7pt guardsmen and 50+pt HQs

[TheShredder]

I recently saw several people on dakkadakka commenting that, because of all their synergies, Guardsmen should cost at least 7pts per model, and that no IG HQ should be cheaper than 50pts.

Do you think they're correct? 

[Ranulf]

That’s why one avoids going to Dakkadakka.

 

Guardsmen have been targeted by the haters since 8th dropped because Guard are one of the strongest armies in this edition and are prone to abuse by using the Loyal 32 in soup lists. It’ll continue until 9th edition comes out and the meta shifts again.

 

Such is the nature of the game.

 

Guardsmen aren’t the problem, Detachments and CP usage are what needs to be looked at.

 

-Ran

[sairence]

Yeah, that's nonsense. Going up to 5 as was rumoured before CA...I could have accepted that. Anymore than that is, frankly, nothing more than the product of ridiculus hysteria with a pinch of butthurt.

 

GW needs to update Command points between different army detachment. That's literally it.

 

And regardless, there won't be any more significant point changes until CA 2019 anyway. So the dakkadakka-crowd can calm down again.

[Toxichobbit]

 

I recently saw several people on dakkadakka commenting that, because of all their synergies, Guardsmen should cost at least 7pts per model, and that no IG HQ should be cheaper than 50pts.

 

Do you think they're correct?

 

You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villany. We must be cautious ... in giving any credence to such hyperbolic drama queens. 7 points per Guardsmen is, quite frankly, idiotic. Sounds like the rustled jimmies of butthurt players to me. I'd ignore them.

 

[NatBrannigan]

7 points per Guardsman AND you have to play while sitting on a spike. It's the only logical solution.

 

Side-note: Spikes to cost 20 points each

[MrZakalwe]

I think this tells you more about how poor the dakkadakka poster is at 40k than anything else. It certainly tells you nothing of value about IG.

[Slasher956]

yeah go for it... and for another 2 points more get a sister of battle with their 3+/6++ save.... oh and HQ wise for 5 points less get a canoness with her 3+/4++.....

[TheShredder]

Oh, I almost forgot, another suggestion I saw was that the IG player should have to pay 1CP to issue an Order.

[Halfpint100]

This is why I avoid dakkadakka. Orders are our versions of auras which we have had for yonks. If you have an issue with guard. Shoot them, wet paper is stronger than flak armour

[WarriorFish]

Let's not jump on another site - that's not how we do things here.

 

You don't need to play Guard to see this is a significant penalty with no justification. As such; is there even anything of worth to discuss here? We'd be here all day if we entertained every flight of fantasy online, and this one has enough poppycock to reach Pluto.

[Toxichobbit]

Oh, I almost forgot, another suggestion I saw was that the IG player should have to pay 1CP to issue an Order.

 

Sounds fair and balanced ......

[NatBrannigan]

To be fair, with the amount of CP's we get I'm not sure I'd notice!

 

To be clear before I get quoted somewhere... That would be crazy. Guard are very good and nothing more. If you want to kill more Guardsmen take more anti-horde Infantry weapons.

 

Saying anything else is beating a dead Ogryn, fix Command points and allies and everyone will soon forget about Guardsmen.

[HallofStovokor]

That would be due to the fact that they have never played with an actual guard player. A 7 ppm guardsman would be ridiculous. That's the same price as a fire warrior. Objectively, fire warriors are better individual models. The have better guns and they have a better save.

 

Forcing the use of CP for orders is just a crybaby kind of thing. It reminds me of a space wolf player I beat, who failed to kill my veterans in close combat. When he found out that I could pull them out of combat and order them to shoot again, he rage quit. I told him that my army in general has a base save of 5+, a bs of 4+, and weapons that tickle my opponents so it was only fair that my infantry models had access to such shenanigans.

[MinoanFresco]

Hello all!

 

Welp, that would suck.

 

Ummm,

 

Taking the discussion in a different direction. Say guardsmen were 7 points a-piece? And say our commanders did cost 50-ish points? What would you have to change about their stats, synergies or equipment, regimental doctrines, etc... to make them worth THAT many points?

 

Cheers,

 

MinoanFresco

[HallofStovokor]

Hello all!

 

Welp, that would suck.

 

Ummm,

 

Taking the discussion in a different direction. Say guardsmen were 7 points a-piece? And say our commanders did cost 50-ish points? What would you have to change about their stats, synergies or equipment, regimental doctrines, etc... to make them worth THAT many points?

 

Cheers,

 

MinoanFresco

They'd need a better save and better weapons to justify the point increase. Also stratagems like overlapping fields of fire and fire on my position would need to cost a point less. Orders would still need to work. Honestly, the guard isn't the problem. The loyal 32 is what makes people angry. Easy solution is to restrict CP to the unit that earned it.

[Lord Marshal]

It's no different to the people who still insist Tau are brokenly overpowered... despite that being an edition ago. They lost to a guy a while ago, or worse still, they read on the internet they were OP, therefore it must be true!

[TheShredder]

 

They'd need a better save and better weapons to justify the point increase. Also stratagems like overlapping fields of fire and fire on my position would need to cost a point less. Orders would still need to work. Honestly, the guard isn't the problem. The loyal 32 is what makes people angry. Easy solution is to restrict CP to the unit that earned it.

 

 

Whilst I personally agree, there's this weird thing where people will endlessly hate on Guardsmen but then defend Soup and CP sharing to the death. 

 

it seems like they want guardsmen to be expensive enough to be crap in their own army, but still able to provide relatively cheap CPs to fuel Knights and the like.

[Lord Marshal]

 

 

They'd need a better save and better weapons to justify the point increase. Also stratagems like overlapping fields of fire and fire on my position would need to cost a point less. Orders would still need to work. Honestly, the guard isn't the problem. The loyal 32 is what makes people angry. Easy solution is to restrict CP to the unit that earned it.

 

 

Whilst I personally agree, there's this weird thing where people will endlessly hate on Guardsmen but then defend Soup and CP sharing to the death. 

 

it seems like they want guardsmen to be expensive enough to be crap in their own army, but still able to provide relatively cheap CPs to fuel Knights and the like.

 

 

In my experience, the people who complain about 'Guard' but defend soup are the people running Loyal 32. Their response to that of course is "W-WELL I NEED TO DO IT MYSELF TO BE IN WITH A CHANCE!" 

 

I feel like a lot of it is because of 8th's changes being hordes in general potentially quite deadly. Gone are the days where they can laugh gleefully as lasguns do absolutely nothing whilst they sweep up whole squads at a time. Now they're suddenly more of a threat after several editions of them not being so, it MUST be because they're overpowered. It doesn't help that Guard haven't really been that great since 5th, which further causes a kind of derealisation where "this shouldn't be happening!" 

 

It's almost always Space Marine players. I think there's something about the MIGHTY ANGELS OF DEATH being mowed down on the tabletop by 'mere guardsmen' that really upsets certain people.

[Tokugawa]

I guess they are marine/MEQ players. I can't imagine a Tau or Ork player has so much hatred against guards.

[TheShredder]

I guess they are marine/MEQ players. I can't imagine a Tau or Ork player has so much hatred against guards.

 

Pretty much, yeah.

 

I think the only exception was a Dark Eldar player who seemed to be of the mindset 'my HQs are overpriced pigswill, therefore no other army should be allowed useful HQs either'.

 

Then again, this is the same person who was adamant that the DE unit most in need of a price increase was Kabalite Warriors, a unit so effective that competitive players . . . avoid taking them entirely. 

[domsto]

Well dakkadakka is full of whiners and wanebe rulewritters.

 

As almost everything written on dakkadakka this is complett nonsense, and i wouldn't think to much about that.

I avoid this side pretty much.

The hate against Guard is nowhere bigger than on this side.

[Toxichobbit]

 

It's almost always Space Marine players. I think there's something about the MIGHTY ANGELS OF DEATH being mowed down on the tabletop by 'mere guardsmen' that really upsets certain people.

 

 

To be fair though, Marines are in a bad spot this edition. There's also a huge disconnect between Marine lore and how they perform on the tabletop, though that's nothing new. I was gunning down squads of Marines with Guard/having squads of my Marines gunned down by Guard back in 2nd ed. Marines have never performed the way GW describes them as performing and anyone who buys into the lore is in for a shock.

 

That's really going beyond the remit of this topic though. Lets not turn this into a Marine player bashing thread.

[Mordian Glory]

A guardsmen, on his own, has the wore stats of any main infantry in the game. Compare its stats and equipment to any other main infantry and Guardsmen are the worst. Even termagants, which cost the same pts, have a higher strength gun, are fearless and can be taken in massive swarms (which lets them reroll 1s to wound). 

 

A lone guardsmen squad is no threat and can be swept aside without any effort. But why then are Guard and Guardsmen considered so powerful? Because of synergy. The IG is an army which really encourages units to work together. Guardsmen on their own cannot achieve a huge amount. An officer on his own will get stomped by any other basic hero. A Leman russ on its own will be get tied up in combat all game. But 3 squads, an officer and a Leman Russ working together can take and hold on objective with ease. 

 

Individual guard elements are weak. When used together, they are incredibly strong. Does this mean that IG need massive points increases? No. The reason being is that our greatest strength is also our greatest weakness. It is very easy for an opponent to target a key unit in our army. For example, by killing the Leman Russes, the enemy can remove our best source of firepower. We have no way to stop our opponent from doing this, we dont have invuln saves, -1 to hit or savior protocol. With the tank support gone then infantry will struggle to do damage and be slaughtered. 

 

When facing Guard, the opposing player has to use good target priority. If they do this then the IG player will struggle. My main opponent uses mono BA or Mono Deathwatch. Both armies which are considered well below the guard. Our games are always so close and he wins as many as he loses. This because he has faced my IG so many times he knows exactly what he needs to do to beat them.  

[-Nemesis-]

I mean, stupid people say a lot of stupid things, so...

[GuardDaddy]

The issue is CP.

 

I think there is a very simple fix.

 

Insert one sentence.

 

"CP may only be used on the faction that generated them."