Librarium Online Forums banner

Fustration with New IG

1K views 21 replies 12 participants last post by  RecklessFable 
#1 ·
Is anyone else fustrated with this new IG. I'm hearing all this talk about the new IG and i hates it. I dislike that they may loose Doctrines cuz now that makes my troops weak and vunerable.
I also dislike that they make it sound like im going to have to paint a Biziollion models.

What should i work on?

Can i go get some hea.....boss is here....crud!
 
#2 ·
sorry, i was at work.

Anyways, yeah im not sure what i should work on, while i wait for the new codex, other then countless guardsmen. I want to add a good bit of heavy weapon teams to make up for a lack of doctrines, but I'm very confused on where and how i could field them?

What should i do?, Other then call it quits and put my IGs on ebay.
 
#3 ·
If you didn't want to paint a lot of models you chose the wrong army.

What I did to get over that hill of painting a lot of troops was take the most expensive units I could until I had finally amassed enough troops to swarm the enemy. Troops might be getting cheaper, but that doesn't mean you have to take them. Don't be concerned about the rumors until the codex arrives and just keep working on your army. Make it the way you like it, and make your vision fit into the new codex rather than frustrating yourself about rules that don't even officially exist yet.

But seriously, the IG mindset is that lives are cheap. If you're not willing to throw 3 squads at an enemy HQ so your heavy weapons will have time to fire at something else, then maybe you need to rethink what army you like best.
 
#4 ·
I love IGs. My current IG army uses a mix between Light Camoflouge Infantry with Multible tanks. It actually works very well.
But without Doctines this throws a monkey wrench in the structure of my list as well as I don't Pride myself on how many causalties i recieve.:freaked-out:
 
#5 ·
Looking at those troops, I don't think you'll face many problems..

Light Infantry will definately still be there, as an upgradeable option..

Cameoline.. This one's slightly more shakey, but I think this one'll be unlockable through a Special Character (Counts As time).

And multiple tanks? You'll probably be able to field EVEN more!!! XD
 
#8 ·
Look, nobody LIKES losing men, but you have to accept, whether you like it or not, that IG are going to die faster than Marines, Orks, Eldar, half the Tyranid list, and maybe even Tau.

Can't go wrong with another Chimera.
You also can't go wrong with Vets, if you don't already have them.
I also don't think you can go wrong with more heavy weapons.
 
#9 ·
I think it's really annoying that they're apparnetly getting rid of most of the doctrine options, as they did with space marines, and that some people are saying that for some of the upgrades you'll need to have a special character because I think the best part of imperial guard, and before teh new codex, space marines, was that you could customise them to effectivly making them purely your own army. The unique way in which tyranids can modify their troops is one of my favourite things about them. Hopefully however they won't be able to get rid of the tyranid bio-morphs as the bio morphs are pretty much the basis of the army list, and if they get rid of them then they've just written a list for a whole new army basically.

I'm glad that atleast light infantry and possibly cameoline and the more popular doctrines should be staying in a way, though I think they should have kept the doctrines but abandoned the ones which no one ever used and made a load more so that you could create a completely and totally unique army, whearas everyone with the next codex will probably be running very similar armies.

That's why I am not looking forward to the release of the new codex anyway
 
  • Like
Reactions: Certs
#11 · (Edited)
As marine players will tell you, while the traits are gone, most of the really useful ones are accessible by having a Captain in your army (allows all sorts of stuff to become "troops," which accounts for many of the more popular traits), having a special character (though not as necessary as you might think), and automatically taken care of (such as two melta guns in one squad, etc.) by a revamp of the single unit entries.

I suspect the IG will be handled in a similar fashion. Rather than panicking when hearing that the doctrine system that allowed you to field an all drop-troop army, grenadier squads or AC-esque lists is gone, consider how utterly stupid GW would be to eliminate those options entirely. I'm pretty sure, for example, that your platoons will get the option to buy grav-chutes for each model at, say, +5 points each, thus allowing you to field an all-drop troop list even without doctrines. I'd be shocked if similar allowances won't be made for grenadiers, light infantry, close order drill, etc.

In short, it might be wise to hold back on the outrage until AFTER the codex comes out. You may find your list virtually unchanged.
 
#10 ·
shrug, the only thing i'm worried about with the special character issue is if they end up as bad as they are now still required for those upgrades.
personally, i'd prefer some sort of 'autarch'-like commander with various upgrades in his profile to get the doctrine abilities that i want. (i think that's how the current eldar should have gone to keep their codex:craftworld aspect or marines with their traits instead of all these armies having all-in-one general purpose lists.)

as for how Guard list composition might change, general feel from these rumors for the most part your list will stay about the same, if anything you'll be able to field a few extra squads or tanks in at their supposed reduced point costs. so just unless your doing some sort of very unorthodox doctrine list, you shouldn't have anything to worry about.

casualties are a merit of pride for IG, choke their damn rivers with your dead. the only time it ever matters is when it's a guy carrying special or heavy weapon... or your down to your last 20% of manpower.
shrug, eventually after playing IG long enough you stop really paying attention to it... though it will come back and hit you when starting one of the more 'elitist' armies after years of just playing IG, their lack of numbers will just make those casualties all the more painful.
 
#13 · (Edited)
I would hate to have a sm-esque special character doctrine combo, it works with sm because they are legendary heroes if we had rules like that replacing doctrines our army would lose it personication.:freaked-out:

Edit: Canew I agree completely, I wasnt to bothered about the sm trait going, and these option do sound good. But if GW do each codex the like the sm, they wont be as special.
 
#15 ·
So, you're saying all the IG characters aren't legendary? You're saying that Yarrick wouldn't be seen on the battlefield surrounded by men who have something in common? You're saying that by having a hero character in your army suddenly the rest of your army is meaningless? Please explain what you mean, because I have no idea what you're trying to say.
 
#16 ·
I think what he is trying to say is that an army like marines is based around big uber characters of doom and it works whereas guard is more of the guy in the unit.

I dont think we will end up with sm character style armies however I do think that is an option without named characters. For exmaple you want a mech regiment you have to take a mech commander etc with soem special character versions.

What is more likely is that each platoon will get it's own customising ability for example it takes lots of heavy wepaons so moves to the heavy support section, the whole platoon can be a drop platon etc. I think basically it is about having platoons that are the base unti from where you can add stuff.

I for one dont want the expensive characters option but a bonus for X points will be fine autuarch style.

I will also have to revamp my armies as guard are dropping so much in points. Meh they have sorted the kill point thing though so NP from me!

To the Op wait till the codex comes out and then use it for a bit dont throw the baby out with the bath water!

A
 
#17 ·
Wait so is there actually no doctrines in the new codex, or is this still a rumor?

I didn't really based my army of doctrines i made a solid army then added doctrines to make it better and to increase the point value. but other than i don't even use them.
 
#18 ·
Wait so is there actually no doctrines in the new codex, or is this still a rumor?
There most likely won't be any doctrines in the new codex, but instead, platoons will have them built in as options, like, lets say they're able to purchase grav chutes for 1p/model, or stealth for +1 model - which is basically the same thing as drop troops and cameleoline.

Also, the above is just examples, not confirmed rumours.
 
#20 ·
And it might also be true that you'll get most of what you already have, except you'll be able to buy 30% more for the points.

You never know, I have high hopes since the Codexes haven't sucked lately. If only Phil Kelly had gotten the assignment for doing Guard (he did Orks) ... /wistful sigh.
 
#21 ·
If only Phil Kelly had gotten the assignment for doing Guard (he did Orks) ... /wistful sigh.
This, I think, is 90% of the problem with any game system. When you have a dozen people writing the codices then you'll have them trying to out-do one another, conflicting visions, and slightly variable interpretations of the same rule. I think this is the root of all codex creep.
 
#22 · (Edited)
Yeah, but after the epic fail that was the Dark Angels Codex, GW must have realized that Jervis, Nerf it til it bleeds, Johnson was both making old time fans unhappy and giving newbies no incentive to buy the latest army.

I still can't believe Alessio wrecked Deamonettes the way he did. But that is a rant for a different thread.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top