Friday, April 22, 2011

Fixing The Imperial Guard: Leadership/HQ

by SandWyrm


I know what you're thinking: "What?! You're not happy with the awesome codex you already have?"

Well no, not really, and it's been gnawing at me for a while.

The codex is certainly flexible and effective. I don't have a problem with it's competitiveness. But it's also feels... unfinished. Like it was designed one way and then scrambled up a bit before release. In other ways it feels bloated. With too many units stuffed in certain FOC slots and not enough in others. Given how similar the Tyrannid codex feels, I'm inclined to think it's a Cruddice thing.

Lots of stuff needs point tweaks. Both up and down.

More than anything else though, I just feel like it lacks... character. Particularly in comparison to the Ultramarine, Dark Eldar, and Grey Knight books. Sure, I can design any number of competitive forces using various kinds of tanks or artillery. But these get kind of... bland after a while. While the choices that are supposed to feel characterful either don't or aren't useful.

So let's go through some of the changes I would make to the codex. In this post I'm going to concentrate just on leadership and HQ changes. We'll assume that the points value for everything stays the same unless I mention otherwise.

1) Bring back the old 12" Leadership Bubbles.

The Guard is supposed to be a fiercely top-down organization, right? While Space Marines are supposed to be the independent-minded ones. So why are normal infantry squads running around with a Space Marines's leadership? Which is also the same as the Leadership of their Platoon Commanders.

Instead, let's make every squad in a platoon LD7 with no Veteran Sergeant options. We'll save the Veteran Sergeants for... Veteran Squads! Making them LD8/7. Platoon Commanders would still be LD8, while Company Commanders would still be LD9. Lord Commissars would continue to be LD10.

Lord Commissars, Company Commanders, and Platoon Commanders would then all have a 12" bubble of leadership around them.  Any squad within 12" could use their leadership for morale checks and orders. We'll raise the base cost of a PCS 5 points to help compensate (35 base), and add 10 points to the CCS squad (60 base). The cost of platoon infantry squads would remain the same.

2) Give some orders to the Lord Commissar.


He should come with 3 orders: "Get Back In The Fight!", "Move! Move! Move!" and a new one called "I Said HOLD!!!" that would grant stubborn to a squad until their following turn. He would be able to issue 2 of these (on second thought, just one) per turn. These would not only be fluffy, but would make him a viable low-cost Commander for a mechanized army. Instead of just being the Heavy Weapons Squad baby sitter that he is currently.

3) Make Voxes Useful


Scrap the order re-rolls. Voxes should enable any squad that has one to receive orders from an officer that also has one in his squad. But they don't get the benefit of that officer's leadership if they're outside of his 12" bubble. "What's that sir? I can't hear you!"

4) Fix Kell

Creed is fine. But Kell needs to be 30 points and simply allow a re-roll to failed orders for the officer he's with.

5) Promote Bastonne to Company Commander


It's pretty obvious if you look at his fluff and picture that he was originally intended to be a Stormtrooper commander. I'd be willing to bet that during testing he made Stormtroopers troops and that he got demoted when GW decided to make Hot Shot Lasguns be AP3. Because oh noes, we can't have an army of Marine killers running around!

Fine. Let's drop the AP3 (It's not that great anyhow) and make them 18" Assault 3 with a lasgun's STR and AP. Which makes them fiercer without going the AP3 cheese route. This way they'll kill half the Marines, on average, as the AP3 version. But they'll kill a third more Orks (About the same as Bolters). That would also allow a 2 point drop in cost (to 14 points) and mesh better with their extra attacks (pistol + CCW) in close combat. If any IG unit is going to drop from the sky, shoot, and run screaming into a unit of Orks, it's Stormtroopers. :)

So back to Bastonne. He should be an 70-point upgrade character that does all of the following:

1) Make Stormtroopers a Troop choice instead of Elite.
2) Make Vendettas a Heavy Support choice instead of Fast Attack.
3) Give Scout Sentinels the deep strike rule.
4) Allow his own squad to take a Valkyrie or Vendetta as a dedicated transport.
5) Allow his own squad to choose one of the Stormtrooper special operation rules.
Edit: 6) Give his own squad Hot Shot Lasguns and Laspistols.

That would give the IG a viable Air Cav option that isn't just an alpha-striking glass hammer.

6) Promote Al Rahem to Company Commander


Let's make the guy actually be useful and interesting instead of a one-trick pony. He's supposed to be a sneaky master of guerrilla warfare, so let's make him an 80 point upgrade character that does the following:

1) Grants Infiltrate to all platoon squads under his command that don't take a Chimera.
2) Grants Scout to all Rough Riders under his command.
3) You give up all of your heavy support slots, but can take up to 4 Fast Attack and 4 elite units.
4) After both armies have set up, but before infiltrators are placed, he may move one objective up to 12" in any direction. As long as it is at least 12" from any other objective or table edge after it's move.

This would become my preferred army very quickly.

7) Promote Mogul Kamir to Company Commander

Make him a 40-point upgrade character that makes Rough Riders troop choices. He gives his own squad horses, hunting lances, and Scout. All Priests and Lord Commissars in his army may get horses for free.

8) Promote Pask to Company Commander


I would have Pask be the way to unlock the Russ-centric armored company that every tread head really wants to run instead of Chimera spam. He belongs in a Leman Russ Vanquisher. But we need to fix that tank first. Let's make it 185 points base, with a standard S8 AP3 large blast in addition to it's anti-tank shell. You know, just like it was in the 2nd Edition codex.

To this, we add Pask for 65 points. Making the unit 250 points and BS5. Pask loses his other current special rules, but gains the following:

1) You lose 1 HQ, 1 Elite, and 1 Fast Attack slot, but may take 5 Heavy Support choices.
2) Only Russes or Hydras may be chosen for Heavy Support. Pask hates artillery.
3) Leman Russ Vanquishers become Elite choices instead of Heavy Support and have BS4. They may not be squadroned.
4) Tank Commander: Pask may issue the "Bring It Down", and "Fire On My Target" orders to any Russ, Russ Squadron, or non-embarked infantry unit. He has no other orders.
5) Intolerant Purist: An army containing Pask may not take Abhumans, Penal Legion Troops, or Psykers of any kind.
6) Guileless Strategist: When deploying, do not roll for first turn. An opponent of an army containing Pask may choose to go either first or second. If going second, an army containing Pask will seize the initiative on a D6 Roll of 5+.

Russes would still not be scoring.

Edit: Oops! Forgot Someone...

9) Tweak the Primaris Psyker

Make his useless "Nightshroud" power simply mimic the night fight rules. Raise the base cost to 85 points and give him a LD9 hood. It's right there on the model anyway.

What do you guys think?

28 comments:

  1. I think I'd like to read your fixing of Orks :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Very good ideas, although I think some of the points costs may have to be tweaked a little higher - but I really like the way you choose to show the character's background in the rules - just as I think it should be!

    Great job!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Fantastic ideas, to my mind fair and would give a greater flexibility to army building and the chance to build the list you really wanted e.g. SAS/SEALS list with Bastonne etc

    However - could one argue that GW tried this 'sort' of thing (the extra slots idea) with the previous SM codex and have since dropped it... must be a reason there somewhere although as to whether it's a good one remains to be seen.

    Also if you were to implement your ideas would you tweak say the Eldar codex and allow more options for the likes of the different craft worlds e.g. shining spears as troops for Saim-Hann and more elites slots for Biel-Tan? Or a wolf scout army for Morkai's company with land speeders as Heavy Support and Fast Attack? A new age in codex design?

    ReplyDelete
  4. sandwyrm: so basically what your saying is make a codex that is already tough as nails a tougher one? I see the rationale for all of the add ons and bonuses, but at the same time, the IG codex is strong as hell and can easily give pretty much any army a run for its money. I think if these changes were made it would hurt the army a bit more by putting it OTT. Right now as it stands the IG codex imho is one of the best balanced armies out there with the ability to build multiple different winning armies that could take on all comers. Although mogul giving troops to rough riders is a no brainer and they should have done that in this addition. lol.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Leadership bubbles: sounds good. MechVets would still be viable as they wouldn't need the leadership but the humble platoon might actually be useful with LD 9.

    Commie Lord: yes, yes and more yes. He needs to be able to do something besides glare menacingly.

    I'd also add in the Psyker Primaris, as he should really have some options somewhere. It doesn't even have to be a full suite of powers, just a couple to choose from, maybe the option of carapace armor as well.

    Bastonne: I'm in for the idea of STs as troops with Bastonne in the game and while I'm all for the other choices they don't seem terribly 5th edition to me. Certainly the dedicated Valkyrie and the special ops rules would work fine, but I think the rest might be a bit too much for an unlock character.

    Kamir: agreed.

    Al'Rahem: I'd even be fine with him if he just granted his platoon Infiltrate instead of outflank. Again for the rest, see Bastonne.

    Vanquishers: not sure. It seems like they'd be stepping too much on the toes of the LRBT then. Maybe a more accurate (TL?) small blast? Definitely give them AP1 on their main shot, though.

    Pask: I can see rules 3,4 and maybe 6. GW doesn't like crossing out units anymore, but I could definitely see elite Tank choices and a tank HQ issuing tank orders to tanks of tankfullness. Granted, I'd like the whole the package, as the Russ is my friend...

    Voxen: agreed. Maybe also give a Vox upgrade to HWS.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think an army of stormtroopers could be cool, and I do think an assault lasgun would fit more with their profile (of the top of my head assault 3 doesn't seem too crazy).

    I will say, though, that switching to Orders instead of the Ld Bubble is something that was, in my mind, made to promote infantry-guard (or at least more of a blend).
    In a world where Mech is King, it's nice to have something that says "hey, maybe I should step outside of the box" (that's physical *and* metaphorical, mind you).
    While the Ld bubble wouldn't help a meched up army per se, it's because they simply ignore the Ld value completely (until you crack the wall of armor, at least). Orders take an infantry unit and make it more flexible than a tank, on top of the other pro's (and to help balance the con's).

    It also still puts a good "cut the head off" feel on the army, as while a platoon is fine for its cost, a platoon of IG is still a bunch of IG. Most things will eat them in either shooting or assault (sometimes both).

    ReplyDelete
  7. I like what you have done, and I do agree with some of it but not all. I feel that there is nothing really wrong with the normal command structure and I understand why GW have given a high LD to squads. If you are like me and have played with Guard since 2nd edition then we know that the command element is key to your guard army. But these days we have young kids that don't understand that and would forget to implement it if it was in the current rules. so GW have made it simple for them. I don't agree with it as it does ruin the fluff that is the Guard.

    I do agree with your sugesstion with the Commissar's. When you read the fluff on the Guard they are the main players in any Army and maintain discipline and in some cases lead and take command from the front. So when I got the codex and find that Commissars are not able to give orders I was a bit confused. In this case GW got that one wrong.

    The last thing I think GW has got wrong is the vanquishers. Now I have 3 in my Army with Plasma cannons as side sponsons. I feel that Vanquishers should be Elite choices and limited to one as they are very rare as indicated in Imperial Armour book 1, and used normally as a command tank in a leman Russ Squadron.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I love the ideas. The bubble on the HQs is great (creed's obviously should be 24") and the vox change is the only way they make sense.

    The special character changes are a great idea. The FW guard lists give you some of that but their murkey quasi-legal status is pretty annoying. More options in the stock list is great.

    I have a few suggestions for that:


    Bastonne should cost an extra 20 points forcing the carapace armour upgrade, but he should also give hotshot laspistols to his squad for free. I agree AP3 spam is bad but maybe Hotshot should give rending rather than being an assault 3 lasgun. They do have pistols for assault weapons already and it fits their fluff of being overcharged lasguns rather than LMGs.


    I like Al's current ability to outflank Chimeras. It feels nice to sweep up the flanks of an opponent with a mechanised infantry force. The guard do lack a Guerilla general though and Al's fluff makes him perfect for that role. His rules you lay out are great and would fit a Tallarn or Catachan force nicely. I'd add "like the wind" to his officers though and I don't get why he needs an extra elites slot, outflanking stormtroopers? sniper spam?


    Mogul Khamir is awesome and much needed but I think all Rough Riders should have scout too.



    For Pask I'd go further with the mechanised theme to give the feel of a fast moving spearhead that you're losing from Al.

    He's gain the extra ability "Pincer Attack":
    He can outflank up to D3+1 Chimeras (and their passengers). They roll for reserves and table edge collectivly.

    It would be fun to force him to only take mounted troops, but that precludes some cool options like having techpriests which seems overly restrictive. Maybe he could have the restriction - "any infantry unit of 12 men or less that can take a chimera as a dedicated transport /must/ take one" (so blob squads don't have to buy useless transports).

    Anyway great stuff. Hopefully some day someone will actually let you play that Al Rahem list it sounds awesome.

    ReplyDelete
  9. @Uberdark

    I'm not approaching this from a standpoint of the Guard needing more power. Balance-wise I'm aiming for about the same competitiveness versus the newer 5th Edition codices that we have now. Obviously, Orks need to be fixed first. But I'm an IG guy, so this is what I care about the most.

    Being both a competitive player and a long-time IG player (3 Codices/Editions now, most of it as a casual player), I'm in a unique position to tweak things in a fluffy but competitive way without breaking the game by making everything in the codex uber.

    My goals are the following:

    1) Tweak point costs to better reflect their in-game usefulness from a competitive standpoint.

    2) Make units/characters that are interesting but uncompetitive now, more competitive. So that...

    3) More themed build options are available to lend more character to the Guard and allow for certain kinds of forces that Guard players like. Much in the same way that certain Marine characters change up the build options for their armies.

    Points costs are guesstimates (except for the Vanquisher, which has a precedent) and are open to modification through testing.

    Certain units (like Pask) can't get so ridiculously expensive that nobody takes them, so I've tried to balance their power with disadvantages. Pask's build options are extremely limited, can't be combined with another HQ or a Psyker Battle Squad, and he'll usually go 2nd in a game. Al Raheem doesn't get the big Heavy Support guns. Orders can go through Voxes, but leadership can't. Etc.

    Maybe it still seems like a bit much, but nerfs are coming later. Specifically to Veterans, Chimeras, and Valks/Vendettas. So keep that in mind. :)

    ReplyDelete
  10. Excellent post Sandy. I really don't understand how GW come out with these bland codices - even the new ones don't boast HUGE amounts of variability - when people like you can create such great posts and thing up great fixes.... and by fixes I don't mean making it more powerful like you said.

    A simple rule would be that every special character should mix up the FoC a bit.

    Great post, thoroughly enjoyable read.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Remember that the IG, Vanilla Marine and Ork codex were written as the 'test' codex(icies?) when GW decided to start the 'warmachine-ization' of 40k. Now look at the army's that have been updated after, all of them are played with characters almost mandatory at this point. The unlocking that you are talking about was pioneered in our codex, but they didn't quite get it right - well not like they did with the Space Puppies and the Space Vampires.

    So I have no doubt that in following copies of the IG codex we will see much better characters, and much more useful characters (I know you and I both tried desperately to get al raheem to work). But like I said, the IG codex was one of their first experiments in making 40k more Warmachine like (ie overpowered characters determining the outcomes of battles and having a huge impact in games), and they got some parts right and other parts wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Sandwyrm: very good points. I think sometimes posts can come out in a totally different way than what the writer is trying to say. I just read it differently. As for Orks, I still love them the way they are, except for that annoying "don't press dat" rule. I have yet to come up against something that makes me say I AM GIVING UP 40K. Inevitably as newer codices come out the other ones will show their age. But I like it when that happens. It makes me want to prove that my codex isnt dead yet. Hell, if I owned a bunch of necrons I would be hitting up the tourney scene with them right now. I think the thing about 40k is to see the weaknesses and come up with new strategies and improve tactics more than retool the codex every single year. I love to go up against someone who has gotten better and gives me a run for my money.

    Case in point, a guy from my LGS started wolves about 6 months ago, he hasnt gotten much new, but I played him a few times, and tabled him. He learned more tactics wise and finally gave me a run for my money. And no I am not saying you dont know tactics, you beat me in that soundly. lol. But why not try up something different that others say doesnt work. I was told by other people to always use lootas now I am considering taking them out as a whole. idk, just some ideas. rock on. :)

    ReplyDelete
  13. @matt1139

    Yes, I would like to see something like that for Eldar.

    Just look at how FOC-swappy the GK dex is now. Plus there's the rumors that there are few, if any troops in the next Tau Codex. The HQs you pick dictate which units count as troops.

    @Commissar Dave

    I could get beind the idea of Elite Vanquishers as standard. I agree it fits their fluff. It would also obviate somewhat the need for Pask in the first place.

    I also need to come up with a standard tank commander in a Vanquisher.

    @Korona

    Your Bastonne/Stormtrooper ideas are interesting. My thought process was that 18" Assault 3 gave them the ability to drop at > 12", shoot once, then shoot again on the next turn and assault. I also really like the visuals of them in the Dawn of War computer game, where their lasguns obviously have a much higher rate of fire than those of the normal infantry squads.

    I considered letting Al give outflank to Veteran Squads, but decided that you could already do that with my cheaper Stormtroopers and a soon-to-be-cheaper Harker. So really, that's covered in a way that's not too overpowered.

    Scout on base Rough Riders would be too much. Plus Kamir isn't that crafty on his own. Like my Pask, he just wants to run in and smack things around directly.

    Besides which, with infiltrate you can already outflank blobs that are supported by Rough Riders. If you pal Al up with Kamir then Kamir can even lead the whole scoring lot of them in… For a price. :)

    ReplyDelete
  14. @Uberdark

    The problem with Orks is that competitiveness in 40k, more and more, is becoming all about reliability. But Orks are inherently random. It's part of their character and appeal. If you roll well as an Ork player, you'll smash face. But if you roll below average, you'll have an impossible time of it against an equally skilled player with another army.

    And ya know, that's not necessarily a bad thing. There's a place for an army like that. Especially for new or more casual players. I don't want the Orks to become cold and calculating like the Tyranids.

    So the changes I'd make (off the top of me 'ead) would be minor and focus on enabling them to get around some of the tank-killing problems they have now.

    1) Make Tankbustas Decent

    Modify the "Glory Hogs" rule of Tankbustas so that they can shoot at whatever they want if they pass a LD check.

    If they destroy a vehicle in shooting or combat, they may immediately move 6" towards another vehicle (or vehicles) as if in assault. Any tank they can touch will then receive one automatic glancing hit and may be attacked (without charge bonuses of any kind) in the following assault phase if the tank does not move away.

    2) Let Kommandos Take Tank Hammers

    :)

    As for IG, I do have plans going forward (Once I get more infantry squads painted) to try out Strakken and Al Rahem. Strakken is going to be an Iron Hands Space Marine Captain. :)

    ReplyDelete
  15. ok.....tank hammers on kommandos. thats just crazy. lol.

    as for tankbustas, they could use the ......whats that called..........uhh.....ummm....oh yeah tankhunter special rule. hehehe.

    the ork army as a whole IS a tournament worthy army. and they are not just for new or casual players. thats where i disagree, you might not be able to get a win out of it every time, but they do quite well in many settings. again im stuck with this thing in my head that says, "you can beat any army as long as you interpret the setting, player, their tactics and your tactics."

    i feel like when you say, "theres a place for an army like that" you are just patting me on the head and saying, "aww its ok kid." i dont know if you mean it that way, but thats how it seems. i respect ya tons and you have helped me out a lot and of that i appreciate it too. :)

    i guess what im saying is any army with all its weaknesses has many other strengths. Some might be better than others, or vice versa, but he make what we can out of them and go from there.

    ReplyDelete
  16. oh one other thing. i forgot to mention. i almost never play my orks randomly. i know their shots are crap. so i work around it. :)

    ReplyDelete
  17. Wait guard are bad? I missed the memo didn't know they needed to be buffed and made better. Thank you SOOOO much Sandy for setting me straight. . .

    Troll face off, REALLY? More battle reports less BS babling about what you wish your AWESOME codex had. In all honesty how much"character" do you think you will get in a codex that is based around men being thrown into service against their will? If you want character play a different army than guard.

    Guard is great as is. . .that is all.

    ReplyDelete
  18. @uberdark: "i know their shots are crap. so i work around it. "

    Could you elaborate? I'm very curious...

    ReplyDelete
  19. I've started a new post for the Ork talk.

    @Rionnay

    Not bad in a competitive sense. But bad in a character/colorful sense. A lot of us old Guard players miss the per-faction mini-codices and the doctrine system in the last codex that allowed you to customize your force and and give it more flavor.

    This is an army that has 8 visually and thematically distinct miniature ranges, after all. That's Marine-level variety, but we all have to play under the same rules now.

    And yes it's whining. I admitted that already. But I write about whatever my brain is stuck on. :)

    ReplyDelete
  20. Guard are not alone in the "new codex lacks character" department, not alone by a long shot.

    Even in the 4th ed Eldar codex, where are my craftworlds?

    I have an answer for ya Sandwyrm: Invent your own flavor. Invent your own fluff. Take your Command Squad HQ dude, give him a name, a story, and kit him out with unique gear, there is your customizable force.

    Guard are a bunch of dudes thrown into a meat grinder, you aren't Space Marines, pretty barbies who get their own books written about individual guys (oh wait, you get plenty of that too).

    "Bad" units in the Guard codex (Ogryns, Stormtroopers) aren't bad at all, they are actually great, many other codices would kill for them. Sorry that they don't stack up to stuff like Hydras, Chimera Vets, Vendettas, and all the other awesome-for-cheap stuff that gets taken for granted.

    Guard with cheap psy defense? Seriously dude? You already get everything BUT that (you can actually still get it to my knowledge)but now the one advantage some armies hold over you, you negate now too?

    This is but a wish list, so all and all I am ok with it. I would not be comfortable with playing against a Guard army that literally gets everything over what it already has, no, the only 5th ed codex that gets anywhere near that level of leniency is Tyranids.

    ReplyDelete
  21. One thing I forgot, I think the platoon standard should be 5pts rather than 15. It's the same cost as the company standard but lacks the super-useful reroll aura. The odds of it being useful is next to zero. Anyway it'd be one per platoon but it can be assigned to any of the squads in the platoon, so an inf blob squad could carry it for example (and may actually get some use out of it!)


    That reasoning for the hotshot las changes is pretty sound. I guess a big external battery being used to fire more shots rather than making the shots more powerful does make sense, and if it's an indiscriminate torrent of fire that fits with it being an assault weapon too.

    The cav probably would be OP with scout but I just feel they are too static with their current rules. Maybe if they could run 2d6 that would work.
    Al + Khamir would be awesome, a huge amount of horsemen coming to save the day LotR style would be great visually.

    With Pask, I'd certainly prefer a Rommel to a Weygand. It's probably best to make him more of a tread head, strip away his air support and force him to use only guys in Russes or Chimeras. In exchange he gets the pincer attack. Manoeuvre is the essence of mechanised warfare and I think it's a lot more interesting if he gets the ability to envelop his opponent, (or at least to try).


    Anyway I don't see how this makes guard any /stronger/. These leaders encourage players to take the weakest and least competitive units in the dex and use them in fun and interesting ways. If anything it's a reason not to take an ultra-competitive mechguard list because these other options will be a ton of fun.


    As for flavour, the guard recruit from a million different worlds with a million different military traditions. The idea it's a homogenised force is nonsense. Each regiment is meant to have its own unique style of fighting and a codex that encourages that is awesome.

    ReplyDelete
  22. @MeisterKai

    I only want a hood because it's on the friggin model. I really don't care otherwise.

    If you like, I can drop him to LD8. :)

    ReplyDelete
  23. And make him not count as an officer (So no LD bubble). That would let him be 70 points.

    ReplyDelete
  24. It's certainly not a bad chunk of ideas, as long as the cost of a Vendetta gets bumped up by 20 points or so. Broken units are still broken units.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Actually, after playing them for over a year now, I think that Vendettas and Valks with MRPs should be 160 points instead of 130.

    By the same token though, some of the Russ variants need to be slightly cheaper. Exterminators should cost 140 (-10), and Eradicators should cost 145 (-15). The Punisher should be 165 (-15). All sponson prices should be cut in half.

    The Manticore should be 180 instead of 160. Hydras should probably be about 85 points or so instead of 75.

    The biggest problem with the Heavy Support section is that it needs some reliable lascannons somewhere to compete with Vendettas in a mech list. Leman Russ Annihilators with 2 Twin-linked lascannon shots would fill that roll nicely for 150 points or so.

    Sentinels are perfectly costed, but need to be elites choices instead of Fast Attack. Hellhounds are perfectly costed too.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Sandwyrm,

    You have put together a very thoughtful way to fuse fluff with efficacy in the IG Codex (as you note your goal is not to make IG better simply more varied). Any trip to a FLGS, local, or regional tournament will tell you that a majority of IGers are bringing mechvet lists with requisite vendettas/Valkyries. This is due to the current list and the current culture of the IG. Thus, the current codex helps to encourage a wider variety of lists. Your suggestions would help to add infantry companies, rough rider companies, storm trooper companies, armored companies, and other variants back into the tourney and FLGS scene.

    As a fellow leader of Tallarns, I particularly like your tweaks to Al’Rahem. I miss my old light infantry doctrine and this would bring it back with a vengeance! Your suggested changes to Al’Rahem would also eliminate the lack of flexibility caused by the current annoying rule, as you have noted in another post, that his platoon and he must outflank.

    I rather like your use of the old Night Lords rule regarding HS/FA slots. Over the years, I have sometimes used a house-rule Tallarn sentinel-themed list at my FLGS that drops 2 HS slots adds another FA (with my opponents permission of course) I usually take 12 scout walkers or 9 scout walkers and a rough rider squadron. Of course, with the 2000 and 2003 IG ‘dexes I could effectively run 5 FAs because, as you recall, you could attach a squadron of sentinels to the HQ. This 4 or 5 FA variant is a fun, balanced list that wins about half the time.

    Thank you for taking the time to put this set of ideas together.



    Tallarn Commander

    IG, “We are many. They are few.”

    ReplyDelete
  27. Hey, good stuff. I agree with what you're talking about from a fluff and interest point of view. As a guy who has played with Al'Rahem forever, I was really psyched that he was in the new IG book. Heck, I've even played with him in tournament armies I love the guy so much.

    Your vision of him is a lot more fun than what is in the IG codex, for sure.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I hear whining from a lot of guard players!!!

    ReplyDelete

Recent Favorites

All-Time Favorites