul. Knights have a warlord trait that does that for free. Also they have a warlord trait that gives a knight a 4++ invul (I've played a dozen castellans, and I've never seen one without that trait). And a strategem that gives them +1 invul. So we are talking a 3+ invul. Which is what makes them not terribly threatened by baneblades (or realistically any shooting). In the dozen or so games I've play against a Castellan or Vallient, and the dozen or so more that I've watch at tourneys, I've only ever seen one die to shooting, and that was killed by another castellan in a mirror match.

Ice_can wrote:
Castallans are probably 50 points undercosted..

I'd say we can agree to disagree on that point. Since they put out roughly twice as much offense as a baneblade, and are significantly more durable, and cost about the same, my theory is 50 points probably isn't enough. You could probably bump it 50-100 points if you took away the 4++ WL trait and the House Raven Strategem.

Ice_can wrote:
The other thing to remember in balance is they will feel unbalanced as to be balanced they need to table an opponent to win as they loose on objectives etc every time.

My experience is that they are always surrounded by 60-90 guardsmen. Sometimes 3-6 hellhounds. 15 blood angels scouts, and 5-10 characters. So usually they have pretty good board presence.

They put out about twice as much firepower as a baneblade and cost about the same. So think of this, next time you are facing an Imperial guard gunline give your opponent a free Baneblade on top of his 2,000 points. See how likely it is that you still have board control after 6 turns. How many times have you seen a Castellan fielded where one player wasn't tabled or close enough to it?