Tough times for the guard?

[GuardDaddy]

Pull those greycoats around you tight on the trenches of Valhalla or find some shade on Tallarn. It seems times are tough comrades. Lean into your brothers and have faith in the emperor.... for it is always darkest just before dawn.

 

Goonhammer competative tier review has us right down in the absolute depths of tier 4 in competitive play as we close out 2020.

https://www.goonhammer.com/goonhammer-competitive-tier-list-november-2020/

 

thoughts?

[MedicMike0708]

An early codex in 8th followed by large codex and power creep coupled with some CP changes and the removal of the ability to double fire ordinance when 9th dropped really hurt the guard.

 

Most competitive lists in current meta would have to be horde guard... which are by the nature of chess clocks less competitive. They have an hard counter in blast weapons, but overall they are still playable with built-in difficulty.

 

We need updated rule tweaks, we need regimental traits and doctrines built for 9th or at least made usable again (**cries while looking at Mordians**) guard have always had good synergy and command point strategies, but I think refreshing them with 9th specifically in mind (and mission objectives) is needed.

[GuardDaddy]

yeah I appreciate not having a codex an issue, especially for things like custom secondaries. I know I'm in a bit of a list planning limbo! Modelling wise I've decided to paint more infantry..... as never enough!

[duz_]

Not surprising

 

Despite its similarities to 8th, 9th is truly a different beast and we're experiencing the same index vs codex hammer we saw in early 8th

 

Until all the codexes are out it's really hard to see where everyone will rank in 9th

Hopefully we get a good shot in the arm! Or at least revise some of them points... :ermm:

[sairence]

Honestly...we'd be helped massively if secondary stacking was tweaked. Each killed unit can only give points for one secondary objective.

 

We'd still have the issue of lacking a good mid-field unit, but at least we wouldn't give up 4 points for every dead tank.

[War Angel]

I’d greatly enjoy taking 5heavy weapons squads in a platoon.

[Shamansky]

 

Honestly...we'd be helped massively if secondary stacking was tweaked. Each killed unit can only give points for one secondary objective.

We'd still have the issue of lacking a good mid-field unit, but at least we wouldn't give up 4 points for every dead tank.

It reminds me 'good old' (no) days of 5th ed, when no matter what you did in a battle, you'd lose because of 'kill points' you brought for your opponent.

[GuardDaddy]

In terms of midfield objectives a chat with friends about this and struggles guard have (he is not a guard player) elicited the following response. 'guard players don't have a single unit that reliably holds objectives, but for some reason you are fixating on this, think of it as points - you can hold an objective for 300pts. For us that might be a unit - for you its three or four'.

 

I think its a good point and made me reflect on plans. (for those interested I pointed out difficulty of doing this for 5 turns....)

[sairence]

The main issue is that again, that opens up a lot of secondaries. Not to mention the difficulties of having 3-4 units sufficiently in range.

 

And for me personally, I never enjoyed the idea of running a mass infantry horde of 200+ models. I don't see it as fun to play with or against.

[Cpt_Reaper]

I loved how GW punishes players for chooseing to not take Leman Russ tanks. I run exclusively tanks on the Malcador chassis and...I'll tell anyone to not do that. You have no Tank Commander to issue orders and if you did Malcadors can't be affected, miss out on Tank Aces and...well a Russ is just better on all fronts.

[War Angel]

I would like to see the stats for that.

 

Running 200+ guard is fun. Having that many weak bodies really makes you have to think about what your doing, as you can’t reliably kill multiple units a turn.

[Diagramdude]

The Guard still have a few tricks up their sleeve.

 

3 plasma command squads and a company commander outflanking for 1CP at a combined 8 PL. Come in 9” from the edge and rapid fire 18” with the officer able to throw out 3 Take Aim orders.

 

Full Payload manticores with a 6 damage hunter killer missile that is now S10.

 

30 Wilderness Survivor conscripts with a Malleus inquisitor and Psychic Barrier astropath to juice them up to a 2+/4++ and fearless. The ultimate tarpit.

 

Lambdan Lions Plasma Scions and Dakka Primes. Both can benefit from the Keys to the Armory and 5++ Refractor Field aura.

 

Tallarn Tank Commanders. They don’t have the reliably high damage and extra range of Gunnery Experts/Spotter Details, but Get Around Behind Them is incredible with the new terrain rules. Park behind an obscuring terrain piece, move onto the terrain in the movement phase, shoot then move back off of it. This can really force the opponent’s hand.

 

I definitely won’t argue that Guard are in a great spot, you guys are right about the secondaries being stacked against us. But we still have enough tools for good players to craft strong lists and win games. Just probably not at a significant enough rate overall as a faction to make it into the meta spotlight.

[HallofStovokor]

I think the problem is that a well balanced guard list is just giving up an automatic 15 points for 2 separate secondaries. I legitimately feel like 9th edition was tested without anyone who played guard even semi-regularly. Everything is stacked against the guard. Detachments hurt, secondaries hurt, the new marine units erase our vehicles, our blast weapons are means none of our vehicles save for the garbage chimera can shoot when tagged. I can still pull out a 50% win rate in my local meta, but I know that I've lost the second I see a marine list get set on the table in front of me. Hell, even dense terrain hurts us disproportionately. Why does a tree which does affect LoS give a basilisk -1 to hit, while a building blocking LoS doesn't do :cuss? I don't know, but GW thinks it's cool Edited December 11, 2020 by HallofStovokor

[duz_]

Why does a tree which does affect LoS give a basilisk -1 to hit, while a building blocking LoS doesn't do :cuss? I don't know, but GW thinks it's cool

I really hope they address this in the codex for our indirect fire units...

[sairence]

 

Why does a tree which does affect LoS give a basilisk -1 to hit, while a building blocking LoS doesn't do :cuss? I don't know, but GW thinks it's cool

I really hope they address this in the codex for our indirect fire units...

I doubt we'll get a pass if other armies non-LOs weapons suffer the same restriction.

 

What you might get is the +1 in LOS strat extended to all artillery, not jut Mantis and Wyvern.

[4ndroid]

a bonus for massed lasgun fire would be nice, doing 1 wound on MEQ w/ 40 shots is ridiculous 

[HallofStovokor]

 

 

Why does a tree which does affect LoS give a basilisk -1 to hit, while a building blocking LoS doesn't do :cuss? I don't know, but GW thinks it's cool

I really hope they address this in the codex for our indirect fire units...

I doubt we'll get a pass if other armies non-LOs weapons suffer the same restriction.

 

What you might get is the +1 in LOS strat extended to all artillery, not jut Mantis and Wyvern.

 

The point of my rant is that 9th edition seems as though they didn't play test it with imperial guard. A large portion of the new secondaries help space marines just dunk on imperial guard. Rules were crafted with no regard to how they operate with pretty much crucial units. The changes to overwatch and morale make the Mordian trait pointless. Who cares about +1 to overwatch when you a) need CP to overwatch and b ) can only overwatch once in a phase? Commissars are absolutely worthless now. Only Yarrick or a lord commissar still have value and it's not for the leadership buff.

 

Artillery interactions with dense terrain is a symptom of the problem with 9th. The real problem is that they only playtested with marines and crons. I know this because they failed to notice that their core rules destroyed several faction traits and even a couple of the new greater good rules. This is the main problem with GW.

Edited December 11, 2020 by HallofStovokor

[Expendable_Aquanaut]

Yeah we've definitely fallen a bit in power since our highs in 8th edition. That said, I think we should focus on the tools we do have and enjoy playing the underdog as much as possible. The wins you get playing as a worse army are so much better!

 

Also, for those of you stuck playing with one core group because of the pandemic - I would suggest trying out crusade. Secondaries arent used in crusade and so guard feels much stronger. Just a thought!

 

Our codex will come out eventually. Until then - hold the line! And maybe try crusade.

[sairence]

Having just finished a game against Nids where I tried Deathriders with their new statline, i can only say...love the horse. Embrace the saddle. Ride to ruin and a red dawn!

 

Kidding aside, i didn't actually get to charge much with them, but they were so valuable for tanking. The FNP on a 3W model is something amazing. The regular Riders soaked up a lot of damage, while the Command squad and the officer have small enough foot prints to be able to sneak into backlines very easily.

 

They don't have a lot of punch, but throw out enough attacks to chew threw chaff.

[GuardDaddy]

I am optimistic that GW are willing to give serious review of rules and expect regiment traits to get significant rewrite. Necron and death guard codex (what we've seen) have seen significant change bearing in mind 9th is 8th edition mk2 so core rules concepts remain same.

[The Pounder]

Having just finished a game against Nids where I tried Deathriders with their new statline, i can only say...love the horse. Embrace the saddle. Ride to ruin and a red dawn!

Kidding aside, i didn't actually get to charge much with them, but they were so valuable for tanking. The FNP on a 3W model is something amazing. The regular Riders soaked up a lot of damage, while the Command squad and the officer have small enough foot prints to be able to sneak into backlines very easily.

They don't have a lot of punch, but throw out enough attacks to chew threw chaff.

 

Glad to hear you’ve used the new Deathriders rules and that they were useful. How many did you use?

I was thinking of running them in 2 units of 8. Are they worth it do you think?

 

I’ve read a lot of people say we need a survivable unit to help take and hold objectives do you think Deathriders could be that unit?

[sairence]

I had 2x10 plus a command squad and an officer. The two big ones were deployed, the other two outflanking.

 

Unless you're trying to save points for something specific I can't think of many reasons to go less than full size, especially as DK ignores combat attrition modifiers.

 

Next game I'll probably try a full outriders with 40 horses.

[The Pounder]

40!!! That’s epic! I’m hoping to get the set with 16 of them, hence the squads of 8!

 

Any chance you could let me know how you get on?