Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
I am pretty new to the guard and I am working out a guard army list and one thing is bothering me. I wrote up the background fluff for my army and as my regular opponent is starting guard also I decided I would take the "bad guy" role and say my army has gone against the Imperium. According to my fluff my army is the remnant of a house guard for a royal family and are trying to keep the last members from being hunted down by the inquisition.
Anyway I thought it would be fluffy to include carapace on the troops as they are a special house guard, but nearly everything I read about carapace says it stinks but then I think about all of those Vostroyan players what do they do? Is carapace really that bad? also would hardened fighters help the IG any in that regard?
Just a noob asking questions here, thanks in advance for any help.
It depends really. I don't find that taking carapace armour is such a bad deal since it comes around to 2 pts per model. However, it does decrease the number of things you can field from there. The other thing is that you will be able to make saves against bolter and shuriken catapults but special and heavy weapons will still do them in.
If your like me and fail almost every armour save you make then don't get it. If your like my regular opponents, then take it. It might make you infantry last a little longer.
In the end, I prefer to field more models but then again it does defeat the purpose of your background.
Imperial Guard: 3000 pts
Chaos Daemons: 1000 pts
Carapace is not horrible, but it is expensive. Your average Guardsman's life has to be more valuable to you than if you weren't including Carapace. Many players prefer to go with numbers over better saves; I see Carapace as being a viable piece of equipment, just keep in mind that everyone pretty much must have it (as per the rules). As for Hardened Fighters, I don't think that's very solid for a Guard army, as in most cases, you shouldn't be in CC; when you are in CC, a slightly increased WS really won't help a Guard army survive (if you're against dedicated CC troops).
Personally, I say go for it. Should be a nifty change when compared to your mate's army.
Anyway, firstly - hardened fighters IS a bad idea, generally. Against MEQ's (Marine EQuivalents) you will still strike on a 4+ in hth. Sure, they now only strike you on a 4+ also, but thats not really enough of a saving to justify the cost.
As for carapace, its not all bad. Some people feel that its better to have more bodies on the field instead (I tend to follow this style), but that doesn't make carapace useless. It does increase your survivability rate by a fair amount, and boltguns wont just automatically destroy you if you're caught out in the open. Carapace works well with the drop troops doctrine.
Most importantly, however, i'd advise you just to go with what you think looks cool. And in a friendly game, it doesn't really matter how 'efficient' your army is. And otherwise? Just 'cos they're wearing bulkier armour doesn't mean you have to use the doctrine.
"Pickles, the drummer, doodily doo. (Ding-dong, doodily, doodily, doo.)"
Also, you should google "garfield minus garfield". Awesome.
Carapace armor can be very useful. I face pure grey knights and necrons often, so having that 1+ to my armor save REALLY helps, i go from getting no save for my troops to haveing a solid save.
It depends on what kind of guard that you want. If you are going for an all infantry list then carapace is a bad choice. A good use for carapace armor is having grenadiers for both troop slots, you then take the veterans doctrine (which would probably also go with your fluff) and take 2 or 3 squads of hardened veterans. this helps fluffwise (why whould the veterans of the army be under equiped?) and makes the veterans much stronger game wise. If you infiltrate the veterans then a 4+ save will improve the unit's durability.
If you plan to include large amounts of troops then you want more bodys, and carapace armor will take away to many points to make up for the bodys you are losing.
Hardened Fighters can be fluffy but, in my opinion, Nothing will make your average guard squad very efficient in combat. Hardened Fighters will probably be more of a point sink. If you want close combat then go with Rough Riders as your first choice.
Have you looked into The Lost and the Damed? if anything you may be able to take ideas from that army.
"Thank him who puts me loath to this revenge on you who wrong me not for him who wrongd"
Like many have said, if your going for less troops, then go carapace(unless your doing drop troops, then its good despite the numbers)
dont take hardened fighters, if you want a slight chance in Hand To Hand(HTH) then(and believe me the chance is slight) use close order drill because it gives you the same int as a MEQ
Hellhounds are good tanks
Satan - "**** you Kage! And **** you Jables! I'll get you Tenacious DDDDdddddddeeeeee!!!!!!"
I would agree with comments about carapace - it's a trade off - less bodies, better save - pays your money, takes your choice.
As for hardened fighters - the only use I've found is in Kill Team on a squad of Hardened Veterans with shotguns, 2 xG/L, 1 x Flamer plus other bits - that can be fun
Only an idiot fights a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne of the kingdom of idiots would fight a war on twelve fronts.
I don't have enough experience to discuss carapace armor (except that there are usually a lot of AP5 weapons and usually a smaller number of AP4 weapons)
But if you take a look in the back of the Witch Hunters book, there is a chaos IG army displayed with Chaos Lemun Russ that looks pretty cool. I would check it out when you're building your army.
Cameleoline is a pretty good alternative to Carapace, but only if your local club plays with a fair amount of terrain. By itself, Cameleoline is cheaper than Carapace, and if combined with Light Infantry, you can play some pretty good games with deployment and cover, though these two together would be more expensive than Carapace armor by itself.
Some of the downsides are that you absolutely need cover to have an effect, there are many weapons that ignore cover and would be devestating (i.e. flamers and heavy flamers) and that it would be more difficult to model. I suppose you could think of a nifty paint scheme and say it is flak armor with the properties of Cameleoline, but yeah.
As far as my own opinion on Carapace and Hardened Fighters goes, I think that Carapace armor is a very situational kind of doctrine. If you're playing mechanized and you're not gonna be fielding a lot of troops anyway, or if that's part of your fluff, then have at it. I personally would rather field more heavy weapons. Hardened fighters does not seem like it has any situations where it would be worth taking. Or at least, the situations are so few and far between that the customization involved in taking your "normal" list and giving it Hardened fighters is more trouble than it is worth.
I will say though that the overriding thing here is to take what you want. If you think it's fluffy to take hardened fighters, take it. I'm of the mind that an army that is fluffy even if you've made a few tactical sacrifices is more fun to play with (and against) than a power gaming list, though there certainly is a place for both.
Last edited by SimulatedSnowman; June 2nd, 2008 at 20:04.
I think you need to spend more time on your floor.
2500 Black Templars