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.

I don't like "always counts as in light cover" rules, because it removes a large part of the positioning of the game. Suddenly it doesn't matter where your models are, because they're getting cover regardless. Also, it doesn't matter where your opponent moves their models because they can't deny you your cover regardless.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
I don't like "always counts as in light cover" rules, because it removes a large part of the positioning of the game. Suddenly it doesn't matter where your models are, because they're getting cover regardless. Also, it doesn't matter where your opponent moves their models because they can't deny you your cover regardless.

yea, its a bit of a lazy mechanic, and i would probably add treat light cover as heavy cover, but with the game being more and more lethal its hard out there for a guardsman or tempestus scion. if you gave them better armor like a 4+ i think people would complain even more as suddenly "power armor should be a 2+ and terminator armor a 1+" would be an even louder call than it already is.

Practically with so many guns now -1AP they would basically just be retaining their current 5+ as a level of usefulness.

open to other ideas, but much like ork boyz the guardsman profile is not working. orders are nice and cheap bodies are nice but they get leaf blowered off the table too easy for the points in my opinion

Have guardsmen be integral to the rest of the army functioning, like spotters for artillery, suppressing fire guys and screens. They’re a resource.

1. More infantry kits with more options at a cheaper price point.

2. Bring back Regimental Doctrines a la 3.5 edition.

3. Bring back the Platoons!

 Kanluwen wrote:
1. Break Infantry Squads into 3 distinctive entities. Veteran status is conferred when building your army, not by a unit choice.
1A. "Raider"/"Skirmisher" archetype, with a 5+ save and a bonus in terrain. No Heavy Weapon Teams, Lascarbines as standard. Special Weapons are able to be doubled up if no Heavy Weapon taken.
2A. "Line Infantry" archetype, the "Cadian look". 4+ save, no bonus in terrain. Heavy Weapon Teams as an option. Lasguns or Lascarbines as options. Single special weapon and single Heavy Weapon if no HWT.
3A. "Heavy Infantry" archetype, the "Grenadier" or "Kasrkin" look. 3+ save or a 4+ with an additional wound or something. Hellguns as standard. No HWT, doubling up Special Weapons or Heavy Weapons.

2. Heavy Weapon and Special Weapon list is revised, as are Heavy Weapon Teams themselves. HWTs are able to be deployed separately to the unit drawn from. HWTs get a bonus save while stationary in cover. Mortars are their own independent team, restricted to a Heavy Support option but gaining a "variable fire mode". Smoke rounds, incendiary/airburst rounds, HE rounds, etc. Fire mode is decided immediately after you fire the preceding round so thought is necessary for how you want to use them.
HWTs get a rule that effectively gives them their own version of autocannons, heavy bolters, lascannons, and twin heavy-stubbers by doubling their ROF at the expense of becoming fire OR move. Missile Launchers become a Heavy Weapon option alongside of a Heavy Stubber, Hellshot Rifle(lorewise they're cutdown lascannons intended to be used similar to an AT rifle), single operator capable AC/HB .
Plasma Guns become a separate choice in and of themselves.

3. Sergeants and Officers gain a pseudo-special weapon list. Plasma Guns, Lasguns, Hellguns, Boltguns, Shotguns. Things like this go into the "Officer/Veteran" armory pool.

I could go on, but y'all said 3.

Just gonna repeat this. Because platoons are trash.

Oh yeah, and because there's so much room for making different styles of Guard into not just a visual thing but a playstyle thing. Having just finished "Catachan Devil", some of the Guardsmen in there swap their Laspistols out for Hand Flamers. All of them barring a remnant from another Regiment are toting Lascarbines as well.

1. Better Regimental Rules: Half of the named ones suck, especially the Mordian one, which is utterly useless.

2. Plastics: Third party companies are utterly killing them when it comes to this. Hell, I'm looking to get rid of all my Cadians once WGA comes out with the Space British Box that is coming out.

3. Price: Price cuts, price cuts, price cuts. I want my Guard cheaper. 5pts for Guardsman is too high.

 BlackoCatto wrote:

3. Price: Price cuts, price cuts, price cuts. I want my Guard cheaper. 5pts for Guardsman is too high.

Not the price cut I was thinking of.

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Astra-Militarum-Cadian-Shock-Troops-2021

$5 for a 20 year old Cadian model is too high!

 Kanluwen wrote:

Just gonna repeat this. Because platoons are trash.

That's not how you spell awesome.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 BlackoCatto wrote:

3. Price: Price cuts, price cuts, price cuts. I want my Guard cheaper. 5pts for Guardsman is too high.

Not the price cut I was thinking of.

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Astra-Militarum-Cadian-Shock-Troops-2021

$5 for a 20 year old Cadian model is too high!

But Mr. Kid! It's a 20-year-old sculpt with a 1-year-old upgrade sprue! That you can't purchase separately! Surely that makes it worth $1 per point!

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Just gonna repeat this. Because platoons are trash.

That's not how you spell awesome.

Because you can only spell platoons one way:
t
r
a
s
h

All it does is further push the army into one direction.

In all seriousness, why exactly do so many folks want to bring back platoons? I remember in 5-7th editions, I loved using platoons and thought they were great in the context of those editions. But in 9th, I don't really understand what problem would be fixed by recreating platoons. We can take lots of every force organization slot very easily with the current detachment system.

The point is the same reason they were ever a thing in the first place - cheap squads on infantry means you fill up your slots very quickly.
Platoons give you the ability to take lots of infantry. Granted you can do that with multiple detachments, but then you're paying CP through the nose to bring Guardsmen of all things.

Idea, akin to platoons: what if detachments consisting of specific units got a cp discount?

For instance, if you had a Spearhead Detachment of only units with the Leman Russ keyword (Leman Russes and Tank Commanders), it only costs, like, 1 or 2 CP. Same if you have a Patrol or Battalion Detachment with all units having the Tempestus Scion keyword, or any Detachment consisting only of any of the following: Company/Platoon Commanders, Command Squads, Infantry Squads, Veterans, Special Weapons Squads, or Heavy Weapons Squads.

Not having to spend as much CP to bring other detachments, so long as those detachments follow specific guidelines, sounds like a good small boost to me, and it's similar enough to Platoons without breaking the conventions of 9th ed.

 CommunistNapkin wrote:
In all seriousness, why exactly do so many folks want to bring back platoons?

It's a great point of flavor about the Guard about how they're a huge HUUUGE organization that deals with conflicts at a different scale than other armies. The platoon organization makes the Guard feel big, even if they're still showing up for this skirmish-level engagement. Guard are the largest organized armed force in the galaxy, and platoons invoke that scale.

There were also side aspects to it that, for the cost of some level of forced organization, allowed Guard to break normal FOC restrictions in other ways. It's a nice high-level faction design paradigm. Flavorful cost/benefit balance. Kanluwens spellchecker is broken

 Insectum7 wrote:

 CommunistNapkin wrote:
In all seriousness, why exactly do so many folks want to bring back platoons?

It's a great point of flavor about the Guard about how they're a huge HUUUGE organization that deals with conflicts at a different scale than other armies. The platoon organization makes the Guard feel big, even if they're still showing up for this skirmish-level engagement. Guard are the largest organized armed force in the galaxy, and platoons invoke that scale.

No, they really don't. The simple size of the armies do.

There were also side aspects to it that, for the cost of some level of forced organization, allowed Guard to break normal FOC restrictions in other ways.

Literally unnecessary, seeing as how if you wanted to you can squeeze in a larger Detachment of choice than anyone else if you so choose.

It's a nice high-level faction design paradigm.

Nah, it's just rose-tinted glasses making you think it is.

Flavorful cost/benefit balance.

Except when it's not, and you're stuck taking what are effectively 3 units as a single Troops choice in small games.

Kanluwens spellchecker is broken

Nah, it just tells the truth.

Literally the only reason to bring them back is to game the Rule of 3, which is a dumb reason to do it when you could actively design to compensate for it.

I dunno, I run 12 infantry squads in my pure infantry list. I have no infantry based fast attack options to make a brigade. If platoons came back, it would fill a battalion with room for two more troop options. I'd like platoons back.

 necrontyrOG wrote:
I dunno, I run 12 infantry squads in my pure infantry list. I have no infantry based fast attack options to make a brigade.
If platoons came back, it would fill a battalion with room for two more troop options. I'd like platoons back.

And this kind of silliness is the perfect example of why they should never come back.

It’s a reason why old force org was nice, you weren’t forced to take fething fast attacks.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 necrontyrOG wrote:
I dunno, I run 12 infantry squads in my pure infantry list. I have no infantry based fast attack options to make a brigade.
If platoons came back, it would fill a battalion with room for two more troop options. I'd like platoons back.

And this kind of silliness is the perfect example of why they should never come back.

Why is this silly? It's four platoons. Been the same since 3rd edition at least.

 necrontyrOG wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 necrontyrOG wrote:
I dunno, I run 12 infantry squads in my pure infantry list. I have no infantry based fast attack options to make a brigade.
If platoons came back, it would fill a battalion with room for two more troop options. I'd like platoons back.

And this kind of silliness is the perfect example of why they should never come back.

Why is this silly? It's four platoons. Been the same since 3rd edition at least.

Because you're using an example of you artificially restricting your army list.

So why wasn't the lack of an infantry FA a problem for you before? What do Platoons solve for you that actually fleshing out the Guard roster would not solve better?

I play a fluffy Tanith army. All light infantry. Platoons would allow me to fit into one force org, and not cost me command points for playing a fluffy list that's been legal for 20 years. What do you suggest I do to play a Tanith army with no vehicles?

 Some_Call_Me_Tim wrote:
It’s a reason why old force org was nice, you weren’t forced to take fething fast attacks.

It's a better reason why Cyclops as Fast Attack options was a Great Idea.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 necrontyrOG wrote:
I play a fluffy Tanith army. All light infantry. Platoons would allow me to fit into one force org, and not cost me command points for playing a fluffy list that's been legal for 20 years. What do you suggest I do to play a Tanith army with no vehicles?

Get used to spending command points on your skew list?

It's not like you having Platoons would seriously change that.

 necrontyrOG wrote:
I dunno, I run 12 infantry squads in my pure infantry list. I have no infantry based fast attack options to make a brigade. If platoons came back, it would fill a battalion with room for two more troop options. I'd like platoons back.

I agree with that, it would be nice to have this option if you want to play infantry centric Imperial guard. It's possible in the lore, it should be possible without too much difficulty on the tabletop.
You can easily fill 5000+ points just with vehicles in a Spearhead [HQ: 2 tank commanders (200+ each), FA: 2 x 3 Hellhounds (6x 110), HS: 6 x 3 Leman Russ (18 x ~ 175), Flyer: 2 x 3 Valkyries (6 x ~ 150) = 5110+]. It should be possible to cram 1500 points of baseline infantry in one single detachment too (that's my opinion, not a fact, claim or demand)


Edit: I realized I broke the rule of 3 in my example with the Leman Russ. So fair enough 3 x 3 Leman Russ + 3 x 3 Basilisks. Should still be something around 5000 points

If they don't return platoons, then they should at minimum remove the rule of 3 on the platoon commanders, command squads, special and heavy weapon squads, and give them objective secured.

Company/Platoon Commanders and Command squads need to be recombined into a command squad that includes the commander.

Anyone who didn't want to play a platoon/infantry heavy guard list in 5th still had the option to run veteran squads as their obligatory troops option. With the flexibility of the 9th detachment structure, if you want an infantry light list, the inclusion of Platoons in the book does not inhibit your ability to be a Tread Head.

The return of platoons just opens up options for those that want to play that style of force.

Platoons should be flexible if they return and all of its contents should count as a troop option.

eg, platoon command squad.

1-5 infantry squads.
per 2 infantry squads 0-1 HWT squad
per 2 infantry squads 0-1 Special weapons squads.
Can designate 1 infantry squad as vets.

That would at the same time avoid the "30 + models per singular troop choice" issue whilest still allowing for the typical setup.

Still i 'd say vets should go back to Troopslot and further still if platoons come back doctrines that modify availability for squad composition and ability need to make a return aswell.

1 - ultra cheap infantry, free merging of troops not at full strength
2 - orders table wide, better orders only available with (table wide) vox
3 - all 'doesn't require line of sight' shots do mortal wounds with a certain range around the target unit (and influence leadership of target unit)

Some way to fix survivability of tanks, though I don't know if it's better save, more wounds or cheaper (so you can have more).

I would then like price cuts and to better phrase it, point cuts.

I’d also let infantry squads go to 20 mans, and conscripts go to 50.

Something with the Vox never sat right with me, the way it works is how the Ciaphas Cain novels describe the PDF to work. Some changes to it's interaction with orders, and orders in general, would be more interesting. Also a way to deal with the fact that guard seems to bleed secondaries way to easy.

Brickfix wrote:
Also a way to deal with the fact that guard seems to bleed secondaries way to easy.

Yeah part one of my answer on a different thread was for that.

Part 1 - mission interaction
Basic Guardsmen squad becomes 'disposable'. That is for missions that require kills, killing them gets you nowt. Otherwise the 10 man squad will never be resilient enough.
OR Vehicles can take hits for guardsmen. If a guardsmen model is within 3" of a leman russ, chimera or lord of war (no support weapons or dangerous hellhounds), if the infantry squad passes a successful leadership test successful hits are applied to the vehicle (the infantry and armour are supporting each other).

(You take this further but I wouldn't, probably. Where Infantry could take hits for armour in the same way, maybe if they pass a LD test with a LD modifier related to the strength of the weapon - -1 if higher, -2 if double or more). Trying to represent combined arms warfare...

Part 2 - composition
Conscripts are the bare bones in blobs of 20-30, basic gear with flamers/grenade launchers (1 per 10). Would have their stats the same as regular guard.

Infantry squads are geared up but points don't change. 10 man squad includes vox, sarge has choice of pistol and chainsword or lasgun, and one guy has a flamer/grenade launcher.
Can give another squad member a special weapon, can also replace the basic special weapon with a different one.
In my dream world the special weapon list includes Heavy stubber. And in my fantasy world the missile launcher becomes a rocket launcher and again is a 1 man weapon.

A heavy weapon team can be added (taking the squad to 12 men for transport purposes), for the cost of the heavy weapon (crew are free).

Then if we really got into fantasy land I would scrap every stratagem (beyond the basic everyone gets), roll the strats into the datafaxes, make the orders speed up play (e.g. FRFSRF becomes lasguns auto hit) and remove the ranges for aura abilities if the model and recipient is near a vox.