Guard in the evolving meta

[depthcharge12]

Its great to see hordes on the table again. I would be extremely reluctant to see a large number of base weapons in the game getting AP bonuses again.

That is what killed infantry in previous editions. Most of the fluff is hordes vs hordes, not elite horde units vs elite horde units.

I agree considering the Guard tactics used to involve min maxed leaf blower squads (not that Mech Infantry should be off the table, but that edition was obscenely good) and I don’t want to return to that. Maybe one of IG’s buffs should be getting easy access to brigades/battalions...like why should we punish that considering it’s how their fluff is based? It would be like telling ork or Nid players that 30 man units is too much and should be nerfed down to 10 or shouldn’t get bonuses for being above a certain unit size.

 

The thing I love the most about this edition is that previously unplayable units are getting a new lease on life this edition. Min maxing can and will always be a thing, but now most units are actually usable!

 

People are generally angry that their current list can’t beat everything. Rather than changing their tactics or ideas they whine. On the other hand, if there is a large consensus on a unit backed up by facts (Dark reapers are fairly inexpensive, don’t need LoS, can come out of deepstrike, can punish other DS/outflankers, aren’t affected by other rules like -1 to hit that exist as a strategy for a number of armies), we should look at how to improve the rules and make changes, not make units obsolete.

[Scurrae]

 

Hi, I could be wrong, but I think that point for point : Ogryns > Bullgryns & Valkyrie > Chimera.

I haven't had a chance to run my recently paint Ogyrns yet so can't compare them directly against each other. That does seem like a bold statement though, I'm curious to hear your reasoning behind it.

 

As for valks and chimeras I certainly agree. They are more expensive but with their weapon load out, durability, movement, grav chute insertion and flying gunship rule its definitely worth the extra points over a chimera if you can spare them.

2 sets of bullgryns/ogyrns in transports is certainly an investment! Why 2?

 

 

Two (unconsciously write that) because I play two Ogryn in Valk, the thing is that when you have a Valk, and a good assault unit with it... it can only end by a brainless run in foes faces first turn, and it's a good moove, but if you don't have any outflank/DP to bring with them, they will have to do their sh*** by their own (my case), and one unit that run on ennemies first turn... (if you are first to play), you can consider them as a decoy more than something that can give you a pts advantage on the board... and well... two Valk -> two times better than one Valk, fast and bulky, perfect to contest during late game.

 

For Ogryn over Bullgryn, well :

- Vehicles are now juste a KEYWORD (anything can hit them)

- the way wounds roll work, mean a strengh bonus will not improve your damages against anything

Bullgrins x3 : 10 A / 7 S / -1 AP / 2 D (66.67% Hit)

Ogryns x3 : 10 A / 5 S / -1 AP / 1 D (66,67% Hit) + 9 Shots / 5 S / 0 AP / 1 D (50% Hit)

S7 vs S5 : Both same chance to wound against T4 and T8 / against T3, T5 and T7, S7 has 16.67% more chance to wound than S5 / against T6, S7 has 33,34% more chance to wound than S5.

So fare, Ogryns > Bullgryns vs 1W models, Ogryns < Bullgryns vs Vehicles (aparrently not that mutch against T8 -> 2D to compare with almost two time the number of attacks, same statment for T4 / 2W Infantry).

 

I just note that 3x3 Bullgryns cost as much as 4x3 Ogryns ; It would be a pleasure to share more of the numbers I have with those both, but my post seem already horrible to read (sorry for that ... I guess I will need to learn BBCode to make things like tables...). For Resilience, Ogryns bring more wounds but bull can choose between more durability against one type of weapon. (basically, your Ogryns trade A for S, and W for better save, when they become Bullgryns, +A and +W are usefull in any situation, +S and better save not).

 

PS : the two stat I creat to compare units are : Damages per Turn per 100 pts invest per enemy's archetype / Damages (taken) per Desctruction per 100 pts invest per weapon's archetype.

Edited January 20, 2018 by Scurrae

[Withershadow]

Ogryns are nowhere near as survivable, and being somewhat better against single wound models is a pretty poor benefit.  Guard is full of resources to deal with 1-wound models, what we need is a tough and reliable unit to throw into enemy melee units.  Bullgryns fill that role, Ogryns fall far short.

[NatBrannigan]

Yep, agree with the above.

 

I just don't think Ogryns are anywhere near the level of Bullgryns for their points. Bullgryns are far far tougher, much better at killing anything other than low toughness single wound models (where they're not far off Ogryns really) and you really don't want your expensive melee unit tied up by a horde or cheap infantry anyway.

 

I do wish the Bullgryns with slab shields gave a bonus to cover for Infantry standing behind them, like in the last edition. It's the reason I got some, I love the idea of a mobile wall (that can punch you if you get close) screening my Infantry. However losing that bonus and having murderously killy Bullgryns is a pretty good trade!

[NatBrannigan]

Taken the idea to start a thread in Amicus just to get some non Guard perspective on our army. Think it sounds pretty reasonable and I tentatively look forward to some informed discussion there!

[Withershadow]

Custodes bring back fearless Infantry blobs, I hope the march rebalance makes Commissars not suck again.

[Cap'm Heckus]

I was really hoping or a strategy or some new rule that’d make regular Ogryns fun again but we didn’t get that. Ripper guns aren’t bad (basically an assault Bolter : 12” assault 3, s5, -1ap). It’d be cool if they counted as pistols in the hands of an Ogryn. Edited January 22, 2018 by Cap'm Heckus

[depthcharge12]

I’m curious if you guys think there is a points disparity between Krieg and regular guard Infantry? Krieg are still the original 5 ppm but they have krak grenades, WS 3+, and cult of sacrifice which pretty much pays for itself. However, we don’t have integrated heavy weapons and subjectively worse orders (no FRSRF or rerolling 1’s to hit).

 

If Guard were to receive a 1 ppm increase, do y’all think it warrants the same for Krieg?

[Altasmurf]

Nah 5 ppm for guard would be fine and I think Kreig could stay the same. But I've been beating the 5ppm guardsmen drum for a while. However intergrated heavy weapon is no big deal. I actually dont even use heavy weapons in hardcore lists. I. Also un awarr of what orders they get instead but I assume it's a wash.

[duz_]

Shhh you! We dont need 5ppm guardsmen again! Im happy with 4 ppm. :)

[Withershadow]

I’m curious if you guys think there is a points disparity between Krieg and regular guard Infantry? Krieg are still the original 5 ppm but they have krak grenades, WS 3+, and cult of sacrifice which pretty much pays for itself. However, we don’t have integrated heavy weapons and subjectively worse orders (no FRSRF or rerolling 1’s to hit).

 

If Guard were to receive a 1 ppm increase, do y’all think it warrants the same for Krieg?

I think the significantly worse orders and general lack of heavy and special weapons (command squads can only take 2, SWSs don't exist), and their vehicles being awful makes this a pretty even trade. Cult of Sacrifice only really became valuable after Commissars were obliterated by nerfs, the WS3+ is mostly on 1-attack models, and the krak grenades only are worth it if you're willing to spend a lot of command points on the Grenadier stratagem.

 

The lack of any kind of re-roll auras or abilities, except for Yarrick, is also a pretty harsh drawback. I don't think they are worth 6 points a model.

[MrZakalwe]

Even at 4ppm you rarely use more than the minimum number of guard squads (even if you will sometimes splash for a second Brigade at 1k  )

 

IG are lucky to have one of the only appropriately costed troops choices in 8th.

Edited January 23, 2018 by MrZakalwe

[Scurrae]

Yep, agree with the above.

 

I just don't think Ogryns are anywhere near the level of Bullgryns for their points. Bullgryns are far far tougher, much better at killing anything other than low toughness single wound models (where they're not far off Ogryns really) and you really don't want your expensive melee unit tied up by a horde or cheap infantry anyway.

 

I do wish the Bullgryns with slab shields gave a bonus to cover for Infantry standing behind them, like in the last edition. It's the reason I got some, I love the idea of a mobile wall (that can punch you if you get close) screening my Infantry. However losing that bonus and having murderously killy Bullgryns is a pretty good trade!

 

Ogryns not that eaz to kill with hord weaponery thanks to T, and bullgryns are not that tough compare to Ogryns...

Well, they are if you opponent play so well, that he use his low AP weap against high Save units... And well... plasma-guns are so unpopular and big saves unit so omnipresent in our army...

The thing is that autocannon range (S7/AP-1) is the most efficient against Ogryns(18 success hit to kill 100pts, 24 for HB) and plasma range (S7/AP-3) is the most efficient against Bull (8 success hit to kill 100pts / 9 for Ogryns) and Both against those weapon ranges are really not far.

A competitive player always know witch weapon use against witch unit, and there is no point trying to be competitive to fight against player that are not, so, if your opponent use blob even to kill your Ogryns (+-45 success hit with boltgun to destroy 100pts) juste be glade (note : For Bullgryn, it's 126 success hit with the boltgun).

 

Offensivelly, run your numbers : Bullgryn are goods against T5 and T6 multiwound... thats all,

Against T7(3+) they are better than Ogryns, but so far from what SWS plasma does against that range. (Bullgryns 3.4W/Turn/100pts ; SWS 7.78 / 9.07(Take Aim! / Cadian Doc)W/Turn/100pts)

Against T4 multiwound and T8 multiwound they are about 0.3 wound per turn per 100pts differents (and I'm not saying Ogryns are good against those),

Against marine Bullgryns are 2.29W/Turn/100pts and Ogryns 4.32, and the dif increase with lower Saves.

Edited January 23, 2018 by Scurrae

[Withershadow]

 

Yep, agree with the above.

 

I just don't think Ogryns are anywhere near the level of Bullgryns for their points. Bullgryns are far far tougher, much better at killing anything other than low toughness single wound models (where they're not far off Ogryns really) and you really don't want your expensive melee unit tied up by a horde or cheap infantry anyway.

 

I do wish the Bullgryns with slab shields gave a bonus to cover for Infantry standing behind them, like in the last edition. It's the reason I got some, I love the idea of a mobile wall (that can punch you if you get close) screening my Infantry. However losing that bonus and having murderously killy Bullgryns is a pretty good trade!

 

Ogryns not that eaz to kill with hord weaponery thanks to T, and bullgryns are not that tough compare to Ogryns...

You are missing the point with the first half of that statement, and wrong on the second.

 

It's not an issue of whether hordes can kill Ogryns or not, the issue is that throwing Ogryns into a horde unit is not what you want to do.  You have much easier ways to deal with  hordes, like erasing them from the table with artillery or lasgun fire.

 

Regarding toughness, you're talking about a 5+ save vs. a 2+ save.  How can you dismiss this?  If this hypothetical genius opponent is targeting your Bullgryns with high AP weaponry, he is not shooting your tanks and artillery who are doing the real damage.

 

There are also TONS of multi-wound models... Terminators, Primaris, Death Guard, Possessed, Custodes, etc, and you will note that many of these are melee-oriented.  Simply sitting back and shooting stuff off the table with impunity is not really an option with the variety of infiltration and deep strike shenanigans with charge re-rolls, etc.  Since we're giving the opponent credit in this discussion, you will be engaged. Having a solid unit on your front lines that can stand up to the most badass of melee units, and requires anti-tank weaponry to remove is invaluable. That is the whole point of the Bullgryns, they fulfill a role in the army that nothing else does except maybe Baneblades (our other melee badass option). Ogryns do what most of the rest of the army can do, except not as well.

[Schlitzaf]

“Melee Badass” followed by “Baneblade” okay explain this

[duz_]

Baneblades can still shoot in combat.

Use heavy flamers on your opponent plus the 2+ to hit and they're dealing out a lot of damage at S9, Ap-2, D:D3

They kinda wanna be in combat ... ;)

[Schlitzaf]

That is kinda disturbing

[duz_]

Oh and they start with 9 attacks ... ;)

[depthcharge12]

Just want to see your initial reactions, two members in the amicus side said that orders should just be completely removed and can only be used by spending command points.

 

Discuss.

[AstraWlad]

They kinda wanna be in combat ...

http://i60.tinypic.com/iz29so.jpg

[MrZakalwe]

Just want to see your initial reactions, two members in the amicus side said that orders should just be completely removed and can only be used by spending command points.

That would be fine but we'd need significant cost reductions to most of our special weapon/heavy weapon choices to make up the infantry firepower deficit. Would be a huge unintentional buff for imperial soup lists (who tend to use the guard as CP engines) and would probably leave us with a lot more psykers on the table while.

 

The big question is 'why though'? It would just make the army less interesting.

Edited January 24, 2018 by WarriorFish
Chat speak corrected

[Halfpint100]

Just want to see your initial reactions, two members in the amicus side said that orders should just be completely removed and can only be used by spending command points.

 

Discuss.

 

Just nope, orders are the only thing which makes infantry playable. Remove orders and our already dwindling competitive playstyles are reduced again. Compared to other codexs that have been coming out, guard are loosing their place in the top tier, it would not suprise me if guard do not get top 5 in this weekends Vegas open.

[NatBrannigan]

That Amicus thread has taken off big time.

 

Last point on Bullgryns, the 2+ save is amazing but if someone shoots high AP weaponry at them you can sprinkle some of the 4++ shields in there as well. It makes them so so much tougher than Ogryns against anything at all, even if you factor in the extra Ogryn you could get for the points.

 

Keep orders, they're one of the best things about Guard! I don't think some people are playing Guard right by the sounds of it. Lots of talk of "ignoring morale" and "three orders per turn from officers". Perhaps the issue is some of the more zealous Guard commanders being, shall we say, over optimistic with their interpretations of the rules or not using the latest rules?

[WarriorFish]

Keep in mind that not everyone will look at this holistically, so take the responses with appropriate salt. Things are all relative - and are on the B&C mostly relative to MEQ - so take that into account also

 

Guard are strong in 8th, but that some armies are not isn't the Guard codex's fault (nor the other horde armies). There's always been an element of rock-paper-scissors with armies to consider too, just to complicate things further. We've more than one topic bouncing around on the B&C addressing some of these problems to highlight the codex discrepancies, perceived or real.

 

For my money if GW were to give your average Marine a bit of a shot in the arm (likely reviewing the Stratagems being easiest?) that would resolve this practically overnight. However for various reasons I don't think we can expect that, which is unfortunate for everyone.

[Thorakitai]

Getting rid of orders would be fine, if we got character auras like every other army in the game. Or all character auras were removed along with orders. That would make characters largely useless, but that seems to be the point... Edited January 24, 2018 by Thorakitai