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.

This thread is a waste of good stupidity.

w1zard wrote:
I really wish people would stop comparing IG to marines and trying to use that as proof that IG is overpowered. Marines are hot garbage and need buffs across the board... IG don't need to be nerfed down to marine levels.

We should really be comparing IG to other upper tier codices like DE/Eldar/Tau/Tyranids.

IG do need nerfs in a few areas (such as infantry squads going to 5 points) but they also need buffs to certain units (chimeras, LR:vanquishers, sentinels), but EVERY codex needs nerfs and buffs to certain units.

If you compare IG to SM or GK, yea IG is going to gak all over them, but it's because SM and GK are BAD, not because IG is too good. If you compare IG to the other upper tier codices the power gap is much more narrow and arguable.

IG are being compared to other Imperium armies because those are the armies they are competing with for cheap Battalions for CP.

No other Imperium army can compete with Guard for infantry. Skitarii comes closest and they still lose out massively by having double the cost per model, no synergy with their cheap HQ's and nothing in the world that can compare to Mortars.

The problem with only comparing IG to other top codexes from different factions and concluding that they are fine means that every Imperium army until 9th edition will be Guard + whatever else is currently strongest.

I seriously can't believe people still bitch about mortars. A full three HS slots full of them get an average of 31.5 Str 4 shots that kill an average of 2.6 marines or 6.8 GEQ per turn. Rule of Three stopped the craziness with bringing 15+ of them to really leverage their cheap cost and on top of that, in ITC they're a huge vulnerability in that they're easy kills for the primary objectives and DBTC (now Butcher's Bill which is even easier to get against these since you only need to kill two units/turn).

 Ordana wrote:
IG are being compared to other Imperium armies because those are the armies they are competing with for cheap Battalions for CP.

No other Imperium army can compete with Guard for infantry. Skitarii comes closest and they still lose out massively by having double the cost per model, no synergy with their cheap HQ's and nothing in the world that can compare to Mortars.

The problem with only comparing IG to other top codexes from different factions and concluding that they are fine means that every Imperium army until 9th edition will be Guard + whatever else is currently strongest.

And this is exactly why CPs should be limited to the faction that generated them.

Alternatively, make players pick a primary faction (the one with their warlord), and say that they can't use stratagems from other factions and can only include Patrol or Auxiliary Support Detachments for other factions.

Either of these would prevent any Imperium army from including an IG CP battery.

RogueApiary wrote:
I seriously can't believe people still bitch about mortars. A full three HS slots full of them get an average of 31.5 Str 4 shots that kill an average of 2.6 marines or 6.8 GEQ per turn. Rule of Three stopped the craziness with bringing 15+ of them to really leverage their cheap cost and on top of that, in ITC they're a huge vulnerability in that they're easy kills for the primary objectives and DBTC (now Butcher's Bill which is even easier to get against these since you only need to kill two units/turn).

31 bolter shots that can reach most of the table and don't need LoS for 100 points.
You understand how no other army can field something that efficient right?
Is it bonkers OP? ..... kinda yeah.
It means for a completely minimal investment I can kill my opponents weaker units and keep my heavy hitters focused on yours.

'But its only 6.8 GEQ' you say. And that's enough I say. I've numerous games simply because my Mortars were plunking away all game and the enemy just ran out of units to capture objectives with.

When the faq nerfed CP regen I went looking around for other battalions to replace my Guard with. And the answer every time was the same, I can get some troops for cheap but nothing can ever replace the 'incidental' damage that mortars do that ends up winning you games.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:

 Ordana wrote:
IG are being compared to other Imperium armies because those are the armies they are competing with for cheap Battalions for CP.

No other Imperium army can compete with Guard for infantry. Skitarii comes closest and they still lose out massively by having double the cost per model, no synergy with their cheap HQ's and nothing in the world that can compare to Mortars.

The problem with only comparing IG to other top codexes from different factions and concluding that they are fine means that every Imperium army until 9th edition will be Guard + whatever else is currently strongest.

And this is exactly why CPs should be limited to the faction that generated them.

Alternatively, make players pick a primary faction (the one with their warlord), and say that they can't use stratagems from other factions and can only include Patrol or Auxiliary Support Detachments for other factions.

Either of these would prevent any Imperium army from including an IG CP battery.

And in one stroke you invalidated every Imperium army except Guard, because none of them can generate the CP they need to function on their own. (most notably BA/IK/Custodes).

 Ordana wrote:
Either of these would prevent any Imperium army from including an IG CP battery.

And in one stroke you invalidated every Imperium army except Guard, because none of them can generate the CP they need to function on their own. (most notably BA/IK/Custodes).

 Ordana wrote:

RogueApiary wrote:
I seriously can't believe people still bitch about mortars. A full three HS slots full of them get an average of 31.5 Str 4 shots that kill an average of 2.6 marines or 6.8 GEQ per turn. Rule of Three stopped the craziness with bringing 15+ of them to really leverage their cheap cost and on top of that, in ITC they're a huge vulnerability in that they're easy kills for the primary objectives and DBTC (now Butcher's Bill which is even easier to get against these since you only need to kill two units/turn).

31 bolter shots that can reach most of the table and don't need LoS for 100 points.
You understand how no other army can field something that efficient right?
Is it bonkers OP? ..... kinda yeah.
It means for a completely minimal investment I can kill my opponents weaker units and keep my heavy hitters focused on yours.

'But its only 6.8 GEQ' you say. And that's enough I say. I've numerous games simply because my Mortars were plunking away all game and the enemy just ran out of units to capture objectives with.

When the faq nerfed CP regen I went looking around for other battalions to replace my Guard with. And the answer every time was the same, I can get some troops for cheap but nothing can ever replace the 'incidental' damage that mortars do that ends up winning you games.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:

 Ordana wrote:
IG are being compared to other Imperium armies because those are the armies they are competing with for cheap Battalions for CP.

No other Imperium army can compete with Guard for infantry. Skitarii comes closest and they still lose out massively by having double the cost per model, no synergy with their cheap HQ's and nothing in the world that can compare to Mortars.

The problem with only comparing IG to other top codexes from different factions and concluding that they are fine means that every Imperium army until 9th edition will be Guard + whatever else is currently strongest.

And this is exactly why CPs should be limited to the faction that generated them.

Alternatively, make players pick a primary faction (the one with their warlord), and say that they can't use stratagems from other factions and can only include Patrol or Auxiliary Support Detachments for other factions.

Either of these would prevent any Imperium army from including an IG CP battery.

And in one stroke you invalidated every Imperium army except Guard, because none of them can generate the CP they need to function on their own. (most notably BA/IK/Custodes).

If your opponent let your mortars live to plink away for a whole game, either you were already winning hard and he couldn't split off enough assets to kill 9 T3/2W/5+ models, you weren't playing ITC rules so he wasn't incentivized to go after them for easy VP, or he's bad.

At what point cost would mortars be 'balanced'? There's an upper ceiling of 7 points, because at 8 points or above you would just take Heavy Bolters. I saw one idiot in this thread call for 10 point mortars, which would be hilarious in that you may as well just delete them from the game at that price. Which is one of the biggest problems with the current points system, there isn't enough granularity because the majority of infantry models and weapons are crammed into 8 or 9 points of design space. The game would really benefit from doubling the cost of everything and then adjusting with the extra room.

 vipoid wrote:

 Ordana wrote:
And in one stroke you invalidated every Imperium army except Guard, because none of them can generate the CP they need to function on their own. (most notably BA/IK/Custodes).

I don't even know what you people want anymore.

"This is terrible - IG are acting as CP batteries for every Imperium faction!"

'Okay, here are some ways to stop that...'

"This is terrible, IG won't be able to be CP batteries for every Imperium faction!!!"




I give up.

Probably because this thread has more then 1 person talking and different people see different problems and different solutions.

Here is my position.
cheap battalions to bring additional CP is needed for many elite armies to be viable because they are only viable through their use of Stratagems.
If you want to get rid of outside CP you need to redesign most, if not all, of the codexes.
This is not happening, so getting rid of outside CP is bad.
Currently the only option for outside CP is Guard. This is undesireable.
So lets make other armies a viable option compared to Guard.
Buffing everyone else to be as good as Guard is probably a bad thing for the game if your not Imperial and again takes a redesign of all codexes.
So bring the bad elements of Guard down a bit, buff some other armies in little ways to close the gap and see where the game is then.

31 bolter shots that can reach most of the table and don't need LoS for 100 points.
You understand how no other army can field something that efficient right?
Is it bonkers OP? ..... kinda yeah.
It means for a completely minimal investment I can kill my opponents weaker units and keep my heavy hitters focused on yours.

'But its only 6.8 GEQ' you say. And that's enough I say. I've numerous games simply because my Mortars were plunking away all game and the enemy just ran out of units to capture objectives with.

When the faq nerfed CP regen I went looking around for other battalions to replace my Guard with. And the answer every time was the same, I can get some troops for cheap but nothing can ever replace the 'incidental' damage that mortars do that ends up winning you games.

Liar
There is a army list that can pull even more Mortars then IG and add up CP for Chaos. but then again "No other army can field something that efficent" seems to have gone to your head.

RogueApiary wrote:

 Ordana wrote:

RogueApiary wrote:
I seriously can't believe people still bitch about mortars. A full three HS slots full of them get an average of 31.5 Str 4 shots that kill an average of 2.6 marines or 6.8 GEQ per turn. Rule of Three stopped the craziness with bringing 15+ of them to really leverage their cheap cost and on top of that, in ITC they're a huge vulnerability in that they're easy kills for the primary objectives and DBTC (now Butcher's Bill which is even easier to get against these since you only need to kill two units/turn).

31 bolter shots that can reach most of the table and don't need LoS for 100 points.
You understand how no other army can field something that efficient right?
Is it bonkers OP? ..... kinda yeah.
It means for a completely minimal investment I can kill my opponents weaker units and keep my heavy hitters focused on yours.

'But its only 6.8 GEQ' you say. And that's enough I say. I've numerous games simply because my Mortars were plunking away all game and the enemy just ran out of units to capture objectives with.

When the faq nerfed CP regen I went looking around for other battalions to replace my Guard with. And the answer every time was the same, I can get some troops for cheap but nothing can ever replace the 'incidental' damage that mortars do that ends up winning you games.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:

 Ordana wrote:
IG are being compared to other Imperium armies because those are the armies they are competing with for cheap Battalions for CP.

No other Imperium army can compete with Guard for infantry. Skitarii comes closest and they still lose out massively by having double the cost per model, no synergy with their cheap HQ's and nothing in the world that can compare to Mortars.

The problem with only comparing IG to other top codexes from different factions and concluding that they are fine means that every Imperium army until 9th edition will be Guard + whatever else is currently strongest.

And this is exactly why CPs should be limited to the faction that generated them.

Alternatively, make players pick a primary faction (the one with their warlord), and say that they can't use stratagems from other factions and can only include Patrol or Auxiliary Support Detachments for other factions.

Either of these would prevent any Imperium army from including an IG CP battery.

And in one stroke you invalidated every Imperium army except Guard, because none of them can generate the CP they need to function on their own. (most notably BA/IK/Custodes).

If your opponent let your mortars live to plink away for a whole game, either you were already winning hard and he couldn't split off enough assets to kill 9 T3/2W/5+ models, you weren't playing ITC rules so he wasn't incentivized to go after them for easy VP, or he's bad.

At what point cost would mortars be 'balanced'? There's an upper ceiling of 7 points, because at 8 points or above you would just take Heavy Bolters. I saw one idiot in this thread call for 10 point mortars, which would be hilarious in that you may as well just delete them from the game at that price. Which is one of the biggest problems with the current points system, there isn't enough granularity because the majority of infantry models and weapons are crammed into 8 or 9 points of design space. The game would really benefit from doubling the cost of everything and then adjusting with the extra room.

Firstly there is a world outside the US that doesn't play ITC.
Secondly, I play Custodes bikes. My opponents tend to be busy not dying to 10 bikes in their face to worry about 9 mortars at the edge of the board outside of range AND LoS of their weapons. If your shooting your basilisk, Hiveguard or whatever at my Mortars rather then the bikes in your face I will thank you.
Thirdly. Why cant a Mortar cost more or the same as a Heavy Bolter? It has more range and ignores LoS. Its a trade of in safety compared to damage and considering their role in my army I would take atleast some 10 point mortars over 8 point Heavy Bolters.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:

31 bolter shots that can reach most of the table and don't need LoS for 100 points.
You understand how no other army can field something that efficient right?
Is it bonkers OP? ..... kinda yeah.
It means for a completely minimal investment I can kill my opponents weaker units and keep my heavy hitters focused on yours.

'But its only 6.8 GEQ' you say. And that's enough I say. I've numerous games simply because my Mortars were plunking away all game and the enemy just ran out of units to capture objectives with.

When the faq nerfed CP regen I went looking around for other battalions to replace my Guard with. And the answer every time was the same, I can get some troops for cheap but nothing can ever replace the 'incidental' damage that mortars do that ends up winning you games.

Liar
There is a army list that can pull even more Mortars then IG and add up CP for Chaos. but then again "No other army can field something that efficent" seems to have gone to your head.

(I assume you mean Renegades) A good old forge world. Probably why its banned in so many places around the world.
My point still stands.

Your point doesn't stand. Infact you even lied more: FW is a offical GW branch and very much allowed in all GW stores and even in Tournaments. so before you dig your hole ever deeper i reccomend you stop.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Your point doesn't stand. Infact you even lied more: FW is a offical GW branch and very much allowed in all GW stores and even in Tournaments. so before you dig your hole ever deeper i reccomend you stop.

Large parts of Europe don't allow Forge World.
Here is the ETC rulespack incase you want to argue more. Note how it says "Forgeworld is not allowed"
https://www.glasshammergaming.co.uk/Downloads/ETC2018_40K8thedition_RULESPACK_vFINALDRAFT.pdf

But sure, have it your way. Lets limit ourselves to Imperium since that's what most of the discussion in this thread is about.
Does anything come close to the efficiency of Mortar teams?

 Ordana wrote:

RogueApiary wrote:

 Ordana wrote:

RogueApiary wrote:
I seriously can't believe people still bitch about mortars. A full three HS slots full of them get an average of 31.5 Str 4 shots that kill an average of 2.6 marines or 6.8 GEQ per turn. Rule of Three stopped the craziness with bringing 15+ of them to really leverage their cheap cost and on top of that, in ITC they're a huge vulnerability in that they're easy kills for the primary objectives and DBTC (now Butcher's Bill which is even easier to get against these since you only need to kill two units/turn).

31 bolter shots that can reach most of the table and don't need LoS for 100 points.
You understand how no other army can field something that efficient right?
Is it bonkers OP? ..... kinda yeah.
It means for a completely minimal investment I can kill my opponents weaker units and keep my heavy hitters focused on yours.

'But its only 6.8 GEQ' you say. And that's enough I say. I've numerous games simply because my Mortars were plunking away all game and the enemy just ran out of units to capture objectives with.

When the faq nerfed CP regen I went looking around for other battalions to replace my Guard with. And the answer every time was the same, I can get some troops for cheap but nothing can ever replace the 'incidental' damage that mortars do that ends up winning you games.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:

 Ordana wrote:
IG are being compared to other Imperium armies because those are the armies they are competing with for cheap Battalions for CP.

No other Imperium army can compete with Guard for infantry. Skitarii comes closest and they still lose out massively by having double the cost per model, no synergy with their cheap HQ's and nothing in the world that can compare to Mortars.

The problem with only comparing IG to other top codexes from different factions and concluding that they are fine means that every Imperium army until 9th edition will be Guard + whatever else is currently strongest.

And this is exactly why CPs should be limited to the faction that generated them.

Alternatively, make players pick a primary faction (the one with their warlord), and say that they can't use stratagems from other factions and can only include Patrol or Auxiliary Support Detachments for other factions.

Either of these would prevent any Imperium army from including an IG CP battery.

And in one stroke you invalidated every Imperium army except Guard, because none of them can generate the CP they need to function on their own. (most notably BA/IK/Custodes).

If your opponent let your mortars live to plink away for a whole game, either you were already winning hard and he couldn't split off enough assets to kill 9 T3/2W/5+ models, you weren't playing ITC rules so he wasn't incentivized to go after them for easy VP, or he's bad.

At what point cost would mortars be 'balanced'? There's an upper ceiling of 7 points, because at 8 points or above you would just take Heavy Bolters. I saw one idiot in this thread call for 10 point mortars, which would be hilarious in that you may as well just delete them from the game at that price. Which is one of the biggest problems with the current points system, there isn't enough granularity because the majority of infantry models and weapons are crammed into 8 or 9 points of design space. The game would really benefit from doubling the cost of everything and then adjusting with the extra room.

Firstly there is a world outside the US that doesn't play ITC.
Secondly, I play Custodes bikes. My opponents tend to be busy not dying to 10 bikes in their face to worry about 9 mortars at the edge of the board outside of range AND LoS of their weapons. If your shooting your basilisk, Hiveguard or whatever at my Mortars rather then the bikes in your face I will thank you.
Thirdly. Why cant a Mortar cost more or the same as a Heavy Bolter? It has more range and ignores LoS. Its a trade of in safety compared to damage and considering their role in my army I would take atleast some 10 point mortars over 8 point Heavy Bolters.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:

31 bolter shots that can reach most of the table and don't need LoS for 100 points.
You understand how no other army can field something that efficient right?
Is it bonkers OP? ..... kinda yeah.
It means for a completely minimal investment I can kill my opponents weaker units and keep my heavy hitters focused on yours.

'But its only 6.8 GEQ' you say. And that's enough I say. I've numerous games simply because my Mortars were plunking away all game and the enemy just ran out of units to capture objectives with.

When the faq nerfed CP regen I went looking around for other battalions to replace my Guard with. And the answer every time was the same, I can get some troops for cheap but nothing can ever replace the 'incidental' damage that mortars do that ends up winning you games.

Liar
There is a army list that can pull even more Mortars then IG and add up CP for Chaos. but then again "No other army can field something that efficent" seems to have gone to your head.

(I assume you mean Renegades) A good old forge world. Probably why its banned in so many places around the world.
My point still stands.

Because the extra strength, AP, and consistent number of shots all easily trump an extra 12" of range and the indirect ability? 48" vs 36" is a marginal gain on anything but Hammer and Anvil and Spearhead Assault and unless your terrain happens to include a bunch of enclosed ruins, getting LOS on one of the three 60mm bases in a mortar squad is not difficult. Those Custodes bikers in your opponent's hands could easily split some bolter fire their way before charging a juicier target.

 Ordana wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Your point doesn't stand. Infact you even lied more: FW is a offical GW branch and very much allowed in all GW stores and even in Tournaments. so before you dig your hole ever deeper i reccomend you stop.

Large parts of Europe don't allow Forge World.
But sure, have it your way. Lets limit ourselves to Imperium since that's what most of the discussion in this thread is about.
Does anything come close to the efficiency of Mortar teams?

Source?
Oh wait NVM since the last Tournaments in europe also allowed FW.
And yes there are quite alot of things that are equally broken pts efficency wise: DP's, Leman russes, Ofcourse good ol Knights. You know the commons. Of course can't miss out on Custodes jetbikes and smashcaptains.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Your point doesn't stand. Infact you even lied more: FW is a offical GW branch and very much allowed in all GW stores and even in Tournaments. so before you dig your hole ever deeper i reccomend you stop.

Do you want to address that R&H are BS 5+ and only a 6+ save unit without orders or regiment traits.
I would say that makes IG mortar teams more efficient

Ice_can wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Your point doesn't stand. Infact you even lied more: FW is a offical GW branch and very much allowed in all GW stores and even in Tournaments. so before you dig your hole ever deeper i reccomend you stop.

Do you want to address that R&H are BS 5+ and only a 6+ save unit without orders or regiment traits.
I would say that makes IG mortar teams more efficient

While we are at it. Milita HWT's are cheaper and sadly the maths goes in their favour for that.

Yeah Renegade HWTs with Mortars are more efficient 1 on 1 compared to the Guard version.
But unlike Guard, the rest of the Renegade units are pretty bad, which is why you don't see them.
That and FW has discontinued most of their range (seriously, the only renegade units FW still sells are the vehicles/artillery they shared with Guard/Admech).

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Yeah Renegade HWTs with Mortars are more efficient 1 on 1 compared to the Guard version.
But unlike Guard, the rest of the Renegade units are pretty bad, which is why you don't see them.

Thank you.
Except if you ever want indirect fire investing in something like this might make your day.
commander

3x6 HWt's with mortars
pts 169


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ordana wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Your point doesn't stand. Infact you even lied more: FW is a offical GW branch and very much allowed in all GW stores and even in Tournaments. so before you dig your hole ever deeper i reccomend you stop.

Large parts of Europe don't allow Forge World.
Here is the ETC rulespack incase you want to argue more. Note how it says "Forgeworld is not allowed"
https://www.glasshammergaming.co.uk/Downloads/ETC2018_40K8thedition_RULESPACK_vFINALDRAFT.pdf

But sure, have it your way. Lets limit ourselves to Imperium since that's what most of the discussion in this thread is about.
Does anything come close to the efficiency of Mortar teams?

Because ETC is the only one organizing in europe......
But please go on.

Because ETC is the only one organizing in europe......

Population wise? that is exactly what happens. You would have to be swiss or nord europe to see a lot of events that are lax with FW units being used.



Why not do a simple fix to IG, remove it as a playable solo faction. And give each imperial army to run some of their models. The IG and IG players problem goes away. Other imperial armies get access to CP and CP generation, and don't have to spam scouts etc.

Karol wrote:

Why not do a simple fix to IG, remove it as a playable solo faction. And give each imperial army to run some of their models. The IG and IG players problem goes away. Other imperial armies get access to CP and CP generation, and don't have to spam scouts etc.

Well, that is about as sensible and fair suggestion than banning soup...

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Yeah Renegade HWTs with Mortars are more efficient 1 on 1 compared to the Guard version.
But unlike Guard, the rest of the Renegade units are pretty bad, which is why you don't see them.
That and FW has discontinued most of their range (seriously, the only renegade units FW still sells are the vehicles/artillery they shared with Guard/Admech).

How many points are they? I doubt they really are, especially once you include the Regiment traits into the matter (though that's not a top many of them).

 Crimson wrote:

Karol wrote:

Why not do a simple fix to IG, remove it as a playable solo faction. And give each imperial army to run some of their models. The IG and IG players problem goes away. Other imperial armies get access to CP and CP generation, and don't have to spam scouts etc.

Well, that is about as sensible and fair suggestion than banning soup...

Or you could give Marines their own Chapter Auxiliaries the way Chaos Marines have Cultists...without deleting Guard as a standalone book, maybe?

 Ordana wrote:

And in one stroke you invalidated every Imperium army except Guard, because none of them can generate the CP they need to function on their own. (most notably BA/IK/Custodes).

100% Hogwash, they can be built and play as their own armies without IG support. They may not be as top tier competitive without an IG CP battery crutch, but they will absolutely function.

Tell that to Deathwatch, Grey Knights, Imperial Knights, most Space Marine builds that even work a moderate amount, Custodes...

 Ordana wrote:
IG are being compared to other Imperium armies because those are the armies they are competing with for cheap Battalions for CP.

No other Imperium army can compete with Guard for infantry. Skitarii comes closest and they still lose out massively by having double the cost per model, no synergy with their cheap HQ's and nothing in the world that can compare to Mortars.

The problem with only comparing IG to other top codexes from different factions and concluding that they are fine means that every Imperium army until 9th edition will be Guard + whatever else is currently strongest.

Skitarii rangers are only 7 ppm not double the cost of guardsmen.... Anyway I've already said guard infantry need to go to 5 points, that will make them mathematically about as efficient as fire warriors.

As for mortars, if you think removing 7 GEQ models or 3 tac marines a turn for 100 points is "broken OP" even if they can do it outside of LOS, I don't know what to tell you... consider that 100 points of scouts can kill 6 GEQ with just bolter fire.

 Ordana wrote:
...because none of them can generate the CP they need to function on their own.

Guard have a lot of CPs, but they are balanced internally by having their stratagems be lackluster. The other factions have less CP, but are balanced by having their stratagems be strong. Guard providing CP to factions with strong stratagems is a problem with soup, not a problem with guard.

I'm not advocating banning soup, but I am advocating tweaking the soup rules instead of nerfing singular factions across the board for being problematic when combined with units from other codices. Nerfing singular factions for being too good in soup is a good way of making them useless OUTSIDE of soup.

Mono-guard are strong, but they aren't winning tournaments left and right. Even in a tournament that banned soup and only allowed mono lists, guard still wouldn't be undisputed top dogs, as DE/Eldar have strong mono-codices, as well as Tau/Tyranids/AdMech having generally weaker codices with a few strong builds that can compete.

Karol wrote:
Why not do a simple fix to IG, remove it as a playable solo faction. And give each imperial army to run some of their models. The IG and IG players problem goes away. Other imperial armies get access to CP and CP generation, and don't have to spam scouts etc.

The sad part is, I cannot tell if you are being sarcastic or not because I am sure there are people (in this thread) that genuinely think that way.

w1zard wrote:
Anyway I've already said guard infantry need to go to 5 points, that will make them mathematically about as efficient as fire warriors.

Then we are in agreement. That's exactly what most people who think Guard needs to be nerfed want. Nothing more drastic.

Guard have a lot of CPs, but they are balanced internally by having their stratagems be lackluster. The other factions have less CP, but are balanced by having their stratagems be strong.

There is zero reason to believe that this is intentional at all. Some factions get good stratagems, some get bad, it is random failure by the writers to balance things. Also, Guard has some pretty decent stratagems, and they definitely have better ones than vanilla marines.

 Crimson wrote:

w1zard wrote:
Anyway I've already said guard infantry need to go to 5 points, that will make them mathematically about as efficient as fire warriors.

Then we are in agreement. That's exactly what most people who think Guard needs to be nerfed want. Nothing more drastic.

Guard have a lot of CPs, but they are balanced internally by having their stratagems be lackluster. The other factions have less CP, but are balanced by having their stratagems be strong.

There is zero reason to believe that this is intentional at all. Some factions get good stratagems, some get bad, it is random failure by the writers to balance things. Also, Guard has some pretty decent stratagems, and they definitely have better ones than vanilla marines.

Ehhhhhh that really depends. Half the IG stratagems are basically worthless since they are too specific. (grenadiers for exemple.
I do belive that this is the idea the writers had planned to balance mass cp armies and on a Mono playing field it actually kinda works but soup literally throws that idea out the window.

 Crimson wrote:
Also, Guard has some pretty decent stratagems...

A couple of decent ones, and a whole lot of situational or 'meh' ones. Certainly nothing like the custodes or knights stratagems.

 Crimson wrote:
...and they definitely have better ones than vanilla marines.

 Crimson wrote:
...better ones than vanilla marines.

 Crimson wrote:
...vanilla marines.

https://tenor.com/view/jontron-cancer-stop-gif-8350300

For the last time... VANILLA MARINES ARE GARBAGE IN 8TH EDITION AND NEED AN ENTIRELY REWRITTEN CODEX TO BE VIABLE OUTSIDE OF GIMMICKY BUILDS FOCUSED AROUND SPECIAL CHARACTERS, STOP USING THEM AS A MEASURING STICK FOR BALANCE.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

w1zard wrote:
Anyway I've already said guard infantry need to go to 5 points, that will make them mathematically about as efficient as fire warriors.

Then we are in agreement. That's exactly what most people who think Guard needs to be nerfed want. Nothing more drastic.

Guard have a lot of CPs, but they are balanced internally by having their stratagems be lackluster. The other factions have less CP, but are balanced by having their stratagems be strong.

There is zero reason to believe that this is intentional at all. Some factions get good stratagems, some get bad, it is random failure by the writers to balance things. Also, Guard has some pretty decent stratagems, and they definitely have better ones than vanilla marines.

Ehhhhhh that really depends. Half the IG stratagems are basically worthless since they are too specific. (grenadiers for exemple.
I do belive that this is the idea the writers had planned to balance mass cp armies and on a Mono playing field it actually kinda works but soup literally throws that idea out the window.

I wouldn't throw grenadiers under the bus. Is a tank too close to your 10-man scion squad that's just outfitted for chaff clearing? Ten krak grenades in the shooting phase, plus an order like Take Aim, or Elimination Protocol Sanctioned.

 vipoid wrote:

I don't even know what you people want anymore.

"This is terrible - IG are acting as CP batteries for every Imperium faction!"

'Okay, here are some ways to stop that...'

"This is terrible, IG won't be able to be CP batteries for every Imperium faction!!!"




I give up.

Dakka in a nutshell.

"Nerf every army except the one that I use"