More varied combat troops - opinions?

[Thomoski]

Hi all, 

Newcomer here, but one of the reasons for joining has been my research into existing fluff and lore regarding IG regiments and their composition. From my experience and perspective, guardsmen have always been portrayed as tyranids with flak armour and flashlights, deployed en-masse as human meat sheilds for heavy artillery and armour. While I think the imagery of swarms of green infantry works well for the sheer bonkers scale of 40k, on the tabletop, guardsmen kinda end up looking a bit dull and samey.

 

One of the things I think contributes to this is probably the lack of unit variety in terms of infantry (excluding stylized, like dkok, steel legion, tallarn etc). To (no pun intended) combat this, is to organise and design an army to suit the fluff of a regiment, and give units different purposes and looks to fit.

 

Just worth noting, units and organisational composition is only for fluff/off the tabletop organisation - actual deployed forces could be made up of different companies, units etc (much like actual conflicts are)

 

A few ideas I've had for mixing things up and giving guardsmen a bit more flavour:

 

Infantry:

• Medics/Medicae - Even assuming the oft-used swarm tactics of comissars, it seems odd that any combat units dont at least have one member carrying some form of quick-response medical equipment. For regular infantry units, I've started including models denoted as medicaes, usually carrying a medical bag, pouch or kit with them. This wouldnt change the rules for obvious reasons, as this is actual gear, but for fluff, I imagine them simply applying bandages to scrapes or wounds or simply easing pain of dying comrades
• Ammunition! - Poor grenadiers carrying all that weight with them, massive magazines in the weapon, carrying one with them too - why not give someone else some spare too! Much like in modern-day combat units, spare ammunition, especially for larger, heavier weapons is often shared around, so one model will carry a spare set of grenades or carrying a fresh promethuem tank for the flamer, despite being armed with a good ol lasgun.
• Ranks: Although some of the higher-level positions in the militarum are a bit confusing, boots on the ground follow a clear hierachy, which should be on display! Troopers carry one chevron, corporals two, sergeants three, etc. Troopers are usually regularly equipped, but corporals are the ones entrusted with special weapons or duties with seargeants of course leading units.

Specialist Units:

Excluding existing specialist units that actually do come with different equipment and rules, I thought that for both a fluff perspective and actually visually identifying units on the tabletop that you use for different tactics would mix things up a little. These would probably have a much more drastic effect on models, so potentially comes with the most issues regarding tabletop. For example - a recon group. Although rules-wise would still be a regular set of shock troops, the models would be kitted out as more "spec-ops" style, carrying bags and sleeping gear, more precision weapons, camo, non-standard armour etc - like scouts or commandos. This makes them clearly stand apart and would help me quickly identify which squad I would use to push forward or take objectives etc. 

 

What do you guys think of things like this, both as IG and Non-IG players? Would you have problems with such drastically different looking troops, non rules-based equipment or conversions? Any suggestions for units or cool additions/details I could add to give my squads more character? And just a side question, what do you think of non GW parts being used, particularly equipment? I know a lot of people are fans of the "what you see is what you get" rules, and adding peices of equipment without their rules applying might go agains that

Edited February 2, 2021 by Thomoski

[GuardDaddy]

I think that sounds cool....

 

So I'm using Necromunda models as a basis for my army!

[SvenIronhand]

I plan to mix in Veteran Squads, Scions (well, Ironbreakers), and Command Squads to make my army more "elite" than the average Infantry guard. I'm also going to use Forge Fathers Forge Guard to represent Squats in Exo-Armor, and use those as Bullgryns. 

[greatcrusade08]

Im using scion heads on my guard infantry to give them berets, the conscripts can have the dunce caps (helmets) as normal, for veterans i think im going to use drum magizes on thier guns to mark them out with cooler looking weaponry

[Shamansky]

 

What do you guys think of things like this, both as IG and Non-IG players? Would you have problems with such drastically different looking troops, non rules-based equipment or conversions? Any suggestions for units or cool additions/details I could add to give my squads more character? And just a side question, what do you think of non GW parts being used, particularly equipment? I know a lot of people are fans of the "what you see is what you get" rules, and adding peices of equipment without their rules applying might go agains that

As IG player i used to have same ideas. The first twenty-something guys were assembled with thorough thinking through: pose, role, equipment all were 'unique'. But then i needed a full size Brigade and a Vanguard detachment in one army. And had only two months to finish the project. Still feel shame for using 15 'easy-to-build' cadians. What i mean is if you have time and desire, go for it.

 

Would it be a problem on the table? I think that very much depends on the opponents you have. Many people enjoy playing against armies with an 'idea'. I remember a tau player who made all his army to look like an army of the Warring Kingdoms period: models with long poled vertical banners with stilized tau heraldy and letters attached to their backs, armor painted to look like it was lamellar, chinese swords, hats, helmets and so on. The conversions and paint job were very good. It was fun even to spectate the game. So what i wanted to say is if an army has a conception, inner logic or fluff and is looking good on the table with the stuff applied, very few WAAC-heads could oppose any alterations in your army. In my opinion this also makes you responsible for your ideas. I think you must make your model better than 'standart' to justify the changes you apply. Many interesting ideas were ruined by slopy fulfillment.

Edited February 3, 2021 by Shamansky

[RADU LYKAN]

In my guard armies I am trying to have each force themed around a particular battle/war and each war zone has multiple regiments combining against a certain foe.

My desert themed army currently has forces from 4 regiments in it

My cityfight army will have 3 regiments

My jungle army will have 3 regiments

I also have a couple of other regiments that I haven’t decided where they will be deployed yet.

By combining different regiments paint schemes like this I can have high and low tech stuff side by side, a platoon of veterans from one regiment, a sea of conscripts from another etc

Using similar colours but in different ways helps to tie them together as does cohesive basing

[Inso]

I can see why people would want to have a bit of unit customisation but you would need to be careful that your units still tick all the boxes for WYSIWYG... so 'medics' in infantry squads would need to be suitably toned down so as not to look like the medics in command squads.

 

Apart from that, I think recon squads, engineer squads and a variety of other squads, with the same uniforms but differently 'webbed up' would be cool. The ammo sharing idea is great... I'd even go as far to have a recon unit with ghillie suits... 

 

You could also have guard dogs acting as chain swords in your command squads/for your sgts (Close Combat Dogs :) )

 

Troopers shouldn't have any chevrons... a single chevron should be for lance Cpl... and there would be a few of those, mixed in with a unit (so more variety).

 

Yep... variety is great :) .

[Thomoski]

I can see why people would want to have a bit of unit customisation but you would need to be careful that your units still tick all the boxes for WYSIWYG... so 'medics' in infantry squads would need to be suitably toned down so as not to look like the medics in command squads.

 

Apart from that, I think recon squads, engineer squads and a variety of other squads, with the same uniforms but differently 'webbed up' would be cool. The ammo sharing idea is great... I'd even go as far to have a recon unit with ghillie suits... 

 

You could also have guard dogs acting as chain swords in your command squads/for your sgts (Close Combat Dogs )

 

Troopers shouldn't have any chevrons... a single chevron should be for lance Cpl... and there would be a few of those, mixed in with a unit (so more variety).

 

Yep... variety is great .

Yeah, I've been quite careful when it comes to actual equipment carried. For a while I hunted for the actual medic bags that you find in command squads, but instead settled for these bits from scion's sprues:

Hidden Content

As theyre in high supply, suitable for what could be considered a rudimentary field dressing kit/ first aid gear (or just a :cuss load of painkillers for putting guardsmen out of their misery, depending on your opinion I suppose) but also dont stand out enough as specialist equipment to suggest the model carries that specific piece of equipment rules-wise. I also try to simply equip normally otherwise, whereas medics in command squads are usually in a pose that suggests providing aid.

 

Regarding ranks, I will admit, I haven't seen any reference to lance corporal as a rank. I know being british GW would most likely follow the british army's enlisted rank structure, but all the lore/fluff/wikis I've read described the lower structure as Conscript/Whiteshield > Trooper > Corporal > Sergeant > etc... The sergeant model has three chevrons actually modelled, so I just worked backwards, two chevrons for corporals, entrusted with specialist equipment or weapons, troopers with one as a fully qualified guardsman, then conscripts/whiteshields with no chevrons at all

[Lord_Ikka]

As far as playing against something like that, I'd have no problems. Themed armies are fun and unique, and I enjoy playing against them. There are some practical considerations though- you need to make sure that your opponent will clearly know what models represent what in-game, so that there are no miscommunications. Otherwise, go wild. I do think for an infantry-heavy IG army you are looking at a lot of work, but doing that is up to you. Having a goal in the hobby is one way to keep up focus and attention, which is usually needed.

[walter h]

Are you talking about a full regiment of each, or say a platoon of each regiment. Perhaps a company of each.

The difficulty will be as most will say is sticking to it. Hobby drift. I am telling on myself about this. This army will be interesting to follow.

[Thomoski]

As far as playing against something like that, I'd have no problems. Themed armies are fun and unique, and I enjoy playing against them. There are some practical considerations though- you need to make sure that your opponent will clearly know what models represent what in-game, so that there are no miscommunications. Otherwise, go wild. I do think for an infantry-heavy IG army you are looking at a lot of work, but doing that is up to you. Having a goal in the hobby is one way to keep up focus and attention, which is usually needed.

Yeah, while theming them, I'm still trying to make the gear close-to-standard so at hopefully that helps clear things up. In regards to infantry-heavy IG, painting has become my downtime really, so while is probably a lot of work, the journey there is the fun part for me.

 

Are you talking about a full regiment of each, or say a platoon of each regiment. Perhaps a company of each.

The difficulty will be as most will say is sticking to it. Hobby drift. I am telling on myself about this. This army will be interesting to follow.

At the minute my plan is really only one or two sqauds per platoon for specialist roles. I might do a mechanized company or an engineering one with more of a consistent theme, or perhaps do a whole platoon in different styles of clothing, but those are mainly ideas atm, not so much plans. 

[Lord Solar Matthius]

would medics not interfear with WYSIWYG? seeing as the imperial guard has rules for med-packs? their in the command squads if you missed them. this means guard formations have the same number of medics as modern US army rifle companies (atleast the most recent version available to the public, ie 2012+ organisation), haveing 1 medic per platoon and another at the company level...

 

but more importantly it means that your med-packs are something that has rules and points, so make sure your oponent knows whether your medics are actually medics or not...

 

as for the rest of it, go ahead and be creative. each guard regiment has its own structure, markings and techlevel, so feel free to be creative in what marks rank/etc as you like. if you are looking for inspiration www.battleorder.org has lots of platoon and company level organisations from multiple countries from ww2 to modern.

 

as for recon gies? they are actually likely/usually less burdoned by bags than regular troops, why? because they always have mounts, be it a horse, a bike, or a transport, even spec-ops recon troops use horses, quadbikes or jeeps. why? because unlike dedicated combat troops, recon troops need to cover a larger area of land searching for the enemy, which to do so without slowing the advance down requires speed, they also are useually more spread out than regular forces, and thus need mobility to avoid combat with enemy combat troops (either to run away, or to consolidate and fight back, depending on doctrine and the strength of the enemy).

this need for speed results in haveing a mount and/or traveling lighter. this means imperial guard recon infantry troops are likely rideing in centaurs, chimera/taurox variants or Valkyrie variants. or on some kind of horse or bike. their bags and packs are going to be left in/on those vehicles/mounts in order to allow them to operate as quickly and stealthily as possible while dismounted.

if you want to distinguish them more, more/larger optics and a lack of heavy weaponry would be better and more realisitic. (aswell as potentially camo, sometimes a different pattern than regulars), usieng carbines (shorter lasguns) to minimise weight and bulk, perhaps less armour (to minimise bulk and noise), etc.

 

the troops you described as 'recon' strike me more as light infantry. light infantry are not really recon forces, except for themselves, but rough terrain troops and/or raiding troops. they carry more of their kit due to the fact the terrain or mission they are on might restrict the use of transports (either because the transports can fit, the transports would slow them down, or the transports would reveal their positions, or because their nation lacks the industrial capacity to give them mechanized transports, and lacks the infrastructure to supply them with organic mounts like horses). thus they have to carry everything themselves. 

->this doesn't really make sense to be mixed in with other types of guard troops unless you make them from different regiments. as generally speaking all units within a regiment are either mechanized or not mechanized. so if you want this style of troops you could also give them a different uniform to indicate a different regiment, from different unit markings all the way to completely different uniform.