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.

It's a well established fact that heavy weapons squads are weak units. Low leadership with low model counts sees them running off the board pretty frequently, with only 1 casualty forcing a check. My proposed solution is to offer these models a gun shield save, since they actually are modeled with gun shields. At 3+, it would mean that they could handle small arms fire pretty well but would fold to heavier weapons like an actual gun shield. What do you guys think?

Alternative option: give the squad a sergeant for some leadership 8, and allow them to take additional Guardsmen with las guns like Devestators can take extra bolter marines.

Leadership 8 with a 4+ cover save from front arc shots

In my upcoming IG fandex, I gave them +1 T, decreased their cost by 5 ppm and gave them the Combined Squad special rule. So they can fare better against small arms fire and high-strength weapons (only dedicated AT weapons can ID them) and they can have extra meat around with Combined Squad.

They also gained the flakk missile, assault cannon and the multi-melta as a heavy weapon option. And their platoon can take all kinds of funky upgrades (like Tank Hunters, and the old Sharpshooters) that could potentially increase their efficiency.

 creeping-deth87 wrote:
It's a well established fact that heavy weapons squads are weak units. Low leadership with low model counts sees them running off the board pretty frequently, with only 1 casualty forcing a check. My proposed solution is to offer these models a gun shield save, since they actually are modeled with gun shields. At 3+, it would mean that they could handle small arms fire pretty well but would fold to heavier weapons like an actual gun shield. What do you guys think?

Alternative option: give the squad a sergeant for some leadership 8, and allow them to take additional Guardsmen with las guns like Devestators can take extra bolter marines.

You don't understand the finer concepts of "Alpha Strike', do you?

 Scipio Africanus wrote:

 creeping-deth87 wrote:
It's a well established fact that heavy weapons squads are weak units. Low leadership with low model counts sees them running off the board pretty frequently, with only 1 casualty forcing a check. My proposed solution is to offer these models a gun shield save, since they actually are modeled with gun shields. At 3+, it would mean that they could handle small arms fire pretty well but would fold to heavier weapons like an actual gun shield. What do you guys think?

Alternative option: give the squad a sergeant for some leadership 8, and allow them to take additional Guardsmen with las guns like Devestators can take extra bolter marines.

You don't understand the finer concepts of "Alpha Strike', do you?

No more than you understand the finer points of argumentation apparently.

To everyone else thanks for your input so far, I especially like giving them combined squad.

 creeping-deth87 wrote:

No more than you understand the finer points of argumentation apparently.

To everyone else thanks for your input so far, I especially like giving them combined squad.

I never gave an argument, I merely asked a question. Without actually hearing an argument from me, you can't say whether or not I understand the finer points on argument. I could give you a text book to read on informal argumentation logic, I've found it really useful. What I am, instead, is rather glib. You're talking about an army which has lots of really pleasant resources up its sleves, that you feel is weaker.

Rather than simply looking for better ways to run them, or a unit that could efficiently replace them, you say "Let's make them better."

You could combine squad them, but this would reduce their efficiency, not increase it - if they can't shoot multiple targets, they can't doo too much.

I suppose you could fit them with infantry squads, but I can just see veteran squads doing fat better.

Heavy weapons teams are not weak. I've played guard for 4 years and they have always yielded good results. even if they do retreat, its not before they have cracked open a dozen metal boxes. I think you need to use them more flexibly, and think about some, hmmm, cover saves?! and if they really do get shot, then it ties up the enemy for enough time for me to crack some shots with my Leman Russes.

Congratulations, you made an actually meaningful post! Now we can have this wonderful thing called... a discussion!

To address your points: firstly, the only 'better way to run' a heavy weapons squad is to take a lord commissar for the leadership 10 bubble, which does a fine job of mitigating their leadership problems but costs at least 70 points to babysit a unit that's not terribly points efficient in the first place, and he does nothing for their survivability.

Secondly, making an entirely new unit to replace them is beyond the scope of this thread. I wanted to fix something, not replace it.

Thirdly, your last 2 sentences betray how little you know of the guard codex. Heavy weapons squads with combined squad would not be used to make bigger heavy weapons squads (which would make them an even bigger glass cannon), it would mean you could attach them to infantry squads which is much better than the current system where you can only field 1 heavy weapon per squad.

I'd say a 4+ armour due to the weapons shield would probably fix it. After all, all normal weapons (e.g. bolters or pulse rifles) are AP5 or worse, but it wouldn't give them such a big save that they required anti-tank weaponry to take them out.

General Annoyance wrote:
Heavy weapons teams are not weak. I've played guard for 4 years and they have always yielded good results. even if they do retreat, its not before they have cracked open a dozen metal boxes. I think you need to use them more flexibly, and think about some, hmmm, cover saves?! and if they really do get shot, then it ties up the enemy for enough time for me to crack some shots with my Leman Russes.

Heavy weapons squads are incredibly weak, this is a pretty commonly accepted fact among guard players for the reasons already stated. Cover saves BARELY increase their survivability, they are not a solution to all the problems that unit has. And I seriously have to question your opponents' target priority if they're using the same weapons to kill your Russes as your heavy weapons squads.

 p_gray99 wrote:
I'd say a 4+ armour due to the weapons shield would probably fix it. After all, all normal weapons (e.g. bolters or pulse rifles) are AP5 or worse, but it wouldn't give them such a big save that they required anti-tank weaponry to take them out.

this seems reasonable, but the points cost of the teams will have to shoot up. after all, carapace is amazing by IG standards, and is only given to vets. cover however is a much better concept without spending more points


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 creeping-deth87 wrote:

General Annoyance wrote:
Heavy weapons teams are not weak. I've played guard for 4 years and they have always yielded good results. even if they do retreat, its not before they have cracked open a dozen metal boxes. I think you need to use them more flexibly, and think about some, hmmm, cover saves?! and if they really do get shot, then it ties up the enemy for enough time for me to crack some shots with my Leman Russes.

Heavy weapons squads are incredibly weak, this is a pretty commonly accepted fact among guard players for the reasons already stated. Cover saves BARELY increase their survivability, they are not a solution to all the problems that unit has. And I seriously have to question your opponents' target priority if they're using the same weapons to kill your Russes as your heavy weapons squads.

I just don't think you have played them enough to see that they are pretty useful in a good old ruin. and I never said that they use the same weapons on my russes, I said they give me the chance for my russes to bust them open, like every reasonable IG general does.

 creeping-deth87 wrote:
Congratulations, you made an actually meaningful post! Now we can have this wonderful thing called... a discussion!

To address your points: firstly, the only 'better way to run' a heavy weapons squad is to take a lord commissar for the leadership 10 bubble, which does a fine job of mitigating their leadership problems but costs at least 70 points to babysit a unit that's not terribly points efficient in the first place, and he does nothing for their survivability.

Secondly, making an entirely new unit to replace them is beyond the scope of this thread. I wanted to fix something, not replace it.

Thirdly, your last 2 sentences betray how little you know of the guard codex. Heavy weapons squads with combined squad would not be used to make bigger heavy weapons squads (which would make them an even bigger glass cannon), it would mean you could attach them to infantry squads which is much better than the current system where you can only field 1 heavy weapon per squad.

It's a bit hypocritical to be sarcastic now.

A better way to run heavy weapon squads is to spam them. if your opponent is ignoring your Infantry in favour of your HWS, because the HWS hold objectives and kill their toys, then you still have the infantry to hold the objective.

Run 3x infantry squads with 5x HWS, then do that as many times as you can fit in your army, while still having meaningful armour/flyers or whatever. Th trick is actually to not upgrae your infantry squads; leaving them as bare as possible - it doesn't matter when the heavy weapon squads are the priority target

If they focus on your HWS, you keep your infantry for turn 5+.
If they focus on your Infantry squads, Great! your HWS can hold objectives while they ruin armour/infantry.

That's an efficient, Alpha strike way to run HWS, that has good late game potential.

to the second, I said consider another unit, not make a new one. I'm completely against these changes, why would I be advocating an addition?

I have not betrayed any ignorance, more to the point I believe you've betrayed your ignorance.

Combined squads currently only work with infantry squads. They are specifically exclusive to infantry squads. It is not unreasonable to assume that only infantry squads can combine with infantry squads, so only heavy weapon squads could combine with heavy weapon squads.

If you choose to make it a house rule that combined squads can work with HWS, that's your prerogative. The point is, that isn't what is said in the codex.

 Scipio Africanus wrote:

Run 3x infantry squads with 5x HWS, then do that as many times as you can fit in your army, while still having meaningful armour/flyers or whatever. Th trick is actually to not upgrae your infantry squads; leaving them as bare as possible - it doesn't matter when the heavy weapon squads are the priority target

You do know that a HWS isn't really that damn cheap to spam. With a bare-bone configuration, you are looking at 430 points (1x PCS, 2x IS, 5x HWS) and you only have Mortars... And Guard infantry can't soak up that much damage to actually make it worth the effort (and the points). Especially since you can always use Vendettas and Russes instead of your fragile footmen.

 creeping-deth87 wrote:
It's a well established fact that heavy weapons squads are weak units. Low leadership with low model counts sees them running off the board pretty frequently, with only 1 casualty forcing a check. My proposed solution is to offer these models a gun shield save, since they actually are modeled with gun shields. At 3+, it would mean that they could handle small arms fire pretty well but would fold to heavier weapons like an actual gun shield. What do you guys think?

Alternative option: give the squad a sergeant for some leadership 8, and allow them to take additional Guardsmen with las guns like Devestators can take extra bolter marines.

I think both of those are sound solutions to the HWT's problems.

I'm actually not being hypocritical at all. I didn't slam you for being sarcastic, I slammed you for strolling into this thread, posting an utterly meaningless rhetorical question, and then dipping.

Firstly, as AtoMaki already stated, Heavy Weapons Squads are not cheap enough to spam. At 60 points per squad with only mortars, they're not points efficient units. Secondly, your advice about running infantry squads with no upgrades just to spam your heavy weapons is exactly how you DON'T play Guard. Guard units rely on special weapons to get anything done, they use more than any other army. And thirdly, and this is perhaps the most damning, your solution is no solution at all. Spamming that unit does not make their leadership problems go away, nor does it make them more survivable. It just means you have more of an already incredibly fragile unit.

To the next point. Infantry squads are the only ones that can combine because they are the only unit that have the Combined Squad rule, not because Combined Squad specifically mentions Infantry Squad, so thank you for demonstrating that you have no idea what you're talking about. Death Korps can already combine their infantry and heavy weapons squads, so it isn't the preposterous solution that you think it is.

I tend to see they start to become useful when embedded in cover so they can make up for low numbers with a good save.

I think the best solutions would be to give them 4+ cover against front arc shots (for the gunshield), I think it would be as strong as carapace, and possibly the ability to take sergeants or at least a vox caster which would make it the one unit I would actually take them on (and some cool radio modeling opportunities).

And yes, DKoK can combine HWS. It leads to some...fun...results

Who remembers the beach Landing in Saving Private Ryan or the varied Assault's in Behind Enemy Lines? or the Hawk scene where the recon team loses their heavy gunner, in black hawk down, yet manage to overcome overwhelming odds from just being inside a decent enough constructed building? or in Thin Red Line? how the heavy weapons soldiers would set up in highly defensible location's? well here is my solution


Cover Save: give them a +2 bonus to cover save, except when in heavy cover (ie fortifications, then they simply gain +1 T, against small arms fire only, idea being in war themed movies one of the hardest units to remove from cover are the HWS, also known as weapon specialists, back to reason why this is good enough an idea...)



HWS's are good at creating Firebases, funneling the enemy towards your gun line. try setting them up on the flanks in heavy terrain.
(when i play guard i am defensive to say the least)

....not many guard i know or heard of play like this since 3rd/4th ed, i rarely play them [IG] or have i felt there was an issue with HWS's. but it sound reasonable enough to add better cover save or +1 T against small arms fire. (bolter, lasguns etc)

 AtoMaki wrote:

 Scipio Africanus wrote:

Run 3x infantry squads with 5x HWS, then do that as many times as you can fit in your army, while still having meaningful armour/flyers or whatever. Th trick is actually to not upgrae your infantry squads; leaving them as bare as possible - it doesn't matter when the heavy weapon squads are the priority target

You do know that a HWS isn't really that damn cheap to spam. With a bare-bone configuration, you are looking at 430 points (1x PCS, 2x IS, 5x HWS) and you only have Mortars... And Guard infantry can't soak up that much damage to actually make it worth the effort (and the points). Especially since you can always use Vendettas and Russes instead of your fragile footmen.

Actually, my suggestion was for lascannons. That increases your price by 150.

15 lascannons, in squads of 3s, will reduce a lot to rubble. If you bring it down on your command, you can reduce heavy targets to rubble very quickly. I've seen this, I've done this.

Also, not everything needs to be uber cheap to be useful. Just because vanilla tacticals are 4 points above the norm, doesn't mean they can't still be good.

And guardsmen don't need to be doing anything. IF you really want to do something with your infantry, you have this amazing unit called veterans.

Another good answer, if you absolutely refuse to use BID would be to allow Veteran HWS.

if you have say, 23 point HWS, with BS4, you'd suddenly have efficient HWS that can spam autocannons, lascannons and heavy bolters. That would make them more efficient, raise their leadership by 1 and make more dangerous, without having to give them an "Out there" rule like combined squads.

Also, a commisar with a squad of conscripts (50, the irritating size) would probably be sufficient to hold an objective, while giving your precious HWS this Leadership bubble you feel they so desperately need.

How about just giving them stealth? It'd mean that they had a good cover save wherever they were hiding, but it wouldn't make them overpowered.

 p_gray99 wrote:
How about just giving them stealth? It'd mean that they had a good cover save wherever they were hiding, but it wouldn't make them overpowered.

I can see 30 points for Stealth and BS4/LD8 Being Feasible.

I believe HWS are fine as is i use two units with 3 autocannons as allies for my chaos not very points intensive and mostly overlooked by bigger threats in my army. If your opponents arnt worried about anything more then your HWS then that force has other problems.

A bit of a points decrease and "eternal warrior" should do it, in my eyes.

They're 2 different dudes for petes sake!

as said before, stealth is probably the best solution to the people who think that HWS are not value for money (not sarcastic). this potentially means that they get a 3+ save (I usually use ruins) - therefore we have a much better solution to the original proposal. cover saves are almost always better than armour saves. and let's face it, if flamers get in the range of your HWS? my friend, you officially suck at guard (save for drop pod or daemonic incursions)


GA

I myself have been playing around with the idea of adding a sergeant into the heavy weapons squads. I actually model one crew member in one of the three teams as a sergeant in my HW squads. It's just that a sergeant would be rather useless in the squad if the only thing he is there for is the leadership. He would need some other fancy rules and that kind of an addition is kind of questionable unless the old heavy weapons platoon from... 4th was it? would be brought back.

I think it would be alright to add the possibility to upgrade a vox-caster and something like camo cloaks for them. I don't really have any complaints of the squads myself though.

I definitely feel the lack of a sergeant and vox caster in heavy weapon squads is a problem. Usually they're the squads my senior officer wants to be giving orders to, and usually they fail, because they don't have the re-rolls from the vox or the leadership bonus from a sergeant. One or the other would definitely help. Probably the vox, because that wouldn't necessitate altering the actual statline - it could be just added in as an option to buy a vox for the usual price.

Well, this thread is novel, an IG player concerned that their infantry die too easily...

Aside from the snarky comments, I'd say give the unit a 4+ armor save and that's it. Those weapon shields were World War 2-esque, and even they wouldn't stop weapons like a Warhammer Autocannon and most other AP4 stuff. I'd like for it to be a cover save, since a flamer should roast these guys like any other Guardsmen, but there's no way to easily model a save that can be ignored by ignores cover* weapons as well as standard AP4.

 creeping-deth87 wrote:
It's a well established fact that heavy weapons squads are weak units. Low leadership with low model counts sees them running off the board pretty frequently, with only 1 casualty forcing a check. My proposed solution is to offer these models a gun shield save, since they actually are modeled with gun shields. At 3+, it would mean that they could handle small arms fire pretty well but would fold to heavier weapons like an actual gun shield. What do you guys think?

Alternative option: give the squad a sergeant for some leadership 8, and allow them to take additional Guardsmen with las guns like Devestators can take extra bolter marines.

i think you just want to give them a special rule that they can fire at full effect when they have gone to ground. They are set up to fire from the prone position and should not be penalized for it.