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.

Eh it can't be that bad

Imperial Guard Sergeants get bolters, which honestly just makes it weirder that they don't get lasguns.
IMO it might be an emulation of how WW2 sergeants often carried SMGs?

But a bolter is fundamentally a support weapon in a Guard squad. If tue sergeant is doing proper supporting fire with their uberweapon, then they probably aren't doing their job properly. An SMG in a line Infantry squad is only useful if things are getting very dangerous.

SMGs are also very useful for CQB in urban environments.
I'm not saying a bolter is a perfect analogy for an SMG, just that it follows the theme of 'the sergeant has a slightly fancier weapon than the grunts'.

SMGs weren't particularly fancier though, they were just smaller, more convenient guns for people that were supposed to have duties that come before getting out and shooting at people. Bolters are heavy weapons that significantly increase the firepower of a squad. It doesn't make much sense for the sergeant to have it.

My biggest issue is that it complicates things. Infantry squad guns don't matter that much but it's all easier if everyone has the same guns or at least the option.

If I say "different" rather than fancy, perhaps that would better represent my point then to you?

 kirotheavenger wrote:
If I say "different" rather than fancy, perhaps that would better represent my point then to you?

Not particularly, because "different" here is mostly lighter and more convenient. The sergeant's job is keeping track fo the squad and making sure nobody gets lost, keeping track of where they're supposed to be and what they need to do, then after those things they need to shoot at people. They're close enough to the action that they can't just have a pistol but you also don't give them the big effective gun because that forces them to focus on operating the gun. If there was a las-carbine then that would be reasonable but that's out of scope for 40k.

Lascarbines totally are within the scope of 40k.

Assault rather than Rapid Fire. Shorter range, same stats otherwise.

I'm breezy on the Laspistol/Chainsword vs Lasgun on Sgts from a design perspective, except I don't really feel like remodelling...Advantage I suppose of the Laspistol/Sword is identifying the Sgt.

I do really feel like having a jeep with a Twin-Autocannon up top and a Heavy Stubber for the vehicle commander over the dash. Yeah!

Most nations in WW2 primarily issued handguns for officers and rifles for NCOs. SMGs for NCOs was driven by availability, and likelihood of close contact. It wasn't a convenience thing; virtually all WW2-era submachine guns were heavier than their rifle counterparts empty, let alone loaded with ammunition, and carrying spare mags required significantly greater LBE than the rifle webbing of the era.

If we're going by WW2 logic, then the Sergeants should primarily be carrying lasguns, with the option for a lascarbine, shotgun, or some other short-ranged alternative, and some regiments ought to have the option to replace the entire squad's armament with the same.

From a gameplay perspective I'd rather just have the option to give the sergeants lasguns.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Lascarbines totally are within the scope of 40k.

Assault rather than Rapid Fire. Shorter range, same stats otherwise.

It's easy to do but it doesn't really matter. Putting them on sergeants is just additional complexity for no real benefit. If you're adding complexity you should really be adding actual value on the tabletop (which is my actual beef with the las pistol sergeants).

And if we are being totally WW2 accurate, depending on TO&E the multiple mem could have had at least in the US army BARS, THOMPSON, M3s, or even M1 Carbine on top of shotguns and even a flamethrowers out their in the Pacific.

Would be fun to see a heavier walker for imperial-guard, like go the starcraft way and make a goliath alternative

How about bringing stuff out from forge world like the Trojan. Or putting Death Korps of Kreig back the way they were before 9th edition took a bunch of units away.

I'd like to hold on to what we have or recover some of what was lost (capability if not models) more than worry about something new.

How about a special unit for each main regiment?
Cadian: Make Kasrkin a heavily armed and armoured veteran unit.
Catachan: Catachan Devils, give them good combat weapons or traps.
Steel Legion: Ork Hunters, bonuses against Orks (Duh).
Vostroyans: A unit with better guns or morale maybe?
Valhallans: Conscripts but more?
Mordians: No clue tbh.
Tallarn: Cool desert cavalry maybe.

 Gert wrote:
How about a special unit for each main regiment?
Cadian: Make Kasrkin a heavily armed and armoured veteran unit.
Catachan: Catachan Devils, give them good combat weapons or traps.
Steel Legion: Ork Hunters, bonuses against Orks (Duh).
Vostroyans: A unit with better guns or morale maybe?
Valhallans: Conscripts but more?
Mordians: No clue tbh.
Tallarn: Cool desert cavalry maybe.

I don't think that does the Valhallans justice. For Mordians - Having read a lot of fluff about them, it would probably be a morale based rule. Something like just a REALLY high LD score or something like that. Could also maybe see a more powerful version of "First Rank, Second Rank".

The point about rebooting the guard is an interesting one. Guard is one of those armies where, if the designers at the time had known how big the game was going to get ("big" in this case refers mainly to all the "stuff" that is available now compared to what was available way back then), they probably wouldn't have designed them this way. I could see one of the current designers going back in time and saying "Yeah - all those different regiments you're drumming up? Don't do those. Trust me, it will make sense in about 15 years."

I don't think the issue is so much Robin C.'s want to have them be a early 20th century force - the rules for the entire game fit more to a Napoleonic style war (Canons, muskets, fix bayonets, CHAAARRRRRGE) anyway, and, if I had to guess, most of the designers probably have a similar fetish. I think the biggest issue is, they built up a massive amount of fluff that they just can't properly support outside of just fluff anymore.

I could almost see something like a "Astra Militarum Reformation" where Bobby G says "Guys, WTF is all this? Vostroyans - how to you hide with those hats? And Steel Legion - you look more like Nurgalite cultists than a IG regiment. No - we need ... A Codex Militarum. We're going to standardize going forward, but Cawl is getting you some good stuff so don't worry." You would, obviously, want to make the fluff reason much less terrible than what I just wrote, but you get the point. In this way, you could begin to standardize things, and bring new gear and squad types in, without invalidating any existing things. With Cadia having been destroyed, you could shift Cadians to a special "elite" slot if you wanted, and then out out a proper looking, updated troop box set that is no longer tied to a specific world, and begin to get away from the old fluff of each regiment looking and fighting like its PDF counter part that is actually tied to the world it was raised on.

Cadia ain't dead yet. There's a looooooooot of stuff going on, it's just the planet itself is gone. The whole Cadian system is still a massive warzone though apparently.

Valhallans, Mordians/Praetorians, Tallarn, and Vostroyans are weird in that they are themselves the 'signature unit' of their planetary regiments thanks to their doctrines/equipment.

Steel Legion are a similar situation, where their doctrine is what makes them special. An Armored Fist Squad would be a better callback to something there, where it's a Chimera taken as part of the squad.

Ork Hunters are off-world regiments effectively 'training' in the jungles there--hence why they're called "Armageddon Ork Hunters" rather than "Steel Legion Ork Hunters"
Scratch this--apparently they've slightly reworked the lore here! Good on them. Still, they're not part of the "Steel Legion" as goofy as that might sound.

I disagree with rebooting Guard and redesigning them to be streamlined. The visual differences between the Guard regiments are an important part of their background, its to show the variety of humanity. Each colony ship took its own culture to the stars and when the Dark Ages came they held onto that to maintain order or just to survive. Yes, SM use the same armour but a Space Wolf is visibly different from a Blood Angel because of their chapter culture. A faceless mass horde of grey armoured humans might be perfect for a unified empire with a powerful leadership but that's not the Imperium. It was the Emperor's Imperium back in the 31st millennium but then this little Horus humbug happened and humanity regressed massively. The reason in lore that Cadians are the face of the Guard is that Cadia was a whole sector dedicated to producing armies to defend the Imperium with something like 8k years of regiments fighting at the fore of humanity's fight for survival. Cadia itself is gone but there are hundreds if not thousands of worlds garrisoned or ruled by Cadian regiments or descendants.

By all means, redo the range but do it in a way that at least the core regiments of the codex get their basic units in plastic with room for a special unit for each to give them some variety and connection to the lore beyond "they wear the right gear".

Tycho wrote:
You would, obviously, want to make the fluff reason much less terrible than what I just wrote, but you get the point.

You gave us more detail and a better story than the Primaris reboot, I say GW would be lucky to have you!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I believe the current justification for most regiments looking like Cadians is because Cadians are upheld as the model Guard regiment, and many emulate their equipment and training.

Yes, they're the propaganda video Guard and their officers are often used to train newly founded regiments.

 Gert wrote:
I disagree with rebooting Guard and redesigning them to be streamlined. The visual differences between the Guard regiments are an important part of their background, its to show the variety of humanity. Each colony ship took its own culture to the stars and when the Dark Ages came they held onto that to maintain order or just to survive. Yes, SM use the same armour but a Space Wolf is visibly different from a Blood Angel because of their chapter culture. A faceless mass horde of grey armoured humans might be perfect for a unified empire with a powerful leadership but that's not the Imperium. It was the Emperor's Imperium back in the 31st millennium but then this little Horus humbug happened and humanity regressed massively.

The reason for the visual differences between the Guard regiments has very little to do with culture. It has everything to do with logistics. More on that in a minute.

The reason in lore that Cadians are the face of the Guard is that Cadia was a whole sector dedicated to producing armies to defend the Imperium with something like 8k years of regiments fighting at the fore of humanity's fight for survival. Cadia itself is gone but there are hundreds if not thousands of worlds garrisoned or ruled by Cadian regiments or descendants.

The reason in lore that "Cadians are the face of the Guard" is that Cadia was not just a whole sector dedicated to producing armies to defend the Imperium.

It's that whole sectors of the Imperium were devoted to producing material for Cadian regiments to defend the Imperium with. There are entire Forge Worlds devoted to producing material just for Cadian regiments utilizing STCs. The same cannot be said about every single Regiment out there.

By all means, redo the range but do it in a way that at least the core regiments of the codex get their basic units in plastic with room for a special unit for each to give them some variety and connection to the lore beyond "they wear the right gear".

And here's the crux of the matter. The "iconic regiments" of these worlds? They're the iconic ones. We don't know hardly anything about the others.

We know about the Vostroyan Firstborn Regiments, carapace-armored first children of the Vostroyans with heirloom lasguns trying to absolve their world of a stain they can never remove...but what about the Second/Third/Fourthborn?

The so oft-touted "variety" of the Guard is more in the tactical elements of the faction than the aesthetics, or at least it should be. Drop regiments, armoured regiments, stealther regiments, grenadier regiments...that's the variety.
Not the "Silly Hats" vs the "Capes" vs the "Helmets".
That's a result of creative types having been left to run unchecked decades ago when metal squads were the norm and we've been saddled with the effects ever since.
We have a continual mention of how the Munitorum runs things, the Munitorum provides things, etc...and yet somehow there's no standardized uniform across the entirety of the Imperium?
We have continual mentions of things like the major differences being variant lasguns or locally produced variant tanks but people keep grousing that we need the hats or longcoats or whatever.

I highly suggest people grab themselves a copy of the Sabbat Worlds Crusade book and see exactly how we can still get differentiation going without needing all the silly kits that people demand. There's a reason why I, personally, keep harping that the need is not for kits but rather units. Lightly armored stealther units, grenadier units, additional Scion elements, additional Officio Prefectus units, and Conscripts going to Auxilia opens up a lot of the 'variety' that people want while still allowing for a cohesive looking army to become a thing.

Catachans needed a choppa for ages. I don't wait for GW anymore to release essential stuff. When I see a nice vehicle unit like a helicopter I buy and include it in my Guard force. Don't worry about scale though as 40K's own scale is pretty inconsistent.

Valkyries are the Imperial Guard helis.
Complete with hovering and door gunners!

I have the Sabbat Crusade book and yes the regiments have their own tactics but the Volpone are remembered for their distinct look of well dressed rich kids with bad attitudes, the Tanith are remembered for a mix of tactics, and their "barbarian" aesthetic, even the random minor regiments are described by their looks. Even the tank regiments uniforms and colours are described before their tactics. When you ask someone "what defines the Catachans?", they're going to say "they're an army that looks like Rambo". 40k isn't just words on a page, it's a miniatures game with physical products. Products need a design and a variety of designs means you can sell more products to different people. If you have a faction with no differing flavours then nobody is going to play them or buy your product.

As for the Vostroyans, that they are "Firstborn" regiments is the whole point, that's what they are bonded to raise after their shame during the Heresy. It's dumb because the Imperium is dumb.

Dealing with units and kits is about what things are not what you wish they were. In 2nd edition, the Ork Hunters might have been off-worlders trained on Armageddon, they aren't now they're special regiments of Armageddon soldiers often drawn from Steel Legion who fought in the Jungles against feral Orks in between the 2nd and 3rd wars.
What you keep seeming to demand is that every regiment is treated the same which is literally impossible in a miniatures game with limited space for rules and models. "GW can do whatever they want it's their IP". Yes, they can but the limits of reality mean that they have to limit what gets chosen so they can actually make a product. Convert your own regiments, there's plenty of kits. Use the rules they give you in the codex or PA book or make up your own in your gaming group.

The level of standardization in doctrine, organization and armament in the Astra Militarum is breathtaking. There is a Tactica Imperium for doctrine. They have standardized Regimental organizations (although with different names). They have common small arms, tanks and artillery (with admitted quirks for different Forgeworlds). Armies on present-day Earth can't even achieve that on a national basis in many cases, never mind forces drawn from hundreds of thousands of worlds.

The diversity of the Astra Militarum has always (well, since 2nd Ed) included variance in uniform to reflect varying cultures. The importance of variance in Regimental/Planetary doctrine has waxed and waned with Editions. I think the 8th Ed Psychic Awakening is the closest we've seen to the 4th Ed (I guess I am thinking the 2003 Codex - was that 3.5?)days in terms of customization.

Do we need new AM infantry units? Not too sure about that. I think we need new baseline plastic infantry kits way more than new units that would be looking for game design space. Unless the new unit is a Recce Jeep designed by the dude who made the GSC bikes with Twin Autocannons and an option for a Missile Launcher. And the crew have scarves and goggles. And maybe a cigar.

 Gert wrote:
I have the Sabbat Crusade book and yes the regiments have their own tactics but the Volpone are remembered for their distinct look of well dressed rich kids with bad attitudes, the Tanith are remembered for a mix of tactics, and their "barbarian" aesthetic, even the random minor regiments are described by their looks.

I'm so glad you brought up the "barbarian aesthetic".

Tanith are described as such by the Volpone, not because they're running around wearing skins and furs but because they have shaggy hair, beards, and facial tattoos.
The Tanith themselves are described, notably, as wearing black fatigues, black armor, helmets, and piebald camouflage capes.

Even the tank regiments uniforms and colours are described before their tactics. When you ask someone "what defines the Catachans?", they're going to say "they're an army that looks like Rambo". 40k isn't just words on a page, it's a miniatures game with physical products. Products need a design and a variety of designs means you can sell more products to different people. If you have a faction with no differing flavours then nobody is going to play them or buy your product.

If someone asks what defines the Catachans and just says "they look like Rambo", then they're missing out on some fundamentals.
Catachans were known as "Baby Ogryn" for a reason. They're supposed to be bigger and bulkier than most humans.

As for the Vostroyans, that they are "Firstborn" regiments is the whole point, that's what they are bonded to raise after their shame during the Heresy. It's dumb because the Imperium is dumb.

Dealing with units and kits is about what things are not what you wish they were. In 2nd edition, the Ork Hunters might have been off-worlders trained on Armageddon, they aren't now they're special regiments of Armageddon soldiers often drawn from Steel Legion who fought in the Jungles against feral Orks in between the 2nd and 3rd wars.

Again, the Steel Legion are a distinct formation within the Armageddon regiments. Ork Hunters are drawn from Armageddon, not the Steel Legion.

What you keep seeming to demand is that every regiment is treated the same which is literally impossible in a miniatures game with limited space for rules and models. "GW can do whatever they want it's their IP". Yes, they can but the limits of reality mean that they have to limit what gets chosen so they can actually make a product. Convert your own regiments, there's plenty of kits. Use the rules they give you in the codex or PA book or make up your own in your gaming group.

What I'm demanding is this:
We actually go to a system that allows for people to represent their factions better. We rework Guardsmen to be the professional soldiery they are supposed to be. We make a clear, delineative distinction between "Conscripts"(aka: "Garbage troopers"), "Veterans", and "Infantrymen".
We expand <Regiment> options to actually include Regimental assets.
Things like scouts with marksmen variant lasguns, camo-cloaks, and 'observer' abilities for artillery/indirect fire weapons dual kitted with jungle fighting specialists. Both would use stripped down lasguns, lighter armor, and things of that nature.
Things like Grenadiers outfitted in heavy armor with hellguns, suspensored heavy stubbers(all of which are things we have in the lore!) with belt feeds, underslung grenade launchers/shotguns, etc.

Then we move and open up some more Auxilia. Conscripts go here. Light if nonexistent armor, autoguns.
Rough Riders go here. We get some nice, feral looking Rough Riders. Bring Mogul Khamir back and have some fun with it!
Smart move as well would actually be to have Conscripts be a double kit allowing for a Valhallan/DKoK styled autogun+ratty coats+helmets or a more Feral World-inspired "Barbarian in a uniform" with extra bits for pistols+CCWs.

Now we move into Militarum Tempestus:
A dedicated Tempestor Prime kit. That art of the Volpone Blueblood in the Sabbat Worlds revamped book is perfect for a Tempestor Prime.

And that all is before we get into things like "making voxcasters actually matter" and "Orders not just being shouting".

The guard really don't need a "new" unit as much as they need a model line refresh akin to Dark Eldar or necrons. Some classics can stick around like chimeras, Russes, etc. The Vehicles are for the most part solid. The infnatry is where the issue is at. Ideally you could get away with this by having 2 infantry boxes. One can be a greatcloak style and the other more of a "modern" cadian body armor style. These would have some number of head or arm swaps inside to make the new unit. It seems a bit pie in the sky but considering ALL of the options in the exceptional Battle Sister Box its all possible. The great cloak box would be Valhallan/Steel Legion/Vostroyan (maybe mordian?) and the modern box would be Tallarn/Cadian/Catachan. Its not ideal but its better than the alternative for sure!

Another option would be a complete visual overhaul of ALL of the regiments. This would be like the Primaris thing and would be a whole new set of standard armor/lsaguns for the guard. IE it would all now be Terra/Cawl Pattern guard gear giving the army a new and cohesive visual aesthetic. This could give all the regiments the ability to have a cohesive look and you can just purchase an uprgade pack for your specific regiment. You lose some of that special flair of your vostroyans and mordians but you you would also gain a cohesive and affordable army (not that us guard players cares about affordability).

The last option seems more likely for GW as a company because it means they wont have to have multiple product lines.

catbarf wrote:And I can't remember what book it was from, but I read a novel that featured an honest-to-god call for indirect fire to cover a bounding advance against an emplaced position, and it's going to bother the hell out of me until I find it again.

I think that could be from 'First and Only', where a battalion of Jantine Patricians uses indirect fire to not only cover an advance, but also to create shell-holes in the hillside in order to get some protection against the platoon of Tanith they're friendly firing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kanluwen wrote:

 Gert wrote:
I have the Sabbat Crusade book and yes the regiments have their own tactics but the Volpone are remembered for their distinct look of well dressed rich kids with bad attitudes, the Tanith are remembered for a mix of tactics, and their "barbarian" aesthetic, even the random minor regiments are described by their looks.

I'm so glad you brought up the "barbarian aesthetic".

Tanith are described as such by the Volpone, not because they're running around wearing skins and furs but because they have shaggy hair, beards, and facial tattoos.
The Tanith themselves are described, notably, as wearing black fatigues, black armor, helmets, and piebald camouflage capes.

Yeah, but I don't see what that changes about their more rugged features. Wearing furs and skins isn't the only hallmark of "barbarism" - although even the idea that excessive facial hair or even wearing furs is "barbaric" is a language holdout that needs to die off. Barbarian might not be the right word, but they definitely do have more of a woodsman/highlander vibe, which I think is the point here.

Kanluwen, I know we've butted heads before about redesigning Guard, but I have to say: If I had to pick between the current style of a bunch of culturally distinct forces that all play roughly the same on the table, or a single unified/rebooted Guard aesthetic with new units and rules that permitted the player to choose from a variety of playstyles as you describe, I'd take the latter in a heartbeat.

I like the historical mish-mash of influences in the Guard- and I think it wouldn't be unreasonable for new kits to have interchangeable parts to support a high degree of visual variation, like generalchaos34 said- but my personal issue with the Guard right now is how their army composition is so bland, regardless of regiment. You get troops and tanks and that's about it.

If a new ruleset gave us the ability to have conscript hordes, stealthy light infantry, tank companies, Stormtrooper battalions, drop troops, motorized/mechanized infantry, grizzled veterans, or fast attack a la Desert Rats- all equally viable and supported- then personally I wouldn't mind whatever conceptual/visual revisions were needed to get there.

 Kanluwen wrote:
[
And here's the crux of the matter. The "iconic regiments" of these worlds? They're the iconic ones. We don't know hardly anything about the others.

We know about the Vostroyan Firstborn Regiments, carapace-armored first children of the Vostroyans with heirloom lasguns trying to absolve their world of a stain they can never remove...but what about the Second/Third/Fourthborn?

The so oft-touted "variety" of the Guard is more in the tactical elements of the faction than the aesthetics, or at least it should be. Drop regiments, armoured regiments, stealther regiments, grenadier regiments...that's the variety.
Not the "Silly Hats" vs the "Capes" vs the "Helmets".
That's a result of creative types having been left to run unchecked decades ago when metal squads were the norm and we've been saddled with the effects ever since.
We have a continual mention of how the Munitorum runs things, the Munitorum provides things, etc...and yet somehow there's no standardized uniform across the entirety of the Imperium?
We have continual mentions of things like the major differences being variant lasguns or locally produced variant tanks but people keep grousing that we need the hats or longcoats or whatever.

I highly suggest people grab themselves a copy of the Sabbat Worlds Crusade book and see exactly how we can still get differentiation going without needing all the silly kits that people demand. There's a reason why I, personally, keep harping that the need is not for kits but rather units. Lightly armored stealther units, grenadier units, additional Scion elements, additional Officio Prefectus units, and Conscripts going to Auxilia opens up a lot of the 'variety' that people want while still allowing for a cohesive looking army to become a thing.

Noting I would really like kits for the abandoned regiments still (and for them to be at least somewhat interchangeable for kit bashing), I definitely agree with the fact that the focus on diversity shouldn't be based on homeworld, but more on regimental doctrine/type. All Steel Legion are from Armageddon but not all Armageddons are Steel Legion, and they aren't the only force in the galaxy that specialized in mechanized infantry. Mordians aren't the only parade drill uniform type either, etc.

On top of this, depending on the warzone, the soldiers might simply be in different uniform. I vaguely remember in one of the Cain books he notes that while everybody pictures Valhallans as always in their heavy coats, that is merely their cold weather gear and that they have lighter uniform for warmer combat arenas.