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'm also happy Squats players are getting their models and rulesback. I did find it perplexing though since as OP mentioned Guard, Eldar and others have some very old models that are reaching drinking age.

While I love the breadth of 40k, there are certainly times where I think GW prioritizes expanding while forgetting to improve their existing products.

Guard is one of my favorite factions in the lore but I've never considered starting the faction due to the age of the models and only 2-3 regiments still get support.

Do IG need new units? Or do IG players just want them for the fun. I thought the current IG kits were pretty good

A whole new faction reset model wise, give a much higher chance to get a fun codex, then having a copy past codex updated to the current edition.

mrFickle wrote:
Do IG need new units? Or do IG players just want them for the fun. I thought the current IG kits were pretty good

Back in 2nd edition, then in 3rd with steel legion added the diversity of aesthetic was huge. You have to understand that some do not like the cadian or catachan look at all, hence why some would spend serious money on a forgeworld regiment instead.

If you are not playing in an environment where GW miniatures are the only accepted game pieces to be used for 40k, your enjoyment of the hobby can reach unknown heights when realising that GW is only a single manufacturer of miniatures one might use. After that it's as easy to use the products of other people or companies like it is for toilet paper, pencils, houseplants, well, any other product.

I prefer to play 40k with friends at our own places, not in a GW shop and I'm not interested in visiting tournaments. Regarding the usage of miniatures from other sources than GW, never ever had anyone of us looked at them and argumented against them, just because they were not sold by GW. It always was about price, design quality and if it would have any negative impact on game mechanics. Most important is the fun at the gaming table.

For infantry miniatures for Imperial Guard I like the ranges of Victorian Miniatures much better than GWs any time: https://victoriaminiatures.com/ . There is a wide variety of regiment designs to choose from and they look awesome. You can also order arms, torsos and other bits separately if you want to.

Since I started printing most miniatures by myself, I prefer these ones: https://www.myminifactory.com/users/RedMakers . The design quality is also pretty good and I love being able to print just what I need for my next game.

GW would have to publish awesome looking new guard models and sell them at a much lower price than the current ones to make me buy their then new product.

-------

I remember the first models I printed myself instead of buying GW ones, they were Vespids, and I printed these ones: https://www.myminifactory.com/object/3d-print-hl20x-heresylab-greater-god-vespid-5-miodels-193945.
My friends told me how glad they are that I decided against the aweful looking ones sold by GW. Another positive side effect was, that I was much more motivated to paint my beautiful self printed ones than I would have ever been to paint GW's ugly ones sold at a laughable price.

So if your playmates are fine with it, look outside of GW's range of models for your regiments. GW is just a completely unimportant company, interchangeable without a second thought like the one which's toilet paper you are buying. It's you who are important and your fun playing a game in your spare time.

Unpopular opinion, but it’s a genuine opinion.

Introducing Regiments Of Guard With Variant Uniforms Was A Mistake.

I mean…what did it really achieve? The differences were essentially purely cosmetic, and lead to multiple boxes for the same unit.

Moving into 3rd Ed, rather than two plastic sets, we got the same one done twice. It’s a needless division of resources for little tangible gain.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Moving into 3rd Ed, rather than two plastic sets, we got the same one done twice. It’s a needless division of resources for little tangible gain.

At the time that didn't feel like a plan as much as a tacit admission that the Catachans were a failed line, and IG required a regiment that was more universally-appealing to carry the faction. The Catachan models were a laughingstock immediately upon their release. I think if they'd been more well-regarded the Cadians might not have come along (or at least not as quickly).

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Unpopular opinion, but it’s a genuine opinion.

Introducing Regiments Of Guard With Variant Uniforms Was A Mistake.

I mean…what did it really achieve? The differences were essentially purely cosmetic, and lead to multiple boxes for the same unit.

Moving into 3rd Ed, rather than two plastic sets, we got the same one done twice. It’s a needless division of resources for little tangible gain.

They had access to different rules and gear, making it possible to build different armies. It also made it safer to play IG, because if the cadians with helmets were bad, there was a chance that the cadians with caps or with bare heads were not bad or less bad.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Unpopular opinion, but it’s a genuine opinion.

Introducing Regiments Of Guard With Variant Uniforms Was A Mistake.

I mean…what did it really achieve? The differences were essentially purely cosmetic, and lead to multiple boxes for the same unit.

Moving into 3rd Ed, rather than two plastic sets, we got the same one done twice. It’s a needless division of resources for little tangible gain.

Regiments of different worlds fits with the lore. Marketing wise its the same as different Marine models in that its trying to represent more of the lore in a way that the game can also generate profit with more potential sales.

GW still does it too, Warcry has generated what, 10 different humanoid chaos worshipping factions. Each one around 10 model kits with very unique designs, yet mechanically in the game they are all very similar with small stat variations and all bolt into the main Slaves to Darkness army.



For the IG GW could certainly get away with a single infantry platoon set per different faction. Throw some basic infantry, heavy weapons teams, command team (with optional parts that lets you make either generals or minor leaders), and a few decals and vehicle insignia parts (like they do for Genestealer Cults). One box that you can repeat buy to build up the core infantry from a different Imperial world.
Perhaps throw a second boxe in if you return Rough Riders to the game!



Thing is do the IG sell well enough to split sales across multiple customers that way. Marines do, IG might not. Also in a creative angle unless GW goes all out, you are basically introducing minor rule variations with model sets. Warcry gets away with this by being a separate game unto itself; with both separate sales and internal budgeting and such. The Marines don't need a separate game, meanwhile the IG might be hard to put into a separate game focused around just infantry cores.


It could be done, it might be done, it has been done in the past. That said I'd also say that I favour seeing GW actually updating existing model lines with better sculpts and adding new factions that are more entirely new. Ergo instead of an IG guardsman in 10 different uniforms; seeing different Imperial and Xenos forces that have much more distinct designs is better.




A good example is Eldar. Whilst GW could make 10 different Guardian forces for different craftworlds and even flesh them out to full armies; I'd rather see them release Exodites who have a totally unique design approach whilst still being part of the same race.
It's the same for the Imperial side as releasing something like the Ad Mech instead of the 10 different IG platoons from different worlds.

Or, as we have now, release the Squats, a new faction with a new and different design approach.

Marines it's same model with different paint job and maybe with upgrade kit. If ig players are happy with variant shoulders/helmets in　upgrade sprue that's fair comparison.

tneva82 wrote:
Marines it's same model with different paint job and maybe with upgrade kit. If ig players are happy with variant shoulders/helmets in　upgrade sprue that's fair comparison.

Having built some Brood Brothers, head swaps and accessories go a long way towards giving the army a different character. It's easy to see how traitor guard or gas-mask guard or baret guard could work with upgrade sprues. I'd want at least another option for a base model though, in addition to the cadians.

Dear OP, let me present you a model called Azrael.

This guy is the chapter master of one of the most popular chapters of the most popular faction. He saw a bit of play at competitive levels in 6/7th edition thanks to its soup abusing, and since the start of the 8th and for the next 5 years has been an auto include in 100% of the dark angels lists.

If there was a ranking for the most played model, he would rank very highly.

Now, since he is a very popular model in the poster boy faction, he will obviously have received some kind of update, right?

No! He is still using his old out of scale metal model, which looked ridiculous next to a tactical marine and is now pitiful next to a primaris.I think that only a couple of eldar models are older than it.

In light of this, I wouldn't keep my hopes up that the niche subfactions of a secondary faction will get redone.

Meh. GW could have done so much more with the Cadian and Catachan plastics but chose not to. I doubt we'll see more regiments, past what we have now and I doubt the majority of the old regiments will make a plastic return.

It's very sad. I'm a big fan of 3rd party models even if it's only for the look with out specific rules.

The new funk-o-pop squat faction looks horrible. I feel really bad for people who played squats a long time ago and got excited only to get these. Very unfortunate.

No reason to dwell on the Guard models though, GW will always do what ever the think is best for business and in this case it's as little as possible.

If you don't play at a GW I very much recommend 3rd party models.

Spoletta wrote:

No! He is still using his old out of scale metal model, which looked ridiculous next to a tactical marine and is now pitiful next to a primaris.

Azrael should look fine next to the modern firstborn line, that's been the same scale since 2nd ed.

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:

Every 1-2 years, release an army box of a different regiment,.

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAh holy gak, guard players are something else.

you REALLY wanna clog up the already packed release schedule with copypasted guard boxes? We already have fething marines doing that job, we don't need more

As a early to mid 90s gw stan i love all those guard regiments too! Maybe as suggested through kill team is the most feasible these days?

If you want to cry about which faction is more deserving, the faction that is getting updated is the one where 'being squatted' was coined to describe a faction no longer getting updates.

Wait your dang turn

 Altruizine wrote:

 Commissar Benny wrote:
I have been advocating for GW to make new models for the long forgotten regiments for decades & have been met with nothing but hostility & dismissal.

You should be dismissed for what you're asking for (although I'm sorry people were hostile to you).

It simply doesn't make sense for a game with this many factions and this many SKUs to produce multiple boxes that are effectively reskins of the same unit.

The Marine comparison is rickety (although there are too many marine kits and there should be fewer). A lot of chapters can fill out swathes of their roster with generic power-armoured kits. Imperial Guard cannot do this with infantry. You're asking for three kits per regiment, but without specifying which ones you think are worthy of being included, so I'm going to assume you want at least Cadians, Catachans, Death Korps, Mordians, Tallarns and Valhallans, and possibly Vostroyans, Steel Legion, and more, so we're talking about 18 to 24+ kits, which is equivalent to an entire faction's roster worth. That's an insane ask for the sake of playing dress-up.

actually you should be dismissed. With a game with this many skus what most factions model releases should be are reskins. That way they don't need to attempt to find every shrinking niche s for some of the largest model ranges.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:


HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAh holy gak, guard players are something else.

you REALLY wanna clog up the already packed release schedule with copypasted guard boxes? We already have fething marines doing that job, we don't need more

What are they suppose to be "clogged" with then, because they are going to be clogged with something. Of course someone who plays one faction is going to want their faction to be the ones getting the updates. And in the end what difference is it to them, if they don't play those factions, if DG or Necron get a full revamp or SoB and the space dwarf gets a plastic model line? Why shouldn't they want one or even multiple of those to be replaced with released for their own factions?

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:

Every 1-2 years, release an army box of a different regiment,.

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAh holy gak, guard players are something else.

you REALLY wanna clog up the already packed release schedule with copypasted guard boxes? We already have fething marines doing that job, we don't need more

Easy solution, stop releasing so much gak for marines. It'd be real nice to see more Guard variety, because really they should probably be the most varied of any faction.

Spoken as a marine player and not a guard player.

Yup. GW could and should do their core units and rules right first before dumping all sorts of IP grabbing 'models and rules' flotsam in the seimming pool. The game is a mess. Voltann is ... unnecessary. Imp Guard should be foundational. But... difficult to patent a starship trooper when it was already stolen. So now we get restartes with weird armor names - Mk 4 and 6 etc being a bit generic for IP legal gurus I would guess, and looking a bit too SW stormtrooper in the helmet area maybe - and factions with weird names and no updates including Guard who are now known as something that GW thinks they own, now, safe from being copied. Yeah, end times bs right here.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 warhead01 wrote:
Meh. GW could have done so much more with the Cadian and Catachan plastics but chose not to. I doubt we'll see more regiments, past what we have now and I doubt the majority of the old regiments will make a plastic return.

It's very sad. I'm a big fan of 3rd party models even if it's only for the look with out specific rules.

The new funk-o-pop squat faction looks horrible. I feel really bad for people who played squats a long time ago and got excited only to get these. Very unfortunate.

No reason to dwell on the Guard models though, GW will always do what ever the think is best for business and in this case it's as little as possible.

If you don't play at a GW I very much recommend 3rd party models.

So much this^^. Exalted.

Well GW is in the proces of , so called, doing their prime and core of the core frenchise which is the space marines. Replacing all the speeders, tanks heroes, unit options and adding a few new ones is going to take them a few editions though. For players it would be nice if they just dropped it in one go, but that is not how GW operates with marines. Do people remember that till 2.0, aka almost entire 8th ed, the intercessor squad leaders couldn't take melee weapons. And now with assault intercessors we are probably going to have to wait till 10 ed, to see them put on jet packs. RG have a special character with a jet pack, we know they exist, but no one has access to them. All marine characters in lore can drive outrider bikes, but in the rules they are chaplain only etc.

It could be a decade before we see a gravis armour Librarian or Chaplain.

I've never understood why GW hasn't released one modular kit for each IG regiment. They would make absolute bank off of it. But its actually why I got into 3D printing and now I have my own custom regiment and there are hundreds of full line proxy armies that cover everything from krieg to penal legion troops. Only issue with the army is I cant play it in a GW store but considering i play 99% of my warhammer not in a GW store and i can just bring one of my official armies there it really isn't a big deal

Asmodios wrote:
I've never understood why GW hasn't released one modular kit for each IG regiment. They would make absolute bank off of it.

I'll bet you that they've run the #s & concluded that they wouldn't make enough bank off of it.

Guard regiments were mostly just a cosmetic choice, though - outside of something like Krieg which had specific units and such. There has to be a limit too somewhere, there are/were at least 9 regiments that had models. Doing them all would be a bit much.

 warhead01 wrote:


The new funk-o-pop squat faction looks horrible. I feel really bad for people who played squats a long time ago and got excited only to get these. Very unfortunate.

Why do you think that?

Not a fan of the Squat models at all.

On the other hand, I’d start an IG project if they released plastic Tallarns or Vostroyans.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:
Guard regiments were mostly just a cosmetic choice, though - outside of something like Krieg which had specific units and such. There has to be a limit too somewhere, there are/were at least 9 regiments that had models. Doing them all would be a bit much.

 warhead01 wrote:


The new funk-o-pop squat faction looks horrible. I feel really bad for people who played squats a long time ago and got excited only to get these. Very unfortunate.

Why do you think that?

The sat around a table and said, squats are space dwarfs right? And developed this new thing which superficially almost but not quite resembles what some one who has only heard of squats might think they are.

Like Star Trek, tribbles are a thing in star trek, people "love" tribbles so Star Trek should have tribbles. It's shallow and superficial at best. They've created a knock off of their old concept and made this new thing which while having at best a little bit of a similarity doesn't or wont have the same rich flavor people remember. Those people who used to play squats back in 1st and early 2nd in this case.
It's cooperate laziness at best, which I am saying as it is not a statement of malice, no malice on the part of GW they are just reaching for the lowest common denominator doing what they think is best for business.
If you like these models then that's fine. I don't like what I have seen. It's perfectly acceptable to disagree. I see these and don't see squats. (Yes I know they have a different name now. so pointing that out would be pointless. Just as pointless as another posted being happy for squat players who haven't really existed in several editions. )
And I don't think it was an easy decision as far as what they should look like because I have read that people disliked the old Squats so GW had to figure that out as well. But I see these and am les than impressed but I do see a 9th edition army. I'm just not a fan.
I hope this was close to an answer.


I think that GW's AoS steam Punk dwrves look more the part than these new models as far as fitting into 40K. Art has this "cheater word", aesthetic. As much as I don't like that word it is applicable.
I had an Art teacher and this was her favorite thing in the world, we did not get along very well.


Edited due to fat fingers and drain brammage.

As others have said, I think GW could have done better with Guard, but thinking there should be 24 or so kits to represent the same 3 units seems a bit crazy. This is not normal with Marines at all (never mind anyone else). You can buy some very expensive shoulder pads if you want - but there are not to my knowledge "White Scars Intercessors", "Raven Guard Aggressors" or "Imperial Fist Bladeguard Veterans" etc.

There are probably ways GW could partially roll this out - Kill Team being the obvious one. Maybe a force in Necromunda etc. But ultimately, its unclear we need a dozen versions of "guy with lasgun".

 warhead01 wrote:

I think that GW's AoS steam Punk dwrves look more the part than these new models as far as fitting into 40K. Art has this "cheater word", Ascetics. As much as I don't like that word it is applicable.
I had an Art teacher and this was her favorite thing in the world, we did not get along very well.

Tastes in looks put aside for a second, how many actual squat players can there be still play w40k? With SoB the army was rare, part metal, part recast and at least it had rules since when ever the last time squats had their rules. On top of that GW people said that they didn't like how the squats turned out to be, doesn't matter if they had or didn't have fans. They changed the esthetic and that is it. A new army, same way necron or DG got a big model line alongside a full army reset. GW couldn't pull a 1ksons or marine style update with the army, because in GW eyes it had no models, no rules and nothing to copy paste from to build a 9th or 10th rule set.

 warhead01 wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:
Guard regiments were mostly just a cosmetic choice, though - outside of something like Krieg which had specific units and such. There has to be a limit too somewhere, there are/were at least 9 regiments that had models. Doing them all would be a bit much.

 warhead01 wrote:


The new funk-o-pop squat faction looks horrible. I feel really bad for people who played squats a long time ago and got excited only to get these. Very unfortunate.

Why do you think that?

The sat around a table and said, squats are space dwarfs right? And developed this new thing which superficially almost but not quite resembles what some one who has only heard of squats might think they are.

Like Star Trek, tribbles are a thing in star trek, people "love" tribbles so Star Trek should have tribbles. It's shallow and superficial at best. They've created a knock off of their old concept and made this new thing which while having at best a little bit of a similarity doesn't or wont have the same rich flavor people remember. Those people who used to play squats back in 1st and early 2nd in this case.
It's cooperate laziness at best, which I am saying as it is not a statement of malice, no malice on the part of GW they are just reaching for the lowest common denominator doing what they think is best for business.
If you like these models then that's fine. I don't like what I have seen. It's perfectly acceptable to disagree. I see these and don't see squats. (Yes I know they have a different name now. so pointing that out would be pointless. Just as pointless as another posted being happy for squat players who haven't really existed in several editions. )
And I don't think it was an easy decision as far as what they should look like because I have read that people disliked the old Squats so GW had to figure that out as well. But I see these and am les than impressed but I do see a 9th edition army. I'm just not a fan.
I hope this was close to an answer.


I think that GW's AoS steam Punk dwrves look more the part than these new models as far as fitting into 40K. Art has this "cheater word", Ascetics. As much as I don't like that word it is applicable.
I had an Art teacher and this was her favorite thing in the world, we did not get along very well.

I do agree, really. I think the classic sci-fi aesthetic is neat, but the lack of Space Dwarf side of them (or something in its place) visible on the models really makes them feel like they're missing something. The high-tech DAoT stuff is cool, but as Space Dwarfs they don't really work too well, while their art and lore seems like it does a far better job with it.

Karol wrote:

 warhead01 wrote:

I think that GW's AoS steam Punk dwrves look more the part than these new models as far as fitting into 40K. Art has this "cheater word", Ascetics. As much as I don't like that word it is applicable.
I had an Art teacher and this was her favorite thing in the world, we did not get along very well.

Tastes in looks put aside for a second, how many actual squat players can there be still play w40k? With SoB the army was rare, part metal, part recast and at least it had rules since when ever the last time squats had their rules. On top of that GW people said that they didn't like how the squats turned out to be, doesn't matter if they had or didn't have fans. They changed the esthetic and that is it. A new army, same way necron or DG got a big model line alongside a full army reset. GW couldn't pull a 1ksons or marine style update with the army, because in GW eyes it had no models, no rules and nothing to copy paste from to build a 9th or 10th rule set.

Original Squats weren't removed for their general aesthetic or the idea of being Space Dwarfs. They were removed because "Silly bikers named Squats" was what they chose as the main theme for Space Dwarfs, which didn't do the idea justice and turned them into a joke.

They already had an updated Squat (2, really) in Necromunda that was a great update without losing the original aesthetic to a significant extent.