PDA

View Full Version : My requests to GW



Deadmanwade
19-01-2008, 16:57
On the off chance that anyone from GW ever reads these pages and takes note (no chance really), here are my requests as a 40k player.
1.) Make IG the new "super" army in 5th ed. They've been cr4p since forever. Unless you take a drop troop, plasma equipped army or some other un-IG-like build they're not really competitive. By buffing up IG, GW will boost their sales since IG are a troop heavy army.
2.) Make shooting in 40k at least as good, if not slightly better than Hand to hand combat. Whats the point in races developing lascannons and brightlances if all their troopers are just going to get knifed. THIS IS NOT FANTASY!!!

Mad Doc Grotsnik
19-01-2008, 17:01
Yes, yes it is. Science Fantasy is quite a different beast from Science Fiction!

Shooting is all well and good, but you risk a return to the bad old days of 2nd Edition, where Overwatch essentially threatened to ruin every game. Why? No matter how cunning you were with movement, a single Devastator Squad on Overwatch was bound to punish you for the necessity of breaking cover eventually.

IG are pretty far from crap. Contrary to popular belief, they are quite the finesse army. So many options to choose from, you need to consider the synergy of your list, much like Tau, but for different reasons. Perhaps some tinkering is needed, to make certain units a bit more palatable for the majority of players, but to say they lack competitiveness just isn't true. Their troops are cheap, well disciplined with the right investment, and backed up by numerous tanks.

Bregalad
19-01-2008, 17:06
You should make separate threads for each question.
I would like to subscribe to the "IG are cr4p since forever" thread, just to see all the flaming and uproar in that thread ;)
You know, there are many many warseer readers who think otherwise! :)

Chaos and Evil
19-01-2008, 17:12
Shooting is all well and good, but you risk a return to the bad old days of 2nd Edition, where Overwatch essentially threatened to ruin every game. Why? No matter how cunning you were with movement, a single Devastator Squad on Overwatch was bound to punish you for the necessity of breaking cover eventually.

Woah, it's almost like indirect fire weapons were useful back then to hit squads on overwatch before you broke from cover...

If some indirect fire weapons were returned to the game / made more common, then overwatch could easily be re-introduced.

Mole Mortars for Space Marines! :p

Deadmanwade
19-01-2008, 17:18
As a regular IG player I have had some succes with them but still they aren't as good as most other races.
Looking at the Baltimore GT, the highest ranked IG army was 41st, with every other army in the game ranking higher with the expection of Kroot Mercenaries.
Even in WD, the IG get slaughtered in nearly every battle report unless teamed up with marines or other allies. And this goes back over the last 3 years or so.
There weapons are over-priced compared to other races. For example a 10pt plasma gun is a hell of a lot better value in the hands of a marine. (Changed for DA I know but still pricey) and the IG have what has to be considered one of the most underpowered standard infantry guns in the game.

BUT all of these points have been made before and will probably be made again, so really I'm complaining for no real reason.:)
I'd just like to see the looks on all the other players faces when the new Uber Guard Codex is released and suddenly the Guard own everyone else. Thats my dream. ;)

Deadmanwade
19-01-2008, 17:21
Mole mortars never made any sense to me. How do you aim the damned thing? Regular mortars use trajectories and gravity to do most of the work. How to you make the shell dig upwards? And what happens if the enemy are standing on a huge natural rock formation? Do you wait half an hour whilst the shell tries to dig through? ;)

Bloodknight
19-01-2008, 17:23
That was why Griffons ruled back then. Launch an inferno round against the people in overwatch and see them burn, run away in random directions, break formation and/or flee.

@bregalad: depends on if they are IG players or not. Most Ig players are fluff nuts and will even accept bad rules to play what they like most without whining.

I mean, there are lots of IG players who actually want Plasma to get rarer or more expensive for no apparent reason except the army's fluff. I'd like to see that attitude in other players sometimes.

That said: the last time IG were really good and balanced was the 2nd edition codex. The 3rd edition BBB list was an overpowered POS and the two codices after that were kicks in the nuts in terms of power.


edit:
ooking at the Baltimore GT, the highest ranked IG army was 41st, with every other army in the game ranking higher with the expection of Kroot Mercenaries.

That's like the IG's record in the whole German T3 tournament circuit. IG is dead last before Witch Hunters and Kroot Mercs, but it is the 7th most played army, after different MEq, Tyranids and (D)Eldar.

Jackal_Strain
19-01-2008, 17:31
I've been lurking on this forum for quite awhile now and I don't get this IG bashing.
I've actually stopped playing Guard for awhile, simply because I'm getting tired of winning!
The key to winning with Guard is twofold.

1.) Army composition.

2.) A sound battle plan.

My 1500p Guard army is made to meet a variety of opponents and the only army I've found marginally harder to beat than the rest is Dark eldar.
A healthy mix of basic infantry, heavy weapons squads, tanks and hardened veterans seems to work quite well for me. My favourite doctrines are sharpshooters and iron discipline.

The key to winning with any army is to stick to your plan(unless it's rubbish) even when things aren't going your way.
If you have problems remembering this, write it down! Keep the note with you as you play so it'll be there and remind. Just don't write you plan down sp your opponent can see it ;)

Oh, I'm new here btw:)

Xenocidal Maniac
19-01-2008, 17:35
On the off chance that anyone from GW ever reads these pages and takes note (no chance really), here are my requests as a 40k player.
1.) Make IG the new "super" army in 5th ed. They've been cr4p since forever. Unless you take a drop troop, plasma equipped army or some other un-IG-like build they're not really competitive. By buffing up IG, GW will boost their sales since IG are a troop heavy army.
2.) Make shooting in 40k at least as good, if not slightly better than Hand to hand combat. Whats the point in races developing lascannons and brightlances if all their troopers are just going to get knifed. THIS IS NOT FANTASY!!!

1) As a IG Player who runs that kind of army, I can tell you even then they're not really competetive.

2) Shooting is at least as good as CC.

Bloodknight
19-01-2008, 17:37
@Jackal_strain:

Two words: bad opponents.


Oh, and: Welcome to Warseer :)

thechosenone
19-01-2008, 18:01
One of my chaos armies is Lost and the Damned. I know its not exactly the same and i know its not a legal list anymore.

I found that the troops really weren't good for anything but advancing and shooting. Which isn't that bad considering how cheap the troops are. you hurl enough str 3 shots at anything, even terminators and your gunna kill something. I think with guard its a matter of everything working in unison, as it is with Lost and the Damned. Basilisks and battle cannons hit a target first and then your guard/traitors try and gun down the rest.

Its abut picking the right specilists to compliment your troops and matching the right armor to your army. My Lost and the damned had an enclosed basilisk, a russ and a hell hound. it worked sometimes and it lost sometimes but either way it was fun. Had great success against my friend and his sisters

Baltar
19-01-2008, 18:04
You should make separate threads for each question.
I would like to subscribe to the "IG are cr4p since forever" thread, just to see all the flaming and uproar in that thread ;)


Its mostly a sad sort of denial. IG continually underperforms at tournaments, etc etc etc

I feel like when people say the Guard are underpowered some people take it as some sort of insult and horrible blasphemy, because people who are Guard players are usually really passionate.

When I say the Guard is underpowered its because I love it more than any other army and I want Guard players to be able to stand up tall.

Guard can and does win a decent amount, but that doesn't mean the list isn't underpowered.

Mr Zephy
19-01-2008, 18:09
I've been lurking on this forum for quite awhile now and I don't get this IG bashing.

Hi, let me explain what happens in the "IG bashing" threads.

1) Someone (x) says that IG are bad
2) Someone else (a) agrees, and points out a reason
3) Someone else (b) disagrees and tells (a) to use tactics
4) More people point out reasons why IG are underpowered and quote tournament statistics
5) Someone else (c) agrees with (b) and tells everybody else to use tactics.

Ad Nauseam) The cycle continues.

Baltar
19-01-2008, 18:10
Hi, let me explain what happens in the "IG bashing" threads.

1) Someone (x) says that IG are bad
2) Someone else (a) agrees, and points out a reason
3) Someone else (b) disagrees and tells (a) to use tactics
4) More people point out reasons why IG are underpowered and quote tournament statistics
5) Someone else (c) agrees with (b) and tells everybody else to use tactics.

Ad Nauseam) The cycle continues.

The very fact that the last few months have been jam packed with Guard discussion just tells you that there is a sea change a brewin.

Mr Zephy
19-01-2008, 18:12
Could be true, might not be. In any case [citation needed] in true wikipedia fashion.

Baltar
19-01-2008, 18:13
Citation needed for what? That the IG has been popping up constantly in discussion for about two months?

Jackal_Strain
19-01-2008, 18:15
@Jackal_strain:

Two words: bad opponents.


Oh, and: Welcome to Warseer :)

Haha, i knew someone would say that. :)

I can assure you that's not the case. We've got every type of player in our community.

Imperialis_Dominatus
19-01-2008, 19:51
Hi, let me explain what happens in the "IG bashing" threads.

1) Someone (x) says that IG are bad
2) Someone else (a) agrees, and points out a reason
3) Someone else (b) disagrees and tells (a) to use tactics
4) More people point out reasons why IG are underpowered and quote tournament statistics
5) Someone else (c) agrees with (b) and tells everybody else to use tactics.

Ad Nauseam) The cycle continues.

You forgot people who come into the thread and ignore all statistics and go "math means nothing, lolz I shot down a Falcon with a lasgun once so Falcons sux."

EDIT: Even if Falcons haven't yet been mentioned in the conversation about IG. These people really exist, and they bother me.

Baltar
19-01-2008, 19:52
You forgot people who come into the thread and ignore all statistics and go "math means nothing, lolz I shot down a Falcon with a lasgun once so Falcons sux."

EDIT: Even if Falcons haven't yet been mentioned in the conversation about IG. These people really exist, and they bother me.

I shot down a falcon just by looking at it funny once.

Imperialis_Dominatus
19-01-2008, 19:53
I shot down a falcon just by looking at it funny once.

Oh my God, Baltar is Chuck Norris!

Better call in Lord Saurfang...

Hicks
19-01-2008, 21:29
I don't really wish for IG to become the most powerfull army, but I reckon that it would be nice if GW gave them a little boost so they can at least become competitive.

I love my army, enough to keep using it despite every battle being an uphill one. But I'm tired to see my opponents making a big smile whenever I don't get first turn.

Baltar
19-01-2008, 21:30
I don't really wish for IG to become the most powerfull army

Why not? Besides that it would bring in a lot of lame powergamers who don't care about the fluff.

Hicks
19-01-2008, 22:01
Well mostly because I wish the game would pit pretty even forces against each other, so that the winner wouldn't be known in advance. I don't like having a subpar army, but shooting fishes in a barrel doesn't look like fun to me either.

lanrak
19-01-2008, 22:21
OMG.
Hicks you want GW to produce a 40k rule set suitabley ballanced for friendly competative wargaming?

Not just a half assed hap hazzard marketing inspired 'rool of kool' , 'flava of the month' biased glossy dross?

Tisk tisk, you realy should know better.:evilgrin:

Just because other developers can produce and support games with MUCH more variety , that are intuative and efficient, AND thier level of ballance is provable.
Doesnt mean GW is going to start treating its 40k game development seriously , any time soon.(Developing new minature ranges and marketing them , thats all GW do nowadays.IMO.)

Grimtuff
19-01-2008, 23:07
I don't really wish for IG to become the most powerfull army

So we would constantly have IG vs. IG battles?

No army is "the most powerful" otherwise it would be played to the exclusion of all else wouldn't it?

Kadaan
20-01-2008, 00:13
Just to add my two cents to the discussion.

I'm a new IG player, have been collecting my IG for one year now. It is my second army. After years of building up and winning with my Chaos force I finally decided to get a second army. I narrowed it down to two choices, either Eldar or IG. What kept me away from Eldar was "teh ub3rest che3ze f4lcon!!!1111" and all the complaints.

So I started collecting IG. And I gotta admit: after playing several games with my IG I just don't seem to get the hang of it. I constantly lose, my win ratio is like 1 games outta 20. But nevertheless I keep trying. I just love my IG too much. They play totally different to Chaos (duh, that was an obvious one) and I just love it when I put down 100+ IG infantrymen in a mere 1000 points game. My mates have adopted to this. When they know I'm gonna field IG they make fun lists, not competitive ones. And with fun lists I mean sometimes ridiculous lists. And I still have a hard time winning against those.

To make this posting short:

I love guard. I will continue to play them, even if they get beaten with the nerf stick several more times. But I would also welcome some new rules to make them on par again with the other armies. Cause in my opinion as a guard player... the codex is customizable, it's fun and everything, but it still remains subpar to other codicis.

colmarekblack
20-01-2008, 00:41
So we would constantly have IG vs. IG battles?

No army is "the most powerful" otherwise it would be played to the exclusion of all else wouldn't it?

To be fair most of the battles fought in clubs/stores/ WD batreps are MEQ vs MEQ. I've only ever seen one Guard v Guard battle and I was playing as one of them.

Guard vs Guard is more realistic in the sense that most of the combatants in the 41st millenium are non-geneticly engineered humans.

Wikhed
20-01-2008, 01:07
All I ask for is every race to get an updated codex.

warboss48
20-01-2008, 14:51
I shot down a falcon just by looking at it funny once.


Oh my God, Baltar is Chuck Norris!

I'm going to have to sig this.

Deadmanwade
20-01-2008, 16:09
Thats the one thing I like about IG more than any other army. The players who use them really do like them even if their win ratio is low.
For all those people who claim to win loads of games with guards, enter them into GT's and win a few of those.
Whilst I generally disagree with math-hammer due to the randomness of rolling dice, it is true that against nearly any opponent guards/flashlights are next to useless. To those who claim that enough lasgun fire can bring down terminators (36 shots to take one down) I'd like to point out that even the smallest amount of [insert name of any other gun in the game here] fire has IG players reaching for a dustpan and brush to sweep up their casualties.

In certain situations, guard can excel. I won a couple of Apoc games using guards in bunkers with cameleoline. (2+ cover saves for the win!!). As soon as my guards left cover though they were annihilated.
Guard do have advantages if they're in the correct scenario. They can generally out-range anyone so if you're playing on short board edges you can really dish out some punishment.
I like to think my win rate with my Marines/DA/Nids is around 50% (I dont keep detailed results like many people have in their sigs), but for IG its closer to 10%

And what are these mystical "tactics" people keep refering to? I have tried varied lists and numerous different styles of play and yet still lose more than I win. If there is some holy grail of IG warfare out there, please share it.

One more thing, as the OP of this post, it was intended as a bit of lighthearted grumbling. I wasnt expecting many if any responses. Thanks :D

Raven1
20-01-2008, 16:27
Well I not be an IG guru, but I'll tell you a guard army with 10+ infantry in 1000 pts is not effectiv. I have a guard detachment in my apocalypse army, and at 1000 pts I have 60 or so models. I would suppose don't take doctrines or units because they are cool effective is more important. Like mechanized with basilisks to pound the enemy from a far and to be erradicated b chimera and Russ fire. I was what I would do if I had a pure guard list

Ironhand
20-01-2008, 16:36
I would add that tournament performance is no criteria to judge an army by. Tournament armies for the most part are designed by people looking to win the game with the army list as opposed to actual skill and tactics, so they are looking for the most broken and abusive things they can find in the list (whichever list that happens to be.)

Hicks
20-01-2008, 17:28
OMG.
Hicks you want GW to produce a 40k rule set suitabley ballanced for friendly competative wargaming?

Not just a half assed hap hazzard marketing inspired 'rool of kool' , 'flava of the month' biased glossy dross?

Tisk tisk, you realy should know better.:evilgrin:

Just because other developers can produce and support games with MUCH more variety , that are intuative and efficient, AND thier level of ballance is provable.
Doesnt mean GW is going to start treating its 40k game development seriously , any time soon.(Developing new minature ranges and marketing them , thats all GW do nowadays.IMO.)

What I wish for and what I expect in reality are two very different things, for exemple, I wish there was no war. I know GW doesn't put out the best rules, I'm aware of codex creep, BUT if everything was balanced I would enjoy 40K more.


So we would constantly have IG vs. IG battles?

No army is "the most powerful" otherwise it would be played to the exclusion of all else wouldn't it?


What??????????

Wraithbored
20-01-2008, 17:34
All I ask for is every race to get an updated codex.

The only races that really need updates are Dark Eldar, Imperial Guard and Necrons. I'm happy with my current dex and aside for a few clarifications in a FAQ (HEY GW hintetyhinthint!;) ).

Deadmanwade
20-01-2008, 18:13
I would add that tournament performance is no criteria to judge an army by. Tournament armies for the most part are designed by people looking to win the game with the army list as opposed to actual skill and tactics, so they are looking for the most broken and abusive things they can find in the list (whichever list that happens to be.)

So the reason guards have a poor tournament performance would be... that other armies are more attractive due to more strengths and less weaknesses.
If 40k cant be balanced in terms of no cheesy lists then the least games workshop could do is make the IG as cheesy as the next army.

I demand cheese for my guard. Cheddar for the troops. Parmesan for Fast Attack. Gouda for Elites. Brie for my Heavy Support and some nice Mozerella for my HQ!! :cheese:

Mr Zephy
20-01-2008, 18:28
Too true! I demand entirely unbalanced Leman Russes that will cause anyone sane to not play someone with more than one.

The_Patriot
20-01-2008, 18:34
The only races that really need updates are Dark Eldar, Imperial Guard and Necrons. I'm happy with my current dex and aside for a few clarifications in a FAQ (HEY GW hintetyhinthint!;) ).

You forget Witch Hunters and Daemonhunters. ;) Both could use a new Codex badly.

Lord_Crull
20-01-2008, 18:40
I play marines and aways get beaten by IG. Evreyone at my club plays them.

Wraithbored
20-01-2008, 18:58
You forget Witch Hunters and Daemonhunters. ;) Both could use a new Codex badly.Yes I am sorry completely missed that, you have my sincere thanks for pointing that out. Personally i'd like to see more Sisters of battle armies out there.:)

Mr Zephy
20-01-2008, 19:00
There also needs to be Xenos Hunters.

Wraithbored
20-01-2008, 19:04
So the reason guards have a poor tournament performance would be... that other armies are more attractive due to more strengths and less weaknesses.
If 40k cant be balanced in terms of no cheesy lists then the least games workshop could do is make the IG as cheesy as the next army.

I demand cheese for my guard. Cheddar for the troops. Parmesan for Fast Attack. Gouda for Elites. Brie for my Heavy Support and some nice Mozerella for my HQ!! :cheese:Don't make me post the 40k cheese sketch again :p

The_Patriot
20-01-2008, 19:04
Yes I am sorry completely missed that, you have my sincere thanks for pointing that out. Personally i'd like to see more Sisters of battle armies out there.:)

It's alright. :) It won't happen unless GW actively supports Sisters of Battle and stops treating them like the red headed step child living down by the river in a van eating government cheese. Which means GW needs to make them in plastic or resin to make them cheaper and offer battleforces as well as an army box.

xibo
20-01-2008, 19:09
Lasguns ( and shotguns, psychic arcs, ... ) are just magic against terminators. They ALWAYS fail their saves against them, especially nurgle ones. Lasguns are so cheese... See GW already started fixing the IG's overpoweredness by removing lasguns from the armoury and therewith forbidding officers to take them, because BS4 lasguns ( and hellguns ) are just purest tilsiter-cheese.

Now that they are unpure/unclean (<- dont remember what the wording of GW was ) we shall burn them all!

scratchbuilt
20-01-2008, 19:19
I'd like IG to get a power boost of course. I'd also like the models to go to 'realistic' scale rather than 'heroic' scale. (That is ordinary sized heads and hands like lotr models). Just think it would really suit IG.