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:

So basically, nothing except "it lets me run skew lists easier"?

Why should anyone need to have more than 18 frigging infantry squads in a game?

It’s called running an Infantry Company, and it’s very lore friendly.

If I could fit 18 infantry squads in one battalion, that’s 6 saved CP and about 200 saved points in HQ tax.

Especially if the rumours of GW nerfing starting CP is true. Apparently you’ll start with 6 and get 2 CP each turn. So if you still wanted to play pure infantry armies soon, you’ll have 0CP.

I’ve also played pure infantry conscript armies competitively. At least 300+ models. You want to say 180 is too much? Lol.

So again, nothing except "it lets me run skew lists easier"?

I said nothing about model count. I simply think it ridiculous to pretend that there is some kind of necessity that should be catered to for running 18 infantry squads in a single battalion...especially when company sizes are variably sized in the number of platoons they feature, which in and of themselves vary from 2 to 6 squads each.

Companies are 2-6 Platoons of Infantry.
Platoons are 2 to 6 squads of 10 Guardsmen each.

Companies also feature a command platoon, so one entire platoon slot is devoted to support elements like heavy weapon and special weapon squads.

 Kanluwen wrote:

..."Invalidating significant portions of a collection" is literally nothing to be acting all indignant about, because spoiler alert: they're doing it to other people too.

It's absolutely something to be indignant about. We all have a right to be mad when armies get invalidated. I'm not sure why you think that we don't.

I happen to 100% know that there is no issue with doing these changes on Guard, because I've been around long enough to have had multiple weapon and armor options removed from characters.

The only people this would be a problem for are metachasers who built their armies based on netlists. And I have zero issues with inconveniencing them. I could use the bits sales to finance another project.

So everyone who chose a loadout with embedded Heavy Weapons Teams or Infantry Squads with Plasma Rifles is automatically a "metachaser"? News to me. Also, we're not talking about characters here - we're talking about units that end up being the backbone of many armies. It's still bad when characters lose options, but unless you're building an entire army around a beatstick, the impact on the rest of the force is likely to be less than if you change options on backbone units like Infantry Squads.

What issue is solved by letting plasma guns be the constant, 100% de facto choice for a squad's special weapon choice?

Because that's where the issue sits:
Special Weapons is a broader category than our dumpsterfire of a book pretends it is--and Heavy Weapon Teams don't belong in infantry squads, period.

Plasma guns being the de facto choice is an issue of statlines, though. You're not even proposing removing them from Infantry Squads, just that they only go on the Sergeant, so unless you mess around with the other special weapons you're still going to have people taking them in Infantry Squads. And why don't HWTs belong in Infantry Squads?

Seriously?

This isn't rocket science. It creates a non-interactive playstyle. It also creates more problems than it should--and it NEVER should have been allowed to be a thing in the first damn place.

So do all no-LOS weapons. And you're going to have to explain what those "more problems" are, because the only gripes I can recall regarding Mortars specifically was Heavy Weapon Squads with all Mortars being a pain in the dick to dig out...pre Ro3...because the Mortars were only 5 points each...

If Ryza's Skitarii Legions can't take 3 plasma calivers in a single squad, why should "planets supplied by Ryza" have such a crazy high supply of them to be tossing them out to basic troopers in basic infantry squads?

Because remember: that's what effectively happens. You replace a BASIC Guardsman with a Plasma Gunner. At least putting it on a Sergeant or an Officer makes a modicum of sense, given that they're usually a veteran.

That's a question for the people who wrote the AdMech book. Also, recall the "Sharpshooter" entry from the 3.5e Regimental rules:

"...The Sharpshooter ability has no effect when firing plasma weapons (which few men survive using long enough to master)..."
There's already high turn-over for gunners for all special and heavy weapons, and doubly so for plasma rifles since (eg) meltaguns don't randomly cook off and burn the user alive. That's absolutely something to be given to a basic Guardsman.

I've discussed it far, far more than I should have had to...Or you could read literally any of the bloody treatises I've wrote on the subject over the years.

I probably already have. I lurk IG threads on the regular. I'm not wasting my time digging through years of threads and tens of thousands of posts just to refresh my memory. If you can't be arsed to summarize or restate your arguments, that's a you problem. We live in the distant sci-fi future, there's plenty of ways for you to strike a middle ground between "writing the whole thing out every time" and "handwaving your burden of proof as already met...somewhere else".

Don't listen to Kan for anything regarding rules. He thinks the reason Skitarii got the "one of each weapon" treatment was because of people spamming Plasma Calivers in Ranger squads LOL

 Kanluwen wrote:
So again, nothing except "it lets me run skew lists easier"?

So, using your logic I shouldn’t be able to take a tank company either? Cause that’s a skew list. Can’t take a mechanised company either, cause that’s a skew list. Can’t desire to play a super-heavy tank company of Baneblades, because that’s a skew list.

Sorry, I thought you were a long term Guard fan. The lore clearly has specialised regiments of infantry or armour only units. That’s exactly what an infantry regiment or a tank regiment is.

I said nothing about model count. I simply think it ridiculous to pretend that there is some kind of necessity that should be catered to for running 18 infantry squads in a single battalion...especially when company sizes are variably sized in the number of platoons they feature, which in and of themselves vary from 2 to 6 squads each.

Companies are 2-6 Platoons of Infantry.
Platoons are 2 to 6 squads of 10 Guardsmen each.

Companies also feature a command platoon, so one entire platoon slot is devoted to support elements like heavy weapon and special weapon squads.

Not if you go by pre-5th edition platoons. Cause from memory you absolutely hate that book anyway. Prior to 5th edition platoons were simply one platoon command squad and 2-5 infantry squads. With special weapon and heavy weapon squad units being seperate.

Your obviously not fielding an entire company of infantry, but you’re certainly fielding more than a single platoon worth of Guardsmen. What, you want me to say half company? Is that how specific I have to be.

Jarms48 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
So again, nothing except "it lets me run skew lists easier"?

So, using your logic I shouldn’t be able to take a tank company either? Cause that’s a skew list. Can’t take a mechanised company either, cause that’s a skew list. Can’t desire to play a super-heavy tank company of Baneblades, because that’s a skew list.

Skew lists aren't a bad thing, or so I was told about my Mor'phann Idoneth built around Namarti. They just are a thing that shouldn't necessarily be catered to in the army building.

Sorry, I thought you were a long term Guard fan. The lore clearly has specialised regiments of infantry or armour only units. That’s exactly what an infantry regiment or a tank regiment is.

Sure, but even Infantry Regiments usually had some organic support in the form of Chimeras, Sentinels, and Heavy Weapons Platoons.

It's right there in the 3.5 dex big ol' Regimental Spread.

I said nothing about model count. I simply think it ridiculous to pretend that there is some kind of necessity that should be catered to for running 18 infantry squads in a single battalion...especially when company sizes are variably sized in the number of platoons they feature, which in and of themselves vary from 2 to 6 squads each.

Companies are 2-6 Platoons of Infantry.
Platoons are 2 to 6 squads of 10 Guardsmen each.

Companies also feature a command platoon, so one entire platoon slot is devoted to support elements like heavy weapon and special weapon squads.

Not if you go by pre-5th edition platoons. Cause from memory you absolutely hate that book anyway. Prior to 5th edition platoons were simply one platoon command squad and 2-5 infantry squads. With special weapon and heavy weapon squad units being seperate.

Codex: Imperial Guard, Doctrines Edition wrote:
HQ choice:
Command Platoon
Consists of a Command Squad and 0-5 Support Squads. Support Squads can be Anti-Tank Squads, Mortar Squads, Fire Support Squads, Special Weapons Squads, and Sentinel Squadrons, as listed below. No more than two Support squads of each type (or one in the case of Sentinel squadrons) may be used.

It's literally right there. Companies featured a Command Platoon.

Oh, and don't forget that Heavy Weapons Platoons were a thing too...featuring just three support squads and a command squad.


And bonus points:
MORTAR SQUADS WERE THEIR OWN THING.

Your obviously not fielding an entire company of infantry, but you’re certainly fielding more than a single platoon worth of Guardsmen. What, you want me to say half company? Is that how specific I have to be.

No, you just need to stop being so wildly inconsistent with what you want.

And to stop pretending that platoons actually did anything outside of let Guard ignore the old FOCs.

 waefre_1 wrote:
It's absolutely something to be indignant about. We all have a right to be mad when armies get invalidated. I'm not sure why you think that we don't.

Because they did it to his army, and if he has to suffer, everyone else should.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Sure, but even Infantry Regiments usually had some organic support in the form of Chimeras, Sentinels, and Heavy Weapons Platoons.

It's right there in the 3.5 dex big ol' Regimental Spread.

And did I say they couldn’t be included? No.

I’m purely talking about Infantry Platoons. 18 infantry squads is 1080 points right now, still plenty of points left over for other units.

HQ choice:
Command Platoon
Consists of a Command Squad and 0-5 Support Squads. Support Squads can be Anti-Tank Squads, Mortar Squads, Fire Support Squads, Special Weapons Squads, and Sentinel Squadrons, as listed below. No more than two Support squads of each type (or one in the case of Sentinel squadrons) may be used.
It's literally right there. Companies featured a Command Platoon.

Oh, and don't forget that Heavy Weapons Platoons were a thing too...featuring just three support squads and a command squad.
And bonus points:
MORTAR SQUADS WERE THEIR OWN THING.

Again, purely taking about Infantry Platoons. I know these existed.

I’d even be happy if HWS’s were split back into Fire Support, Anti-Tank, and Mortar Squads again. It means you have the potential to field 9 rather than 3 HWS’s and it prevents spamming 1 type of weapon.

No, you just need to stop being so wildly inconsistent with what you want.

And to stop pretending that platoons actually did anything outside of let Guard ignore the old FOCs.

I’ve never been inconsistent. I’ve been saying Platoons need to come back ever since 9th edition changed detachments to cost CP instead of give you CP.

I’m not pretending, that’s literally the reason they need to come back.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 waefre_1 wrote:
It's absolutely something to be indignant about. We all have a right to be mad when armies get invalidated. I'm not sure why you think that we don't.

Because they did it to his army, and he has to suffer, everyone else should.

To be fair you're a dirty WAAC player if you don't agree to GW's terrible unit entries. Obviously Sword Brethren got theirs because people were spamming Power Mauls.

Jarms48 wrote:

It’s called running an Infantry Company, and it’s very lore friendly.

If I could fit 18 infantry squads in one battalion, that’s 6 saved CP and about 200 saved points in HQ tax.

Isn't an Infantry Company just 9 infantry squads? So an Infantry Company with attached support is entirely doable in just 1 Brigade Detachment and nothing else. I can't see why would anyone need to put specifically 18 infantry squads specifically in 1 Battalion Detachment.

 AtoMaki wrote:

Isn't an Infantry Company just 9 infantry squads? So an Infantry Company with attached support is entirely doable in just 1 Brigade Detachment and nothing else. I can't see why would anyone need to put specifically 18 infantry squads specifically in 1 Battalion Detachment.

This is a bad example of GW not understanding how large their own forces are. Here’s a more accurate one.



Which would be around 300 Guardsmen, not including any of the HQ or support units.

Also this one:



Which has about 250 Guardsmen, not including everything else.



This is about 600 Guardsmen.

But then again:

“The size and composition of Imperial Guard regiments is not standardised across the Imperium; the number of individual Guardsmen alone can vary enormously between regiments, with some only a few hundred strong at founding-strength, whilst others possess tens of thousands of fighting troops.[1] This non-standardisation is reflected in the organisation of Imperial Guard companies, which can vary in numbers and composition just as much as regiments.”

Jarms48 wrote:
This is a bad example of GW not understanding how large their own forces are.

Hey, how can you tell? Maybe that's exactly how it is supposed to be and the others are wrong. So yeah, a lore-accurate Infantry Company is still doable right now, no need to get stuck on squeezing 18 infantry squads into 1 Battalion.

Cause the 3 others are all GW lore as well. I could share more examples too. 90 Guardsmen is ungodly small, that’s smaller than a SM company.

Jarms48 wrote:
Cause the 3 others are all GW lore as well. I could share more examples too.

So? How can you tell which is right and which is wrong? Which one GW has intended as the most lore-accurate version? Maybe they intended the 9 squads as THE most lore-accurate version and the others are just "whatever, many regiments many numbers" and such.

Jarms48 wrote:
90 Guardsmen is ungodly small, that’s smaller than a SM company.

If realistic scale was a consideration then things would look VERY differently. 90 guardsmen for a company. That's what GW says so that's what it is supposed to be. End of story. Squeeze them into a Brigade and call it a day, there is your perfectly lore-friendly Infantry Company. Is it ridiculously small if you think about it? Sure. Should you think about it? Hell no, unless you want a headache.

Honestly, you guys getting caught up in trying to make sense of things is kind of hilarious. Whether I can fit 18 infantry squads into a Battalion feels like a rather abstract problem when my guardsmen are still carrying crappy Plasma Guns instead of awesome Plasma Chadblaster Megafusils like everyone else. If you catch my drift.

 AtoMaki wrote:

If realistic scale was a consideration then things would look VERY differently. 90 guardsmen for a company. That's what GW says so that's what it is supposed to be. End of story. Squeeze them into a Brigade and call it a day, there is your perfectly lore-friendly Infantry Company. Is it ridiculously small if you think about it? Sure. Should you think about it? Hell no, unless you want a headache.

That’s entirely my point. Each source I gave is a GW one. Each one is drastically different. So they clearly contradict themselves all the time.

Jarms48 wrote:
That’s entirely my point. Each source I gave is a GW one. Each one is drastically different. So they clearly contradict themselves all the time.

Yeah, so no reason to fuss about fitting 18 infantry squads into a Battalion, There is no point. It is not a fluffy Infantry Company or anything like that, it is just you trying to push the envelope with the FOC for no discernable reason whatsoever. While the real problem (the infantry squad being trash and apparently people wanting it to be trashier) goes completely unaddressed.

How do you even get that? Pure infantry is lore friendly. Lol.

Jarms48 wrote:
How do you even get that? Pure infantry is lore friendly. Lol.

Then take your 18 infantry squads in 3 Battalions and be done with it.

Regarding the very first post: the proposed change to the Grenade Launcher would make it pretty good though. So if all Specials stay at the same price it would likely really turn it into a real alternative for plasma/melta, especially at range >12".

Not sure about turning flamers into heavy weapons though. Sounds a bit weird on first glance and I didn't have the impression that guardsmen advancing and flaming units are a problem that would have to be adressed that way

Jarms48 wrote:
How do you even get that? Pure infantry is lore friendly. Lol.

"Lore friendly" does not mean "should fit in a Battalion detachment" though, correct?

You can still fit 126 Guardsmen into a Battalion:
6 Infantry Squads
3 Veteran Squads
3 Special Weapon Squads
3 Heavy Weapon Squads

129 if you include all the Company Commanders you can. One of the things that seems to constantly get glossed over when making comparisons to the Platoon era is that we also had two other Troop choices(Armored Fist Squad and Conscript Platoons) that required you to take an Infantry Platoon to unlock...meaning it opened up two more units by being a kind of compulsory tax that most other armies did not feature at the time.

Yeah, you just get rid of that tax. Our troop choices should be:

- Conscripts
- Infantry Platoon
- Veterans
- Kasrkins

MT Only:
- Scions

Jarms48 wrote:
Yeah, you just get rid of that tax. Our troop choices should be:

- Conscripts
- Infantry Platoon
- Veterans
- Kasrkins

MT Only:
- Scions

-Conscripts
-Infantry Platoon
-Veterans
-Grenadiers

Please don't lock grenadiers to Cadian only! To be honest, I think grenadiers should be an elite choice for Guard, or an upgrade for veterans.

I do miss penal legionaries, but these could be represented by a conscript option for explosive collars or something.

 Haighus wrote:

Please don't lock grenadiers to Cadian only! To be honest, I think grenadiers should be an elite choice for Guard, or an upgrade for veterans.

I do miss penal legionaries, but these could be represented by a conscript option for explosive collars or something.

I only say Kasrkins cause that's what the model is. I'm hoping they're generic grenadiers too.

Personally, I'd be happy either way. Elites makes sense, but it's a very crowded spot currently. Troops makes sense, as there's entire regiments of kasrkins or grenadiers. Called heavy infantry regiments.

I think Penals could easily exist again, just make it a stratagem for Conscripts like White Shields.