9th Ed. Wishlist?

[Warhead01]

New bodyguard rule is like super Look Out Sir. You cannot target an enemy character (with 9 wounds or less) with ranged attacks whilst they are within range of a body guard unit. Even if there is only 1 model left in the bodyguard unit. Even if the character is in front of the bodyguard unit. Even if the character is out in the open but the bodyguard is totally out of line of sight. 

 

Its an absolutely horrible rule that gets abused a lot. There is a whole Dark Angels list built around 2-3 un-targetable Talon masters that stand out in the open firing away and you cant do anything about it because of the bodyguards. However, its out now and several factions have it and abuse, so Guard should also get access to it. 

That's what I figured was being referred two. My friend who plays SOB's has a bodyguard unit with a a different bodyguard rule and different criteria. So I was a little confused as not ever body guard key word rule is identical.  His have to be in front of the characters while the SM ones don't. He thought they both had to be in front and that it had been faq'd that way but it was only for his unit from the sob codex when I went looking, about 3 weeks back. It may have changed in the last few week? This edition is just god awful to keep up with. 

If I'm no longer correct I wouldn't know. But we have all of these bespoke rules, which is why it even came to mind to ask. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

I'm not sure it would be all that useful for us...like which of our characters do you need to make untargetable that aren't small enough to hide from LOS anyway? Our Psykers are the only ones that really need LOS and is that really worth it?

 

And they're not going to let Bullgrys bodyguard Tank Commanders again.

[Diagramdude]

An untargettable company commander is not in the same league as untargettable talon masters. And it’s such a lame rule I hope it doesn’t proliferate.

[OldWherewolf]

I'm ok with the concept of the rule and what it's supposed to accomplish.  that being said, it does need tweaking.    Something like if the bodyguards is out of LOS, then the character can be targeted, but any wounds are applied as MWs to the bodyguard unit with no saves of any kind allowed against the MWs.  MWs in excess of the bodyguard unit are applied to the originally targeted character, with no saves of any kind allowed.

 

Like Diagramdude said, it's a big difference between a character dreadnought, talon masters and Celestine vs. a company commander surrounded by Ogryn bodyguards. 

[jarms48]

New bodyguard rule is like super Look Out Sir. You cannot target an enemy character (with 9 wounds or less) with ranged attacks whilst they are within range of a body guard unit. Even if there is only 1 model left in the bodyguard unit. Even if the character is in front of the bodyguard unit. Even if the character is out in the open but the bodyguard is totally out of line of sight. 

 

Its an absolutely horrible rule that gets abused a lot. There is a whole Dark Angels list built around 2-3 un-targetable Talon masters that stand out in the open firing away and you cant do anything about it because of the bodyguards. However, its out now and several factions have it and abuse, so Guard should also get access to it.

 

The only issue with this is that we don’t really have any amazingly shooty or fighty characters. If we get command squads with characters again that might be alright. Like we could have 4 untargetable BS3+ plasma or melta.

[OldWherewolf]

I believe we need more LOS! in our army, as it would help us quite a bit.  I'd make these units eligible as well:

 

- Psykers (if we add Wydvanes to Primaris/Astropaths to form a unit)

- command squads

- special weapon squads

- HWTs

 

Bodyguard is just an extension of LOS!, so bodyguard units could provide the same benefit to these units.  I really like the idea of a command squad running next to a shield wall of Bullgryn.  Or Bullgryns protecting a psyker unit while the psykers are completing mission objectives.  It would be a waste for the Bullgryns to cover the HWTs, but could still be thematic even if it doesn't lend itself to game mechanics

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Not sure how big the Malcador tanks are, but I kinda hope the tanks between Russ and baneblade are GW plastic malcador kits that make either the defender or the assault variants.

 

I kinda like the defender’s look a lot, and 7 heavy bolters backed up by a big cannon seems like a nice bit of firepower

Edited November 29, 2021 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Diagramdude]

I walked into a retail Warhammer store today and the guy working there says he expects the new Guard codex late Q2 or Q3 2022 with a heavy emphasis on new plastic Krieg.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

I walked into a retail Warhammer store today and the guy working there says he expects the new Guard codex late Q2 or Q3 2022 with a heavy emphasis on new plastic Krieg.

I feel like malcadors fit the krieg theme pretty well lol

[OldWherewolf]

I walked into a retail Warhammer store today and the guy working there says he expects the new Guard codex late Q2 or Q3 2022 with a heavy emphasis on new plastic Krieg.

That would really be nice.

 

One thing I was thinking about was with all the latest armies, there's sooo much -1D, -1 to wound, invulnerable saves, FNPs, ignore -1/-2AP and limited LOS that an AP2 D2 battle cannon is DOA before the codex even comes out.  Almost anything D2 is DOA.   With a BS of 4 against an opponent with a 5++ or 5+++, then every 6 shots is 2 hits, and at best 2 dead models, at worst, it's 2 damage total.  All of our big guns only get 7 shots on average.  With Gravis armored models, even D2 isn't a marine killer anymore, and is highly inefficient against 3W models, and worse if that 3W model has -1D.

 

I was trying to think of ways of countering this without just increasing the number of shots or doing MWs "just because".  Some thoughts I had:

1. Exploding wound rolls.  Something like needing a 2/3+ to wound, each wounding hit is 3 hits.  If you need a 4+, then each wounding hit is 2 wounding hits.  (we roll enough dice already)
2. Keep the 2D, but change the way damage is allocated to 1 at a time.  So if a single 2D battlecannon shot hits an wounds for 2D, then that becomes 2 wounding hits at 1D each.  So -1D does nothing, as each hit is 1D.  Invulnerable saves are slightly less valuable as it's tougher to spike 4x5++ vs 2x5++.  FNPs are unchanged
3. Some sort of crossfire rule that strips away durability layers.  Something like "if 2 AM units shoot at a single target, then invulnerables saves may not be taken.  if 3 AM units shoot, then neither invulnerable saves nor FNP saves may be taken.".  It would also need a no-split fire caveat, and all the units involved would have to declare their firing at the same time.

#1 & #2 just add dice, and it's a way of countering the durability.  But I like #3 more, as it adds more tactical depth to the game, and can make less valuable units still serve a purpose.  Like guardsmen won't need to be as effective, as they are paving the way for bigger hitters.

[The Pounder]

Really excited that the new Astra Militarum release will be Kriegcentric!!

 

#3 would definitely add more utility!

 

Just have to wait and see.

 

Hopefully not too long.

[brother_b]

Interesting ideas. I’ve got three Leman Russ tanks one will have the gattling cannon.

 

I’m guessing if they price tanks appropriately, we will have a chance to win by weight of fire.

 

I Think orders as we know them are gone, and will now likely only be available for core groups. I hope though that they add utility. Guard have been one of my long-term desires to play as an army.

Edited December 27, 2021 by brother_b

[OldWherewolf]

I was trying to think of ways of countering this without just increasing the number of shots or doing MWs "just because".  Some thoughts I had:

• Exploding wound rolls.  Something like needing a 2/3+ to wound, each wounding hit is 3 hits.  If you need a 4+, then each wounding hit is 2 wounding hits.  (we roll enough dice already)
• Keep the 2D, but change the way damage is allocated to 1 at a time.  So if a single 2D battlecannon shot hits an wounds for 2D, then that becomes 2 wounding hits at 1D each.  So -1D does nothing, as each hit is 1D.  Invulnerable saves are slightly less valuable as it's tougher to spike 4x5++ vs 2x5++.  FNPs are unchanged
• Some sort of crossfire rule that strips away durability layers.  Something like "if 2 AM units shoot at a single target, then invulnerables saves may not be taken.  if 3 AM units shoot, then neither invulnerable saves nor FNP saves may be taken.".  It would also need a no-split fire caveat, and all the units involved would have to declare their firing at the same time.

Ok, thinking about this more, I'd make #2 into the 'SHRAPNEL' keyword, and #1 the 'AIRBURST' keyword.  Then, we can give Demo Cannons D3+3 damage, Earthshakers D3+2 damage and give them both AIRBURST.  Then we give Battlecannons & manticores D2 (flat), then AIRBURST and SHRAPNEL.  Then we can keep the 2d6 shots flat across all models

 

Now Demo cannons and Earthshakers have play into hard targets with high damage, BCs and manticores into softer targets and 1W models.  So we have a reason to take both, so we're actually presented with a choice in list construction. 

Edited January 3, 2022 by Brainpsyk

[Phubar]

The new Tau railgun can be an hint of what we will get with the Vanquisher? Obviusly the Vanq will have some smaller numbers somewhere.

[Diagramdude]

I’m not exactly sure how the vanquisher stacks up against the rail gun in the lore but any combination of these new features like ignore invulnerable, d3+X damage, cause additional mortal wounds on a successful wound etc would help immensely toward wanting to actually include Vanquishers in a list, plus it’s not a blast weapon so could disintegrate a single enemy that tries tying it up.

[Shamansky]

Would be good to get anything for Vanquisher that makes it more useful than other weapons. But i would not start opening champagne yet. Since tau always had 'weird-science' guns in the past. And that was not influencing imperial guns in any way

Edited December 30, 2021 by Shamansky

[Plague _Lord]

The thing is the vanquisher cannon is still an explosive munitions type weapon, while the railgun on the other hand does most of it's damage frm kinetic energy. The mortal wounds part of the profile makes sense... what doesn't is the silly ignore invuls part. 

 

The vanquisher profile should look like this imo - 1d3 shots range 72'', str 12, ap -4, 3d3 damage and inbuilt +1 to hit. Heavy tanks still have a chance against it but when it goes through they can receive a lot of damage.  This profile paired with the double shot deals an average of 9 wounds off a leman russ, so it cripples it but isn't a guaranteed kill and this is how a tank killer should work - their should be a margin of error but it should still be effective.

[sairence]

Honestly, as Guard players we shouldn't worry about ignore invun abilities. We should welcome them and want more, cause we don't get invuns anyway.

[The Pounder]

I’d say the most likely route forward for the Vanquisher will be similar to the Macharius Vanquisher cannon.

 

Str16 AP-4 with a flat damage of 9

 

Throw in a +1 to hit Vehicles or Monsters as well as Grinding Advance and I think we’ll be somewhere handy!

 

Though I do like Plague_Lord’s idea of D3 shots.

[Diagramdude]

the shot profile would have to balance out against whether the russ retains the shoot twice ability, because getting to shoot d3 shots twice with a 9 damage weapon would be a bit nutty

[Plague _Lord]

Yeah it's either high set damage and few shots or more shots and random damage. In this case I'd rather have more shots and random damage, since it get's us less chances of the vechicle doing 0 damage.

[Phubar]

I think that Vanq could be few shots at high AP and damage as it is a tank/monster killer so having the chance to oneshot (kill or cripple) is more fluffy than having it doing a good average that needs more shots to kill a target.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Still hoping they make the exterminator unique and interesting enough to compete with the other Russ options, and not just relegate it to a cool fluff option.

[OldWherewolf]

Agreed on the Exterminator.  The sad thing is that it's going to be tough because of all the -1D and ignore -1AP in the game right now.  Making the gun -2AP 2D brings it on par with the battlecannon. 

 

Now 4d3 shots at -1AP 3D (Just like the predatorx2) is interesting.  That gives good punch into tougher targets, and against -1D and 5+++ its a reliable 2D.  If the BC gets Airburst & Shrapnel, then we've got 2 very different weapons serving different purposes.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Agreed on the Exterminator. The sad thing is that it's going to be tough because of all the -1D and ignore -1AP in the game right now. Making the gun -2AP 2D brings it on par with the battlecannon.

 

Now 4d3 shots at -1AP 3D (Just like the predatorx2) is interesting. That gives good punch into tougher targets, and against -1D and 5+++ its a reliable 2D. If the BC gets Airburst & Shrapnel, then we've got 2 very different weapons serving different purposes.

i think making it heavy6 or giving it, the old school twinlinked rule might help if it was the cheapest variant.