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.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Tygre wrote:
Personally, a guy on a horse charging into combat makes more sense than a bike doing so. Bikes are harder to steer with no hands; and have trouble standing upright below a certain speed.

Truthfully, this is the whole reason why Rough Riders are such a poor concept. It's someone charging with a mount and an exploding lance.

Look at the Atalan Jackals. They can take CCWs but also can be bringing actual ranged weapons to the party. Their associated special character type? It's a sniper on a motorcycle.
It's not hard to envision Guard getting bikers with utility effects for artillery in the back or toting normal ranged weapons instead of just "Grrrr! Charge!"

Also horses are quieter.

"Remember men, that on this recon with have to be quiet to not alert the enemy." Starts bike, RAAAAAAAAAAARH!!!

Horses being quieter is...debatable. Horses can be pretty damn loud when they want to be and they can have a heck of a temper.

Since people keep wanting to bring Real World(tm) into this...look into the kinds of motorcycles that the military uses now for special operations. All kinds of fun gadgets from headlights that only show up with night vision gear active to muffled engines or solar/electric motors.

So... riders on horses must have lances and riders on bikes can do all the other cool things you suggest?

I don't see the distinction in 8th terms. Unit types are no longer really a thing, so a unit called "Rough riders" can happily be used to represent both.

All they need is a suitably high move characteristic, and the option to take lances and/or longarms as their primary weapon. Then everyone is happy yes? That covers both? Honestly, there is no reason the Rough rider rules shouldn't allow more weapons options, except a lack of kit.

Also, all the things about bikes being more durable today don't terribly matter for 40k, where they have very effective personal armour, widespread cybernetics and use of combat-enhancing drugs, and various examples of incredibly tough genetic varients of things. Ogryns are genetically a human subspecies, that are harder to kill than a Space Marine. The "horses" of the 41st millennium will be different to the horses we have today.

 Melissia wrote:
Why do you feel "everyone" loves Rough Riders? A lot more people have absolute disdain for them or just don't care for them than "love" them.

Yes, but this is an internet forum, where every statement needs to be taken to ridiculous extreme. "Why do some people like Rough Riders and some others do not?" wouldn't work nearly so well as clickbait.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Haighus wrote:
The "horses" of the 41st millennium will be different to the horses we have today.

The horses of the Death Korps of Krieg already are.

I don't know why people keep mentioning Rough Riders with horses when probably horses are the less used animal in the Rough Riders regiments of the galaxy.

The classic model has horses because they where Attilan Rough Riders.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
It's someone charging with a mount and an exploding lance.

Yes, this is exactly why it is perfect. Charging with a horse and an exploding lance, against a space marine with a chainsaw sword and RPG pistol or a horde of rioting British soccer fans led by Margaret Thatcher. A cavalry charge fits the setting beautifully.

Like I said- "Those who love RR and those who are wrong".

It's not like the guard codex is overflowing with close combat or highly mobile choices...

EDIT: They did provide some excellent modelling potential too. I've seen rough riders on motorcycles, clockwork horses and dinosaurs.

 Nerak wrote:
It's not like the guard codex is overflowing with close combat or highly mobile choices...

I've found movement phases to be a foreign concept to some IG players.

They have decent speed so they're pretty good at grabbing objectives and helping guard score things like recon.

They're not awful on the charge, esp vs other fast throwaway units other armies use to grab objectives.

They're just deadly enough to be useful while being not deadly enough to make them a priority target.

Horses won't be outdated on the battlefield at least until humans are, if not later.

 Nerak wrote:
It's not like the guard codex is overflowing with close combat or highly mobile choices...

EDIT: They did provide some excellent modelling potential too. I've seen rough riders on motorcycles, clockwork horses and dinosaurs.

Yep, that was part of the draw for me. My original Cadian rough riders were all on scout bikes, with a mix of tallarn and forge world models for variety. The new GSC models is giving me the oppurtunity to update some new sergeants.

I like Rough Riders for a lot of reasons.

First, 40k is written with space marines and not basic humans as a baseline. Many of the IG units cover the variety of ways mundane humans could possibly compensate against a galaxy where the odds are stacked against them. Ride a machine, or ride animal. Riding a mount that is as large as a space marine and out performs a space marine in a few ways give humans some means of being more than fodder.

On the table top IG tend to be static, but Rough Riders give the army an interdiction capability and one of the few close combat capabilities. Use them poorly and they're only speed bumps, use them wisely and their contribution is disproportionate.

Third, I think a lack of cohesive vision for the army on GW's part has seen the "Imperial" part of the Imperial Guard theme neglected. The IG are a galaxy spanning military force, the original vision for the army was an IG army should be composed of all these units from different parts of the galaxy that are organized into something more effective than a single worlds military capability. They are suppose to be the army of a galaxy spanning empire and not just slightly better grade planetary defense. What units actually convey that part of their identity? -Mostly the elites, Tempestus Scions who come from the elite military school, Ogryns and Ratling abhumans that set a time scale on how far into the future it is and show how diverse humanity has become... But also arguably character units like Sanctioned Psykers and Commissars. Roughriders do as well, they bring to the IG the fact that many Imperial worlds are backwards and feudal by todays standards and that the IG are more than just an analogue for a modern military.

People watch the original Star Wars movie and see a Storm Trooper riding a big lizard, and its something cool and adds to the world building.

The failure of Rough Riders is a failure in execution, and a failure to update them. Some people want to give them motorcycles to do that, but it does nothing to build on the armies themes and the setting. FW got it right when they made bio-engineered bionic enhanced super horses for DKoK or the alien beast for Tallarn. A bike can come from any world. Even if GW didn't want to be more imaginative with their Rough Riders' mounts and just stuck to plain old horses... the concept of what the rider represents can still be further accentuated.

The riders are described as being the elite and the children of the nobility from a variety of different worlds. So make them that, as much as any of the other units that use similar descriptions... other nobility and children of nobility have tanks and Knights, some cases they are in the Tempestus Scions or Commissariat... so even if they're riding a horse they should get some consideration towards their status. GW could double down on sci-fi feudal and give the rider a power sword and a storm shield with the horse carrying the power supply. Put an energy shield around that bio-engineered super steed, its easier for people to grasp how it survives.

Alternatively go a different route, make them like Storm Troopers on horseback... wearing heavier body armor and wielding the larger more powerful pistols and carbines that historical Dragoons would carry. And or, allow them some greater distinctiveness... make them something like Pink/Blue Horror... where after a model is "killed" the rider dismounts and keeps fighting from the ground.

My point is that when people dismiss them they're looking at a unit that no one at GW has tried to consider since 2nd edition. IF you judged chaos by how it originally presented Obliterators, we wouldn't have the craziness being previewed today.

w1zard wrote:
How many battles were turned by the presence of cavalry on the battlefield?
Right...

When has a guy with a sword ever mattered when you go to nuke a planet? A lot of suspension of disbelief is necessary for 40k. A guy on a horse is orders of magnitude more believable than planet melting aliens, extraplanar daemons, or Egyptian robots.
Don't try and bring logic to our fantasy. Rule of cool. Where cool is in the eyes of the beholder.

 aka_mythos wrote:
I like Rough Riders for a lot of reasons.

First, 40k is written with space marines and not basic humans as a baseline. Many of the IG units cover the variety of ways mundane humans could possibly compensate against a galaxy where the odds are stacked against them. Ride a machine, or ride animal. Riding a mount that is as large as a space marine and out performs a space marine in a few ways give humans some means of being more than fodder.

On the table top IG tend to be static, but Rough Riders give the army an interdiction capability and one of the few close combat capabilities. Use them poorly and they're only speed bumps, use them wisely and their contribution is disproportionate.

Third, I think a lack of cohesive vision for the army on GW's part has seen the "Imperial" part of the Imperial Guard theme neglected. The IG are a galaxy spanning military force, the original vision for the army was an IG army should be composed of all these units from different parts of the galaxy that are organized into something more effective than a single worlds military capability. They are suppose to be the army of a galaxy spanning empire and not just slightly better grade planetary defense. What units actually convey that part of their identity? -Mostly the elites, Tempestus Scions who come from the elite military school, Ogryns and Ratling abhumans that set a time scale on how far into the future it is and show how diverse humanity has become... But also arguably character units like Sanctioned Psykers and Commissars. Roughriders do as well, they bring to the IG the fact that many Imperial worlds are backwards and feudal by todays standards and that the IG are more than just an analogue for a modern military.

People watch the original Star Wars movie and see a Storm Trooper riding a big lizard, and its something cool and adds to the world building.

The failure of Rough Riders is a failure in execution, and a failure to update them. Some people want to give them motorcycles to do that, but it does nothing to build on the armies themes and the setting. FW got it right when they made bio-engineered bionic enhanced super horses for DKoK or the alien beast for Tallarn. A bike can come from any world. Even if GW didn't want to be more imaginative with their Rough Riders' mounts and just stuck to plain old horses... the concept of what the rider represents can still be further accentuated.

The riders are described as being the elite and the children of the nobility from a variety of different worlds. So make them that, as much as any of the other units that use similar descriptions... other nobility and children of nobility have tanks and Knights, some cases they are in the Tempestus Scions or Commissariat... so even if they're riding a horse they should get some consideration towards their status. GW could double down on sci-fi feudal and give the rider a power sword and a storm shield with the horse carrying the power supply. Put an energy shield around that bio-engineered super steed, its easier for people to grasp how it survives.

Alternatively go a different route, make them like Storm Troopers on horseback... wearing heavier body armor and wielding the larger more powerful pistols and carbines that historical Dragoons would carry. And or, allow them some greater distinctiveness... make them something like Pink/Blue Horror... where after a model is "killed" the rider dismounts and keeps fighting from the ground.

My point is that when people dismiss them they're looking at a unit that no one at GW has tried to consider since 2nd edition. IF you judged chaos by how it originally presented Obliterators, we wouldn't have the craziness being previewed today.

w1zard wrote:
How many battles were turned by the presence of cavalry on the battlefield?
Right...

When has a guy with a sword ever mattered when you go to nuke a planet? A lot of suspension of disbelief is necessary for 40k. A guy on a horse is orders of magnitude more believable than planet melting aliens, extraplanar daemons, or Egyptian robots.
Don't try and bring logic to our fantasy. Rule of cool. Where cool is in the eyes of the beholder.

So much this!

It would be awesome if they made a duel kit that could build the sort of light cavalry we have now, and an armoured heavy cavalry version. The ogryn/bullgryn kit shows this can be done. Ideally, both builds could use lances, with the light cavalry getting access to lasguns/shotguns and the heavy cavalry getting hotshot carbines like you say. If they could maybe squeeze in some command squad parts, that would be superb.

That would be fething awesome! The number of sprues may be excessive, even for five riders. If they used three sprues like SM Tactical squads, it could be done.

w1zard wrote:


A bike with solid construction doesn't die or buck its rider after it gets shot either...

They are also much easier to maintain and keep operating.

If the shot jams the front wheel whole.moving at speed, or shears the front forks, then yes the bike could also buck the rider when shot.

In low technology environments, or away from repair facilities, horses are self replicating.and self.repairing in a way that bikes aren't. Durability in a high intensity battlefield.is one thing, while there are also advantages to be had of a horse in a low intensity setting.

 Flinty wrote:

w1zard wrote:


A bike with solid construction doesn't die or buck its rider after it gets shot either...

They are also much easier to maintain and keep operating.

If the shot jams the front wheel whole.moving at speed, or shears the front forks, then yes the bike could also buck the rider when shot.

In low technology environments, or away from repair facilities, horses are self replicating.and self.repairing in a way that bikes aren't. Durability in a high intensity battlefield.is one thing, while there are also advantages to be had of a horse in a low intensity setting.

On the more advance side of it, lets also not forget in the 40k setting the Mechanicus can and does produce Psyber animals... A sufficiently elite corp of riders on a feudal world, paying fealty to a Mechanicus Forgeworld could just as easily be supplied with robotic horses controlled by mind link interface units.... and thus never buck unless the rider himself wants it to.

Historically, mechanized forces require less maintenance than ones equipped with horses in the long run. Though horses can eat off the land, if there is insufficient food and water they quickly become a logistical nightmare.

Ironically, the German army in WW II used MORE horses for transportation past the first year and a half of the war because they were less strain on the one thing the Germans severely lacked: fuel. Not really a problem with the Imperial Guard's power plant technology.

 amanita wrote:
Historically, mechanized forces require less maintenance than ones equipped with horses in the long run. Though horses can eat off the land, if there is insufficient food and water they quickly become a logistical nightmare.

Ironically, the German army in WW II used MORE horses for transportation past the first year and a half of the war because they were less strain on the one thing the Germans severely lacked: fuel. Not really a problem with the Imperial Guard's power plant technology.

Not to mention the fact that the Russian Steppe was one giant mud hole! WW1 and WW2 were horse wars history just dosen't like to talk about that part. We want to think it was a graceful expansion of trains and trucks, who did indeed play host to much of the more dynamic parts of the war. However, Horses moved the equipment, the food, and even the fuel. Plus in the middle east horses were integral to pretty much all of the combat since it was a highly mobile affair.

I think mounts in 40k could stem from all kinds of things. Local traditions, adapting to terrain, or even just pure weirdness (we do have floating skulls, giant flying baby ammunition carriers, and armies of feral chem addicts, if its stupid and wasteful its in 40k).

I think people love rough riders for two reasons

1. They are actually quite good now since they can deep strike. Dropping in a plasma gun that can also tie up a shooting unit or a low cost is pretty nice
2. They are the fun to build and model. If you want a Rough Rider you will have to get your conversion hat on and get to work. Guard players occupy the same hobby niche as Orks where conversions and ridiculousness goes hand in hand and there is no limit to how much guardsman you can really own (I have 3 1/2 guard armies, im kind of a madwoman).
3. Its almost like a challenge to the system. For some reason GW dosent want to make them a model and they still include the rules. Most people probably unconsciously see it as fighting the power because "screw those guys, i'll make my own Rough Riders....with Hookers and Black Jack! In fact, forget the Rough Riders!"

4. Its cool, look at mine! Its Praetorian Lizard Riders, how much more 40k can you get? They even have giant mutton chops.

Those lizards don't have muttonchops. 0/10

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Those lizards don't have muttonchops. 0/10

Well then, back to the green stuff, that sounds HILARIOUS! (silly stuff is always fun, we have a guy locally who armed all of his Custodes with push brooms and mops)

I absolutely love that we're arguing motorbikes v horses in a gonzo, over the top sci fi game. The internet is the best!

But yea, in my sci fi world, the bikes are electric, and utterly silent. Plus they're all self driving, the handlebars are just for stability, if the rider feels their giant sword is too heavy and they want to rest.

I really just liked the bike models over the horse models (if I remember correctly, the original RR models are really showing their age). I think a really trippy alien mount would be cool too. Something like the kroot use for cavalry, or some variant of the slanesh weird anteater thingie.

Or yea. Lizards with mutton chops

 Flinty wrote:

w1zard wrote:


A bike with solid construction doesn't die or buck its rider after it gets shot either...

They are also much easier to maintain and keep operating.

If the shot jams the front wheel whole.moving at speed, or shears the front forks, then yes the bike could also buck the rider when shot.

Notice I said, a bike of "solid construction".

Such a bike would be built in a way that nothing short of an anti-materiel round would jam the front wheel or shear the front forks.

I find the argument for cyber horses much more compelling, but a motorcycle is more low tech and easier to both construct and maintain than a cyber-horse would be. Arguably still more durable too. Fleshy bits are always inferior to metal, even cybernetically enhanced fleshy bits.

"Notice I said, a bike of "solid construction"
Then how does it turn?

That's not a bike you're describing. That's an armored vehicle.
Besides, if you're making a low tech motorcycle, it's not going to be much more durable than a modern one, and a horse is still comparable.

 Mmmpi wrote:
Then how does it turn?

It is still a motorcycle?

It's totally possible to construct a bike out of materials that are resistant to small arms fire.

Granted, it isn't going to be invulnerable. But it will take more punishment before breaking down than a horse ever could.

 Mmmpi wrote:
Besides, if you're making a low tech motorcycle...

Who says they have to be low tech? Remember this is the guard we are talking about... I'm sure there is an STC of a rugged military motorcycle kicking around somewhere, considering that hoverbikes are commonplace on some worlds.

w1zard wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
Then how does it turn?

It is still a motorcycle?

It's totally possible to construct a bike out of materials that are resistant to small arms fire.

Granted, it isn't going to be invulnerable. But it will take more punishment before breaking down than a horse ever could.

 Mmmpi wrote:
Besides, if you're making a low tech motorcycle...

Who says they have to be low tech? Remember this is the guard we are talking about... I'm sure there is an STC of a rugged military motorcycle kicking around somewhere, considering that hoverbikes are commonplace on some worlds.

Hover bikes being common is news to me last I heard Samual had the "Last Jetbike"

w1zard wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
Then how does it turn?

It is still a motorcycle?

It's totally possible to construct a bike out of materials that are resistant to small arms fire.

Granted, it isn't going to be invulnerable. But it will take more punishment before breaking down than a horse ever could.

 Mmmpi wrote:
Besides, if you're making a low tech motorcycle...

Who says they have to be low tech? Remember this is the guard we are talking about... I'm sure there is an STC of a rugged military motorcycle kicking around somewhere, considering that hoverbikes are commonplace on some worlds.

Not if you're putting enough armor on it to stop an AT round.

Shoot a horse in the chest, horse drops. Shoot a motorcycle in the engine block, it's just as done. You're not mounting tons of armor on either without massively compromising endurance/fuel efficiency, and maneuverability.

There are. They're call Space Marine bikes. Outside of the custodies, the only factions that get anti-grav anything are the Space Marines, and even they only have one jetbike. Why would the guard have them?

Same reason the Guard got those Carnodons with volkite culevrin.

 Mmmpi wrote:
Not if you're putting enough armor on it to stop an AT round.

I didn't say anything about stopping an AT round, I said resistant to small arms fire.

It is totally possible using even modern day materials and technology to make a motorcycle that can take 30 or 40 rounds from an assault rifle before it is appreciably damaged. (Standard, non-AP rounds)

 Mmmpi wrote:
Outside of the custodies, the only factions that get anti-grav anything are the Space Marines, and even they only have one jetbike. Why would the guard have them?

Plenty of depictions of worlds with hover cars and other such vehicles in many Imperial Guard novels. The tech is probably expensive, but with that level of technology I don't see why it would be too difficult to construct a rugged military motorcycle for outriders and scouts.

You flat out said anti-material rifles. Those are still light AT weapons.

It's not possible to make a motorcycle that can take that punishment and still retain full maneuverability or fuel economy. And it still can't take a .50 or 20mm round.

Sure. But the fluff also says unambiguously that only custodes and one space marine have bikes, and that the marines would use them if they were available. So no hover bikes for RR.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying "No motorcycles". I'm saying "Not only motorcycles".

 Flinty wrote:
In low technology environments, or away from repair facilities, horses are self replicating.and self.repairing in a way that bikes aren't. Durability in a high intensity battlefield.is one thing, while there are also advantages to be had of a horse in a low intensity setting.

Pretty much this.
It is of course nonsense to charge into battle on a horse across the no-mans land in the middle of a massive battle, with tanks exploding all around and tactical nukes flying above. You'll probably get mowed down, like everything else.
Having a horse on, for an example, a recon patrol, where you don't have access to supplies, a horse might be more effective than a bike. You might be slower, but you don't care about noise, horse fuel and if you get into a dire situation, the horse can be used as a fuel for you as well.

Imagine being stranded in the middle of the Amazon rainforest / Siberia / wherever, away from all civilization and no means of communication. Would you rather take a bike or a horse, in order to get back?

I think the relevance of Sammael's "last jetbike" is that it is the last military-grade jetbike in Imperial service outside the Custodes. It seems that heavy duty grav is the rare stuff, so once you start slapping armour on something, you can't find sufficiently powerful grav engines.

Lots of more advanced Imperial worlds make widespread use of light grav vehicles- after all, a servo skull is basically the same thing. Grav technology is not totally lost to the IoM. But it would seem these light vehicles are not suited to war.

The durability of a bike vs horse is a bit silly when we are talking about bikes and horses after 30,000 years of selective breeding and technologic development As an example, Ogryns are genetically a human subspecies who are tough enough to survive an antimaterial rifle round. Who is to say some horse derivative has not been bred to be as tough?

"Horse" has also been a loose term for Rough riders, out of the 4 official models produced, two have been on huge but phenotypically-modern horses in appearance; one on genetically, cybernetically, and chemically modified super-horses; and one on some alien beast of burden. Common conversions are on Cold One dinosaurs or motorbikes of some kind. I think this nicely illustrates the range of units Rough riders have the potential to represent.

 Haighus wrote:

"Horse" has also been a loose term for Rough riders, out of the 4 official models produced, two have been on huge but phenotypically-modern horses in appearance; one on genetically, cybernetically, and chemically modified super-horses; and one on some alien beast of burden. Common conversions are on Cold One dinosaurs or motorbikes of some kind. I think this nicely illustrates the range of units Rough riders have the potential to represent.

You forgot those...

 Hawky wrote:

 Haighus wrote:

"Horse" has also been a loose term for Rough riders, out of the 4 official models produced, two have been on huge but phenotypically-modern horses in appearance; one on genetically, cybernetically, and chemically modified super-horses; and one on some alien beast of burden. Common conversions are on Cold One dinosaurs or motorbikes of some kind. I think this nicely illustrates the range of units Rough riders have the potential to represent.

You forgot those...

Spoiler: