Jump to content

Welcome to The Bolter and Chainsword
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

9th Ed. Wishlist?


  • Please log in to reply
429 replies to this topic

#101
jarms48

jarms48

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 253 posts
  • Location:Australia

 

 

 

Medi-packs work in a bubble. So that 60 point Infantry Squad (55 + 5 for the medi-pack) could resurrect Bullgryns, they would also have a 6" inch 6+++ bubble if they work just like Apothecaries. If there's no Bullgryns then you'd be bringing back a ton of Guardsmen. 

 

 

So an Infantry squad becomes ablaitive wounds for more special equipment in it. That would make veterans even more obsolete choice. But If Veterans could become Troops again that would make flexibility. Veterans would take damage role, Infantry squads would become kind of staying power buffers.

 

 

If it was up to me I'd make our Troops looks like this:

- Conscripts

- Infantry Platoon

- Veterans

- Scions (Moved to Elites in an AM detachment, still Troops in an MT detachment)

 

That's the bare minimum that should be done. 


  • Shamansky likes this

#102
Squike

Squike

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 133 posts

I think a big improvement would be to bring infantry platoons back, 

 

Minimum 2 infantry squads and a platoon commander.

 

up to:

3 infantry squads

platoon commander

command squad

heavy weapons squad

veteran squad

5 chimera 

 

this would enable us to stack out our force org slots a bit better and navigate around some of the rule of 3 that stops us bringing many heavy weapon squads and such.

 

also allowing the medic in the command squad to have a 6+ FPN (or invun but I think this isn't as thematic) for all infantry platoon members (- Vehicles) that are in a squad within 6", but loose the ability to revive infantry squad members. ( your combat medic is patching up all the minor casualties but is not bringing a guy back that's had his arm blown off, he's going back to the "aid station")

 

I also think that the 2+ save for LR & Bane/Sword is a good call and 3+BS for the Bane/Sword also.


Edited by Squike, 27 April 2021 - 02:21 PM.

  • SteveAntilles likes this

#103
jarms48

jarms48

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 253 posts
  • Location:Australia

I think a big improvement would be to bring infantry platoons back, 

 

Minimum 2 infantry squads and a platoon commander.

 

up to:

3 infantry squads

platoon commander

command squad

heavy weapons squad

veteran squad

5 chimera 

 

this would enable us to stack out our force org slots a bit better and navigate around some of the rule of 3 that stops us bringing many heavy weapon squads and such.

 

Why would you lock Veterans and Chimeras behind an infantry platoon? They should be independent. The only units in an infantry platoon should be:

- Platoon Commander

- Platoon Command Squad (could be added back to the Platoon Commander like GSC Familiars).

- Infantry Squads

- Special Weapon Squads

- Heavy Weapon Squads 

 

Having Conscripts and Veterans as alternate choices makes sense. Conscripts let you avoid the Platoon Commander tax and blob up your infantry, but come at the cost of worse stats and less flexibility. 

 

Veterans you pay a premium for avoiding the Platoon Commander tax and BS3+, but that comes at the cost of limited troop slots. 


  • SteveAntilles, Shamansky and Squike like this

#104
Shamansky

Shamansky

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 689 posts
  • Location:Siberia

 

...(could be added back to the Platoon Commander like GSC Familiars).

 

Should be... Must be... 


  • Lord Raven 19 likes this
gallery_30308_9518_1600.png Regiments Of The B&C   Warrant Officer Class 2

 


#105
jarms48

jarms48

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 253 posts
  • Location:Australia

 

Should be... Must be... 


 

 

 

Yeah, it's an indirect buff and nerf. It also frees up space in our heavily bloated elite options. 

 

You could still use a command squad as a special weapons squad, but you would now have to risk the life of the commander they're suppose to be protecting. On the flip side, they'd now actually count as characters making them a buffing unit with a voxcaster, medi-pack, and/or a standard much more worthwhile. 

 

Special Weapon Squads I'd really love the ability to take up to 4 extra Guardsmen. With the Guardsmen who don't have special weapons can swap their lasguns for shotguns, or take a voxcaster. I just think that'd be a nice option. 


  • Lord Raven 19 likes this

#106
sairence

sairence

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 896 posts
At them very least I would like to see Command Squads to have a bodyguard rule similar to Deathguard Terminators. But combining them with the character like GSC familiars would be better.
gallery_30308_9518_8251.png

#107
Stofficus

Stofficus

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 481 posts
  • Location:Paris, France

I'm having trouble getting a sense for what might happen with Guard. In part, due to how bad Covid has been where I live I've had no opportunity to play 9th, I haven't been able to be truly involved with the game and how it's evolving, but I do long for the day where the Guard get to once more crush the enemies of the imperium under their mighty treads, and whose guns bring the sky itself falling upon its foes. 

 

I have some theories, but first let's go through what observable facts we have right now affecting Guard: 

 

-  Huge cut to FW support:

  • Elysians Legends'd, models cut
  • DKoK extremely reduced, several models cut
  • Most FW upgrades and unique gear Legends'd

- 3 limited edition Catachan models (Colonel, Sgt, Marbo)

- No new mainline models since the 6th edition splash of Scions/Taurox/Ogryn/Hydra/Commissar

- Handful of Made-to-Order metal model runs (Kasrkin, 3rd edition regiments, Vostroyans)

- Continued regimental rules support for legacy regiments

- slightly above average rules support across 8th:

  • Specialist detachments
  • Scion regiment rules expansion
  • Considerable psychic awakening support (tank aces ho!)

 

I'm probably missing a few points which might belong here, but we can see a rough trend here of receiving very sub-par model support, possibly the fewest model releases of any mainline army since 5th edition, and if we factor in FW's posture, the most shrunk range of any faction, but have enjoyed fairly good rules support which respect's the Guard's diverse history - moreso than we have enjoyed since 4th edition. 

 

GW clearly has no idea what to do with Guard as a model range, I suspect in no small part due to trademark-ability and difficulty in figuring out how to recapture the considerable revenue which goes to the numerous aftermarket Guard model makers (seriously, what other faction has whole studios who just make Imperial Guard alternate models?) in the same way Primaris took a chunk out of the Marine aftermarket industry. Mechanically, however, the Guard isn't doing too bad. 

 

So what does this mean as a possible precedent for the future? 

 

I think a range refresh is inevitable, but I find it hard to say whether or not it will be a good or bad thing for the faction. GW can't ignore the fact that there are other small businesses thriving off the neglect of this faction, but those same small businesses primarily cater to nostalgia (modernizing the old 3rd edition range, like Victoria Miniatures) or deliver historically and pop-culture inspired options (Mad Robot and Anvil Industries), neither of which are something GW, given its corporate anxiety over its own IP, would be likely to engage with. 

 

They've already rebranded the faction with the moronic sounding Astra Militarum (which honestly probably hurt brand recognition in the long term, but that's another matter - we're in the Guard son), and while the few models they've released have all been Catachan, I'm not convinced they'll be the basis of a new range. Rambo is very much a product of the 80s, and Catachans landed with quite the whimper when they first came out (I don't think anyone has ever liked those models, and I have never seen a Catachan army in 15 years of playing on 3 continents), and they certainly aren't distinct enough to brand as their own IP. 

 

Ergo, I expect something breaking with tradition - more akin to what was done in the Kasrkin/Stormtrooper to Scion transition. Could be good, like the High Elf to Lumineth in Age of Sigmar by drawing on tradition but making something distinct enough, or it could be generic and uninteresting like the Sigmarines. If we're damned lucky with the Emperor smiling upon us, I would wish for plastic Death Korps with an eye to modularity with GW selling upgrade kits to a few other regiments, but I'm also not crazy enough to think that'll happen. \

 

As for mechanics, Guard came through 8th pretty decently. I don't think we were ever a true powerhouse, but nor were we "alright, I was tabled turn 2, that's a new record" of late 7th edition. I think the old regiment rules will be with us for the long haul, as GW is happy to keep using them in their fluff, with Black Library and with the occasional Made to Order splash, which also means we're unlikely to see any dramatic changes to how guard units work. 

 

Thus, in terms of "crunch," I think we'll likely stay as-is with only minor tweaks to costs, unit and weapon profiles with some mechanics to bring some of the poorly-working support units in line with other factions, like command squads and advisors, and maybe if GW is ambitious, something akin to the platoon rules or more specialized detachments (like Armoured, Mechanized, Artillery, Infantry detachments and so on) until such time the model refresh happens. 

 

At the end of the day, the Guard "work" so until there's something which forces a more dramatic change, like a bunch of new models, I would expect more of the same, with the occasional attempt to make older concepts work again. GW keeps bringing back the specialized Guard detachments seemingly every edition under a new veneer, maybe this time they'll get it right? 


Therefore, I conclude, Valve should announce Half Life 2: Episode 3.
Posted Image

#108
Brainpsyk

Brainpsyk

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 131 posts
  • Location:The Arid Zone
  • Faction: Astra Militarum of Cadia

I think for the most part, the guard work. However, the game's lethality had gone up, but our survivability hasn't.

So, how do we address the key weaknesses?

1 - we need a buff to damage output compared to durability on tanks. we give up too many free VPs just by playing the game

-tanks need either more wounds/better armor and a flattening of their output curve. Just make everything a flat 1/2/3/4 damage output.
2 - what works: cheap ObSec bodies, but they have *zero* output. Orders are what should make them effective, but don't, and there is not enough orders to go around.
- adding the LTs to platoons saves FO slots, and increases the availability of orders. It can also provide re-rolls to flatten the output curve, making the army easier to balance.

I've also been thinking that the specialist detachments could be made into specialist units. Emperor's Fist tank platoons, drop force squadrons, etc. Pay for a platoon type, and LRs become ObSec, but have to deploy within 6". Or pay for a different type of platoon, and they can attach to a squad and fire overwatch for them.

We have all the makings, we just don't play the mission in 9th because of a lack of output and comparable survivability and options after getting tagged.

Edit - on mobile


Edited by Brainpsyk, 28 April 2021 - 09:13 PM.

  • duz_ likes this

#109
Brainpsyk

Brainpsyk

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 131 posts
  • Location:The Arid Zone
  • Faction: Astra Militarum of Cadia
On vets and conscripts, we should be able to take them in the same platoon. Experienced troopss along with replacements for lost troops. A horde of bodies to screen the important ones. Makes sense to me :-)

#110
jarms48

jarms48

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 253 posts
  • Location:Australia

On vets and conscripts, we should be able to take them in the same platoon. Experienced troops along with replacements for lost troops. A horde of bodies to screen the important ones. Makes sense to me :-)

 

Then we just go back to 5th edition where no-one takes conscripts because you already have to take a platoon commander and 2 infantry squads as tax. At that point you might as well just take more infantry squads to fill out the platoon. 

 

The problem with veterans is that they just make a special weapon squad redundant if they're in the same slot. Veterans are better as a separate unit. 



#111
domsto

domsto

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 427 posts
  • Location:Austria
  • Faction: Imperial Guard

 

GW clearly has no idea what to do with Guard as a model range, I suspect in no small part due to trademark-ability and difficulty in figuring out how to recapture the considerable revenue which goes to the numerous aftermarket Guard model makers (seriously, what other faction has whole studios who just make Imperial Guard alternate models?) in the same way Primaris took a chunk out of the Marine aftermarket industry. Mechanically, however, the Guard isn't doing too bad. 

 

So what does this mean as a possible precedent for the future? 

 

I think a range refresh is inevitable, but I find it hard to say whether or not it will be a good or bad thing for the faction. GW can't ignore the fact that there are other small businesses thriving off the neglect of this faction, but those same small businesses primarily cater to nostalgia (modernizing the old 3rd edition range, like Victoria Miniatures) or deliver historically and pop-culture inspired options (Mad Robot and Anvil Industries), neither of which are something GW, given its corporate anxiety over its own IP, would be likely to engage with. 

In terms of models i think Guard still hold up pretty well. Yes the humble Cadia Range looks a bit dated compared to the new hot Primaris, but look good compared to say Tau or Eldar. Vehicals are still Top.

And i am a big fan of the Kitbash friendly design of the Infantry Kits. Looking at new Sisters,Primaris or Necron Models they sure look great but all Mono pose and Hard to Personalize. And then their is the Price increase that would inevitably come with a new Guard Range. 

 

Regarding the 3.Party Manufacturer i still think they would hold up pretty well even if GW remakes the Guard Range. Because they would and can not make diffrent kits for the diffrent Regiments. Most likey they would remake Cadia and maybe Catachan(or with the new Orks in Mind create a new Regiment that becomes the Poster Boy for the Faction) So for more special looking Regiments like Vostroyans or Mordians,... there would still be a marked for them.

 

And yes the 3. Party support for Primaris Marines got a hit, but i think the reason for this is the Fact that Primaris Marines from diffrent Chapter only differentiate in a coat of Paint nowadays. Not Chapter specific Units or Datasheets. And Primaris are in no way as heavy decorated as their Old marines counterparts were.

A Space Wolf Intercessor looks the same as a Imperial Fist Intercessor. Even in Artworks. So there is no real need for Special Bits from a 3.Party Shop 


  • Lord Raven 19 likes this

A good soldier obeys without question. A good officer commands without doubt.


#112
Squike

Squike

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 133 posts

 

I think a big improvement would be to bring infantry platoons back, 

 

Minimum 2 infantry squads and a platoon commander.

 

up to:

3 infantry squads

platoon commander

command squad

heavy weapons squad

veteran squad

5 chimera 

 

this would enable us to stack out our force org slots a bit better and navigate around some of the rule of 3 that stops us bringing many heavy weapon squads and such.

 

Why would you lock Veterans and Chimeras behind an infantry platoon? They should be independent. The only units in an infantry platoon should be:

- Platoon Commander

- Platoon Command Squad (could be added back to the Platoon Commander like GSC Familiars).

- Infantry Squads

- Special Weapon Squads

- Heavy Weapon Squads 

 

Having Conscripts and Veterans as alternate choices makes sense. Conscripts let you avoid the Platoon Commander tax and blob up your infantry, but come at the cost of worse stats and less flexibility. 

 

Veterans you pay a premium for avoiding the Platoon Commander tax and BS3+, but that comes at the cost of limited troop slots. 

 

Yeah I like this and think your points are 100% valid!!!

Also my thinking wasn't to make the things like chimera, veterans or heavy weapon squads exclusive to the infantry platoon,

 

you could have in the elite slot, Special weapons Platoons, and Veteran Platoons say each being minimum 1 squad, max 3 squads and a platoon commander.

same for heavy weapons platoons in the heavy slot.


  • Lord Raven 19 likes this

#113
zero88

zero88

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 403 posts
I'd like to see Multilasers changed to Rapid Fire 3 to make them serviceable

Ive also had an idea for a priority target strategem for the LRBT:

PRIORITY TARGET RECEIVED (1CP): Use this stratagem in your shooting phase when a LRBT has fired at least one weapon and the model has at least one weapon left to fire. You may immediately redeclare targets for all remaining weapons (Except for double firing using Grinding Advance).

#114
Brainpsyk

Brainpsyk

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 131 posts
  • Location:The Arid Zone
  • Faction: Astra Militarum of Cadia

 

On vets and conscripts, we should be able to take them in the same platoon. Experienced troops along with replacements for lost troops. A horde of bodies to screen the important ones. Makes sense to me :-)

 

Then we just go back to 5th edition where no-one takes conscripts because you already have to take a platoon commander and 2 infantry squads as tax. At that point you might as well just take more infantry squads to fill out the platoon. 

 

The problem with veterans is that they just make a special weapon squad redundant if they're in the same slot. Veterans are better as a separate unit. 

 

Not really.  My idea was that you can take squads individually or in a platoon.  That way you only have to take a Lt as a tax, which then provides leadership and orders. 

 

Also, taking the veterans in a platoon means they don't take up a force org slot, leaving you more options for elites & fast attack.  This could also remove a duplicate unit type, while making them ObSec.  They'll be out of range of the Lt, but having an ObSec vet/special weapon squad in a Valkyrie is a real threat.

 

Think of this for 1 Troops Force Org Slot:

  • 1 Lt/Command Squad providing orders & re-rolls
  • 2 Infantry Platoons
  • 1 Vet squad in a Valkyrie w/4 special weapons
  • 1 Conscript squad
  • 4 independent heavy weapons teams
  • and all of it ObSec for being Troops. 

that amount of ObSec would be terrifying, even if we didn't increase their lethality at all (we still have to fix their points).  Plus the vets to harass the opponent's backfield.

 

Now elites are filled with Bullgrys, Commisars, psykers, etc. , Heavy support with LRBTs and artillery, FA slots with sentinels and hellhounds. 

 

This plays the 9th Editions missions:

  • artillery & ObSec mobile units to take opponents off their backfield objectives
  • enough ObSec to make the opponent have to come to the mid-board and face our LRBTs
  • ObSec Heavy Weapons teams for holding our backfield objectives and providing fire support


#115
jarms48

jarms48

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 253 posts
  • Location:Australia

 

 

On vets and conscripts, we should be able to take them in the same platoon. Experienced troops along with replacements for lost troops. A horde of bodies to screen the important ones. Makes sense to me :-)

 

Then we just go back to 5th edition where no-one takes conscripts because you already have to take a platoon commander and 2 infantry squads as tax. At that point you might as well just take more infantry squads to fill out the platoon. 

 

The problem with veterans is that they just make a special weapon squad redundant if they're in the same slot. Veterans are better as a separate unit. 

 

Not really.  My idea was that you can take squads individually or in a platoon.  That way you only have to take a Lt as a tax, which then provides leadership and orders. 

 

Also, taking the veterans in a platoon means they don't take up a force org slot, leaving you more options for elites & fast attack.  This could also remove a duplicate unit type, while making them ObSec.  They'll be out of range of the Lt, but having an ObSec vet/special weapon squad in a Valkyrie is a real threat.

 

Think of this for 1 Troops Force Org Slot:

  • 1 Lt/Command Squad providing orders & re-rolls
  • 2 Infantry Platoons
  • 1 Vet squad in a Valkyrie w/4 special weapons
  • 1 Conscript squad
  • 4 independent heavy weapons teams
  • and all of it ObSec for being Troops. 

that amount of ObSec would be terrifying, even if we didn't increase their lethality at all (we still have to fix their points).  Plus the vets to harass the opponent's backfield.

 

Now elites are filled with Bullgrys, Commisars, psykers, etc. , Heavy support with LRBTs and artillery, FA slots with sentinels and hellhounds. 

 

This plays the 9th Editions missions:

  • artillery & ObSec mobile units to take opponents off their backfield objectives
  • enough ObSec to make the opponent have to come to the mid-board and face our LRBTs
  • ObSec Heavy Weapons teams for holding our backfield objectives and providing fire support

 

 

The 5th edition Infantry Platoon was:

- 1 Platoon Commander and their Command Squad (5 models)

- 2 - 5 Infantry Squads (Minimum 20 models - 50 Max)

- 0 - 5 Special Weapon Squads (Minimum 0 models - 30 Max)

- 0 - 5 Heavy Weapon Squads (Minimum 0 models - 15 Max)

- 0 - 1 Conscript Squad (Minimum 0 models - 50 Max)

 

So a single Troop choice in 5th edition could have 150 models. The only change that needed to be done back then was split off the Conscript Squad, as there was no point to take them as you already had to invest in Infantry Squads. So you were always better getting more Infantry Squads. 

 

Veterans have always been independent from the Infantry Platoon. Though they've swapped between being Elites, to being Troops, to becoming Elites again. Guard could have a perfect "holy trinity" of Troops choices. With Conscripts being cheap but durable units, Infantry Platoons for flexibility, and Veterans as the premium option.

 

I imagine GW limiting the Infantry Platoons choices though, probably to something like:

- 1 Platoon Commander and their Command Squad 

- 2 - 3 Infantry Squads 

- 0 - 1 Special Weapon Squads 

- 0 - 1 Heavy Weapon Squads 

 

You simply can't add Veteran Squads to an Infantry Platoon. As it makes the Special Weapon Squad redundant. So it might as well go to Legends if you add the Veteran Squad. Which is a shame because it's been an option forever. 

 

With the above you've just freed up 4 elite slots. Platoon Commander, Command Squad, Special Weapon Squad, and Veterans. 

 

If you want to make something like Ratlings and Ogryns more usable you could make them Troops as well. You could give them a rule similar to what Death Guard has for Cultists. "You cannot include more Militarum Auxilla units than Regiment Core Infantry units in each Astra Militarum Detachment in your army."

 

Then you've just freed up another 2 elite slots. 


Edited by jarms48, 30 April 2021 - 04:00 AM.


#116
War Angel

War Angel

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 4,370 posts


On vets and conscripts, we should be able to take them in the same platoon. Experienced troops along with replacements for lost troops. A horde of bodies to screen the important ones. Makes sense to me :-)


Then we just go back to 5th edition where no-one takes conscripts because you already have to take a platoon commander and 2 infantry squads as tax. At that point you might as well just take more infantry squads to fill out the platoon.

The problem with veterans is that they just make a special weapon squad redundant if they're in the same slot. Veterans are better as a separate unit.

Can you elaborate on this? They are currently fighting for the same space, while with the suggested change they would both be individual parts of the same platoon, not fighting for space. One would cost a little more at better accuracy, the other is cheaper, with less extra bodies. Both would be usable for different roles on the table, I would still be taking both. Could even limit the vets to one squad while the special weapons could be 2 or 3

#117
Squike

Squike

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 133 posts

 

 

I imagine GW limiting the Infantry Platoons choices though, probably to something like:

- 1 Platoon Commander and their Command Squad 

- 2 - 3 Infantry Squads 

- 0 - 1 Special Weapon Squads 

- 0 - 1 Heavy Weapon Squads 

 

 

I think this is the sweet spot between having too much in the infantry platoon that means other slots are empty and not having infantry platoons at all. this means that special weapons squads and heavy weapons squads aren't competing nearly as much with their elite and heavy counterparts respectively, enabling them to be more common on the table top but enabling you to take other hard hitting choices like LRBT & veteran squads. I also think conscripts should be outside the infantry platoon to make these the cheap infantry choice without any other tax's (LT's, & conscript squads may need a points adjustment to make this work, not sure what they are right now.)


Edited by Squike, 01 May 2021 - 06:48 AM.

  • jarms48 likes this

#118
jarms48

jarms48

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 253 posts
  • Location:Australia

I imagine GW limiting the Infantry Platoons choices though, probably to something like:
- 1 Platoon Commander and their Command Squad 
- 2 - 3 Infantry Squads 
- 0 - 1 Special Weapon Squads 
- 0 - 1 Heavy Weapon Squads

 
I think this is the sweet spot between having too much in the infantry platoon that means other slots are empty and not having infantry platoons at all. this means that special weapons squads and heavy weapons squads are competing nearly as much with their elite and heavy counterparts respectively, enabling them to be more common on the table top but enabling you to take other hard hitting choices like LRBT & veteran squads. I also think conscripts should be outside the infantry platoon to make these the cheap infantry choice without any other tax's (LT's, & conscript squads may need a points adjustment to make this work, not sure what they are right now.)

Personally, I think all Conscripts need is the Raw Recruits ability removed or changed to failing only on a 1. Which makes it easier to stack buffs on them.



I made rules for taking Militarum Tempestus in an Inquisition detachment. Regiment units in a Tau detachment and regiment units in a CSM detachment. Basically giving Guard the unique option of still being allies in other armies.

https://docs.google....eOS1zRub8E/edit

I tried to keep it as simple as possible and explain what exactly changes when taking them in each detachment. The Chaos one looks like a lot, but really it’s just that they have so many different sub-factions.

Basically it works pretty similar to Brood Brothers, swap around a few keywords. Suddenly you can now have a Chaos Lord running around with his Traitor Guardsmen, whilst the Traitor Company Commander barks orders and keeps them organised. Instead of being purely degenerate Cultists.

#119
sairence

sairence

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 896 posts

I also think conscripts should be outside the infantry platoon to make these the cheap infantry choice without any other tax's (LT's, & conscript squads may need a points adjustment to make this work, not sure what they are right now.)


In fairness, that spot (cheap infantry choice) is currently taken by barebones Scions squads. 45p for built in deepstrike that doesn't hurt you on secondaries if all you want is to fill in troop slots is amazing.

Conscripts won't be able to compete with that without offering something actually unique.

I just don't see how Platoons in general fit into the detachment structure. What I find much more likely is that they might give you a bonus for a detachment if you take certain units, similar to how Patrols are free for Drukhari.

Edited by sairence, 30 April 2021 - 12:03 PM.

gallery_30308_9518_8251.png

#120
Warhead01

Warhead01

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 3,288 posts
  • Location:Crescent City Fl.
  • Faction: The Deleted.

 

I also think conscripts should be outside the infantry platoon to make these the cheap infantry choice without any other tax's (LT's, & conscript squads may need a points adjustment to make this work, not sure what they are right now.)


In fairness, that spot (cheap infantry choice) is currently taken by barebones Scions squads. 45p for built in deepstrike that doesn't hurt you on secondaries if all you want is to fill in troop slots is amazing.

Conscripts won't be able to compete with that without offering something actually unique.

I just don't see how Platoons in general fit into the detachment structure. What I find much more likely is that they might give you a bonus for a detachment if you take certain units, similar to how Patrols are free for Drukhari.

 

Either way I don't want to pay more taxes on my Conscripts than I have too. As much as I'd enjoy bringing platoons back I don't want it to be mandatory.


uberwolve 15/01/03 - 6/18/17  username replaced 

http://warhead01.blogspot.com/
Fix Bayonets! 
Hail Hail Freedonia! 

 


#121
Brainpsyk

Brainpsyk

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 131 posts
  • Location:The Arid Zone
  • Faction: Astra Militarum of Cadia

 

Either way I don't want to pay more taxes on my Conscripts than I have too. As much as I'd enjoy bringing platoons back I don't want it to be mandatory.

 

 

In a way, I have to agree here.  9th edition favors a cheap unit that you throw up onto the point just to die.  The downside is that it makes the entire troops choice a matter of which is cheapest.  To counter that, we have to pay a tax to make them effective enough to be worth their points, or add rules (re-rolls, power from pain, doctrines, etc) to make them worth their points. 

 

Given a choice of a 45pt Scion squad, 55pt IG squad or a 100 point conscript squad, you take the 45 point scion squad every time - they'll accomplish the same thing and give me more points to use on more effective units (literally plasma cannons and a HK missile on 2 LRBTs).  Scions won't suffer from blast, eat a time clock for movement, or throw buckets of dice for 1.5 wounds (3 with FRFSRF). 

 

A squad of Wyches (the new meta thanks to GW's codex creep) is 50 points, 40 for Wracks & KabWars.  That's our new killing/efficiency target.  But there's another choice more suited to guard:  Less efficient units, but enough units to make a difference.  If I can throw an ObSec unit past a point (the screen), and have another ObSec unit behind a point, then I can hold the objective, even if you wipe the 1st one.  But to go this route, we have to have enough ObSec units where we trade 1:2 (2 of ours for 1 of theirs).  With 6 slots in a battalion, we just can't do it without paying a huge CP tax.  So you pay a tax in points, or a tax in CP.  I think spending points should allow you to play the game, spending CPs should win you the game.



#122
Crix

Crix

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 326 posts
I wouldn’t be surprised if we see a reimagining of force org for the Guard. We’ve already seen minor bending with Drukhari, and of all the factions, Guard have the tightest lore bond to utilizing an actual force org. At the same time, the current options arguably don’t really fit as they should to this organized land force.

Since every book now is getting its own expanded flair from 8th, I’d argue manipulating force org could make the most sense for IG in addition to a more robust orders system. More so than a random bonus to AP or something.

I can’t begin to fathom or describe, on a mobile device, what this might look like, but Ive brought it up for consideration.
  • Lord Raven 19 likes this

#123
Inquisitor_Lensoven

Inquisitor_Lensoven

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 2,987 posts
  • Location:C-Bangity
  • Faction: Paenito Angelus, Black Dragons



Should be... Must be...




Yeah, it's an indirect buff and nerf. It also frees up space in our heavily bloated elite options.

You could still use a command squad as a special weapons squad, but you would now have to risk the life of the commander they're suppose to be protecting. On the flip side, they'd now actually count as characters making them a buffing unit with a voxcaster, medi-pack, and/or a standard much more worthwhile.

Special Weapon Squads I'd really love the ability to take up to 4 extra Guardsmen. With the Guardsmen who don't have special weapons can swap their lasguns for shotguns, or take a voxcaster. I just think that'd be a nice option.

I think GW sells a lot of elites because it seems like all imperial factions are overloaded with elites. Marines probably have the worse once you get into the supplements.
The answer is on the floor -Shihan John Roseberry

#124
Brainpsyk

Brainpsyk

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 131 posts
  • Location:The Arid Zone
  • Faction: Astra Militarum of Cadia

We really have talked about it yet, but along with a re-imagining of the force org chart, we should also think of Guard secondaries.  Without GW rewriting the existing secondaries, we're going to give up 15 BID and 15 GTD points, just by playing the game.

 

I can't think of anything cool off the top of my head, so I'm going to toss out a couple wacky things:

  • Catachans:  "Burn 'em out!" - 1 VP for destroying a unit hit in the same turn it was hit by by a flame weapon, 2VPs if the unit was destroyed by a flame weapon (max 4 points per turn)
  • Cadians:  "Overlapping fields of fire":  1 VP for destroying a unit using units from a single force org slot, 2 VPs for destroying a unit from 2 different org slots (max 4 per turn)
  • Armageddon Steel Legion:  "Hammer and Anvil" 2 VPs if an enemy unit was destroyed in the turn that was damaged by an ASL unit that disembarked from a transport


#125
Inquisitor_Lensoven

Inquisitor_Lensoven

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 2,987 posts
  • Location:C-Bangity
  • Faction: Paenito Angelus, Black Dragons

I'm having trouble getting a sense for what might happen with Guard. In part, due to how bad Covid has been where I live I've had no opportunity to play 9th, I haven't been able to be truly involved with the game and how it's evolving, but I do long for the day where the Guard get to once more crush the enemies of the imperium under their mighty treads, and whose guns bring the sky itself falling upon its foes.

I have some theories, but first let's go through what observable facts we have right now affecting Guard:

- Huge cut to FW support:

  • Elysians Legends'd, models cut
  • DKoK extremely reduced, several models cut
  • Most FW upgrades and unique gear Legends'd
- 3 limited edition Catachan models (Colonel, Sgt, Marbo)
- No new mainline models since the 6th edition splash of Scions/Taurox/Ogryn/Hydra/Commissar
- Handful of Made-to-Order metal model runs (Kasrkin, 3rd edition regiments, Vostroyans)
- Continued regimental rules support for legacy regiments
- slightly above average rules support across 8th:
  • Specialist detachments
  • Scion regiment rules expansion
  • Considerable psychic awakening support (tank aces ho!)

I'm probably missing a few points which might belong here, but we can see a rough trend here of receiving very sub-par model support, possibly the fewest model releases of any mainline army since 5th edition, and if we factor in FW's posture, the most shrunk range of any faction, but have enjoyed fairly good rules support which respect's the Guard's diverse history - moreso than we have enjoyed since 4th edition.

GW clearly has no idea what to do with Guard as a model range, I suspect in no small part due to trademark-ability and difficulty in figuring out how to recapture the considerable revenue which goes to the numerous aftermarket Guard model makers (seriously, what other faction has whole studios who just make Imperial Guard alternate models?) in the same way Primaris took a chunk out of the Marine aftermarket industry. Mechanically, however, the Guard isn't doing too bad.

So what does this mean as a possible precedent for the future?

I think a range refresh is inevitable, but I find it hard to say whether or not it will be a good or bad thing for the faction. GW can't ignore the fact that there are other small businesses thriving off the neglect of this faction, but those same small businesses primarily cater to nostalgia (modernizing the old 3rd edition range, like Victoria Miniatures) or deliver historically and pop-culture inspired options (Mad Robot and Anvil Industries), neither of which are something GW, given its corporate anxiety over its own IP, would be likely to engage with.

They've already rebranded the faction with the moronic sounding Astra Militarum (which honestly probably hurt brand recognition in the long term, but that's another matter - we're in the Guard son), and while the few models they've released have all been Catachan, I'm not convinced they'll be the basis of a new range. Rambo is very much a product of the 80s, and Catachans landed with quite the whimper when they first came out (I don't think anyone has ever liked those models, and I have never seen a Catachan army in 15 years of playing on 3 continents), and they certainly aren't distinct enough to brand as their own IP.

Ergo, I expect something breaking with tradition - more akin to what was done in the Kasrkin/Stormtrooper to Scion transition. Could be good, like the High Elf to Lumineth in Age of Sigmar by drawing on tradition but making something distinct enough, or it could be generic and uninteresting like the Sigmarines. If we're damned lucky with the Emperor smiling upon us, I would wish for plastic Death Korps with an eye to modularity with GW selling upgrade kits to a few other regiments, but I'm also not crazy enough to think that'll happen. \

As for mechanics, Guard came through 8th pretty decently. I don't think we were ever a true powerhouse, but nor were we "alright, I was tabled turn 2, that's a new record" of late 7th edition. I think the old regiment rules will be with us for the long haul, as GW is happy to keep using them in their fluff, with Black Library and with the occasional Made to Order splash, which also means we're unlikely to see any dramatic changes to how guard units work.

Thus, in terms of "crunch," I think we'll likely stay as-is with only minor tweaks to costs, unit and weapon profiles with some mechanics to bring some of the poorly-working support units in line with other factions, like command squads and advisors, and maybe if GW is ambitious, something akin to the platoon rules or more specialized detachments (like Armoured, Mechanized, Artillery, Infantry detachments and so on) until such time the model refresh happens.

At the end of the day, the Guard "work" so until there's something which forces a more dramatic change, like a bunch of new models, I would expect more of the same, with the occasional attempt to make older concepts work again. GW keeps bringing back the specialized Guard detachments seemingly every edition under a new veneer, maybe this time they'll get it right?
as someone who was in Jr high and HS during 4th&5th with limited funds and little access to online shopping I think the lack of Catachan armies was largely in part to it being so hard to find kits for them.
I never saw a Catachan hvy weapon squad in the tripod style until I came back to the hobby last year for example.
Same with Catachan vehicle crew for tanks and APCs.
The answer is on the floor -Shihan John Roseberry




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users