Frater Cornelius Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 The book seems solid enough and while Eldar and Tau may muster more firepower, IG do have other advantages. So, what is it that holds them back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
librisrouge Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 IG have a couple of things working against them: Our close ranged firepower is good but not tough, so it only gets one chance. We rely a bunch on solid template action while the meta seems full of things that ignore or don't care about templates (MCs, Flyers, FMCs, Invis, etc.) Our anti-air is too expensive to spam, unlike other factions that don't have that problem. AV14 front armor is wonderful, but AV10/11 on the rear means our tough vehicles die to melee just as much as a Rhino will. We aren't exceptionally mobile. No tough or accurate deep strikers, bikes, or grav...anything, means that we struggle to pull of last minute grabs for the objectives. While melee isn't a big part of this edition...our melee sucks. This means that we kinda give up on a whole phase of the game where others are doing killing (especially since assault lets you sweep a unit while shooting leaves survivors that'll need picked off all too often.) Our psychic phase isn't terrible, but isn't the best either. This leaves us often not wanting to compete in the psychic phase compared to some other armies. Don't get me wrong, we're not a bad faction...at all...just not top tier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoffeeGrunt Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 I'd argue that when/if Tau and Eldar get updated, things will change massively for the overall tournament game. AM when compared to the rest of the 2014 Codices is good but not overpowered, which is a nice trend of recent releases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorFish Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 I think the lists of the Guard codex matters too, there's lots of ways to run the codex but there's no "killer build". In tourney you tend to get the focus on the "best" codices and builds especially if there's something at stake, that and Guard armies can require a fair few models too. That's an investment that people won't do for an army that isn't top tier plus there's the issue of transporting all the models. It's impossible to say what the reasons are accurately, but I think all of the above mount up. Such is the nature of the highly competitive game - you've got to bring your A game and if you're putting the B team down then you're going to be the underdog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frater Cornelius Posted October 24, 2014 Author Share Posted October 24, 2014 Yeah, I like the way GW is tuning down the codex creep. However, I have never been one to play according to general acceptance and listen to the meta. You have to consider that the majority of people are net-listing and while it is true that Tau and Eldar are the top dogs right now, I suspect that many wannabe competitive players choose those armies because they read that they kick ass. No one reads about IG being awesome. The main IG players are either long-timers or people interested in the army rather than into easy wins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorFish Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 Probably, if this is true and much of it stems from the Internet hive mind then it would make sense. How many Guard lists appeared during the so-called "leaf blower" days? The meta is it's own beast when it comes down to it; remember comrades if General Consensus comes up to you and tries to give you advice report it to your nearest Commissar People don't collect the Guard because the codex is strong; we collect the Guard because they're the true heroes and everyone loves tanks right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altasmurf Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 I think due to the intial cost of the army it's often surpassed for other flavour of the months. Also the codex is full off units that do a decent job at anything but not the best, tournament armies tend to be spam the best unit and take whatever other minimums are needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilofix Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 Too much to paint, and no "death star". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bartali Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 I'd argue that when/if Tau and Eldar get updated, things will change massively for the overall tournament game. AM when compared to the rest of the 2014 Codices is good but not overpowered, which is a nice trend of recent releases. New codexes for Tau and Eldar won't change things, GW can't help themselves. They'll have released something new by then which is way stupider. Only three months ago they gave Imperial Knights the Adamantine Lance formation, expect more stupid to leak out every now and again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorFish Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 GW will always do shiny of the moment, they want to sell the new kits. Look no further than the Wyvern for our own version. Did GW deliberately make it good value for points, or did they just get it wrong? We can't know for sure but it's probably a case of both. Nobody gets things right straight off the bat, take computer games as an example - how many patches do you see to rebalance things? Being a "physical" game GW can't have that sort of ability to correct things so it takes longer, FAQs don't make radical changes to books such as point or stat changes. You can be sure we will see the Wyvern change next codex, almost certainly in the form of a points increase. We'll never get the weird and wonderful stuff like other armies as that's not what we do. Guard is the common human pitted against all with nothing but a lasgun and flak armour. Guard is the mailed fist of the mechanicus blasting and grinding the enemy to dust. We don't need the fancy things, just a bayonet and some guts behind it - if that's not for you then you should look elsewhere! This isn't to say GW are perfect, far from it, but it is a complex game and achieving balance must be the devil's own work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TankCommanderWittmann Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Imperial Knights are battle brothers so we can always take one of those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prot Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 In a word I'd say Maelstrom. It has changed the game. Armies I struggled with (chaos, dark angels) are reborn and the old steady stand and shoot armies suffer. I've had three guard armies and I think they're as hard to win with as ever. I know maelstrom isn't a full out tournament scenario but it is implemented in part to the degree that you get a lot of similar mechanics that give Astra a handicap. Think of the most mobile, rigid and survivable troops in the game and ig don't come to mind. You really gotta earn those wins and you really have to be aggressive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorFish Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Mobility wins games indeed. That's why Chimeras are always useful and as Prot says you must be aggressive. Even if you're taking more troopers in place of transports you've got to get those boots in step. Advance up the field and crush the enemies of the Emperor under their feet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prot Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Absolutely. I have a very good friend who I consider darn near a 'master' (if there is such a thing) with Astra. He's played them as his main army since... I'd guess the mid-late 90's? I used to have a very even win/loss ratio with him in 6th. In 7th edition, I think he's only one 1 time out of our.... gees, I'd have to guess 20+ games? Maybe much more? The reason? He's trying to make parking lot work. He knows it's not the path of least resistance to victory, but I think he enjoys the challenge. When I made my Straken based Catachan list (if anyone saw my failed attempt at painting a Valkyrie for the army, it was at the time I posted that hobby disaster.) I made that army with mobility, and survivability in the form of blobs with axes and Priests. Backed by Strakken the units worked for me, and mobility came in the form of Valk's dropping vets. I really liked that list. If GW did an official re-run of Catachan models I'd be all over that like stink on a fart. Anyway, I love Astra now because for a time I did feel a bit sheepish with the stand back and shoot scenarios that played so well to their strengths. And now you have to be proactive, rather than reactive... I really like that. I'm the type of guy that can't play the best army though... it bores me. I think Astra are in a fantastic spot. You aren't given anything, but there's a lot of fun, and potency in that codex in so many ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorFish Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 I've never subscribed to the belief Guard should stand and shoot, you always need mobility. Even in the olden rubbish codex days, even with the mech parking lot craze - I've always done my own thing and found it worked well enough. Like you said sometimes the nature of the game and codices makes it difficult but that's the measure of a man and your love for your army. No matter what you will make it work, even if you're doing something you know is suboptimal as your friend is doing Dogged determination against all odds and the drive to keep putting one boot in front of the other in pursuit of victory no matter how unlikely. That is the way of the Guard and why we're all here after all yeah, I'm going to go and build some Guard models now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoffeeGrunt Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 I find I struggle to threaten the midfield or backfield in games, much less hold ground against opponents there. Perhaps it's my strategy, but Chimera Vets are often too fragile to do it for me if they become a tangible enough threat to draw attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.