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.

If you want more than 6 Infantry Squads without spending CP for a second detachment, isn't the Brigade still an option?

OK, I'm saying that without crunching whether all the compulsory stuff in other slots fits OK, but this is the Guard we're talking about - we're cheap, son...

For me I’d just make the infantry squads cheaper, I got around 180 guardsmen, and anything besides s3 ap 0 doesn’t make sense.

 Dysartes wrote:
If you want more than 6 Infantry Squads without spending CP for a second detachment, isn't the Brigade still an option?

OK, I'm saying that without crunching whether all the compulsory stuff in other slots fits OK, but this is the Guard we're talking about - we're cheap, son...

It's been a hot minute since I whipped up a list like that, but last I checked a Brigade it was really something you could only really do over ~1250pts (I was building under a "Bring Platoons Back!" paradigm of also including Platoon Commanders plus Command Squads etc., and IIRC 1250 was juuuust too low to include extras like medkits or special weapons on the Infantry Squads - cut out some of the fat I had and 1250 would probably be about enough, though damn near everyone is going to be stock/min-sized/the cheapest possible option for the slot, and not getting the extra points to spend on upgrades might cripple the list).

Edit: Grossly misremembered, barebones minimum Brigade is ~700 pts if Battlescribe is to be believed, so wanting to run 7+ squads at low points level games is actually pretty doable.

If people don't want to better the Lasgun, what about making the Heavy/Special Weapons Squads cheaper and easier to get and protect?

What about a reverse ability to the Space Marines' Combat Squad ability, where, instead of splitting Squads, you can attach an Infantry Squad to a Special Weapons or Heavy Weapons Squad. This is balanced by them going over 10 models for the purposes of Blast Weapons, but allows us to better protect the Special Weapons. Combine that with making the Heavy Weapons Squad 15 points cheaper overall and the Special Weapons Squad 5 points cheaper (upping the Special Weapons price to that of the Infantry Squad).

Veterans can be moved as is to troops and can be a cheaper alternative to the above for less bodies, but maybe with an ability that gives light (or dense) cover when within 3" of an Objective or terrain piece.

Merge Command Squads with Company and Platoon Commanders and give them the character keyword. Bring the price up to 75 points (Company) and 60 points (Platoon), but give the entire Squad the Character keyword and make the Medkit, Banner, Vox, and the lesser special weapons (Sniper, Flamer, Grenade Launcher) free. (Vox should be a free upgrade overall IMO)

 Dysartes wrote:
If you want more than 6 Infantry Squads without spending CP for a second detachment, isn't the Brigade still an option?

OK, I'm saying that without crunching whether all the compulsory stuff in other slots fits OK, but this is the Guard we're talking about - we're cheap, son...

The problem with a brigade is the FA slot. If you want to run pure infantry guard, there are no Fast Attack options you can put into a brigade. You get Sentinels or Hellhounds only.

 necrontyrOG wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
If you want more than 6 Infantry Squads without spending CP for a second detachment, isn't the Brigade still an option?

OK, I'm saying that without crunching whether all the compulsory stuff in other slots fits OK, but this is the Guard we're talking about - we're cheap, son...

The problem with a brigade is the FA slot. If you want to run pure infantry guard, there are no Fast Attack options you can put into a brigade. You get Sentinels or Hellhounds only.

sentinels with flamers don't seem that bad, and anyway, theyre cheap enough where it doesnt really matter, your opponent shooting them means theyre not shooting at your better stuff.

Oh and 40k at 1k pts breaks no matter what you bring.

 Some_Call_Me_Tim wrote:
For me I’d just make the infantry squads cheaper, I got around 180 guardsmen, and anything besides s3 ap 0 doesn’t make sense.

Feck no. This game doesn't need a another race to the bottom. I'd argue we should be seeing more stuff get more expensive relative to the Guard than the Guard get cheaper.

Or we stop using the bloody Infantry Squad as the baseline metric for cheapest unit in the game and instead use units that are supposed to be simply meatshields like Cultists, Gretchin, etc for that metric?

Sound good?

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 necrontyrOG wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
If you want more than 6 Infantry Squads without spending CP for a second detachment, isn't the Brigade still an option?

OK, I'm saying that without crunching whether all the compulsory stuff in other slots fits OK, but this is the Guard we're talking about - we're cheap, son...

The problem with a brigade is the FA slot. If you want to run pure infantry guard, there are no Fast Attack options you can put into a brigade. You get Sentinels or Hellhounds only.

sentinels with flamers don't seem that bad, and anyway, theyre cheap enough where it doesnt really matter, your opponent shooting them means theyre not shooting at your better stuff.

Oh and 40k at 1k pts breaks no matter what you bring.

The issue there isn’t quality, it’s theme.

Sentinels aren’t infantry.

Infantry Squads in particular are already nearly the highest they've ever been on a PPM basis (and the extra .5 PPM still just feels a bit petulant, at least to me - if GW can't justify 5 PPM Guard in the current paradigm, I'd figure that's a call to rethink the apparent 5 PPM floor they've decided on, not a call to make Guard more expensive). Unless they do make everything else more expensive to match (spoiler: that's even less likely than GW rethinking the 5 PPM floor), I'd say that our current performance would be reasonable rationale to make Guardsmen cheaper.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 necrontyrOG wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
If you want more than 6 Infantry Squads without spending CP for a second detachment, isn't the Brigade still an option?

OK, I'm saying that without crunching whether all the compulsory stuff in other slots fits OK, but this is the Guard we're talking about - we're cheap, son...

The problem with a brigade is the FA slot. If you want to run pure infantry guard, there are no Fast Attack options you can put into a brigade. You get Sentinels or Hellhounds only.

sentinels with flamers don't seem that bad, and anyway, theyre cheap enough where it doesnt really matter, your opponent shooting them means theyre not shooting at your better stuff.

Oh and 40k at 1k pts breaks no matter what you bring.

The issue there isn’t quality, it’s theme.

Sentinels aren’t infantry.

Ok? So because you cant fill a brigade of your skew list, its an issue?

 JNAProductions wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 necrontyrOG wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
If you want more than 6 Infantry Squads without spending CP for a second detachment, isn't the Brigade still an option?

OK, I'm saying that without crunching whether all the compulsory stuff in other slots fits OK, but this is the Guard we're talking about - we're cheap, son...

The problem with a brigade is the FA slot. If you want to run pure infantry guard, there are no Fast Attack options you can put into a brigade. You get Sentinels or Hellhounds only.

sentinels with flamers don't seem that bad, and anyway, theyre cheap enough where it doesnt really matter, your opponent shooting them means theyre not shooting at your better stuff.

Oh and 40k at 1k pts breaks no matter what you bring.

The issue there isn’t quality, it’s theme.

Sentinels aren’t infantry.

Would you accept an infantry and cavalry force? Not mechanized or air cav, but actual cavalry? As in rough riders. Glorious horse cavalry.

 JNAProductions wrote:
The issue there isn’t quality, it’s theme.

Sentinels aren’t infantry.

Neither are Rough Riders or Armoured Fist Squads or Tauros or any of the other popular suggestions.

Sentinels fit in fairly well, being essentially more mobile versions of a Heavy Weapons Team.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Or we stop using the bloody Infantry Squad as the baseline metric for cheapest unit in the game and instead use units that are supposed to be simply meatshields like Cultists, Gretchin, etc for that metric?

Sound good?

I am not against that. Point was they shouldn't go down further in points.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 necrontyrOG wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
If you want more than 6 Infantry Squads without spending CP for a second detachment, isn't the Brigade still an option?

OK, I'm saying that without crunching whether all the compulsory stuff in other slots fits OK, but this is the Guard we're talking about - we're cheap, son...

The problem with a brigade is the FA slot. If you want to run pure infantry guard, there are no Fast Attack options you can put into a brigade. You get Sentinels or Hellhounds only.

sentinels with flamers don't seem that bad, and anyway, theyre cheap enough where it doesnt really matter, your opponent shooting them means theyre not shooting at your better stuff.

Oh and 40k at 1k pts breaks no matter what you bring.

The issue there isn’t quality, it’s theme.

Sentinels aren’t infantry.

The person I was replying to was talking about wanting to take more than six Infantry Squads in a detachment in order to screen tanks - which would imply that this particular theme bit isn't actually an issue...

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Or we stop using the bloody Infantry Squad as the baseline metric for cheapest unit in the game and instead use units that are supposed to be simply meatshields like Cultists, Gretchin, etc for that metric?

Sound good?

I am not against that. Point was they shouldn't go down further in points.

Truthfully, the real point is that Infantry Squads are a horribly dated concept that need to be reviewed.

There is ZERO reason for Catachans to have the same armor save as Cadians. There is ZERO reason for Tallarn to have the same armor save as Vostroyans. There is ZERO reason for there to be one singular "Infantry Squad" given the doctrinal and equipment differences that are supposed to exist between the various regiments.

This book could have been fixed decades ago, if it had been someone who did not simply tow the company line.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Or we stop using the bloody Infantry Squad as the baseline metric for cheapest unit in the game and instead use units that are supposed to be simply meatshields like Cultists, Gretchin, etc for that metric?

Sound good?

I am not against that. Point was they shouldn't go down further in points.

Truthfully, the real point is that Infantry Squads are a horribly dated concept that need to be reviewed.

There is ZERO reason for Catachans to have the same armor save as Cadians. There is ZERO reason for Tallarn to have the same armor save as Vostroyans. There is ZERO reason for there to be one singular "Infantry Squad" given the doctrinal and equipment differences that are supposed to exist between the various regiments.

This book could have been fixed decades ago, if it had been someone who did not simply tow the company line.

So, 3 Additional datasheets per regiment? Possibly each regiment getting their own Codex Suppliment? Is that what you're going for?

I'm still of the opinion they should just let Infantry Squads combine with Heavy and Special Weapons Squads pre-game, and reduce the price of the latter two.

Arcanis161 wrote:

So, 3 Additional datasheets per regiment? Possibly each regiment getting their own Codex Supplement? Is that what you're going for?

No. I'm going for making the stupid visual aesthetics matter like they used to with the much touted 3.5 Doctrines book. Every upgrade was SUPPOSED to be modeled.

Light Infantry Squad--No tripod mounted HW, limited specials, lascarbines and a lighter 5+ armor save with a bonus to moving across terrain features.
"Regular" Infantry Squad--Tripod HWs, normal specials, lasguns, 4+ save with no native bonuses.
"Heavy" Infantry Squad--No tripod HWs, expanded specials options, lasguns OR "heavy"/"shotgun" lasguns mentioned elsewhere in the lore. 3+ armor saves; stupid expensive points-wise.

Conscripts--5+ armor save, autoguns or autopistol/ccws as standard, upgradeable to Lasguns. No specials, no heavies.

I'm still of the opinion they should just let Infantry Squads combine with Heavy and Special Weapons Squads pre-game, and reduce the price of the latter two.

Why? Why would you EVER want that?

If anything, Heavy and Special Weapon Squads need to be treated like vehicle squadrons: bought as X numbers within the unit then deployed separately with a pseudo-character protection layered onto them and given a few other perks that actually make them more appealing than just loading up Command or Infantry Squads with the same options.

Arcanis161 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Or we stop using the bloody Infantry Squad as the baseline metric for cheapest unit in the game and instead use units that are supposed to be simply meatshields like Cultists, Gretchin, etc for that metric?

Sound good?

I am not against that. Point was they shouldn't go down further in points.

Truthfully, the real point is that Infantry Squads are a horribly dated concept that need to be reviewed.

There is ZERO reason for Catachans to have the same armor save as Cadians. There is ZERO reason for Tallarn to have the same armor save as Vostroyans. There is ZERO reason for there to be one singular "Infantry Squad" given the doctrinal and equipment differences that are supposed to exist between the various regiments.

This book could have been fixed decades ago, if it had been someone who did not simply tow the company line.

So, 3 Additional datasheets per regiment? Possibly each regiment getting their own Codex Suppliment? Is that what you're going for?

I'm still of the opinion they should just let Infantry Squads combine with Heavy and Special Weapons Squads pre-game, and reduce the price of the latter two.

Book is too far away *glares 2 meters to right where it is sitting*, but the 3.5 book did a fun job of differentiating the regiments while using the exact same datasheets. One regiment might have a 6+ save but get bonus to cover saves and access to heavy flamers, while another had all infantry in deep strike, yet another had a 4+ armor save, and then a fourth one could have stormtroopers/scions as troops. Most of these alterations had point costs attached to them as well, so yes they *were* guardsman +1, but they also paid to get that.

Mind you, the book had several severe balance issues, such as the fact that you were sacrificing the use of 10 mediocre units to customize and make better the rest, and internally some of them were very overpriced. Camo cloaks for bonus to cover save was 10 points per squad, while 4+ armor or a 6+ invuln were 20 points I believe. It also let you build the world's worst regiment by using your 5 buy points to purchase back 5 of the 10 units you lost if you really wanted to. I still scratch my head at why that is technically a thing you could do and why it wasn't simply 1 point spent on buying back units unlocking 2 units.

Bringing back something like that with a more fine tuned cost list could go a long way in revitalizing guard. "Jungle fighters" with 6+ save but getting better cover saves and better at shooting into cover Heavy infantry that gives their squads a 4+ save for 1 or 2ppm (or a flat number per squad if that ends up too little/too much). None of that really requires a datasheet, so long as it is printed clear and simple somewhere so you can show your opponent what is up right from the get go.

Nah. It absolutely requires a datasheet at this point. Otherwise it just becomes proxyhammer.

I have zero interest in playing the "let's pretend!" game with someone on this crap at this stage in my life. Buy the right kit to represent what you're fielding or take the initiative and convert things.


Additionally, a datasheet means that you can actually do something interesting with it beyond just everything being a "skin". It opens up Regimental Restrictions(IE: Catachans can't have "Heavy Infantry Squads" while Vostroyans can't have "Light Infantry Squads") and allows for some dual-kitting to happen too.

Light Infantry Squads being used as the basis for a proto-Tanith styled infantry unit that also can build a unit of Scouts for a FA choice? Jazzy!
Heavy Infantry Squads being able to be used for a dedicated bodyguard unit under Elites? Aces!

And then there's also what looks to be GW wanting to do some Regimental exclusive units. There is art of new Grenadiers/Engineers for the Death Korps. There is art of new Death Riders. There is art of a new Marshal look. And then there's the now confirmed-ish Kasrkin...

Just need Catachan Devils and the Big 3 archetypes have even gotten a cool signature unit!

 Kanluwen wrote:

Arcanis161 wrote:

So, 3 Additional datasheets per regiment? Possibly each regiment getting their own Codex Supplement? Is that what you're going for?

No. I'm going for making the stupid visual aesthetics matter like they used to with the much touted 3.5 Doctrines book. Every upgrade was SUPPOSED to be modeled.

So three humongous datasheets to include every minor detail change on the model. Right.

 Kanluwen wrote:

I'm still of the opinion they should just let Infantry Squads combine with Heavy and Special Weapons Squads pre-game, and reduce the price of the latter two.

Why? Why would you EVER want that?
Seriously.

"Let's make a big ol' giant blob to shoot at! Woo!"

Wow, looks like I struck a nerve. You want some fries to go along with your salty attitude? Let me rewrite that for you:

All that will accomplish will be creating a big blob for an enemy to shoot at

It will be a blob for an enemy to shoot at. Here's my train of thought:

-Our vehicles, including the Leman Russes, are bad right now. We lose at minimum 2 vehicles per turn even with 12 wounds and a 2+ save. Giving something like an invuln save, while effective, makes little sense lore-wise as invulnerable saves are "supposed" to be rare things. While we could toss the lore entirely, players of other factions will cry endlessly asking for invulnerable saves on their own vehicles. The arms race continues.

-I agree with other posters here on the Lasgun: it should remain s3 Ap-0 D1. The point of the lasgun is that it alone can't compete with anything any other race can bring. This weakness is made up for with sheer volume fire. I could see improving orders to get more wounds in, but that alone won't boost us enough.

-I also agree that we're already throwing enough dice as is at any given round. GW has been trying to streamline the individual phases (and I'm clarifying, individual phases, not rules) to make game play faster if possible. While I'm content rolling 720 dice per round, my opponents won't be.

With all of this in mind, how can we improve performance without just simply cutting points to ridiculous levels?

What we do have is several Infantry units that have been neglected for a long time, if my understanding is correct, ever since we lost the use of Platoons: Heavy Weapons Squads and Special Weapons Squads. They're competing for slots that are better used for other units and never bring enough firepower to justify their low survivability.

So, my idea is increase the survivability. Allow an Infantry Squad to attach to each, and pair that with some points adjustments to keep this pair around 100 points, even with maximum upgrades.

Does this make them more vulnerable to Blast Weapons? Yes. But 10-15 of these running around the field that I doubt would be taken out in 2-3 turns.

And, if you're that concerned about Blast Weapons, then consider this alternative: if your Warlord is a Company Commander*, for every Infantry Squad within the Detachment, you may bring either a Special Weapons Squad or Heavy Weapons Squad without utilizing an Elites or Heavy Support slot respectively. Still similar result, but now Blast can't get them (though they still remain very, very squishy).

*still want the Company Commander to merge with the Command Squad again.

I like how you automatically assume that the datasheets would have to be "humongous". I've shown these things in the past for my ideas. They ain't huge. You don't need pages upon pages of special rules. Most of it comes down to stats.


My dislike for "blob squadding" zero to do with Blast. Blast is a garbage mechanism anyways, arbitrarily set at the stupidest numbers imaginable. It has everything to do with gameplay and lore.

What's the point of having a stew "unit" for the game? It isn't interesting. It does nothing for the army, it does nothing for the units involved outside of wound allocation nonsense, and it does nothing but look bad on the battlefield overall...not to mention it really doesn't match anything outside of Valhallans(and then the HWS/SWS wouldn't be in there either since their big huge blobs are supposed to be Conscripts).

There is zero reason why HWS or SWS should be free either. If anything is to happen with them, it's to take the methodology established in the D-99 list and expand upon it.

You want snipers? Cool, you can take a sniper squad! 3 sets of 2 Guardsmen, a spotter+sniper each. Give 'em Infiltrate and put them in FA.
Want to spam Plasma? Cool, that's an Elite choice. 3 sets of 2 Guardsmen, as a "light" vehicle/monster hunting team.

Mortar Squad as a dedicated Heavy Support option, a "Fire Support Squad" of Autocannon/Heavy Bolters as another one, and a "Tank Hunter Squad" as a final one with Lascannons and Meltaguns.

Give each option something to add some flavor to them(snipers+spotter teams can interact with Mortars or vehicles that have the Artillery keyword by giving them rerolls or allowing them to extend their range further or hell outright just making the spotter teams a requirement for Indirect Fire to be an option, Fire Support Teams getting to engage in "suppressive fire" and lock a targeted unit out of actions while not dealing damage, etc), rework the Infantry Squads and see what all shakes out.

Also, I fully expect something to be done for Leman Russes with regards to survivability.

The thing is, GW would keep up the only stats low on special rules for maybe 3-4 books, and then they would drop something extremly heavy on special rules and the army would be dominating everything. Plus they don't really get feedback from different types of normal players. they have their own studio people, who seem to play the game like some sort of wierd comp historical kind of a game, and they have the top end tournament playtesters. Other media have the same problems too. Some video games , like WoW, are practically made by a bunch of people who don't play it with systems that are suppose to please and engage people taking part in the world first race, which is probably like 1000 people. While the rest of the people are having very little fun.
I would love to hear from someone high in the DT explain what a new player, who bought 2000pts of stuff he likes is suppose to do, if they aka GW and the DT team wrote the rules in such a way that his new army is borderline unfun to play or if his army is border line unfun to play for his friends. And I have a feeling the the anwser to the question would be take 1000-1200$ and buy more models.

One thing we can be sure of is GW isn't going to give us rules options that don't have models. There will be no light/normal/heavy infantry because there are no such models. There will be no different types of lasguns because there is no such models.

That's why my thoughts concentrate on upgrading the humble lasgun via orders. If you go back to my thought experiment rules, you get the following firing 9 lasguns at Space Marines beyond 12":

9 Lasguns, no orders: 9 shots WS 4+, Wound on 5+, Save on 3+, for a result of 0.5 Wounds

9 Lasguns, FRFSRF (2 shots at max range and AP-1): 18 shots WS 4+, Wound on 5+, Save on 4+, for a result of 1.5 Wounds

9 Lasguns, FRFSRF & Bring It Down(+1 Wound): 18 shots WS 4+, Wound on 4+, Save on 4+, for a result of 2.5 Wounds

Two orders layering to give you 5x the damage out put, although still modest, to the Lasguns. Added benefit is that Bring It Down works on non-Lasguns, so whatever the Sargent is caring is impacted as is the Special and/or Heavy Weapons. Might be a spicy rules improvement to have FRFSRF do something to the Special and Heavy Weapons in the squad also.

I'm not saying my idea is perfect, but I hope GW has a way of making Guard Infantry viable other than making the base Lasgun stats better. You certainly can't make the AP -1 without every bolter in the game going "What about me!"

 alextroy wrote:
One thing we can be sure of is GW isn't going to give us rules options that don't have models. There will be no light/normal/heavy infantry because there are no such models. There will be no different types of lasguns because there is no such models.

We literally have rules for Lascarbines right now. They came with Gaunt's Ghosts(Corbec has one). Larkin's got rules for the Long-Las as well.

The one thing we can be sure of right now is that we cannot be sure of anything.

 alextroy wrote:

I'm not saying my idea is perfect, but I hope GW has a way of making Guard Infantry viable other than making the base Lasgun stats better. You certainly can't make the AP -1 without every bolter in the game going "What about me!"

Shuriken catapults and fleshborers wave energetically.
'Oh baby bolter, you'll catch up one day.'

From Goonhammer on Norsehammer Open 2022 40k (https://www.goonhammer.com/competitive-innovations-in-9th-godzilla-mode/):

The fully loaded airburst team can do a prepostorous amount of damage to the Drukhari, doing so as early as turn one if the Homing Beacon goes off, and with over a hundred (on average) indirect shots each round

Looks like the gloves need to come off on the ideas, as that kind of firepower will clear our infantry in 2 turns.
* -1 to Wound on our vehicles. All of them. * Drop Chimeras chassis to 9W. with -1 to wound, that's equivalent to 10.4W, but the number of T4/5/6 shots it takes to take down a chimera just doubled. (Going from 5s to 6s), but is now only 1VP * Boost LRBTs to 14W, w/ -1TW, that's ~16.2W, but the number of T5/6/7 shots needed to take down a LRBT just doubled. * Chimeras get ObSec if they have an ObSec unit embarked, and (if they are a dedicated tranport to a unit in a platoon) get the orders from that platoon. * HWTs get Look Our Sir! (then we can put them in the open, but near a hidden Manticore/Wyvern/Basilisk). * As suggested above, orders from higher-ups need to stack * I like Lasguns going to Assault3, or RF2, or my idea of D3 auto-hits (this one is past discussion time, it is what it is). * If you have platoons, then for each infantry, conscript or veteran squad you can take a single HWT or Special Weapon squad. If the SWS is entirely equipped with sniper rifles, then the squad may infiltrate. For each veteran infantry squad, 1 HWT or 1 SWS can be upgraded to veterans. An IS/VIS can either 1) have 2 models replace their lasguns with special weapons or 2) form a HWT. (if they have a HWT they get LOS!). * Tanks get 6" Unit Coherency (but immune to morale, Chimeras in the same infantry platoon count as being in the same squadron), allowing us to put the wounds on any tank in the squadron, but a tank can leave coherency at any time. LRBTs count as Bodyguards for TCs. 1 LRBT in a squadron can give orders, and then the TC orders stack. Put the Lt in the middle, the cheap tank in the back, and put all the wounds on the cheap tank in the back while the Demo Cannon up front goes to work. * ACs on vehicles are 2d3 shots, 3D. Infantry ACs are still 2 shots 3D, but cheaper. Let Chimera's have turret ACs again. * Drop LRBT grinding advance entirely. Demo Cannons & Earthshakers are flat 2d6 shots, d3+3 damage. Change Manticores & BCs to 3d6 shots, flat D2, allocated 1 point at a time (so they have play into 1W models, and anything with -1D). Wyverns could be 6d6 shots, still S4 -1AP. (still less hits than a 120 points dakkajet, at a weaker strength). Punishers are 40 shots at AP-1, 6s explode against T2/3 models. (better against guardsman than a BC, worse against T4 AV3). Vanquishers could be flat 4 shots at D6+d3, ignoring invulnerables. Emergency Plasma Vents when taken on an Executioner would make it so Plasma sponsons don't overheat, while the Executioner cannon itself goes to D2/D3 * Orders are now 6" auras. With vox casters (since it's a bullhorn and not a radio) order range is extended to 18". (note, this allows senior officers to take a command squad w/Vox, and have a very large aura bubble). Command Squads & Ogryns get Bodyguard. * Hydras are BS3 against anything with the FLY, FLYER and/or JUMP PACK keyword, with a strat to fire in the opponent's movement phase. * Fix "Fire on my Position", and make it so it can be used if the unit is prevented from falling back. * "Optimum Range Bracket". Bonus -1AP depending on range. Artillery bonus against targets 18"+. Heavy weapons vs targets 9-36". RF/Assault weapons from 0-12" (this gets Lasguns their -1AP at close range). * Baneblade chassis go to BS3, and count as a TC.
Yep, that means we abuse the bodyguard rules to no end. We make it so their indirect targets the stuff we want, on the tank we want. If they want to get to our infantry, they have to get thru our tanks. At the same time, our infantry can start doing some work.

Individually, these are decent buffs (except the -1TW on tanks, which is unholy). But when you see how things start to stack, it's quite potent. For example, with SMOKESCREEN, LRBTs are -1 to hit, -1 to wound, 2+ Sv, and in a squadron we're putting the wounds on the tank in the back. Take Hydras in squadrons with a Master of the Fleet to give orders, and they can be firing at flyers with BS2, 8d3 3D shots, re-rolling 1s to wound during your opponent's movement phase. With Take Aim! being +1 to hit, a LRBT would be hitting on 3s, TCs on 2s, with potential -1AP bonus (DCs@-4AP, BC@-3AP, Punisher@-2AP), re-rolling 1s to wound from the squadron commander 6-12" behind him, and either Advancing and shooting or +1 to wound from a nearby (6", 12" or more!) Tank Commander.

As funny as it is, the points costs for our units wouldn't change much, and would probably go down. Our output is brought up to 9th, we boost our durability considerably.

No thanks. I'll just bin the army if any of those suggestions remotely come close to what they do.

They already fethed over Skitarii, a supposedly elite fighting force, by allowing you to do 20 model squads and mandating a 1:10 for each special rather than letting you specialize.

I'm not wasting my time going forward playing Guard in a manner that is not actually what Guard are supposed to be.

 Dysartes wrote:
If you want more than 6 Infantry Squads without spending CP for a second detachment, isn't the Brigade still an option?

OK, I'm saying that without crunching whether all the compulsory stuff in other slots fits OK, but this is the Guard we're talking about - we're cheap, son...

Brigades should be representative of multiple companies from different regiments working together in combined arms. Like a tank company and infantry company working together. A battalion should be a single company with smaller support elements from other forces, so an infantry company supported by a tank squad loaned from another regiment.

Basically, the idea should be platoons let you save CP from not having to take other detachments and also save you points from not needing to take more mandatory units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Some_Call_Me_Tim wrote:
For me I’d just make the infantry squads cheaper, I got around 180 guardsmen, and anything besides s3 ap 0 doesn’t make sense.

Infantry Squads can’t get much cheaper sadly. GW are adamant that 5 points per model is the floor. So, you could maybe see a return of 50 point Infantry Squads. Maybe we could get a free Sniper Rifle and then reduced special weapon costs, like how SWS’s come with Sniper Rifles and then only pay 3 points for a plasma or melta gun. Vox-casters could become free as well and just work like Datatethers. That’s about all you can do though.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
sentinels with flamers don't seem that bad, and anyway, theyre cheap enough where it doesnt really matter, your opponent shooting them means theyre not shooting at your better stuff.

Barebone sentinels are one of our most durable units at the moment. As Cadians and given the Obsec stratagem one of our most competitive units. Any weapon upgrades just ruin them though. They’re all too expensive for what they do. Each of those weapon upgrades should be at least 5 points cheaper to be viable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:


Light Infantry Squad--No tripod mounted HW, limited specials, lascarbines and a lighter 5+ armor save with a bonus to moving across terrain features.
"Regular" Infantry Squad--Tripod HWs, normal specials, lasguns, 4+ save with no native bonuses.
"Heavy" Infantry Squad--No tripod HWs, expanded specials options, lasguns OR "heavy"/"shotgun" lasguns mentioned elsewhere in the lore. 3+ armor saves; stupid expensive points-wise.

Conscripts--5+ armor save, autoguns or autopistol/ccws as standard, upgradeable to Lasguns. No specials, no heavies

There’s no need for any of this with the <Regiment> bonuses.

Light Infantry could be done by being able to ignore difficult ground, getting additional save bonuses in cover, a pre-game move, etc.

Heavy Infantry will be represented by the new Kasrkin. Scion statlines and equipment, but get <Regiment> bonuses instead of <Tempestus Regiment> ones.

Jarms48 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:


Light Infantry Squad--No tripod mounted HW, limited specials, lascarbines and a lighter 5+ armor save with a bonus to moving across terrain features.
"Regular" Infantry Squad--Tripod HWs, normal specials, lasguns, 4+ save with no native bonuses.
"Heavy" Infantry Squad--No tripod HWs, expanded specials options, lasguns OR "heavy"/"shotgun" lasguns mentioned elsewhere in the lore. 3+ armor saves; stupid expensive points-wise.

Conscripts--5+ armor save, autoguns or autopistol/ccws as standard, upgradeable to Lasguns. No specials, no heavies

There’s no need for any of this with the <Regiment> bonuses.

Nah. There's a need. The need is to expand the options for the Guard beyond "Scion, Infantry Squad, and Conscript". The need is to ACTUALLY PROVIDE A MEANINGFUL DIFFERENCE IN PLAYSTYLE.

Light Infantry could be done by being able to ignore difficult ground, getting additional save bonuses in cover, a pre-game move, etc.

Nope. Needs to be tied specifically to models and statlines. Needs to have different loadouts. Otherwise, there's too much potential for metanobbery.

Heavy Infantry will be represented by the new Kasrkin. Scion statlines and equipment, but get <Regiment> bonuses instead of <Tempestus Regiment> ones.

Might be represented by the new Kasrkin. You don't know for certain, nor do I.