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.

Hate to sound like a petulant child, but thanks to those who couldn't stay anywhere near the topic in the LAST IG info thread, I've taken the liberty of putting up a new thread for people to post any further romours or info they come across for IG. Needless to say, I'm really looking for something to crop up, but no need for lunchtime data. Well, anyone care to start us off, or will this thread too sink down to the ashheap of history?

I think you're in the same boat as those of us eagerly awaiting more news on Dark Eldar, Space Wolves and Necrons. Sadly, I think we may already know all there is to know. Probably won't be until after Christmas that we hear anything new on any of these armies.

There is no new news. When there is people will post new threads about it. The last topic went off topic specifically because the topic had no where to go without more info that wasn't coming.

Eventually we will find out more stuff. But if even half those rumors are true then fun times lay ahead.

Yeah, no kidding. Still, I can't wait til your damn roach army gets re-written in the next Cron-dex, Big H. Those things are crazy as-is. Gimme a call, I'm in town finally.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/223222.page

look here for ig

*indicated LordBoJangles post*
Always important to remember, lasguns do not suck, everything else is just really tough. Taking a realistic perspective (I know...blah), lasguns are fine from the perspective that most imperial guard combat would be against other imperial guard that have gone traitor.

I'm just trying to stop the ever escalating hyperbole regarding the lasgun. How will anyone ever take an army seriously if everyone gives it more ridicule than it deserves?

Hopefully by playing against it a few times themselves and making a decision based on experience as oppossed to hearsay.

I'm eagerly anticipating the new Guard. Squadrons of Russes and Mechanized IG beckon.

CK

The promise of a retooled Leman Russ kit (with suspension, I hope) is the only thing keeping me from buying an Apoc tank deal right now, just to have it all ready to play by codex time.

Russ will most likely only get a redone turret:

I'm guessing those are for the baneblade not the russ

Turret's not right for the Baneblade. That's definately a Leman Russ turret.

Hooray for the Plasma Russ! All hail the Plasma Russ!

We might be getting a redone Russ kit with parts for the Vanilla, Demolisher and Executioner (plasma version), or this could be one of those GW moments where they create something with CAD just to see if they can do it. The big gun next to the new Russ turret is a heavy mortar, so there might be a new Griffon or some other sort of artillery support that makes its introduction come May.

If the CAD drawings are for real, then, I'd expect:
- combination Demolisher / Executioner kit similar to Crusader / Redeemer. Functionally, I can't see the attraction of the Executioner, as the Demolisher handles AP2 *very* well, along with having higher Armor for Assault duties. Now, if the Executioner were changed to be R48" S7 AP2 Heavy 1/Large Blast, then that would be useful, but it'd still need the Demolisher's AV14/13/11 armor to compete.

- redone combination Basilisk / Griffon (negates cover saves) kit. Conceptually, this is similar to the distinction between longer-range, higher-S Baneblade and negate cover Hellhammer.

Just give the Griffon access to the shell types as seen with the heavy mortar entry in Imperial Armour 5, something for everyone.

Yeah. Infernus Shells in regular 40K. Totally not broken there.

A plastic Griffon would be interesting... no... I have an arty Company already. I don't need more... I don't need more...

*takes deep breaths*

BYE

You might not NEED more, but you can always GET more!

HBMC, an addict ALWAYS _needs_ their next fix. Junkies never say "I've had enough heroin, thanks."

BrookM, had that pic already been posted elsewhere? I am _very_ interested in that DE-looking splinter carbine/shuricat (or whatever it is).

And lots of spare Russ turrets floating around are always nice.

I keep reposting those pictures until people stop forgetting about them.

OMG! There's a plastic Trukk kit coming out!

Thanks for the scoop Brook!





BYE

H.B.M.C. wrote:Yeah. Infernus Shells in regular 40K. Totally not broken there.

A plastic Griffon would be interesting... no... I have an arty Company already. I don't need more... I don't need more...

*takes deep breaths*

BYE

I'll settle for the same options a whirlwind has, especially the ignore cover one.

Savnock wrote:BrookM, had that pic already been posted elsewhere? I am _very_ interested in that DE-looking splinter carbine/shuricat (or whatever it is).

Oooooh! I had dismissed that as an Eldar Shuriken Catapult until you drew my eyes back to it and I saw the sketch to the left of it with all the blades affixed. That has got to be new DE stuff! Very exciting.

The talk of a griffon does make you wonder what they will do to differentiate it as much as possible from the Basilisk. In the past it was indirect fire. I guess the ammo options could always be the route GW take, one that ignores cover and one that causes "go to ground" would be the easy things to do. With the idea that artillery will be represented, it will be interesting to see how true artillery units get differentiated from self propelled gun and mortar.

Just thinking here...

Whats the betting that Hellhounds will force the enemy to fall back again? Can't remember if it does at the moment, but it certainly used to!

aka_mythos wrote:The talk of a griffon does make you wonder what they will do to differentiate it as much as possible from the Basilisk.

Being really cheap was good enough. The Griffon was a very cheap infantry support weapon, and did a good job of it too. People thought it inoffensive, so mostly ignored it, to their own peril of course. I like the Griffon because you get exactly what you pay for.

BYE

aka_mythos wrote:The talk of a griffon does make you wonder what they will do to differentiate it as much as possible from the Basilisk.

In the past it was indirect fire. I guess the ammo options could always be the route GW take, one that ignores cover and one that causes "go to ground" would be the easy things to do.

With the idea that artillery will be represented, it will be interesting to see how true artillery units get differentiated from self propelled gun and mortar.

Griffon will be cheap, indirect, and ignore cover. If it's available in squadrons for battery barrage, it'll do just fine.

Artillery is cheap, fragile but diffuse, and move-or-fire. That's different from a Griffon.

I don't think I posted this here (I wasn't actually signed up as a member here at the time but did lurk) but when I was able to chat to Robin Cruddace about the Guard Codex at GD UK, he couldn't tell me an awful lot at the time (he said that things were far from confirmed then)did give me the following piece of information :

As of the time of GD UK, he said there were rules for 21 different tanks inside the Guard Codex. When I asked how they were able to fit that many in, he just said "The book will be big". I asked if it was comparable to the Marine Codex, and he couldn't say.

Now personally I took 21 tanks as meaning 21 different variants (i.e most of the Forge World variants becoming Codex-legal), and taking that number into consideration, and leaving out FW super heavies, as well as "impractical" vehicles for a standard 40K game such as the Atlas or Trojan, that still leaves room for 1 or 2 new variants (which ties into the "four-barrelled Russ turret" seen in the rulebook).

Although I couldn't get any more specifics out of him, I did ask him about how he personally saw the IG as an army and what sort of direction he felt they should go in. And in his opinion, the four main points of an IG army were :

- Lots of men
- Lots of tanks
- Vast firepower
- Attrition-style warfare

That's basically all I could get out of him myself..I have heard that other people who come to forums such as this (Col. Gravis for example) also got to chat to him and get some other info from him (to be honest I was stunned that I was actually able to get as many answers as I did, plus I was watching my friend suddenly get this HUGE grin appearing on his face as he was chatting to Phil Kelly about his ideas on the Wolves), so maybe some of those guys can add more if they haven't already?

Hopefully he understands that 'Attrition Style Warfare' and 'Kill Points' are mutually exclusive unless something is done about how many KP Guard Squads are worth.

BYE

Loads of tanks, men and guns *is* what guard is all about. I really hope GW is serious about this.

Kill Points would not be that hard to fix. Even something like "IG infantry squads only generate 0.5 Kill Points" would go a long way in making us a more viable army.