Welcome to Librarium Online!
I've been reading a lot of lists for IG and noticed that people really like redundancy. Why is one of something generally considered a waste of points? Is this some hard-wired tradition or is there a solid argument for the case? Why, when there are many options, do people only take autocannons and grenade launchers? Why is every squad armed the exact same way? Are some of us lazy to think of the different uses of different arms combinations?
Something else that troubles me. I see so many people complain about the weediness of the guardsman. Who knew? Why don't you play SM? Everyone takes these crazy elite squads and justifies the choice by saying guardsman don't cut it. It seems to me like people try to make lists more and more like SM with all sorts of reserves and melta and elite units.
Alright still more ranting here but why do we use about half of the codex list available to us? All I see are vets or stormies, CCS, BTs, and sometimes vendettas, chimeras and hellhounds. NO ONE uses ratlings, psykers, ogryn, primaris, priests, enginseers, penal legions, conscripts, sentinels, rough riders, ordnance batterie...
I think a lot of the lists and thoughts right now regarding IG are close minded. Have people really tested these things that people say are garbage? Sure they aren't a marine but they have uses. Ratlings + psykers is gross! One wound causes pinning at -4 or so leadership? doesn't work against fearless? w/e - psykers just let loose that largeblast and ratlings peck at big nasties like fexes or daemon princes.
Just saying people, lets diversify.
I can understand your ranting Stonebeard. But not everyone likes redundancy (like me for example). What you've probably seen in this forum are peoples list that are configured for tournaments, or lists that are designed to win, and it is true that in these cases the same things do crop up constantly. I am in fact a bit of a hypocrite, as in the army list section you may have noticed my comments. But if you were to see me own army, you would get a totally different picture. I use all sorts of units, like ogryns, psykers, priests and ratlings, for the simple reason that they are cool, fluffy, and can be effective. In, fact, I rarely abide by my own 'rules' at all. And it is perfectly possible to play with these units, win and above all-have a fun game.
That is of course the golden rule - have fun. It is after all, still just a game. I also believe people like playing against units such as ogryns and priests, as it is more fun. I would rather play a tyranid army with killing machines ranging from trygons, to pyrovores, to gargoyles, to zoanthropes, rather than an army of genestealers. You may have got slightly the wrong impression from the army lists forum. A lot of peoples lists on there are designed to be competitive.
I for one don't care about guardsmen being weedy. In fact, that makes the game more fun (albeit in a twisted way). Theres nothing more entertaining than seeing guardmen kill chaos lords.
Another reason why I have stood with the guard for more than five years (a third of my life to date! Is that good or bad?) is their conversion potentials. The guard can be converted more than any other army in 40k.
The guard wouldn't be the guard if they were like space marines. If they were then what would be the point? None at all. I agree with you totally, and would call upon other players to try different units and army lists.
Last edited by ChadMS; December 21st, 2009 at 18:19.
You have to bear in mind a lot of the lists posted on here are quite competitive in nature, people are looking to get advice from hopefully better/more experienced players, and therefore want as much bang for their buck. Commonly taken combos such as lists of melta vets in chimeras or valk/vends and lots of demolishers are relatively cheap and effective. The more, shall we say, fluffy and varied elements are generally more expensive (points and/or money) and more situational. Autocannon/grenade launcher squads are again rather effective while being multi-functional.
I would love to be able to use ogryns because they are cool, offer a nice CC punch and have nice models but in the UK they are 140 pounds for a unit of 10 that I would want, which would buy me 4/5 tanks which would serve me a lot better in my opinion. Rough Riders are the opposite with the stupid 2nd ed models on one end or expensive forgeworld models. The ratling/PBS example you gave is quite expensive and rather a one trick pony. Sniper rifles in-game are no way near as awesome as they should be. Techpriests aren't very good at their role of fixing tanks because they are slow/expensive. Penal Legion are too random for my liking and are more of a theme centric-unit - my regiment don't want anything to do with dirty convicts.
If price is a problem then convert it! Techpriests don't have to be slow - just borrow a chimera from a command squad. You don't like insane, desperadoes ernie? Huh-highborn so-and-so
This is true, but how do you cost effectively convert ogryns? I quite like most of the fluffier elements but also like fielding as much as possible.
I see techpriests as "backroom" staff, like basilisks, they are support elements not battle field units in my opinion.
And no I prefer my more trained and disciplined insane people thank you very much
Use a standard box of Ogres from the WHFB line to convert your Ogryns. It's a bit cheaper, they're a bit cooler, easier to pose, and you can get their weapons from Bitzbarn or your own bin.
I agree that a lot of what you see here on the forums are people looking to build a winning list for tournaments or competitive gaming. If you post up your friendly list, people are going to start telling you to replace unit-such-and-such or to add this weapon to that squad etc. However, you can choose whether or not you want to do this. Some people do, others don't. Just because someone makes the suggestion to drop the Deathstrike doesn't mean that the player actually will, or will do it all the time.
Redundancy is a good thing in lists from a tactical standpoint. You never want your only anti-armor squad located all the way across the field where the enemy infantry is. And you never want the enemy to say "I only need to take out that squad, and then my tanks are safe." Redundancy ensures that whatever your army is geared-up to do, it does well, and it does regardless of casualties or deployment. It's like a safety net. I've seen Eldar armies where almost every unit was build for a different purpose, but that player was so good, and so advanced, that it rarely ever caused him troubles. And even he had duplicates of some squads, just for the purpose of making sure that they were properly deployed.
If you get into the mathhammer, some regiments just have more bang-for-the-buck when it comes to doing their job. Yeah, a plasmagun can knock out a tank, but a meltagun does it better. So it you want to kill tanks take a meltagun. If you want to kill hordes, a heavy bolter or flamer will do better than a plasmagun, so you take those instead of the plasmagun. Suddenly, you stop using plasma altogether.
And thats why I run a Melta/Plasma mix!
Conscripts are a hard unit, and really a gamble. You arent ever really sure what role they're going to be until you start the game. Sometimes you really need them to be an effective assault troop. Congrats! they've got assault weapons, when you really needed that extra CCW.
As for Elites, the points that you could use to get an elite unit can be spent elsewhere. I could take Ogryns, or I could take a Grey Knight Grandmaster/GKTs. It'll cost about the same points AND price wise, and provide me with a counter-assault unit that is far scarier than Ogryns will ever be. I don't like min-maxing, but I also don't like throwing my hard earned cash away to buy models that I will hardly ever use. If I think I might sorta use a model, I'll buy it (points to his 10 Wraithguard models), but outside of what you commonly see, I rarely use another model (Though I do want storm troopers, I can see how they'd be useful), and I love my Hellhound and varients, AND I love my basilisks (and varients).
I don't mind losing, but I don't want to spend cash to go out of my way to do so.
Because Guard units have only mediocre stats and/or serious weaknesses, you cannot rely on any one unit working. The Russ missed a clutch shot, the infantry didn't catch the order, the Chimera exploded on the first hit. Bringing two of a unit for the same purpose means you can count on them doing what you need them to. Other armies with better stats and abilities can "do it on a 2+" but, for the Guard, 'twin-linked' usually means 'two squads'.I've been reading a lot of lists for IG and noticed that people really like redundancy.I blame Codex Creep. Now that Guard is (momentarily) the best special weapon-spam army in town, we're attracting all of the hardcore competitors who don't even notice an army's fluff, let alone care. Rest assured, though, it won't last. As soon as Eldar (or Black Templars, or Dark Eldar, or maybe even Tau) get their next revision you'll be able to buy two Chimerae for a dollar as the powergamers move on. Meanwhile, we gunline/armored cav/infantry regiments are here for the long haul (and with the biggest guns, too).It seems to me like people try to make lists more and more like SM with all sorts of reserves and melta and elite units.
"My tanks have names, my men have numbers." -Col. Edmund Grahvess, 23rd Kronecker Prison Guard
If it's not too late for me to comment...
Most of the lists posted in the army list section are compedative/ tournament builds. If you have a themed army you aren't as inteerested in exploiting the codex for every bit of an advantage you can get. I rarely post in the AL section for this reason, I posted there quite commonly before the new codex came out but building the most compedative army as possible isn't what WH40k is about to me so I post more in other sections of the forum.
Also people have different ideas of what's the most compedative, all of my infantry squads use missile launchers instead of autocannons, they have used them for 5 years.
I've been a for fun gamer, i've been to 2 tournaments in my 6 years of gaming -the first one I spent more time talking to the guy I met in the first round about Tanith, time after our game (it finished fast, I had my marines he had his armoured company), between rounds, after the tourney...
I'm more interested in the fluff and social aspects of gaming than making all conquoring lists, ask my all-scout army lead by Shrike.
Anyway the new Tyranids codex wil be out soon, so people will move on to it; many people at my LGS are already begining to sell their armies to have some money for when the 'nids codex hits us.
The Emperor Protects
IG Best Gen 1st overall of 10 DE 4th overall of 6
Eldar 3rd Overall/Best General of 26--2nd Overall/Best General of 7--1st Overall/Best General of 11
Really, it's all been said. Sure there are lots of fluffy and fun reasons to play Guard, but let's face it, it is generally more fun to win with an army than to lose. I personally have a lot of units I wouldn't bring to a tourney, but I enjoy painting them and making them fit into my fluff. I bring them along when I'm playing against my similarly minded buddies, and its a great time. However, if I was putting together a fun list just to play with my friends, then I wouldn't really seek advice on a forum about how better to streamline it or make it more effective because it doesn't really need to be. However, I would definitely post my list up if I was making a take all comers, serious tourney list.
Come to think of it, it might be a cool idea for a thread for people to post their not so hardcore lists just to see what kinds of units people like to take, as opposed to units they feel like they need to take. just sayin
Formerly known as SimulatedSnowman