Tactica Imperial Guard

[b4z]

Downloading the PDF now, looking forward to reading it all. Thanks to everyone who contributed to it.

Lord Cook, could you please link the 'Imperial Guard Army List Calculator' i created, into the first post... as it will help people in compiling their army lists... and i got a lot of good feedback on it... the original thread is here : http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=196321

[Lord Cook]

in a 2 vanquisher squadron-

a) 1 hull lascannon each/no sponsons for deluxe mobile tankhunting
or
b) 3 heavy bolters each for 18+2 anti infantry shooting

I would definitely go for the lascannons without any sponsons. You may as well keep them mobile and support the role they were intended for. Makes them handy against monstrous creatures as well.

I'll set up a temporary web server (I'll keep it online for a week or two, maybe longer) where I'll host the file to get around the pesky rapidshare if it's okay by you.

Of course. Thank you.

Here's a question for you.

When constructing squadrons (hellhounds, leman russ or artillery), is it generally recommended to build specialised squadrons (e.g. all geared for anti-tank or anti-infantry role) or a mix, giving the squadron more flexibility?

I would favour specialised squadrons. The vehicles are forced to target the same enemies, so it seems counter intuitive to have vehicles whose intended targets aren't the same as each other.

Really wish I could see this but the problem is Rapidshare isnt playing nice and the other mirrior site SGT john Keel put up doesnt load for me for some reason. I really cant wait to see this anyone have another method to download it?

I can't seem to download it!

This is another link for downloading it from MegaUpload that I've just added to the first post. If it isn't working I'd try that.

Should I pick Free User?

Unless you want to pay for an account, then yes.

[innerwolf]

Congratulations and thanks for the document Lord Cook!! Reading it right now.

Wait, I got quoted? OMG, it feels so good! XD

[withershadow]

Right on! I'm glad this thing has finally seen the light of day, after all the build-up and anticipation. And here I was just about to resurrect that 5.0 tactics thread in protest. :P

[Badger[Fr]]

A splendid job indeed. As a whole, it may lack coherency, but the many points of view provide an interesting if somehow chaotic overview of the Imperial Guard's tactical depth. Its writers deserve a well-earned Internets. And cookies. And half-naked Daemonettes...

[Mordant 33]

Hey everyone. I usually just lurk on this forum, but I avidly read the old thread and would like to say thanks for everyone who put in the effort to make this!

I have a few questions, however;

1) my army is reconnaissance themed with a minimalist infantry platoon, some mech vets, lots of sentinels etc. and would like to add another veteran squad with forward sentries to hold my home objective. How should I go about arming them, they will be staying still mostly so an Autocannon, some plasma-guns maybe, or possibly sniper rifles?

2) I will be adding a hellhound in the near future, but for the hull mount was thinking of a multi-melta. I know specializing is better but I have very little anti-tank, and usually only one gun can fire on the move, so having the option for anti-tank can be good.
Alternatively, a devil dog with heavy flamer could work too.

Thanks again

[Thornz]

Cookie,

/21 gun salute!

When constructing squadrons (hellhounds, leman russ or artillery), is it generally recommended to build specialised squadrons (e.g. all geared for anti-tank or anti-infantry role) or a mix, giving the squadron more flexibility?

I run all my squadrons of like vehicles, no mixing them up. EG: 2x LRBT with Hull H.Bolters, or 2x Hell Hounds. No mixing.

1) my army is reconnaissance themed with a minimalist infantry platoon, some mech vets, lots of sentinels etc. and would like to add another veteran squad with forward sentries to hold my home objective. How should I go about arming them, they will be staying still mostly so an Autocannon, some plasma-guns maybe, or possibly sniper rifles?

If your truly running a fluffy option I don't see anything wrong with AC and 3x Sniper Rifles. Great Idea BTW.

2) I will be adding a hellhound in the near future, but for the hull mount was thinking of a multi-melta. I know specializing is better but I have very little anti-tank, and usually only one gun can fire on the move, so having the option for anti-tank can be good. Alternatively, a devil dog with heavy flamer could work too.

I run my HH with Hull Heavy Flamer. Firstly it's FREE and Secondaly it is still a viable threat after the infero cannon is gone.

[CaptainDaris]

2) I will be adding a hellhound in the near future, but for the hull mount was thinking of a multi-melta. I know specializing is better but I have very little anti-tank, and usually only one gun can fire on the move, so having the option for anti-tank can be good.
Alternatively, a devil dog with heavy flamer could work too.

Thanks again

Personally I would specialise and go with the Devil with multi melta. It seems a bit odd to mix anti-tank and anti-infantry to me. Of course, if it fits in with your style then go for it

[Colonel Jacka]

Cookie,

Great job well done. And to those of you with little faith.

A splendid job indeed. As a whole, it may lack coherency, but the many points of view provide an interesting if somehow chaotic overview of the Imperial Guard's tactical depth. Its writers deserve a well-earned Internets. And cookies. And half-naked Daemonettes...

Badger[Fr]

Since when has the IG had coherency!

[DigitsDavid]

Still reading it - pretty good!

[Lord Cook]

Thank you everyone for your kind support. I'm glad your download is working now Digits.

I agree Badger[Fr], but in order to get proper consistency one person would have had to write the whole thing.

1) my army is reconnaissance themed with a minimalist infantry platoon, some mech vets, lots of sentinels etc. and would like to add another veteran squad with forward sentries to hold my home objective. How should I go about arming them, they will be staying still mostly so an Autocannon, some plasma-guns maybe, or possibly sniper rifles?

Hi Mordant. If you wanted stationary troops to hold your objective, I think regular infantry would be a better choice. You could get two squads with autocannons for less points than your camo-cloaked Veteran squad, even if the Veterans pick the cheapest special weapons. The two squads would be more durable because of having twice as many models, and their firepower is going to be more effective at range than a mish-mash of weapons that don't fit that well together.

Alternatively, if you really wanted a Veterans squad perhaps get Harker? He provides camo cloaks as well, and for the extra 25 points you get infiltrate, move through cover and a heavy bolter. Buy a heavy bolter for the squad as normal and three grenade launchers, and you have a reasonably durable, mobile unit that will be good for taking objectives (or defending your own) and can fire nine S5/6 Ap4 shots a turn while stationary, or six while moving. It's more expensive, but with infiltrate you have far more freedom of where to deploy, and you can always deploy the squad after your opponent has put his army down as well.

2) I will be adding a hellhound in the near future, but for the hull mount was thinking of a multi-melta. I know specializing is better but I have very little anti-tank, and usually only one gun can fire on the move, so having the option for anti-tank can be good.
Alternatively, a devil dog with heavy flamer could work too.

If you wanted a tank that could do a bit of both, I'd go for the Devil Dog. 120 points gets you the melta cannon and heavy flamer. By comparison getting a multimelta for the Hellhound costs 145 points, for a very similar vehicle.

Saying that, I prefer to specialize.

[Havock]

That harker-led veteran squad was also something I was thinking of: Harker, 3 grenade launchers and an autocannon. Perfect gfor sitting on home turg or being an annoying fly in the enemy's plans.

[only joking...]

Lord Cook&all other contributers thank you all so much this tactica is sure to become an invaluble resource to all of us (and thanks for sticking the Praetorians in there as well ). Well done to everybody involved, it was worth the blood sweat and tears you put in to it

Oh and some of those quotes are hilarious...

[Khornies & milk]

Just downloaded it and it looks and reads very well...a hardy thanks to all concerned.
Now to get reading.........

[AllisterCaine]

Great reading, and it really fits into the idea of a collected essay of individual experience.

However, I do have a question regarding CCS with all special weapon load-outs. Am I missing something or are these rather stupid? If you're going to use them like that why not use veterans? They can essentially do the same job while being more cost effective. Why not take advantage of the Order system and try to keep your HQs safe, with a modest hitting power and leadership bonus so that they can continue to be effective throughout the game?

[Vaktathi]

Great reading, and it really fits into the idea of a collected essay of individual experience.

However, I do have a question regarding CCS with all special weapon load-outs. Am I missing something or are these rather stupid? If you're going to use them like that why not use veterans? They can essentially do the same job while being more cost effective. Why not take advantage of the Order system and try to keep your HQs safe, with a modest hitting power and leadership bonus so that they can continue to be effective throughout the game?

The CCS can have more specials than a vet squad, and if you are running a mech vet list anyway you probably aren't giving out orders much, and you might as well use the BS4 weapons capability that you have. Orders are nice, but not critical, and are practically disposable in a mech army. Even loaded with specials, you needn't throw them out in front, you can keep them in your line to act as a reaction unit (melta the crap out of that drop pod Ironclad dread for instance).

[Volandum]

They can still give orders when mounted, and are 20pts cheaper for 5 fewer models, which won't matter when you're still in the Chimera.

P83 of this document - WHAT ON EARTH 2D6 Penetration? No no no.

EDIT: P106 the gun is AP2.

EDIT: P106 again 3 small blasts is 27/4 pi "^2, more than the Demolisher's 25/4 pi "^2.

[AllisterCaine]

The CCS can have more specials than a vet squad, and if you are running a mech vet list anyway you probably aren't giving out orders much, and you might as well use the BS4 weapons capability that you have. Orders are nice, but not critical, and are practically disposable in a mech army. Even loaded with specials, you needn't throw them out in front, you can keep them in your line to act as a reaction unit (melta the crap out of that drop pod Ironclad dread for instance).

Right, but wouldn't you also lose those special weapons much faster? If the transport blows up and the CCS gets wounded, you can only allocate 1 hit on the CO, which means there's a good chance you'll lose 1-2 special weapons right off the bat. After that with their transport gone, if something even looks at their direction they will most likely die.

Wouldn't it be more preferable for them to order disembarked mechanized veteran units to fulfill jobs such as the one you described above?

Edit: Was curious about the comment above.

[The Basilisk may be outclassed, but I wouldn’t call it a poor vehicle per se. S9+2d6 armour
penetration makes it a potent tank hunter against very large targets such as Land Raiders.
Meanwhile an Ap3 large blast is death to even heavy infantry. If anything, I would call the
Manticore a generalist leaning towards anti-tank and anti-horde, while the Basilisk is a
generalist leaning towards anti-tank and anti-heavy infantry. Choose appropriately based on
your local opposition. ~Editor].

He most likely means 2d6 and and pick the highest one and just didn't accurately specify it. Having said that however, there really doesn't appear to be much logic here. First of all, when shooting vehicles, Ap2-6 are meaningless- only Ap1 or Ap- makes a difference. S9 Ordnance is only slightly better against AV14 than a lascannon, in which case the most reliable method of dealing with are melta-based weapons (or even the Vanq). Shooting Basilisks at vehicles seems to be a last resort sort of thing, like shooting battle cannons at tanks. I would hardly call it "anti-tank" by any stretch of the imagination.

[Vaktathi]

Right, but wouldn't you also lose those special weapons much faster? If the transport blows up and the CCS gets wounded, you can only allocate 1 hit on the CO, which means there's a good chance you'll lose 1-2 special weapons right off the bat. After that with their transport gone, if something even looks at their direction they will most likely die.

Wouldn't it be more preferable for them to order disembarked mechanized veteran units to fulfill jobs such as the one you described above?

Usually yes, but the CCS can also join in if you are taking one. If you are taking it, you might as well kit it out and use that BS4 and the availability of the special weapons, especially if you are not running Vets, but rather platoons, or especially Mechanized platoons like my current army. Even if you keep the CCS hidden most of the game, having it available and full of meltas or flamers when you need it can be a nasty surprise for an opponent.

[Volandum]

AllisterCaine: Probably, yes. The difference between 2D6 and best of 2D6 is massive though. Only slightly better in this case (S9 ordnance vs S9 normal against AV14) is almost twice the chance to penetrate. The Basilisk is expensive and vulnerable though.