Welcome to Librarium Online!
I was reading the Elysian thread, and Cheredanine's comments on Arnhem got me thinking about IG airborne troopers. And when I get thinking, well, I come up with ideas like this:
Rangers Doctrine, can be given to any guard infantry unit at a cost of 5 points. The following rules apply to any unit with this doctrine:
On the Bounce: Rangers are trained as mobile infantry, and are adept at moving on foot. They gain the Move Through Cover special rule.
Base of Fire: Any Ranger unit that does not select a special weapon may equip a single guardsman with a heavy stubber at a cost of 8pts.
Assault Unit: Any Ranger unit without a heavy weapon may equip up to two guardsmen with melta bombs at a cost of 5pts each. A ranger unit with no heavy weapon/melta bombs and a heavy stubber may equip a single trooper with a melta gun at a cost of 10pts.
In a perfect world, rangers would move through cover like Light Infantry and the heavy stubber would have a modified profile, something like Heavy 3 @ 30"/Assault 1 @ 18", but I'd like to keep the initial doctrine cost down.
Anyway, you end up with squads that are pretty similar to (fairly) modern airborne units, with the heavy stubber serving as a bren gun, and the melta weaponry filling in for lewes bombs and piats. Of course, you can designate squads as support units by giving them the stubber and then a heavy bolter/autocannon. Combining this doctrine with say...drop troops, chameleoline, iron discipline and maybe veterans would give you a very nice airborne/special forces list,
I might try this out soon, as I've already got a few heavy stubbers modeled that I use as heavy bolter teams.
707 Travalonian Armored Brigade
If the tanks succeed, then victory follows.
i think its a great idea, although i think that overwatch should be brought back as well, esp. for ranger doctrine (10 man squad, 2 remain back with heavy weapon, laying cover fire while rest of unit advances up, then following turn the heavy weapon moves up while the rest of group lays cover. I know it would break the unit coherency rule, but WE, rangers are cool like that dammit!
"Goebbels was in favor of free speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you're in favor of free speech, then you're in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise. Otherwise, you're not in favor of free speech."
youve been legal pwned
http://www.librarium-online.com/foru...+new+doctrines (Ideas for new doctrines!)
I like reinstating old threads of mine
BURN THE HERETIC!
KILL THE MUTANT!
PURGE THE UNCLEAN!
The light at the end of the tunnel is an incoming freight train.
Sounds cool, were you thinking of combining this with other doctrines, how would it mesh with other special rules?
I make a point of never laughing at stupid people. They can't help that they're stupid, just as I can't help hitting them.- Aun'Vre