Horde Meta! That's OUR gig....

[GuardDaddy]

CanCon ITC 40k 2019 (Australia) just had Tyranid list with 150 Termagants winning and horde lists very successful. 

 

Lists: https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/aku3y2/cancon_itc_championship_tournament_result_140/

Video: 

 

The development of horde is a direct counter to the knights and loyal 32 meta that developed over last 6 months.

 

This means that despite chess clock time pressure in tournaments (standard in ITC now including LVO2019) the common dismissal of horde list (take to long to play) is clearly something that be overcome.

 

For me (disclosure mono faction infantry guard fan) it seems this should be a list style we excel at.

 

1. what do others think about this premise?

2. Any list suggestions/combos that are particularly evil?

 

[WarriorFish]

With that many models anyone will struggle to remove them, it's taking the advantage for horde up to 11! Skewing lists and saturation (or rather super saturation?) has always been a good way to play with established metas, back in the day of mech I got some great wins by turning up with infantry because people weren't equipped for it. While Guard will benefit the same I don't think quite as much as nids.

 

Nids essentially ignore the morale aspect of the game which makes a big difference, and the main reason why I don't think it will be as effective with Guard. There's nothing stopping the same approach, but I think the Guard approach would still want some vehicles for the heavy lifting.

[MARK0SIAN]

The other key differences between horde armies like Orks or Nids (aside from the morale) are that Nids and Orks are horde units that really want to move up the board really quickly and get into CC with everything. Guard (generally) aren’t like that.

 

The other thing is that, although Guard can field a lot of infantry, that doesn’t actually mean it’s a horde. Other than conscripts, our core infantry unit size is 10. That means you’re not running a horde, you’re running a lot of individual units. Playing 3 units of 30 models is very different than playing 9 units of 10 models, even though the numbers are the same. It means you can’t run guard as a horde army as easily so I think they will always need a balance of infantry and vehicles.

[GuardDaddy]

The other key differences between horde armies like Orks or Nids (aside from the morale) are that Nids and Orks are horde units that really want to move up the board really quickly and get into CC with everything. Guard (generally) aren’t like that.

 

I think that's because people are doing it wrong! Infantry lists should not be static, the essence of this approach is to dominate the board spatially. Against close combat units guards will always die... but we can choose where and the other side of the board is where you want that to happen!

 

 

The other thing is that, although Guard can field a lot of infantry, that doesn’t actually mean it’s a horde. Other than conscripts, our core infantry unit size is 10. That means you’re not running a horde, you’re running a lot of individual units. Playing 3 units of 30 models is very different than playing 9 units of 10 models, even though the numbers are the same. It means you can’t run guard as a horde army as easily so I think they will always need a balance of infantry and vehicles.

 

This is an advantage. People to overkill guard units. I agree that you need the ability to deal with both infantry and vehicles, but not that you need them yourselves.

 

 

With that many models anyone will struggle to remove them, it's taking the advantage for horde up to 11! Skewing lists and saturation (or rather super saturation?) has always been a good way to play with established metas, back in the day of mech I got some great wins by turning up with infantry because people weren't equipped for it. While Guard will benefit the same I don't think quite as much as nids.

 

Nids essentially ignore the morale aspect of the game which makes a big difference, and the main reason why I don't think it will be as effective with Guard. There's nothing stopping the same approach, but I think the Guard approach would still want some vehicles for the heavy lifting.

 

I think that currently the starting point of many list is 'how am I going to deal with a Castellan Knight'. This has skewed weapons and lists towards anti vehicle/multiwound models. Thats perhaps why horde lists growing in popularity, as many lists have moved away from horde killers

 

With morale I find that guard infantry squads have to pass morale once. After that they have so few models to lose its not a problem, or they are wiped out anyway!

 

I don't have enough painted up yet to do a full infantry list, but the is local tourny end march. Might aim for that and give it a go 

[WarriorFish]

In the more competitive elements definitely. Either way horde is strong in 8th, and some armies struggle to have the answers more than others so there's different amounts to gain. Playing the meta is always competitive, but depends on how competitive your meta is as to how effective it is so the games in front of you should always be your focus After all, it doesn't matter what somebody you're never going to play does

[HallofStovokor]

I find that the best army composition is grenade launchers on infantry. It gives you the option to fire krak at high toughness infantry or light armor vehicles and frag gives you a lot of shots against hordes. Punishers are great against troops and can usually get 2-5 wounds against knights. Battle cannons are good against everything. Executioners are good against everything except -1 to hit armies. Demolishers are great against vehicles and good against troops. Basilisks are great against vehicles and good against troops and perfect for shooting necrons. Mortars clear away hordes. Scout sentinels are great sleeper choices, because nobody thinks to target them and they can counter da jump from the orks. Hellhounds and the banewolf are great anti-infantry weapons. The banewolf in particular will wound all infantry models on a 2+. Nid troops will die instantly and only Orks death skulls will have a save against it.

[Shamansky]

The Guard needs to be mobile and hit hard from distance. That's why i do not play Cadian and Vostroyan doctrine any more. Most of the time i take Tallarn brigade and some Elysian/Storm troopers contingent and if points allow i take a Catachan detachment of Artillery or Hellhounds. Infantry is loaded with plasma as it is still the most effitient weapon. Not that cheap as Grenade Launchers but brings more universal threat to the table, and makes every unit a target, none of them is considered as weak enough to ignore. That's the advantage of the Guard: needs and orks have model numbers, but we have unit numbers. In any case i never leave home without a Punisher Cannon or two, or twin. 

[Kallas]

This is an advantage. People to overkill guard units. I agree that you need the ability to deal with both infantry and vehicles, but not that you need them yourselves.

 

Yeah, that is definitely an advantage.

 

Against a thirty to forty strong Ork Mob, you can dump fire into it, knowing that you're very unlikely to waste shots. Against three or four ten-strong units, you need to weigh up where you drop your anti-horde guns. Take the Punisher (LRBT or Vulture) as a prime example: it's got a great anti-horde weapon, but it can only target one enemy with it; against three ten-man units of Guardsmen, at least twenty will survive those Punisher shots.

 

It does mean buffing them becomes more onerous, as one has to choose where the buffs go, but the Guard maxim has pretty much always been to take three of something to get the job done!