9th Ed. Wishlist?

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

7 minutes ago, duz_ said:

Interesting approach 

Would be nice to see that on more of our artillery in general. An alternative could be the pick a point on the board every unit within 6-12" of that point suffers X hits. Whether that be a fixed or variable number.

The Taroux seems a bit small to have such large area effect weapons unless it was one use only or lost transport capacity. 

Maybe a compromise would be a mobile mortar launcher:

S4, D1, AP0, Blast. Pick a spot on the board any unit within 6" make d6 attacks (ie you'd still have to roll to hit). That would still be pretty impressive and on par with the substandard Wyvren. 

I'd like the Wyvren to get ignores cover back. Maybe a similar mechanic to the above, but maybe 2D6 shots for every unit within 6". S4, D1, AP-1 and on a 6 to hit its an auto wound, or maybe on a 6 to wound its a MW + regular damage. 

I’ve grown tired of random shots/damage, and would prefer not add more dice rolls to the game.

 

admittedly random number of shots hitting targets is more thematic, but  it’s just so disappointing to spend money and time on a vehicle, and then spend points on it, just to have roll a 1 for shots and have that shot miss, when it’s literally call a multiple rocket launcher.

Edited July 11, 2022 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[dees]

1 hour ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

I’ve grown tired of random shots/damage, and would prefer not add more dice rolls to the game.

 

admittedly random number of shots hitting targets is more thematic, but  it’s just so disappointing to spend money and time on a vehicle, and then spend points on it, just to have roll a 1 for shots and have that shot miss, when it’s literally call a multiple rocket launcher.

Very true.  The more I think about it the more I'm of the mind set that good 40K players minimize the randomness of the game to better get the desired outcomes.  It is frustrating to see come new factions get that (like the DE Dark Lances did as an example) but the Lasscannon doesn't.  On the other hand randomness did make the Orks more fun to play way back when.       

[duz_]

2 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

I’ve grown tired of random shots/damage, and would prefer not add more dice rolls to the game.

Fair, randomness is inherit to a dice game though. 

In terms of speed though, I guess an alternative could be:

Fixed number of shots for a weapon. Like you said Heavy 9. Then you add multipliers based on unit size, or keyword? 

Eg. Units less than 5 are -1 to hit, 5-9 no modifier, 10+ +1. If theyre characters -1, vehicles or monsters +1 etc. The question becomes does this stack? Id say yes. (That way you're less likely to snipe a character with 9 shots). Do they stack with the capped +/- 1 modifier? I don't know someone would have to do the math. My gut says they ignore any additional modifiers good or bad. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

2 hours ago, duz_ said:

Fair, randomness is inherit to a dice game though. 

In terms of speed though, I guess an alternative could be:

Fixed number of shots for a weapon. Like you said Heavy 9. Then you add multipliers based on unit size, or keyword? 

Eg. Units less than 5 are -1 to hit, 5-9 no modifier, 10+ +1. If theyre characters -1, vehicles or monsters +1 etc. The question becomes does this stack? Id say yes. (That way you're less likely to snipe a character with 9 shots). Do they stack with the capped +/- 1 modifier? I don't know someone would have to do the math. My gut says they ignore any additional modifiers good or bad. 

Yes randomness is inherent to a dice game but there’s no reason for the random number of shots or randoms amounts of damage like this.

it really hamstrings weapons in their own niche, and 2D3 or D6+1 are just bandaides that help but don’t fix the issues.

a dedicated anti-tank weapon doing 2 damage is better than 1 but it’s still failing in its role.

same for a anti-horde weapon getting only 2 shots.

[The Pounder]

Yeah, I’m well onboard with removing the random number of shots and maybe even damage too.
 

I can understand rolling to hit and wound etc but number of shots and damage seem to make things far too random.

I find that my artillery can be incredible one turn then completely whiff the next!

My Macharius Vanquisher on the other hand tends to do reliable work with its flat 9 damage.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

A small ask.

bring the alternate chimera turret loads into the main codex.

[TCC]

To make shock troops more resilient on objectives they can have an order ‘dig in’. This this could give a modifiers to saves and/or to hits.

[domsto]

I think resilience is the one mayor Weakness of Guard. Our Tanks get oneshooted by almost everything, our Infantry dies in droves.

There are only two options to fix this either our Troops and Tanks become dirt cheap as they once where so we can afford to loose 50 Guardsmen a Turn as we have plenty on the field or we buff the saves of almost every unit. Talking about Guardsmen with a 4+Sv and Sions with a 3+Sv and so on

 

i personally wish for a mixture of both. Make the Infantry cheaper again. 40points for a barebones Squad and get rid of the flatrate nonsense. So we can field the needed amount to survive past Turn 3. And buff the Tanks( AoC is a good start) i am talking T9 on Leman Russ, T10 on Baneblade and upping some of the aussault Vehicles like the Hellhound to T8.

 

[Shamansky]

1 hour ago, domsto said:

i personally wish for a mixture of both.

Veterans with doctrines as Troops and Platoons were somewhat providing that. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

8 hours ago, domsto said:

I think resilience is the one mayor Weakness of Guard. Our Tanks get oneshooted by almost everything, our Infantry dies in droves.

There are only two options to fix this either our Troops and Tanks become dirt cheap as they once where so we can afford to loose 50 Guardsmen a Turn as we have plenty on the field or we buff the saves of almost every unit. Talking about Guardsmen with a 4+Sv and Sions with a 3+Sv and so on

 

i personally wish for a mixture of both. Make the Infantry cheaper again. 40points for a barebones Squad and get rid of the flatrate nonsense. So we can field the needed amount to survive past Turn 3. And buff the Tanks( AoC is a good start) i am talking T9 on Leman Russ, T10 on Baneblade and upping some of the aussault Vehicles like the Hellhound to T8.

 

Yeah a cheap infantry squad should be a thing.

15-20pts per squad plus upgrade costs

but the guard infantry should not be durable by any stretch of the imagination.

I think our armor is in a good spot for survivability, maybe they could use to be dropped 10-15 points but I’m not complaining about where our armor is at

 

 

7 hours ago, Shamansky said:

Veterans with doctrines as Troops and Platoons were somewhat providing that. 

Platoons don’t help with unit cost or survivability.

if cost per unit doesn’t go down the platoon system won’t make a difference (but each detachment is essentially a different style of platoon any way.)

[Shamansky]

Platoons taken as a SINGLE Troops choice helps saving slots for mass infantry. That's where they help. You will run out of slots before you fill your FOC with cheap infantry.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

2 minutes ago, Shamansky said:

Platoons taken as a SINGLE Troops choice helps saving slots for mass infantry. That's where they help. You will run out of slots before you fill your FOC with cheap infantry.

And that’s pretty pointless because as it stands you’ll still run out of points…

[Shamansky]

you were asking for cheap troops. durable by quantity. now you say they are expensive. i'm not sure i'm getting this.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

1 hour ago, Shamansky said:

you were asking for cheap troops. durable by quantity. now you say they are expensive. i'm not sure i'm getting this.

I said as it stands, as in right now.

I said for us to truly have durability through numbers, we need cheaper infantry squads, and honestly with more infantry squads there’s less need for things like HWS, and SWS, because we can simply have more special and heavy weapons, meaning squads dedicated to them are less necessary meaning the limited HS and elite slots is less of an issue.

[Shamansky]

Ah, well i ment platoons without 'all-inclusive' infantry squads, just dudes that can be upgraded if needed, as you suggested

[OldWherewolf]

I don't think the 'durability thru numbers' will work.  The few people who have done the conscript spam have stated that 300 infantry is the magical number.  Even taking 100 infantry puts the guard army in a bad place because it's no longer fun to put down 100 models just to pick them up by turn 3.  Or we have to make our infantry as bad as Gretchin, and I don't want that either.  With HotE, Conscripts at 5ppm, regular infantry with free wargear at 6ppm, and then Vets at BS3 & free wargear at 7ppm seems about right.  Now everything is a choice & trade off in army list construction. 

Even right now, making Guard infantry cheaper won't help Guard play 9th, as Guard is already asking infantry to do too much:

1. Hold objectives (with no durability...)
2. board screening/move blocking (which they do REALLY well with MMM!)
3. screen tanks (with no durability, so this doesn't fly)
4. do actions (which they do just fine, IF you can get the large blob over the line...)
5. Contribute to damage output (with free wargear & HotE this is now an option)

Screening tanks is really what's holding the infantry back, because the tanks (even the TCs) aren't doing their job.  Tanks are too fragile, under-powered and over-costed, so Guard is compensating by using infantry in a role they were never designed to do (tank screening).  So again, cheaper infantry doesn't help, Guard need ALL their tanks to step to the plate.  Tanks should be freeing-up infantry, not tying them down.

I still like platoons, not because it's a way to spam infantry, but a way of getting the infantry I want without taking additional detachments (like in a Spearhead for example).  Taking a Brigade means I have to take crappy FA choices and weak Elites to get 2 additional HS slots.  Yes, units should still be able to be taken individually, but then those individual units loose the platoon benefits (like LTs re-rolls and orders). 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

1 hour ago, Brainpsyk said:

I don't think the 'durability thru numbers' will work.  The few people who have done the conscript spam have stated that 300 infantry is the magical number.  Even taking 100 infantry puts the guard army in a bad place because it's no longer fun to put down 100 models just to pick them up by turn 3.  Or we have to make our infantry as bad as Gretchin, and I don't want that either.  With HotE, Conscripts at 5ppm, regular infantry with free wargear at 6ppm, and then Vets at BS3 & free wargear at 7ppm seems about right.  Now everything is a choice & trade off in army list construction. 

Even right now, making Guard infantry cheaper won't help Guard play 9th, as Guard is already asking infantry to do too much:

1. Hold objectives (with no durability...)
2. board screening/move blocking (which they do REALLY well with MMM!)
3. screen tanks (with no durability, so this doesn't fly)
4. do actions (which they do just fine, IF you can get the large blob over the line...)
5. Contribute to damage output (with free wargear & HotE this is now an option)

Screening tanks is really what's holding the infantry back, because the tanks (even the TCs) aren't doing their job.  Tanks are too fragile, under-powered and over-costed, so Guard is compensating by using infantry in a role they were never designed to do (tank screening).  So again, cheaper infantry doesn't help, Guard need ALL their tanks to step to the plate.  Tanks should be freeing-up infantry, not tying them down.

I still like platoons, not because it's a way to spam infantry, but a way of getting the infantry I want without taking additional detachments (like in a Spearhead for example).  Taking a Brigade means I have to take crappy FA choices and weak Elites to get 2 additional HS slots.  Yes, units should still be able to be taken individually, but then those individual units loose the platoon benefits (like LTs re-rolls and orders). 

100 infantry backed by 3-5 chimeras, and 2 leman russes, with a basilisk is much more survivable and provides quite a bit of alpha strike potential bringing a lot of S5+ multishot or multi damage weapons.

100 infantry is 100 wounds, even with trash durability, with proper placement like using cover to increase durability it’s hard for most armies to get 25+ wounds in a turn.

throw in some armor even a chimera or taurox, and you increase the number of army wide wounds by a lot with more durable targets that are bringing even more heavy weapons to bear

Edited July 19, 2022 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

1 hour ago, Brainpsyk said:

I don't think the 'durability thru numbers' will work.  The few people who have done the conscript spam have stated that 300 infantry is the magical number.  Even taking 100 infantry puts the guard army in a bad place because it's no longer fun to put down 100 models just to pick them up by turn 3.  Or we have to make our infantry as bad as Gretchin, and I don't want that either.  With HotE, Conscripts at 5ppm, regular infantry with free wargear at 6ppm, and then Vets at BS3 & free wargear at 7ppm seems about right.  Now everything is a choice & trade off in army list construction. 

Even right now, making Guard infantry cheaper won't help Guard play 9th, as Guard is already asking infantry to do too much:

1. Hold objectives (with no durability...)
2. board screening/move blocking (which they do REALLY well with MMM!)
3. screen tanks (with no durability, so this doesn't fly)
4. do actions (which they do just fine, IF you can get the large blob over the line...)
5. Contribute to damage output (with free wargear & HotE this is now an option)

Screening tanks is really what's holding the infantry back, because the tanks (even the TCs) aren't doing their job.  Tanks are too fragile, under-powered and over-costed, so Guard is compensating by using infantry in a role they were never designed to do (tank screening).  So again, cheaper infantry doesn't help, Guard need ALL their tanks to step to the plate.  Tanks should be freeing-up infantry, not tying them down.

I still like platoons, not because it's a way to spam infantry, but a way of getting the infantry I want without taking additional detachments (like in a Spearhead for example).  Taking a Brigade means I have to take crappy FA choices and weak Elites to get 2 additional HS slots.  Yes, units should still be able to be taken individually, but then those individual units loose the platoon benefits (like LTs re-rolls and orders). 

Accidental double post

Edited July 19, 2022 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[sairence]

Good armies in the current game will kill 100 Guardsmen in the open turn 1 just fine. Craftworlds don't break a sweat removing even more, Tau can do it just fine too to name just a few examples. Sisters will do it turn 2, when their cc-units connects, and will hide everything of value before that. Same with Blood Angels. Hell, Guard can remove plenty of bodies, given half a chance.

Besides, you're not going to manage sticking 100+ Guardsmen in good cover AND have them be able to sally out to grab objectives the next turn.

Good armies in the current game will kill 100 Guardsmen in the open turn 1 just fine. Craftworlds don't break a sweat removing even more, Tau can do it just fine too to name just a few examples. Sisters will do it turn 2, when their cc-units connects, and will hide everything of value before that. Same with Blood Angels. Hell, Guard can remove plenty of bodies, given half a chance.

Besides, you're not going to manage sticking 100+ Guardsmen in good cover AND have them be able to sally out to grab objectives the next turn.

[Emperor Ming]

Yep, one of my group uses about 160 inf and 3 tank commanders, I killed almost all of it by turn 2 with eldar But at the same time as a guard player as well

Hammer of the E and aoc helped slightly, but without that it would have been a complete joke 

Guard secondaries aint great either

Guard also suffer from morale and most factions forget that it exists and its prob a reason why the points of inf squads should go back down

Edited July 19, 2022 by Emperor Ming

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

A guard army with less than 100 infantry, 3 TCs, 3 scout sentinels, and 3 basilisks, went undefeated at the Paris GT, coming in 3rd.

im not saying we should all expect these kind of results, but clearly a mix of infantry and armor doesn’t reliably get wiped.

 

I don’t play meta lists or try to min-max, just build lists I think are cool, and even standing most of my army out in the open my army managed to survive until turn 3 or 4 and nearly wiped my enemy of white scars as well, with only 36 infantry, also not using orders or strats.

Edited July 20, 2022 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[TCC]

Shoot into combat with the risk of hitting your own troops. Not a stratagem but army wide rule.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

7 minutes ago, TCC said:

Shoot into combat with the risk of hitting your own troops. Not a stratagem but army wide rule.

This is probably the most fluffy rule I’ve seen suggested lol.

on a 1 you hit your own people

[The Pounder]

Great idea TCC!

Am I misremembering in my old age? Or was there an option to do this in 2nd edition?

[Shamansky]

13 hours ago, Jud Cottrell said:

Great idea TCC!

Am I misremembering in my old age? Or was there an option to do this in 2nd edition?

I was not playing for that long, but shooting into HtH works almost like this in RPGs in WH40k setting