Mixing and Matching Regiments

[TheShredder]

Do you think it's reasonable to mix and match regiments in the same list?

 

For example, I was thinking about making an Armageddon list with several Veteran/SWSs in Chimeras. However, I'd also like to include some Sentinels and Leman Russ. The thing is though, it seems like the Tallarn doctrine is a much better fit here - as it gives a much more useful bonus for vehicles than the Armageddon one.

So, do you think its cheesy to use both Armageddon and Tallarn doctrines in the same list?

[TheShredder]

[sorry, I just realised I posted this in the Army List section. Could a Mod possibly move it to IG General Discussion?]

[HenricusTyranicus]

I don't think it's cheesy. I myself am refraining from it right now because I don't have a great way to differentiate which models are which, and because I'm already crushing people right now. Once new Codices come out, and I find time to paint models in slightly different colors or something, I'll probably start doing it as well.

[duz_]

I have to admit I've been pondering this myself

Particularly with my armour vs troops... 

 

From a tactical PoV it certainly makes sense!
From a fluff PoV it is also supported! You read about mixed regiments all the time

From a being nice PoV... well thats tougher... 

With all the angst about Guard at the moment I might avoid it for the time being... however once more factions have their codexes I don't see why not!
 

[sirparthos]

Same list, different detachments?  Your Steel Legion Infantry is supported by a spearhead detachment of Tallarn Tanks.

[Guardsman Bob]

Some people (the ones in the know) will be thanking you for not going all Tallaran.

[Brother Talarian]

I don't see a problem with it. Like duz mentioned it's supported in both fluff perspectives and tactical. I for one will be using Cadian, for my back line objectives/HWTs, MT because I think they're cool looking, and Armageddon for some mobile bunkers. We'll see soon enough if it's broken but I don't think the units I'm taking to be too be game changing OP

[Nicodemus Doloroso]

I agree that it's acceptable, BUT, the stuff that belongs to different regiments should be clearly differentiated.

 

So if your tanks are Tallarn, they ought to have a noticeably different paint scheme from the chimeras of your Armageddon detachment.

[olcottr]

I've had both Cadians and Catachans for years. Even before 8th, I typically use the Cadians as sit and shoot and the Catachans as a mobile strike force.  Not sure how I'm going to incorporate the Strength +1 but it will change the way I use them.  Another thing I'll have to figure out is which vehicles I'll use in which regiment, and repaint them accordingly.

[RangerRob24]

So long as the Detachments from different factions are easy to tell apart, you should good to go.  Officers are tricky too.  Can't have your Cadian officer ordering your Catachan troops.

I'm running Mordians and Stormtroopers (Scions)...Got them painted up different, easy to tell apart.  Tanks are the generic Green / Tan used by Cadia and Catachan...however I have Mordian decals on the sides.  Running 2 or 3 detachments of  Mordians  with a detachement of Tempestus.  

 

[Adeptus]

It's the same as Space Marines IMO. If you're running Dark Angels, but using the Space Wolf rules then that's a no-no. You use the Dark Angels rules for the Dark Angels models.

 

Similarly, if your models are clearly Armageddon Steel Legion, then those are the rules you should use. Using other rules (especially when it's purely for gaming advantage) is... frowned upon.

 

Now, if you want to have a Steel Legion where all their Chimeras have been destroyed, but the infantry somehow survived, and they've been paired up with a Tallarn regiment whose infantry have all been killed but their Chimeras have somehow all survived, well then, I guess that's your decision, no matter how unlikely it would be. But I would want to see different camo/paint jobs on each different contingent.

[Kinstryfe]

As long as the two regiments are modeled and/or painted sufficient deferent, I wouldn't mind it. I would probably never do it myself, despite having enough different guard models to do it. In a tourney setting, I wouldn't even find it distasteful. For casual games, I could never see myself doing it unless it was some kind of narrative (the last remains of this regiment are holed up in cover under seige from orks, and the second regiment is attacking from the rear to try to rescue them, etc), because it seems to much to me like playing to get an advantage that, to my sensibilities, is just a little distasteful. Same as taking a mixed army of Ultramarines gun line with Conscript bubble wrap and 10 astropaths or whatever to spam smite, ya know? Legal, but kinda suspect.

 

Now, if you just drop down a whole bunch of matching green models and say the infantry are the Generic 25th, they train with this doctrine, and the tanks belong to the Generic 52nd, and they train with this other doctrine, and those sentinels, they're forward scouts from the 85th, and they use THIS doctrine...let me know before I unpack my army. That's no different from THESE blue Marines being Ultras, but THOSE blue Marines are Scars...

[Thoridon]

I'll be doing this as I already have before - I have Praetorian, Mordian, Valhallan, Catachan and Cadian models. I already had them geared up for different roles from previous versions before any special regimental rules so the new Codex just means I get a bonus for something I was already doing. Each regiment can clearly be identified with different paint schemes so there should be no doubt which is which.

 

It also means that for certain models I hadn't built yet (like tanks) as I was waiting for the Codex I'm now having a think where to put them. With different regiments having different focus I can use a group if I want a certain approach to a game or use a couple of the different regiments to support each other. I don't see that as cheesy, it's fluffy and how the Guard work. I've also been mixing them since 2nd Edition so see no reason why I should stop now it's a slight benefit as well as being thematic.

 

What I would have an issue with, as other have said, is using the same 'scheme' of models to represent different regiments. If someone had an army painted similarly but said this group are Cadian, these are Valhallan etc. without a clear way to distinguish them it would just be confusing. Even if you use the same models (eg. all Cadian plastics), as long as they're clearly painted differently I'd have no problem. If they're all in the same green camo but supposed to represent 2-3 different regimental doctrines it would just be a pain.

[Vel'Cona]

As long as it's clear which regiment is which, this is fine.  It's about the same as using different Detachments of Space Marine Chapters or Forge Worlds, IMO.  That being said, if all your guys are grey plastic and you want me to believe these 30 Conscripts are Valhallan and these 10 Guardsmen are Tallarn, I'm probably going to be somewhat disgruntled.  :P

[dakkamasta]

My army is one colour scheme so I don't plan to run mixed regiments except for one exception which is taking a Tallarn detachment that is purely to utilise the Ambush stratagem. In any other case I would agree having an army in your deployment zone where they're multiple regiments but look the same is very annoying for your opponent. But personally I find with the Ambush stratagem it would be okay considering the portion of the force that is a different regiment will be easy to distinguish as they will be arriving completely separate from your main force.

 

Never the same units in 2 different regiments however (unless different colour scheme of course). Eg. if there are Leman Russes outflanking via the stratagem, then the detachment comprising the force starting on the table will not contain Russes. I feel like that would be a good way to run a mixed regiment without having to fork out cash to buy models you already own so that they are a different colour.

[Major_Gilbear]

As long as it's crystal clear, I wouldn't have an issue - even if the models are technically from the same regiment.

 

For example: "All troops and transports = Mordian, all other vehicles = Tallarn", even if they are all painted up as Cadians. That's easy and clear, and so it's fine.

 

My counter to this is that if there is any confusion because "these green plastic Cadians over here are Mordians, and these green plastic Cadians over here are Cadians, and these green plastic Cadians over here are Catachans", then either they pick one Regiment for everything, or they get no Regiment benefits at all.

 

I am very willing to be considerate to any opponent, but in the end I'm there to play a game and have fun, not have a gruelling multi-hour memory test. My consideration will therefore extend as far as my opponents'. ;)