Eldar Guardians Will they be Worth Playing

[Sainhann]

Now we have talked about the new Eldar Wraithknight and the cost of the new rebox Dire Avengers.

But what about the Eldar Guardians?

I have seen that there is suppose to be some new "Rending" type rule for the Shuriken Catapults so that on any "6" there is no armor save.

But will they get a range increase? Not likely I believe.

Because if they still have only a 12 inch range they will still have the worst Infantry weapon in the game.

Dire Avengers got a 6" increase back in 5th Edition for one reason - no one was using them because having 6-10 Eldar with a 12 inch range weapon was not a unit you wanted on the table.

So they got a range increase in for their weapons. Guardians didn't and they sucked and very few gamers actually used them & if they did it was only to have that heavy weapon platform.

GW nerfed the Shuriken Catapult many, many years ago because it was a Marine killer. It was strength 4 and had a -2 armor save and Marines were dying in droves.

So what did GW do they cut the range in half to just 12 inches gave the Marines a 3+ save while it only was an AP 5 weapon. So Marines were now safe from it.

Oh and at the same time they changed the movement to 6 inches and assault was another 6 inches. Results Guardians disappeared from nearly every single Eldar army and Eldar players went over to Mech Eldar.

Because their once powerful Guardian & Aspect armies became useless.

So will Guardians be a viable Troop choice or will they continue to be crap?

I am thinking that they will still not be worth taking, due to them having a crap weapon and with the Force Composition Chart putting a limit on just how many troops choices you can have in your army (max of 6).

[Kamin_Majere]

I still take them. They are good for Long range (with the support platform) and good at mopping up things once they get to your lines (at least greatly weakened things like single wounds nid monsters or 3 strong tact squads)

But even though i love my guardians I cant put more than a single squad (two in an extreme case) in any army list i make.

While i have my doubts about the baby rending (why couldnt they just have given us shred) the move shoot move will make them better and if their points drop by 1-2 points that will help, but dont expect to see guardian mobs taking over any times soon. 2nd edition had us as one of the top armies in the game, and since then we have slowly been eroded away into near oblivion. 6th edition looks to be trying to change that, but dont expect guardians walking around with storm bolters anymore. The change over to AP vs AM and fixed vs variable movement has effectively killed dreams like that

This isnt fact, but a good impression i'm getting from everything that has been happening in 6th

[chicop76]

If doom is still out there and they can rend it will make them a really good unit.

Shred or Rend is good either way. Shred is good for anti-horde and rend is good anti- hard to kill normally.

They probablly have shred since you do not want guardians taking out 400 point toughness 9 wingd monsters. The shred reminds me of the last edition termagaunts. The rerolling on 4s within 12" was devestating and that was with only one shot instead of 2.

I would say serpent hoping guardians would be nice to use again or the huge line of guardians forming a line like in the old days.

[MrBo]

via BoLS 5-13-2013
Word has reached us of two divergent schools of though for the latest codex shuriken family, and the jury is still out on which one was ultimately selected. Both are highly divergent from the short-ranged 12" S:4 AP:5 Assault 2 weapon we have now (oh those poor, poor Guardians). Here we go folks:

OPTION A: The Bane of Flesh

Shuriken Pistol 12" S:4 AP5 Pistol, (Fleshbane or Shred)
Shuriken Catapult 18" S:4 AP5 Assault 2, (Fleshbane or Shred)
Dire Avenger Shuriken Catapult 24" S:4 AP:5 Assault 2, (Fleshbane or Shred)
Shuriken Cannon 24" S:6 AP:5 Assault 3, (Fleshbane or Shred)
Shuriken Shreiker Cannon 24" S:6 AP:5 Assault 3, (Fleshbane or Shred), Poison(4+), Pinning

OPTION B: The Rain of Shuriken

Shuriken Pistol 12" S:4 AP5 Pistol
Shuriken Catapult 18" S:4 AP5 Salvo2/4
Dire Avenger Shuriken Catapult 24" S:4 AP:5 Salvo 2/4
Shuriken Cannon 24" S:6 AP:5 Salvo 3/6


i think they will do just fine =)

[chicop76]

Bane of flesh would be good. The rain would be a bit more difficult to benefit the guardians. I think if you can sprinkle endurance on a squad than rain would be boss.

[deinol]

The most likely of those is the 18" Shred version. Everything else seems a bit much.

[Saunders]

I don't believe either of those.

The later rumors since WD appeared have suggested the quasi-rend rule is what we will get for shurikens.

[Power Klawz]

I'm guessing 6 inch range increase and ignores armor on a wound roll of 6. Combined with move shoot move guardians are probably going to be amazing. I see terminator lists crying buckets of invulnerable tears.

[MrBo]

even without all the extra goodies, the range increase would be nice, and both rumor lists seem to confirm at least that much, still taking it with a grain of salt tho

[Kamin_Majere]

According to the ibook glossary (taken from someone that preordered it and has the ibook preview) the guardian catapult is only getting the bladestorm rule (the 6 to wound auto wounds and counts as AP2)

There will be no range increase, just bladestorm and 6 points per model. So while cheap and chipper the guardian is still quite useless.

[DarkLink]

If there's no range increase, they'll probably still suck. Dire Avengers will probably be flat-out better. Pseudo-rending is nice, though.

[MrBo]

o god that would just suck, a 12 inch range for normal troop gun ranges is not acceptable the way they have set 6th edition up.
case in point, i stopped using guardians years ago after my sm opponent started taking flamethrowers en masse.

[legalsmash]

I would posit that even without upgrading termagants to a devourer, the fleshborer with poison is worthwhile as it can drown you in shots that autowound on 6. The ability to bypass armor on 6, to me at least, is really worthwhile, even on a bolt pistol equivalent. I REALLY want increased range on the guardians, but tears will not streak my bed if it is not in the cards. Not tomention you have the new shoot and scoot ability.... that may be considered when thinking of the effective range... if you can move in three, pepper your opponent, then run up to 6 away, its pretty reasonable for a bunch of bakers and potters, no?

DA with Av/shuricat getting an increase range, I hope, is in the book through, otehrwise, they just made a really expensive, useless box of nothing out of their repackage.

[Defenestratus]

o god that would just suck, a 12 inch range for normal troop gun ranges is not acceptable the way they have set 6th edition up.
case in point, i stopped using guardians years ago after my sm opponent started taking flamethrowers en masse.

Confirmed - the standard bog Shuricat is 12" range.

Seems my guardians are staying on the shelf for another 7+ years.

[DanTheGameMan]

Yeah, the 12" sucks, but with the ability to shoot and then run (with Fleet, no less) means that you can keep assault units just out of arms reach while you pepper them with shuricats and a shuricannon, the pseudo-rending means that, given the crazy high # of shots, you'd have to have a terrible roll, you should get a handful of 6s, which means that you can even cause Termies to break a sweat while they chase your guardians, giving you more time to outmaneuver and have a heavier-hitting unit back them up.

I believe that, as long as you're using them as they're intended, as a support role, that they can be used quite effectively to distract and harass units that, until this release, would have been untouchable before.

[MrBo]

Confirmed - the standard bog Shuricat is 12" range.

Seems my guardians are staying on the shelf for another 7+ years.

if ( and i do mean IF) you can run shoot run with guardians, i will have to give up drinking during games,so i can remember to do all the crazy eldar dancing its gonna take to keep them alive XD

[Defenestratus]

Yeah, the 12" sucks, but with the ability to shoot and then run (with Fleet, no less) means that you can keep assault units just out of arms reach while you pepper them with shuricats and a shuricannon, the pseudo-rending means that, given the crazy high # of shots, you'd have to have a terrible roll, you should get a handful of 6s, which means that you can even cause Termies to break a sweat while they chase your guardians, giving you more time to outmaneuver and have a heavier-hitting unit back them up.

I believe that, as long as you're using them as they're intended, as a support role, that they can be used quite effectively to distract and harass units that, until this release, would have been untouchable before.

So you can move, run then shoot. Or you can move shoot then run.

Either way you need to be able to start out within either ~20" or 18" to be able to get a volley off, then if you want to be sure you get everyone in range of firing, some are going to have to be closer than 12" when they fire...

If you run first, shoot then you're left open for whatever is left and lets admit it, not much is scared of charging a bunch of guardians.
If you shoot first then run, then you're going to be still very likely in assault range afterwards unless you can hop in and out of cover....

I don't see the runshooting thing as a particularly good defense of 12" ranged basic guns.

[DanTheGameMan]

Fair enough, but also keep in mind that Running isn't affected by difficult terrain, but Assaulting is. Not that this will be a complete protection, but if you manage your unit well, it's an extra defence to keep them at arm's length.

Again, to your point, this in and of itself isn't going to stop Guardians dropping like flies. But in concert with all the other little things, it's at least an improvement.

[DarkLink]

Why bother assaulting when you can just, say, Rapid Fire back. And, of course, just shoot the Guardians before they get there. And Eldar transports are too expensive to allow you to horde Guardians like they were Orks, so you either don't have the speed to ever reach that 12" with enough bodies to be effective or you don't have the bodies and durability to stand up in such a short range firefight long enough to do meaningful damage.

[zenBen]

I guess you just need to use the Guardians in synchrony with other units so the guys they just shot are more worried about sthg else. It has worked before...

[Koremu]

I guess you just need to use the Guardians in synchrony with other units so the guys they just shot are more worried about sthg else. It has worked before...

Using disparate units together in synchronicity is kind of the Eldar schtick, if you ask me.

In any case, the "bounce" move/shoot/run technique will be very effective if paired with heavy terrain, a transport vehicle, or another Eldar unit that has the ability to slow enemy units down (Vibrocannon? Monofillament Webs?)

[DarkLink]

But in that case why not use Dire Avengers?

Actually, I've heard that the WD implies that you can take special and heavy weapons in the same unit, like mixing Storm and regular Guardians. That would be worth it for a cheap scoring unit with a little extra firepower, especially if you can still add a warlock with Destructor and do their little triple flamer thing, but this time for cheaper and with a lot more rending shots.

I'm sure there will be uses for Guardians. They'll just be pretty limited depending on what other units you can make scoring, and Guardians probably won't ever be more than a cheap scoring/backup unit.

[Montserrat]

So some ipad users are repoerting that the shuricat is 12" range, they saw it in the codex preview for ipad, under the vyper profile. Im seriosly worried about this. but....there is a but (hopefuly)...im quoting myself on the other thread:


Mmm about the shuriken catpult being 12". I dont have an iPad, cant see that preview, buy IIRC we talking about the vyper shuricat profile...

I want to believe. In the same way that twin-linked bolters in space marine bikes got their range croped, may be the vyper, other vehicles and jetbikes shuriken catpults version are only 12", but the guardians ones are 18" or even 24" who knows.

Cmon they cant fall in the SAME ERROR for the 3rd time in a row.(you Gav, i hate you, but you Phil, if this is true, i hate you twice).

[eldargal]

Never take Guardians anyway, completely un-lorefriendly in most cases. Disappointing if they can't even make them work. HOWEVER we don't know enough to judge. In many of the photos from WD and the codex the Guardians are shown not just with support platforms but the larger support battery so they may have more, heavier guns to field with shuricat as a backup to hold off people assaulting the main guns. Just speculation, but let's not get too upset until we know the full picture.

[DarkLink]

Since when do SM bikes have shorter range bolters than other Marines?

[chicop76]

I
Never take Guardians anyway, completely un-lorefriendly in most cases. Disappointing if they can't even make them work. HOWEVER we don't know enough to judge. In many of the photos from WD and the codex the Guardians are shown not just with support platforms but the larger support battery so they may have more, heavier guns to field with shuricat as a backup to hold off people assaulting the main guns. Just speculation, but let's not get too upset until we know the full picture.


I am hoping for black guardians again. For Ulthrwe guardians for troops are very fluffy. Unless wraithguard to be better warriors kill them and take their blood and drench themselves in the blood to be more effective. Wouldn't be surprised with fluff like that again. Unless they changed the fluff again guardians for other armies are not use as heavily due to them being citizen soilders.

[Dalleron]

I have a use for guardians. Take my green and white Biel Tan guardians, repaint them blue to be Dire Avengers. Oh no, they don't have plumage on their fancy elf helms, OMG!! My DA are the old ones with the short stubby catapults anways. Possibly search bitz sellers for DA heads if people are going to complain that much. But this would be after finishing painting my 2 Dark Vengence halves.

[Xarga]

Hi guys, just recently registered despite reading the BOLS forums for a while.

Here's just a thought that came to mind; what if Gaurdians can be upgraded to take the modified Shrunken Catapults in the new dex. It's pretty much certain now the new S'Cats are 12" with the new Bladestorm rule but i don't see it being too far fetched that at maybe +2 points per model they could upgrade to the 18" S'Cats. Doubtfull true, but IIRC Mr Phil Kelly mentioned somewhere along the lines about Gaurdians becoming a usable if somewhat competitive troops choice now or at least respectably usable. Seeing that Gaurdains are only 6 points per model in the new dex i think a +2 points each for extra range might be quiet a nice addition. Just a thought, no real ground or rumors to base it off. :)

[Baron.roboto]

Well, they from what I've read they ARE better. Better weapons (rend-esque), an additional 6" range with Battle Trance AND cheaper for the trouble. What will really be a deal maker/breaker to me will be the Heavy Weapons and Warlock.

Are the heavy weapons cheaper/better since they are essentially albative wounds for the platform?
Does the Warlock behave differently now/is more costly, since you'd only pay the points for a 30pt Embolden (ok, 33)?

I think these two questions will tell me whether my Guardians will play the same, or whether they need to be used differently/not at all.

[Archon Charybdis]

We haven't really heard much about Guardians, so I'm still holding out hope they might be able to take a Support Weapon platform as part of a Troops choice in some way. It'd be a great reason to include Guardians and would make Support Weapons very attractive if they don't have to battle for a HS slot.

[Andrea Florio]

If troop guardians could field vibro or D cannons then yeah they will become useful

[DarkLink]

but IIRC Mr Phil Kelly mentioned somewhere along the lines about Gaurdians becoming a usable if somewhat competitive troops choice now or at least respectably usable.

Has GW itself ever had even a slight understanding of what is and isn't good in their own game? Because Phil Kelly has a long, long track record of writing books with absolutely terrible internal balance. One, maybe two, awesome units per slot that are basically auto-includes (from 4th ed Holofield Falcons to Heldrakes), some mediocre units that you can use but are clearly inferior to the uber-units, and then some absolutely terrible units that will probably never see the light of day. Dark Eldar are his only book so far that has bucked that trend. If we're lucky, maybe he's learned a few lessons, but until the book comes out I'm not taking his word that Guardians are good, especially since he didn't do anything to address their main blatantly obvious flaw.

[SeekingOne]

Has GW itself ever had even a slight understanding of what is and isn't good in their own game? Because Phil Kelly has a long, long track record of writing books with absolutely terrible internal balance. One, maybe two, awesome units per slot that are basically auto-includes (from 4th ed Holofield Falcons to Heldrakes), some mediocre units that you can use but are clearly inferior to the uber-units, and then some absolutely terrible units that will probably never see the light of day.

As far as now-obsolete Eldar codex goes, I couldn't disagree more. Phil Kelly did a great job with it. Eventually its internal balance proved to be far from perfect, BUT:
1) Under 4th edition rules, the internal balance was still quite good. Just a couple of units were completely useless, and both mechanised and footslogging (both elite-based and guardian fodder-based) armies worked well enough, even in competitive environment;
2) the internal balance was still much better than that of the previous (3rd edition) codex. Mr. Kelly did try to address the issues of most useless units from the older codex, and he was on the right track with most of them - and some of the changes were quite huge, they just proved to be still not enough... Shinig Spears, for instance, were pretty close to actually becoming usable - they just should've had their cost cut down further, say, to 25 pts apiece. But, given the fact that in 3rd edition their cost was 50 pts apiece, AND they didn't even have power weapons (let alone option of "Hit'n'Run"), the changes were still quite dramatic and they were definitely made in the right direction.
3) And last but not the least, the internal balance was still much better than in the absolute majority of the codices published to that day.

Yes, there was a Falcon flaw, but anyone who's acquainted with design process will instantly see that it was unintentional, and shows severe lack of playtesting resources rather than low quality of the design. A much more glaring flaw was the blatant nerf of starcannons, which was needed but had to be done more consciously. But noone is ideal, right? :)

All in all, the codex stood up quite decently against both the change of editions and the overall "codex creep", which, imo, is the best sign of its overall quality.

[Shas'O Alohcry]

According to the ibook glossary (taken from someone that preordered it and has the ibook preview) the guardian catapult is only getting the bladestorm rule (the 6 to wound auto wounds and counts as AP2)

There will be no range increase, just bladestorm and 6 points per model. So while cheap and chipper the guardian is still quite useless.


How is this rule "rend-esque" it is just rend completely. Just with a different name. I would hate for Eldar to have rend on all their weapons even 12" weapons, shred would have been much better.

[Carstens]

How is this rule "rend-esque" it is just rend completely. Just with a different name. I would hate for Eldar to have rend on all their weapons even 12" weapons, shred would have been much better.

It has no effect on vehicles, so it's "only" one half of rending.

[Shas'O Alohcry]

Ah I see, still think thats a tad too much if the are only 6 pts each. Shred would have been better I think, and make it AP4

Edit: if they are 6pts

[chicop76]

As far as now-obsolete Eldar codex goes, I couldn't disagree more. Phil Kelly did a great job with it. Eventually its internal balance proved to be far from perfect, BUT:
1) Under 4th edition rules, the internal balance was still quite good. Just a couple of units were completely useless, and both mechanised and footslogging (both elite-based and guardian fodder-based) armies worked well enough, even in competitive environment;
2) the internal balance was still much better than that of the previous (3rd edition) codex. Mr. Kelly did try to address the issues of most useless units from the older codex, and he was in the right track with most of them - and some of the changes were quite huge, they just proved to be still not enough... Shinig Spears, for instance, were pretty close to actually becoming usable - they just should've had their cost cut down further, say, to 25 pts apiece. But, given the fact that in 3rd edition their cost was 50 pts apiece, AND they didn't even have power weapons (let alone option of "Hit'n'Run"), the changes were still quite dramatic and they were definitely made in the right direction.
3) And last but not the least, the internal balance was still much better then in the absolute majority of the codices published to that day.

Yes, there was a Falcon flaw, but anyone who's acquainted with design process will instantly see that it was unintentional, and shows severe lack of playtesting resources rather than low quality of the design. A much more glaring flaw was the blatant nerf of starcannons, which was needed but had to be done more cosciously. But noone is ideal, right? :)

All in all, the codex stood up quite decently against both the change of editions and the overall "codex creep", which, imo, is the best sign of its overall quality.


Sadly the 3rd edition codex could probably out perform some 5th and 6th edition codexes out their. I am curious on the direction the went with eldar. Did they super nerf them again, bring back 3rd and earlier material( seems like a trend in the 6th edition).

Even without the 3rd edition core rules. The eldar 3rd edition codex, the supplement with the different eldar fractions, and eye of terror material I would further say would still dominate today. The 4th edition codex, or 4.5 codex. Was a knee jerk reaction.

- Seer Council is broken got to tone that down.
- star cannons everywhere killing all, got to tone that down.

Those are the two biggest complaints I remember. Falcons was bad, but that was due to core rules not codex rules. With a codex change it wasn't as power a cheap Necron Monolith.

I never liked the 4th edition codex. Heck it's the reason why I stoped playing eldar. It's the core rules as well since you can shoot through my troops like they wasn't there, if your leadership was high enough. Heck you still can, but atleast you get a cover save. Guardians as meat shields and or wraith guard was common things. Either you went serpent spam, wraith spam, or hide your army behind fortuned +5 cover save spam with guardians.

One of the things I miss is black guardians. The eye of terror codex was cool since all guardians was + 1 bs or + 1ws. Meaning that vypers, war walkers, etc. Had the boost as well. In the regular Ulthrwe force you had two squads that can be black. I miss my unit of enhanced storm guardians. They can take two flamers and was ws 5 and I 5, awesome. They did rather well vs marines and all was good until 4th edition came around.

I forgot they got rid of augment which was awesome. It doubled the range of powers. They also got rid of the black guardian option.

Than again I remember units like Khaine having every exarch with him and all dark reaper armies with Mugan Ra.

I am curious about the Avatar. It' interesting that he was like 90 points which he was well worth those points. Heck he will still be good today. They doubled his points and all he got was some immunity to a few weapons, melta shot, and a better save. I am curious if the doubled him again and what additional craziness he will have.

I'll buy the codex, but after deamons and Tau I am really hurting. I kinda hope the codex is bad so I can save money lol. If it's worth while I might get back into eldar like I did tau, both armies I stopped playing thanks to 5th edition. Well I can say thanks to 4th, 5th just made it worst.

With all that said Eldar is still a good codex. Heck everyone is using them as allies. Even on their own thy are not a bad codex. It's not like oh good it's eldat, easy win. Bike council is still a pain even though tone down greatly.

[DarkLink]

As far as now-obsolete Eldar codex goes, I couldn't disagree more. Phil Kelly did a great job with it. Eventually its internal balance proved to be far from perfect, BUT:

I never really played against Eldar back in 4th, but that still leaves how many poorly balanced books? 2 out of 5+ is not a great record. Though I guess to be fair Ward is the only rules writer who consistently has decent balance in all of his book (not really his fault that everyone decided they wanted to start playing Grey Knights and so people got tired of facing them real quick).



Yes, there was a Falcon flaw, but anyone who's acquainted with design process will instantly see that it was unintentional, and shows severe lack of playtesting resources rather than low quality of the design. A much more glaring flaw was the blatant nerf of starcannons, which was needed but had to be done more consciously. But noone is ideal, right? :)

Playtesting for balance is part of the design process. If you don't playtest enough and miss design problems, then you can't say you've got a good design. GW consistently misses some pretty obvious balance issues in almost all of their codices.



All in all, the codex stood up quite decently against both the change of editions and the overall "codex creep", which, imo, is the best sign of its overall quality.

Not really. I mean, it's still playable, but it's been a very weak codex for a long time, with the exception of one or two specific builds that are decent enough a very good player can do well with them, and even if it had good internal balance in 4th, it really didn't in 5th and certainly not in 6th.

[lattd]

Hasn't Phil kelly written eldar, which has lasted quite well, dark eldar which was hailed as the best thing since sliced bread, space wolves which was pretty well balanced except long fangs, CSM which is apparently balanced save fast attack. Compare that to Ward who has very many auto includes - psyrifle dreads, purifiers, paladins, Necron fliers....

[DarkLink]

CSM has pretty poor internal balance, with a handful of very good units (Heldrake, Obliterators, Autocannon Havoks, Kharn, Abaddon) outshadowing the bad units (Mutilators, Warp Talons, Raptors, heck, any FA other than the Heldrake, Warp Smiths, Thousand Sons, Berzerkers). Same thing with Space Wolves. Every Space Wolf list seems to have the same Long Fangs, Grey Hunters, some Wolfguard, and maybe some Thunderwolf Cavalry, but do you ever see any of the Blood/Sky/whatever Claws, or wolf packs? Not in competitive lists. Compare to Grey Knights, where every single unit is pretty much a viable competitive option. Purifiers are good. Paladins are good. Strike Squads are good. Interceptors are good. Grand Masters are good. Librarians are good. The special characters are good. The only outliers in the whole GK codex are psyrifle dreads (which is really just poorly priced psybolt ammo) and rad/psykotroke grenades, and a small number of the special characters and some of the Inquisitorial options are crappy. So compare a bunch of well balanced units with only a handful of off-balanced wargear options, compared to multiple codices where half of the army is clearly inferior to the other half. Ok, I guess the Brotherhood Champion sucks, but with Heroic Sacrifice you can even find uses for him.

Also, saying Paladins and Purifiers are both auto-includes doesn't really make much sense, because you can't really build an effective list around both of them at the same time. When you have a codex that has a significant number of completely different approaches you take to building an army, all with roughly equal levels of power, that's good internal balance. You can take a Purifier list. You can take a Paladin list. You can take an Acolyte list. You can take a bunch of Strike Squads. You can take Interceptors and Dreadknights. You can take a mix of all of them. There is a huge range of competitive options. You cannot fault the GK codex in the context of internal balance. GKs were in a lot of ways a victim of their own success, because literally overnight everyone had an army and people got sick of playing against them.

Dark Eldar have pretty good internal balance, too, but competitively they're really a spoiler army. If you come up against a good matchup, you'll destroy them, but against one of their poor matchups you lose. That dichotomy is much more pronounced due to their fragile nature than with most armies, and I hesitate to call anything that's too rock-paper-scissors well balanced. With regard to Necron flyers, flyers in general are the shotgun to your rock/paper/scissors. Shotgun beats everything but another shotgun (though a handful of armies, mainly hordes, can simply ignore Flyers by taking up enough space to restrict their ability to maneuver and simply tank casualties), and really only Tau have access to enough anti-air to reliably face flyers without flyers of their own (discounting the Aegis Defense Line).

With a well balanced army, a competitive player should be able to bring a list that is neither too weak nor too strong when facing any other competitive player.

And even Matt Ward has plenty of balance issues, despite having the most consistent internal balance out of any of the codex writers. Then we just come back to my original point that GW itself doesn't have a good understanding of what is and isn't competitive, so I wouldn't take their word for it when they say Guardians will be good. With pseudo-rending and a 1pt decrease, they can make a decent unit of cheap objective holders, and if you can stick special weapons in the squads with shuriken catapults then you can maybe make a decent unit for flying up and shooting something up and grabbing an objective (but Dire Avengers will probably do it better, in a more point efficient manner). But in both cases they'll won't be anything fantastic unless there's something that hasn't come up yet, which is the important part. The codex hasn't come out yet, so we don't know, and we can't trust Phil Kelly to understand what is and isn't balanced, so we're just going to have to wait and see.

[Lexington]

Then we just come back to my original point that GW itself doesn't have a good understanding of what is and isn't competitive, so I wouldn't take their word for it when they say Guardians will be good.
I imagine GW's got a pretty decent idea of what is and what isn't good/competitive/etc., and rather specifically ignores it when creating new game material.

[Dalleron]

I agree. There has to be some people at GW who work on the rules for codex' that read what we on the intertubes say. The internet is everywhere, and if you write rules for a codex, they must be curious to know what those who use it say about it.

Whether or not they take what we say into account is debatable.

[Power Klawz]

Guardians are much better now, don't think there's too much argument on that angle. The real question now is how much better are they and are they good enough to compete with Avengers.

Deadliers weapons: yes, although not as awesome as was hoped, the 12 inch range really keeps this from being over the top amazing. I think if we were looking at 18 inches there'd be no discussion whatsoever. Still, they can threaten everything on the table that doesn't have an engine.

Better Guardians: Yes, with run and shoot now a thing they are unilaterally better, no doubt about it. Now what really matters is whether they are still WS/BS 3 or if they've bumped up to 4. I assume they're still 3. We're also not sure on their armor yet, but I'll assume its still 5+.

Cheaper: I'm not sure if its been confimred yet, but it looks like we're talking orky levels of cheapness here. If we're looking at 6 to 7 points a model then this is a win.

So they are killier, more mobile and more than likely cheaper, all good things. What can they do? Well they can be very annoying and force the opponent to make a tough decision as to whether or not to level that tac squads bolter fire at a 60 point squad of annoying guardians who somehow manage to kill a couple of dudes a turn, or that pricier and more dangerous unit barreling down on them. Great for trolling your opponent and forcing him into no win situations, which is very eldary. What we're really talking about here though is how do they measure up to Avengers?

I haven't seen anything on Avengers yet, they were a pretty great unit before and I suspect they'll remain as such. I also have a sneaking suspicion that they'll either stay the same price or go up slightly, so you're looking at likely more than twice the price per space elf compared to guardians. You're also looking at what will more than likely be a devastating killing machine with 18 inches of rend lite, more shots per model than god, better armor and, for some reason, an exarch who can kick your teeth in in CC if it comes down to it.

Avengers will undoubtedly be ferocious and, on a model for model basis, far superior to guardians. What you lack, however, is target saturation. If you're paying a price premium you're just not going to have as many bodies, and its a much simpler thing to concentrate your fire on a 10 man squad of avengers than 30 guardians spread through 2 or 3 squads, not to mention the heavy weapons they'll likely bring with them.

I see both units working marvelously together of course. Throw in a farseer and you've got a fire base to make Dark Angels a little jealous. Of course its a short ranged fire base that will be running around trying desperately to stay out of assault range, but that's interesting in and of itself.

[DarkLink]

With 12" guns, you need a transport to get more than a round of shooting off, and they suck in assault. Doesn't matter much how potent the gun is if you can't effectively engage the enemy.

[Power Klawz]

We're looking at a 24 inch or less threat range for most of their contemporaries. Tau of course beat this, but don't get in a firefight with tau...

Depending on who does what first you have a few basic scenarios. This is of course from a single unit vs. single unit perspective, which of course never actually happens. Again, you want the other guys shooting at your guardians instead of your all killy units.

Camping in cover, hopping out to harry passing or incoming units then hopping back into cover. You're going to get shot more times than you shoot back but you get to stay in cover and increase your threat range slightly. If you're really good/lucky you can hop into firing range then hop out of LOS behind something and LOL really hard.

Footslogging across open terrain into the waiting arms of massed bolter fire: why are you doing this again?

Marching forward in conjunction with something meaner, camping right outside 12 inches. Now your enemy has to make a few decisions. Shoot your guardians and leave the killy unit untouched? Bad idea. Try to assault the guardians after shooting? This becomes a trickier proposition when you can run after shooting, you should be between 13 and 18 inches away at the end of your shooting phase, meaning that the enemy will need between a 7 (which is average, but which constitutes a very poor run roll, which you get to reroll due to fleet btw) and a 12, which is statistically improbable. All the while the other unit is either charging them or shooting them to bits. If they decide to focus the deadlier unit your rending little *******s get to happily plink away until someone does something about them. They make great mobile support and harassment units.

Their threat range is also increased since they can fire after running as well as before. They can reposition quite well when needs be to support other units. They threaten 19 to 24 inches depending on their run roll.

Really the value of the unit comes down to the points cost and the ability of their weapons to threaten everything on the table that has legs. (except for walkers I guess... but most walkers have 10 rear armor so even they might get glanced a bit.) Nobody wants to waste fire on them since they are so cheap, but inside 12 inches they will kill you so you kind of have to. Depending on their heavy weapon options they seem very interesting. With BS4 they seem decent, with farseer support they seem deadly.

[Bitrider]

With 12" guns, you need a transport to get more than a round of shooting off, and they suck in assault. Doesn't matter much how potent the gun is if you can't effectively engage the enemy.

You notice they didn't take Guardians in the WD battle...just the super expensive DA.

[Power Klawz]

On a straight unit for unit basis guardians will never catch up with a tac squad of bolter bros that really wants to stay out of range. Being fleet, however, they won't find it terribly difficult to stay out of range themselves. They shouldn't be marching headlong into enemy fire or being kited around the map though, obviously not their intended design. Guardians seem to be designed to make things pay for encroaching in a particular area, which is to say for GUARDING objectives. You're going to be the one walking into the blender, otherwise you're not going to be able to engage them because they should just be running away, flitting about the edges of your range since you can't run and shoot. If you park at 24 inches outside an objective its not going to be terribly effective. Even with 5+ cover it will take you at least 3 turns to wipe out a 10 strong unit of guardians with a 10 man tac squad of bolter bros. 3 turns at full efficacy shooting, and who sits 10 guardians on an objective? Its just not feasible, you're going to have to go in for that rapid fire kill and when you do its clobberin time, because pseudo-rending assault 2 str 4 shuricats are better than bolters. Especially when they come at half the price.

Want something that can march into bolter fire and decimate marines? Take wraithguard.

Want something to sit on an objective and make most other troop units pay for trying to shove them off, and you want this for the McDonalds value menu price? Take guardians.

Want an expendable unit to tag team with your Dragons or Avengers? Take guardians.

Want to absolutely hose Terminators for a fraction of the cost? Take a bunch of guardians. Even at 4 to one its a bargain basement slaughter. The rage factor is included free of charge. (bonus points if you can get that powerfist toting unit of termies to eat a face full of overwatch and fail their charge.)

I'm disappointed about the 12 inch range too, but I can't help but think there's still some bite left in those bakers and ballerinas.

Edit: Although if the new rumors are true and guardians are 9 points per model then I'm pretty sure they stay garbage, which would be very sad. Hopefully that 90 point quote comes with something like a weapons platform, if its 9 points per dude we're in trouble.

Although even if it does include a weapon's platform of some sort that's still bad news since it really reduces their flexibility, What if you just want straight shuricats and no upgrades? Unless they're rocking a 4+ save now 9 points is ridiculous.

[DarkLink]

We're looking at a 24 inch or less threat range for most of their contemporaries. Tau of course beat this, but don't get in a firefight with tau...

30" threat range for almost every basic troop choice in the game, thanks to Rapid Fire allowing you to move 6" and shoot to 24". 18+D6" isn't even close to that.



I'm disappointed about the 12 inch range too, but I can't help but think there's still some bite left in those bakers and ballerinas.

There's a big difference between mediocre and good. Even at 7ppm, they'd fall into the former with a mere 12" range.



Edit: Although if the new rumors are true and guardians are 9 points per model then I'm pretty sure they stay garbage, which would be very sad. Hopefully that 90 point quote comes with something like a weapons platform, if its 9 points per dude we're in trouble.

Although even if it does include a weapon's platform of some sort that's still bad news since it really reduces their flexibility, What if you just want straight shuricats and no upgrades? Unless they're rocking a 4+ save now 9 points is ridiculous.

Yeah, I'm less and less impressed as more rumors come out. 13pt Dire Avengers, too? Because Dire Avengers were so broken before.

[Power Klawz]

13 point DA don't really bother me as much. They seem like they'll kill a lot of everything, especially if they can still fire off 3 shots in a turn.

[MrBo]

13 point DA don't really bother me as much. They seem like they'll kill a lot of everything, especially if they can still fire off 3 shots in a turn.
bladestorm does something different now.

and unless flamethrowers dont take handfuls of guardians off the table any more, guardians will not be frontline soldiers

[Bitrider]

bladestorm does something different now.

and unless flamethrowers dont take handfuls of guardians off the table any more, guardians will not be frontline soldiers

To answer the thread, I think they will be. Maybe not in huge numbers, but certainly as an objective holder way in the back or diversion unit, etc.

[Sainhann]

I imagine GW's got a pretty decent idea of what is and what isn't good/competitive/etc., and rather specifically ignores it when creating new game material.

I don't believe GW even has a clue on what is good/competitive. They only want you to buy several of those big overpriced Wraithknights.

They are in for the money and nothing else.

[Sainhann]

So we have them going up a point to 9 points per model or are they cheaper?

With GW I cna see them increasing their point cost because they gave them the mini-rending.

If they cost more then they are even worst then before.

Individuals mentioned putting them into cover. Which would make a lot of Space Marine players very happy.

Deep Strike near the Guardians in cover move up and Flame them - results lots of dead Guardians.

The only way Guardians will be good again is to give them back their 24" range and have them not have to take a Weapon Platform.

Also give them a similiar troop structure like the Imperial Guard or get rid of the stupid Force Composition Chart and allow them to have as many troop choices instead of limiting it to just "SIX".

No Guardians will continue to suck in this Edition just like they have in the past two Editions.

[cebalrai]

Guardians are fantastic now.

People need to stop trying to analyze units in isolation. Guardians are now the guys that show up next to your aspect warriors with psychic support and throw 22 BS 4 rending shots at your enemy plus whatever mayhem their BS4 cheap heavy weapon can cause - then they stick around to hold the objective.

If you can't find a way to make that worthwhile for 9 points per model then you really need to go back to playing Spass Muh-reens.

[Mr Mystery]

I don't believe GW even has a clue on what is good/competitive. They only want you to buy several of those big overpriced Wraithknights.

They are in for the money and nothing else.

Or they don't really care about the tournament scene, as they prefer their way of gaming perhaps?

On 'in for the money'. Different to every other company ever in what way? Because you seem to be suggesting it's somehow odd behaviour....

[Cap'nSmurfs]

Well, they care about the tournament scene. They just don't *only* care about the tournament scene, but about the whole bunch of ways one can use the product they put out. Painting, modelling, collecting, terrain building, custom scenario writing, campaigns, Beerhammer...

As to dear old Guardians - is this not about as clear a bump in their proficiency as any unit's ever received in one go? I mean, +1 to WS, BS, I, and also your gun has Rending for one measly point more? And they retain all their old bonuses: it's the cheapest scoring unit you can take, and also can we introduce you to their friends, Mr. Warlock and Mr. Nasty Heavy Weapon?

They're short ranged and weak, yes. Of course they're weak, they're Eldar. They make up for being short ranged by being able to zip around all over the place, firing and moving. And did we mention Rending? And the Warlock...?

"But Space Marines can kill them!" isn't really an argument, given Space Marines can kill pretty much anything if they want to.

[Kamin_Majere]

I will still end up using a mob of 20 of them as i have just about always have (since the squad size was increased) it gives me baby rending and two weapon platforms (actually might use bright lances again) but for troops i think jet bikes and rangers have mostly taken over... dire avengers with an always 5+ save are decent as well though so we are kind of spoiled with decent to good troop choices.


and always choose Beer hammer, its much more fun watching your little green army men kick the crap out of your friends little green army men while buzzed lol

[Baron.roboto]

Ok, so we know that they are now more expensive and just as fragile, so lets look at the stats. Running a bit of Mathhammer, these are very impressive against MEQs.

Assuming a squad of 10 old Guardians shot at a squad of Marines, you'd average 1.65 dead marines.
Now, using a squad of 10 new Guardians, you'd average 3.68 dead marines - now that's very impressive!

Let's look at it against other units:
A unit 10 Warp Spiders are regarded as pretty good MEQ killers by via sheer volume of wounds they can inflict - a squad of these (old codex) will inflict an average of 3.65 dead marines - that's a smidge less than the new Guardians!

These stats are not including 1) the heavy weapon, or 2) Doom, the Primaris power you're now guaranteed to have with the right character.


We all assumed that Guardians will become the disposable Cultist equilivent - but instead we're look at them truly reflecting the fluff depiction of the Glass Cannon. At such a great threat at only 90pts, I've now come around so thinking they have a lot of potential, though they need to be played differently to the static albative HW platform shield they were.

So the question is, how do you keep them alive?

[DarkLink]

Well, they care about the tournament scene. They just don't *only* care about the tournament scene, but about the whole bunch of ways one can use the product they put out. Painting, modelling, collecting, terrain building, custom scenario writing, campaigns, Beerhammer...

Hahahahaha... oh, wait, you're being serious, aren't you.



As to dear old Guardians - is this not about as clear a bump in their proficiency as any unit's ever received in one go? I mean, +1 to WS, BS, I, and also your gun has Rending for one measly point more? And they retain all their old bonuses: it's the cheapest scoring unit you can take, and also can we introduce you to their friends, Mr. Warlock and Mr. Nasty Heavy Weapon?

Making a crappy unit less crappy doesn't necessarily make them good. Wait to play them to see if those buffs will actually make up for their issues. For one, WS and I buffs aren't very useful, Guardians suck in assault anyways. WS3 only matters against Guardsmen and Daemon Princes, and either way against Guardsmen it's a slap-fight, and Daemon Princes will carve swathes of blood. The BS boost is really nice, though. I think I'll get a unit or two, even if I won't be spamming them.



"But Space Marines can kill them!" isn't really an argument, given Space Marines can kill pretty much anything if they want to.

For one considering that Space Marines are the most common army in the game by far, counting Grey Knights and all the variant chapters, if something sucks against Space Marines, it sucks. More importantly, Guardians don't have issues with just Space Marines, they have issues with anything with an approximate bolter equivalent. Tau, Necrons, Sisters, Dark Eldar, heck, pretty much everything but 'nidz and Orks, and in both of those cases the enemy has so many cheap bodies that getting inside of 12" is a death sentence. You'll get tarpitted, and then figure out why Guardians aren't an assault unit.

[Defenestratus]

Doom is not a primaris power - a bad version of prescience is.

[DrLove42]

I can see a Conceal Warlock, with a 20 blob and 2 scatter lasers making its way back into my lists and sitting behind a defence line on the gun. BS4 for the gun, and at long range (their main range) 4 S7 and 8 S6 shots to worry people and concealed behind the line.

Or now they're BS4, Lances might be useful on them again

[Defenestratus]

I can see a Conceal Warlock, with a 20 blob and 2 scatter lasers making its way back into my lists and sitting behind a defence line on the gun. BS4 for the gun, and at long range (their main range) 4 S7 and 8 S6 shots to worry people and concealed behind the line.

Or now they're BS4, Lances might be useful on them again

That is going to be a very expensive, very squishy unit.

180 for the guardians themselves, + the heavy weapons, plus the cost of the warlock plus the cost of the ADL?

Suck.

[DrLove42]

Well I'm not playing a list WITHOUT a Defence Line, cos the Quad gun is one of the only interceptor/AA guns you can be reliable with

[DarkLink]

Find a different unit for it, then, or at least one that's not as expensive. Or, are Farseers BS 5? Stick one there and use it to toss out buffs 24". Anyways, ~100pts just for a scoring scatter laser is too much when you can get one on a faster, tougher Wave Serpent, along with a Shuriken Cannon, and the Serpent is basically always Twin Linked.


Hahahahaha... oh, wait, you're being serious, aren't you.


Sorry, I just had to say this.

Seriously, though, pretty much the only thing GW did in 6th for tournaments was introduce Hull Points. Almost every other major change from 5th was a move towards randumb beer and pretzels gaming.

[Caitsidhe]

Seriously, though, pretty much the only thing GW did in 6th for tournaments was introduce Hull Points. Almost every other major change from 5th was a move towards randumb beer and pretzels gaming.

This is because they operate under the delusion that this is a little kids game. They want it like Candyland where winners and losers are as random as possible, i.e. to make the rules equalize the playing field by minimizing skills the players can control. :) I don't know who plays it over in the U.K. but it sure as hell isn't kids over here and most people outgrow Candyland.

[Power Klawz]

Random charge range and a return to randomly generated abilities like psychic powers and warlord traits, to be honest these things add unexpectedness and actual critical thinking in game. If you're just trying to create a game where every unit is amazing you wind up with unmitigated power creep and very little actually interesting gameplay.

This unit kills this many of this type of target per turn, if I take this many of this unit I will kill my opponent before he kills me in this many turns. I am so great at this game.

A game entirely dictated by lopsided rules and math is a terrible game, when you start running into obvious outcomes before the first shot is fired why are you even playing?

If anything randomly generated abilities and random charge lengths add risk to balance out the reward element. Whereas before you could coldly calculate that you'll definitely reach your enemy in 2 turns and lose an average of 30% of your unit prior to the assault, after which you'll wipe them at the cost of a single model, there was really no chance for thrill outside of statistical outliers (at which point I'm sure many players would complain that its not right that unit of grots killed all your spess muhreens and now they need feel no pain or something equally inane.) Now you have to carefully weigh the pros and cons of approaching within the rapid fire threat range of your enemy to risk an assault. Do you hang back outside of 18 inches to avoid taking double taps for another turn, or do you risk that12 inch charge, statistically you won't make it but if you do you just bypassed the real threat of full BS rapid fire and got right into the thick of things.

Real decisions have to be made and real risks have to be taken now, and sometimes those risks won't play out, all in all I don't see that as "randumb" or whatever, its just another element of surprise.

[DarkLink]

What's worse is that a well balanced game with lots of tactical and strategic depth is just as good for 'forging the narrative' as an extremely random game is. It feels like GW intentionally moved to randomness not to forge some narratives, but to punish competitive play, because if GW put just a little more effort into the quality of their rules the two things are far from mutually exclusive.

[Caitsidhe]

<chuckles> They didn't end up punishing competitive play (if that was their goal). They just punished the groups who relied on certain things by forcing them to be so random. Don't get me wrong, I'm not opposed to an element of chance. This is a war game and there is such a thing as the "fortunes of war," that is a far cry from what GW has managed to simulate.

Outside of reserves and normal deviation, there is very little that is ever random in my lists.

[Caitsidhe]

Random charge range and a return to randomly generated abilities like psychic powers and warlord traits, to be honest these things add unexpectedness and actual critical thinking in game. If you're just trying to create a game where every unit is amazing you wind up with unmitigated power creep and very little actually interesting gameplay.

You are confusing critical thinking with gambling. There are tactics. There is strategy. There is risk assessment. All are important talents for a gamer. Nobody is talking about insisting that every unit be "amazing," so I'm not sure where that came from.


This unit kills this many of this type of target per turn, if I take this many of this unit I will kill my opponent before he kills me in this many turns. I am so great at this game.

It is rarely that certain even in a less random game. Moreover, since you can't know or force your opponent to take what you want him/her to take, such calculations come with their own risk.


A game entirely dictated by lopsided rules and math is a terrible game, when you start running into obvious outcomes before the first shot is fired why are you even playing?

I think we would all like the rules to be LESS lopsided. A "balanced" game would by definition not have lopsided rules. All tactical strategy games are driven by math. Real warl is likewise driven by math. You win battles by placing the right troops (the most unfair advantage you can muster) in the right place. That's it.


If anything randomly generated abilities and random charge lengths add risk to balance out the reward element. Whereas before you could coldly calculate that you'll definitely reach your enemy in 2 turns and lose an average of 30% of your unit prior to the assault, after which you'll wipe them at the cost of a single model, there was really no chance for thrill outside of statistical outliers (at which point I'm sure many players would complain that its not right that unit of grots killed all your spess muhreens and now they need feel no pain or something equally inane.) Now you have to carefully weigh the pros and cons of approaching within the rapid fire threat range of your enemy to risk an assault. Do you hang back outside of 18 inches to avoid taking double taps for another turn, or do you risk that12 inch charge, statistically you won't make it but if you do you just bypassed the real threat of full BS rapid fire and got right into the thick of things.

This is kind of what I said. The random rules are intended to take away the skill-set factor of the player so they can't coldly calculate their logistics and let their intelligence and logistical knowledge take its toll. :)


Real decisions have to be made and real risks have to be taken now, and sometimes those risks won't play out, all in all I don't see that as "randumb" or whatever, its just another element of surprise.

The choices and risks were no less real when the game was less random. Fortune simply favored the intelligent and punished the stupid.

[DarkLink]

Random charge range and a return to randomly generated abilities like psychic powers and warlord traits, to be honest these things add unexpectedness and actual critical thinking in game.

Trust me, it took much more skill and critical thinking to pull off a good charge back in 5th. I played Daemonhunters, where you'd get like two squads of Grey Knights in Land Raiders for your whole army, and to win you pretty much had to carefully out-maneuver your opponent while whittling them down at range, then carefully coordinate a counter assault. It was a ton of fun, because it took skill.

Now, charges amount to getting as close as you can, and rolling well on 2D6. Or very likely 3D6 drop the highest, because they changed the rules for how you charge into terrain.

A degree of randomness isn't a bad thing, but there are too many quality games out there that have no randomness whatsoever, like Chess or Go, for me to take any claim that you need randomness seriously. And too much randomness means that you're no longer playing the game, you're just observing the dice.



If you're just trying to create a game where every unit is amazing you wind up with unmitigated power creep and very little actually interesting gameplay.

If you end up with a game where everything is equally amazing, then the game is balanced and there's no power creep. If you end up with a game like what we've got now, where certain units *coughFlyerscouth* are quite obviously better than everything else, you get power creep and end up with tournament where all the winners are Necrons allied with either Grey Knights for tough scoring units or CSM for the Heldrake. I can't tell you how many games I've played that have been ruined by poorly balanced gameplay, and how many have been awesome because the two armies happened to be well balanced against each other so it was an even matchup.



This unit kills this many of this type of target per turn, if I take this many of this unit I will kill my opponent before he kills me in this many turns. I am so great at this game.

Which is where my comments about tactical depth come into play. IG, and now Tau, just sit there and roll dice and the opponent removes models from the table now. Eldar, though, have to use their mobility to kite around the enemy and whittle them away until the enemy is too weak to win, and it becomes a game of cat and mouse. Guess which one is more fun, and guess which one has more tactical depth. It has nothing to do with how random it is. Except when stuff that you rely on for maneuverability and synergy (psychic powers, assault moves, etc) become random. Then the balance of the game is predilected on your ability to roll precisely what psychic powers and charge distances you need, rather than your skill as a player.



A game entirely dictated by lopsided rules and math is a terrible game, when you start running into obvious outcomes before the first shot is fired why are you even playing?

So you're agreeing that if GW does what I'd like and make the game more balanced, then the game will be better? Because right now GW does a fairly mediocre job at balancing the game, there are plenty of terrible lopsided rules, and there are lots of Rock-Paper-Scissors with obvious outcomes that aren't worth playing. So why do you sound like you're trying to argue with me?



If anything randomly generated abilities and random charge lengths add risk to balance out the reward element. Whereas before you could coldly calculate that you'll definitely reach your enemy in 2 turns and lose an average of 30% of your unit prior to the assault, after which you'll wipe them at the cost of a single model, there was really no chance for thrill outside of statistical outliers (at which point I'm sure many players would complain that its not right that unit of grots killed all your spess muhreens and now they need feel no pain or something equally inane.) Now you have to carefully weigh the pros and cons of approaching within the rapid fire threat range of your enemy to risk an assault. Do you hang back outside of 18 inches to avoid taking double taps for another turn, or do you risk that12 inch charge, statistically you won't make it but if you do you just bypassed the real threat of full BS rapid fire and got right into the thick of things.

Real decisions have to be made and real risks have to be taken now, and sometimes those risks won't play out, all in all I don't see that as "randumb" or whatever, its just another element of surprise.


Adding an element of gambling can be a good thing. It adds a little depth because sometimes things won't go as expected and you'll have to adapt.

Too much random, though, and it doesn't matter how good you are at math. The margin of error and standard deviation on the bell curve will be so great that even the best of mathematicians won't be able to reliably predict anything, except in the very long run, and it takes too long to play a game of 40k that the long run won't matter much, and then it stops being about player skill and all about luck of the dice. Some people like removing all skill and relying on luck instead, but there's a very large percentage of players who don't like that, which is precisely my point. GW is pandering to a segment of their audience, and it's not the competitive crowd.


For example, rolling to hit, wound, and saves is ok because you can get a relatively large sample size. Assault and shooting units get plenty of attacks that a good player can reliably judge what will win a combat. It won't always go to plan, though, so it keeps players on their toes and requires them to adapt when an opponent just won't fail their saves.

Rolling psychic powers are pretty reliable, but there is a little bit of risk built into them, just enough that occasionally you might want to refrain from casting a power to avoid Perils, or that your super-combo won't work out.

But when everything is based on dice rolls, particularly things like psychic powers where you can't reliably get what you want (there's a reason why everyone takes Divination and no one takes Pyromancy, because with Divination you can reliably get good powers and with Pyromancy you can't), it's no longer about player skill or synergy or tactical depth. It's about rolling, and half the time one player's dice will screw them and the opponent's dice will get them exactly what they want and then it's a near-foregone conclusion as to who will win. Do you think that's balanced, or fun?

5th ed had some issues, mainly the lack of Hull Points, but 6th has issues here too, and it feels very much like an intentional choice to alienate a large portion of GW's audience in favor of another portion, when they could have just done a better job and written more balanced rules and satisfied both halves of the spectrum.


Edit:
Plus, with more balanced gameplay, you face much more varied armies. Instead of facing a handful of power-builds, you end up facing a huge range of solid but not overpowered lists. But that requires balanced gameplay. I'd love to have a game where every single Necron list wasn't 6x5 Immortals in Night Scythes, with allied Heldrakes. But 40k isn't very well balanced, so you run into this problem. You tend to face the same lists over and over. I don't think anyone of functional intelligence could possibly disagree that a well balanced game with a wide variety of armies is better than a poorly balanced game with a handful of power builds dominating everything else. This is so blatantly obvious in most of GW's work that I can rarely take anyone who argues with my general position on this seriously.

[Sainhann]

As to dear old Guardians - is this not about as clear a bump in their proficiency as any unit's ever received in one go? I mean, +1 to WS, BS, I, and also your gun has Rending for one measly point more? And they retain all their old bonuses: it's the cheapest scoring unit you can take, and also can we introduce you to their friends, Mr. Warlock and Mr. Nasty Heavy Weapon?

They're short ranged and weak, yes. Of course they're weak, they're Eldar. They make up for being short ranged by being able to zip around all over the place, firing and moving. And did we mention Rending? And the Warlock...?

"But Space Marines can kill them!" isn't really an argument, given Space Marines can kill pretty much anything if they want to.

What old bonuses? they never had any old bonuses.

They are still short range and more than likely still have to take a Weapon Platform and the Rending means nothing since it only stops normal saves and does nothing against the cover save.

I would much rather have them with their old 24" range weapon instead of the rending. Plus I would have the weapon Platform as upgrade to the squad and not be force to take one.

[Cap'nSmurfs]

I mean the things I listed after the colon. Which is what that means.

"Bonuses" = "they're cheap, they've got friends, they're packing heat".

[magickbk]

It feels like GW intentionally moved to randomness not to forge some narratives, but to punish competitive play

I frequently say that GW doesn't seem to intentionally do anything to promote or hinder competitive play, because everything is so wildly inconsistent from book to book that it shows a complete lack of a long term plan in any direction. Punishing any particular style or type of play frequently just becomes a side-effect, because as a non-tournament player, I have the same frustrations, just for different reasons.

As for Guardians, they are better than they were, which isn't a reason to take or not take them. Ultimately their value depends on what you as a player have to face. If you are a tournament player, then almost everything needs to be compared to Cron air or Heldrakes or MSU Transport Spam of some sort, or whatever the flavor of the year happens to be. If you are a casual player, then your group is going to have a unique meta that may or may not dictate your choices. If you happen to play in a group where everyone is fielding Tau and Orks and Imperial Guard, then your selections are going to be vastly different than someone playing against mostly Marines, Chaos, and Necrons. As a good example, a few years ago, I listened to a few episodes of the Independent Characters, and I was stunned to discover how many multi-Land Raider lists those guys were both playing and playing against. That was just the way their local scene looked, but I'd never seen anything like it on the table where I've played. I have a feeling that many people who frequent this site would end up having vastly different lists than players who went primarily to other sites. It is how humanity operates which is why different regions develop accents and dialects and different art and so forth.

My intention is to make an Ulthwe Black Guardian-type list, and I imagine I will probably struggle against some armies, and do very well against others.

[Cap'nSmurfs]

Everytime this "randomness!!!" discussion comes up again (again!) I laugh, because I came in with 2nd Ed, and I'd have loved to see your faces when confronted with that.

[Caitsidhe]

I don't dwell on the random factor too much. I simply remove as much of it (as any general does) as possible. Since it got just as idiotically random for everyone else as it did for me, the issue is largely moot. The only thing you can do if you don't like it is build your armies based on eliminating it (or selecting your faction based on the same).

I think Eldar are hurt by randomizing their psychic powers and because of it we will see far less variation in builds. People will naturally gravitate towards things they can rely on. I should state that I'm NOT an Eldar player (CSM). I'm just commenting in general since many of my hardest games (oddly enough) are against a local, very talented Eldar player. He will adapt. Of that I have no doubt.

[magickbk]

Everytime this "randomness!!!" discussion comes up again (again!) I laugh, because I came in with 2nd Ed, and I'd have loved to see your faces when confronted with that.

The roll for grenade effects phase...

[Defenestratus]

The roll for grenade effects phase...

The thing about 2nd edition was that the randomness was a fun side effect that really didn't have a lot of gameplay implications unless of course you played Orks.. in which case whether you won or not came down to whether you were playing against warp spider and how great your prayers to gork and mork were.

[Sainhann]

Ok, so we know that they are now more expensive and just as fragile, so lets look at the stats. Running a bit of Mathhammer, these are very impressive against MEQs.

Assuming a squad of 10 old Guardians shot at a squad of Marines, you'd average 1.65 dead marines.
Now, using a squad of 10 new Guardians, you'd average 3.68 dead marines - now that's very impressive!

We all assumed that Guardians will become the disposable Cultist equilivent

So you kill 4 Marines from a unit of 10, here is what is going to happen on the Marine's players next turn.

They will move within range and then assault.

Results lots of dead Guardians.

Plus you are forgetting that the Squad of Marines can shoot out to 24" so they will kill off a few Guardians before they can even get into range.

[Sainhann]

I can see a Conceal Warlock, with a 20 blob and 2 scatter lasers making its way back into my lists and sitting behind a defence line on the gun. BS4 for the gun, and at long range (their main range) 4 S7 and 8 S6 shots to worry people and concealed behind the line.

Or now they're BS4, Lances might be useful on them again

Okay is this two squads of ten or did GW give Guardians the ability to buy a Support Platform for every ten guys.

Because right now it is only one Weapon Platform per squad.

Plus against the Marine player who knows just how good Vanguard Assault is thie unit would be dead by turn two.

Plus you would be better off getting a Squadron of WarWalkers with Scatter Lasers behind the wall. They would have 24 x S6 shots and with cheap Farseer near by (who can man the AA gun) can guide them.

Far better use of points because the Warwalkers will not be limited to just 12" due to their weapons.

[Sainhann]

I mean the things I listed after the colon. Which is what that means.

"Bonuses" = "they're cheap, they've got friends, they're packing heat".

They cost more now 9 points instead of 8 and the BS4 and rending is not really going to help them since they will still only have a 12" range weapon so what good will it be if they are still 14-15" away after they move. They still can't shoot since they are out of range.

Plus I have seen most of the gaming tables that people set up. Very limited on the terrain and a large squad of Guardians will stand out and with their armor will get shot to pieces.

So you put them behind the Aegis Wall but you are facing Imperial Guard who have 2-3 Leman Russ's, results very dead Guardians.

At best you will only take one unit of them so there is no back-up once it gets killed and that will happen.

There are so many ways in 40k to close the distance with them and once you are within 12" of them they are dead.

[Sainhann]

The thing about 2nd edition was that the randomness was a fun side effect that really didn't have a lot of gameplay implications unless of course you played Orks.. in which case whether you won or not came down to whether you were playing against warp spider and how great your prayers to gork and mork were.

Loved 2nd Edition since is was more balanced and you got some fun results with those Grenades.

Like:

The time the Plasma Grenades expanded and put a stop to a serious Genestealer advance.

Or, when I threw a Rad Grenade into a building that ended upcovering the whole insides thus slowly killing off the Orks that were inside.

Though while not a big fan of the Virus Grenade, had a game where I lost nearly half my Eldar army and if the game had gone one more turn I would have won.

[Chronowraith]

So you kill 4 Marines from a unit of 10, here is what is going to happen on the Marine's players next turn.

They will move within range and then assault.

Results lots of dead Guardians.

Plus you are forgetting that the Squad of Marines can shoot out to 24" so they will kill off a few Guardians before they can even get into range.

You are forgetting a number of factors in your analysis. First, you forgot Battle Focus. The guardians are hardly going to sit there after shooting and wait to be charged. They'll try and move away and while they may not get out of "charge range" if they are 10-12 inches away after the marines move (and then rapid fire). IF they do manage to complete the charge, you didn't factor in the overwatch shots. Since the unit gets 20 of them, that's pretty significant. Next, your points are disparate. Comparing 10 Space Marines to 10 Guardians really shouldn't lead to any surprises. You are comparing 170ish points to 90 points. Lastly, and most significantly, you fail to take into account the rest of the battlefield. I don't know too many games that play with a unit of space marines charging headlong across the board with the sole intent of killing a unit of guardians. Even if the guardians are camping on an objective there are other units on the board.

So there's nothing we can do to take the rest of the board into account. We will also assume the Eldar failed to get out of charge range and that the Space Marines make their charge. Given that these are large assumptions, we'll assume that the guardian unit has remained intact throughout the game as well.

20 Guardians (no platforms) will have 40 shots. Of these 26.6 will hit. Of those 13 will wound. Of those 13, 4 will be rends. Of the remaining 9 wounds caused 3 will fail their armor saves. That kills 7 marines. Now the marines can either rapid fire or charge. If they charge, the guardians will hit 6.6 times. One of those will rend with another wounding and likely being saved. That means that 2 marines get into combat with a squad of 20 marines. I know guardians suck at combat but the odds of numbers are with them in this fight.

Now, that'[s an even comparison with a LOT of assumptions that are likely NOT to be true during a battle. Nonetheless, I'd hardly say that a unit of 20 guardians is terrible since they can pretty effortlessly chew threw a unit of 10 marines. Yes, it's a pain to move them around the board to shoot. However, they are called guardian defenders for a reason. Sit on an objective and hold it. When an opponent comes near, spray them with firepower.

[DarkLink]

You are forgetting a number of factors in your analysis. First, you forgot Battle Focus. The guardians are hardly going to sit there after shooting and wait to be charged.

Then the Marines get two turns of shooting before the Guardians are able to get in range, if you're not using your Run move to get inside of 12".


IF they do manage to complete the charge, you didn't factor in the overwatch shots. Since the unit gets 20 of them, that's pretty significant.

3 hits isn't insignificant, but you'll still be lucky to kill one Marine. And that's assuming there's still 10 Guardians left, which there won't be.



Next, your points are disparate. Comparing 10 Space Marines to 10 Guardians really shouldn't lead to any surprises. You are comparing 170ish points to 90 points. Lastly, and most significantly, you fail to take into account the rest of the battlefield.

It'll only end up worse for the Eldar. The force with longer range and more maneuverability will win, and so a Marine player can just sit outside of the Guardian's range and mow them down, so 10 Marines will win out over 20 Guardians as well. Unless of course you take a Wave Serpent, in which case it gets more even, but only really because the Wave Serpent is good, not because the Guardians are. Plus, I'd rather have Guardians fly up and shoot at me than many other Eldar units, say Fire Dragons or Wraithguard.



I don't know too many games that play with a unit of space marines charging headlong across the board with the sole intent of killing a unit of guardians. Even if the guardians are camping on an objective there are other units on the board.

No, you're right, Space Marine players don't simply walk across the board normally. Which means that they're taking Rhinos and/or units with a lot more firepower than just bolters, which means the Guardians are even more screwed.



So there's nothing we can do to take the rest of the board into account. We will also assume the Eldar failed to get out of charge range and that the Space Marines make their charge. Given that these are large assumptions, we'll assume that the guardian unit has remained intact throughout the game as well.

You're making just as many assumptions in order to let the Guardians get their shots off. And, sure, a good player can make both sides work. But it's a lot harder to make a unit with a mere 12" range that isn't, say, a bunch of meltaguns, make its points back.



20 Guardians (no platforms) will have 40 shots. Of these 26.6 will hit. Of those 13 will wound. Of those 13, 4 will be rends. Of the remaining 9 wounds caused 3 will fail their armor saves. That kills 7 marines. Now the marines can either rapid fire or charge. If they charge, the guardians will hit 6.6 times. One of those will rend with another wounding and likely being saved. That means that 2 marines get into combat with a squad of 20 marines. I know guardians suck at combat but the odds of numbers are with them in this fight.

How did you ever get 20 Guardians within 12"? I know that I'd put at least a round of Storm Bolter fire into them, and that's ~10 dead Guardians, just from one unit of GKSS. A Thunderfire Canon will kill just as many. Any decent army should be able to deal with a relatively fragile footslogging unit with such short range.



Now, that'[s an even comparison with a LOT of assumptions that are likely NOT to be true during a battle. Nonetheless, I'd hardly say that a unit of 20 guardians is terrible since they can pretty effortlessly chew threw a unit of 10 marines. Yes, it's a pain to move them around the board to shoot. However, they are called guardian defenders for a reason. Sit on an objective and hold it. When an opponent comes near, spray them with firepower.

They're not terrible, they're just not really good. And the problem with sitting on an objective is that you can't engage anything with such a short range, except on your opponent's terms. And that's nearly 200pts just sitting there, though at least you've got some heavy weapons to shoot with.

[Baron.roboto]

No, I still think that the new damage output from Guardians are far too big to ignore. Hell, they now kill more Marines in a volley than a squad of Bladestorming Dire Avengers.

Unless shrouding and other cover related spells get to be dished out like Candy, I do think I'll have to keep my squad mounted.

[Sainhann]

No, I still think that the new damage output from Guardians are far too big to ignore. Hell, they now kill more Marines in a volley than a squad of Bladestorming Dire Avengers.

Unless shrouding and other cover related spells get to be dished out like Candy, I do think I'll have to keep my squad mounted.

Thing is if a Eldar player does take Guardians it will most likely be one and they will put them behind a Aegis Wall because their armor save is still only 5+.

If I was facing them I would know that the chances of them moving outside of that wall is slim to none. Plus knowing that they only have a 12" range I can very easily stay outside of that range or...

On my first turn I deep strike in with some Vanguard Marines (pricely but they are worth it) move towards the Guardians and first shoot them (with flamers) and assault the rest.

There will not be so many left after they get flamed and I will more than likely end up in control of your Aegis wall and Quad gun, which on the next turn I will use against them.

[scadugenga]

There is no overcoming the 12" range issue. You could have BS10, and still not get to use it as you get gunned down before you get into range.

The cheap points and hvy weapon platforms are what made guardians remotely worth taking. (Jetbikes are another matter)

Guardians will continue to be backfield objective holders, just more expensive than before. But BS4 means you'll have less qualms about taking a brightlance or EML instead of the ubiquitous scatter laser or shuriken cannon.

They will remain what the Great Nerf of '98 relegated them to: ablative wounds for the heavy weapon platform.

[Sainhann]

There is no overcoming the 12" range issue. You could have BS10, and still not get to use it as you get gunned down before you get into range.

The cheap points and hvy weapon platforms are what made guardians remotely worth taking. (Jetbikes are another matter)

Guardians will continue to be backfield objective holders, just more expensive than before. But BS4 means you'll have less qualms about taking a brightlance or EML instead of the ubiquitous scatter laser or shuriken cannon.

They will remain what the Great Nerf of '98 relegated them to: ablative wounds for the heavy weapon platform.

15 years ago and many players today only have known the 12" range.

Oh that was also the time when GW started to go downhill.

But at BS4 I would still take the Scatter Laser because 4 shots will always be better.

Imperial Guard will out shoot them 24" range compared to 12" range, hell everyone will out shoot them because of that 12" range.

It is sad that a once very capable shooting army is now force to get within 12" with most of it weapons in order to shoot anything.

[Anggul]

12" range screws them. Simple.

[eldargal]

I think of Guardians catapults now as thei holdout weapon. They sit on an objective with some fearsome heavy weapon pewpewing at all the things it can and then when someone tries to assault them off said objective you get a lot of almost Rending S4 shots maybe at full BS if you are lucky with your psychic rolls. A big blob of Guardians will statistically kill a few of whatever assaults them and you can charge the engaged assault unit with a dedicated melee unit to finish them off before they grind down the Guardians.

[daboarder]

I think of Guardians catapults now as thei holdout weapon. They sit on an objective with some fearsome heavy weapon pewpewing at all the things it can and then when someone tries to assault them off said objective you get a lot of almost Rending S4 shots maybe at full BS if you are lucky with your psychic rolls. A big blob of Guardians will statistically kill a few of whatever assaults them and you can charge the engaged assault unit with a dedicated melee unit to finish them off before they grind down the Guardians.

Yup, and the great thing is, the more expensive the assaulting unit (most forward units are pricey) the scarier psuedo-rending is.

[Defenestratus]

Yup, and the great thing is, the more expensive the assaulting unit (most forward units are pricey) the scarier psuedo-rending is.

Why would you even assault guardians? Ever? If I was a blood angels player, I'd just use my baal predators on them, then assault some other juicy aspect warrior like scorpions or avengers.

You can just sit at 20-24" range for two rounds to kill them all with your bolters or flashlights and fear little to no reprisal from the same squad.

Now that rapid fire weapons are move and fire at long range, there's simply no trying to explain a 12" range gun. Hell the pistols have the same range.

[DarkLink]

Yeah, the problem with Guardians holding objectives is that you allow your opponent to dictate how he deals with them, because Guardians can't do **** until your opponent decides to get close enough. Against a halfway competent opponent with a decent army, that means he'll probably find a good plan for clearing off your Guardians without too much trouble. A pair of scatter lasers just isn't enough firepower for the points your spending, though you can add in the quad gun on an ADL for a little more benefit. I'd still rather go with Rangers for Snipers and a 3+ cover behind the ADL or in Ruins. 10 Rangers are a whole 10pts more than 10 Guardians with a Scatter Laser.

[magickbk]

Why would you even assault guardians? Ever? If I was a blood angels player, I'd just use my baal predators on them, then assault some other juicy aspect warrior like scorpions or avengers.

Everything is situational. Let's say you aren't a marine player at all. Let's say you are a Dark Eldar player, those Guardians are on an objective, the game is nearly over, and the only unit you have nearby are some Wyches. You'd be better off getting whoever you can into combat, because there is a better chance of survival. Heck, as a Blood Angel player, in the same situation, being in combat is probably more survivable than standing around, because you reduce the number of possible shots. As we all know, every unit has an optimal counter in the game, but part of strategy assumes that your opponent is equally skilled as you are, and will be making sure that the unit that you want to be there, won't be, and coming up with an unexpected alternative. That's why I've always disliked the 'mathhammer' concept. Math removes the board from the equation, the situation, which is what separates Warhammer from Chess, or any other 'space' mechanic board game.

[cebalrai]

Why would you even assault guardians? Ever? If I was a blood angels player, I'd just use my baal predators on them, then assault some other juicy aspect warrior like scorpions or avengers.

You can just sit at 20-24" range for two rounds to kill them all with your bolters or flashlights and fear little to no reprisal from the same squad.

Now that rapid fire weapons are move and fire at long range, there's simply no trying to explain a 12" range gun. Hell the pistols have the same range.


You realize that things happen in the context of a wider battle, right?

And what if the Guardians have 2+ cover?

[Koremu]

You realize that things happen in the context of a wider battle, right?

And what if the Guardians have 2+ cover?

What if they do? He's turning Template Weapons on them.

[cebalrai]

What if they do? He's turning Template Weapons on them.

He said bolters and flashilights.

If you're just going to say X unit is easily killed because there's a gun somewhere in the game that's strong against them then there's no point in discussing any of this. But the fact is Guardians can be used as competent objective holders now. You can make the argument of "but what if a Helldrake..." all you want, it doesn't change the fact that a unit of 9 pt models can pony up shrouding and be a workable objective holder.

[Mr Mystery]

So Guardians mean your opponent can pick and choose? Bunkum. Utter twaddle.

Find objective. Camp Guardians on it. Now my opponent doesn't want to come within 12" of said objective, because it'll really ****ing hurt. Interdiction zone established. And your own units can wait inside the 12" umbrella.

Baal Predators? Yeah they're pretty good. But they have to get near them. Or more specifically, near them without getting all shot up by the rest of the Eldar army. Or even the Guardian's weapons platform(s).

[DarkLink]

So he just shoots them before he moves within 12". Rocket science, I know, but if it's going to hurt to get close to a unit then I'm going to shoot them up before I get close. If they Go to Ground for a better cover save, awesome. If they've got a warlock with Conceal, that's not too bad, you're really starting to spend a lot of points on that unit and I can still get them with template weapons. Which they won't be able to counter, because by the time they get to shoot I've already moved into range and flamed them. If you just leave a 200+pt unit with a 12" range just sitting around, that's a big advantage to me. Sure, maybe the rest of your army can shoot me up enough to make it a little tougher to kill the Guardians, but I'm not going to be afraid of them by any means.


He said bolters and flashilights.

If you're just going to say X unit is easily killed because there's a gun somewhere in the game that's strong against them then there's no point in discussing any of this. But the fact is Guardians can be used as competent objective holders now. You can make the argument of "but what if a Helldrake..." all you want, it doesn't change the fact that a unit of 9 pt models can pony up shrouding and be a workable objective holder.

Heldrakes, torrent weapons, drop podding flamers, and basically anything Tau, are all hard counters to a big unit of guardians camping on an objective. And there's plenty of stuff that will put a lot of wounds on T3 infantry, cover or no.




The key here is that the rest of the army is doing all of the work. If you're going to kill your opponent's army while short 200+ points, you might as well just take some Rangers and let them contribute. You get a much longer range, the ability to put wounds on MC's and precision shot stuff, and build-in cover bonuses, so your expensive backfield unit isn't just twiddling its thumbs.

There are a couple uses for Guardians I can think of, but none are camping an objective in the backfield.

[Sainhann]

Yup, and the great thing is, the more expensive the assaulting unit (most forward units are pricey) the scarier psuedo-rending is.

Is it first the Guardians will need to roll six to hit. So a squad of 20 would have 40 shots so around 5-9 hits then they need to roll a six again so you might actually kill one.

That does not scare me.

I played back when Overwatch actually meant something and it didn't stop me from moving or charging back then so why would it stop me in 6th Edition where you need 6's to hit?

[Cap'nSmurfs]

They need to roll a six to hit: unless you've parked a Farseer with the power from Divination which allows them to fire Overwatch at full BS.

Then reconsider the scenario.

[Caitsidhe]

I don't camp objectives with ANYTHING. I don't get on objective until just before the game ends specifically so I don't get them wasted by Drop & Pops or whatever else they want to fire at it. Until I actually MUST move toward an objective or get out of a vehicled, I don't do it. :)

[Sainhann]

They need to roll a six to hit: unless you've parked a Farseer with the power from Divination which allows them to fire Overwatch at full BS.

Then reconsider the scenario.

So you are taking a 20 Guardian unit with two Weapon Platforms so that is pushing 200+ points they might also have a Warlock so now it is around 240 points and you want to add in a Farseer that is what 100 or so points and may be more. So now we are talking about nearly 340-350 points or maybe even more.

But we will call it 350 points, in a 1850 point game or 19-20% of your total points.

Eldar are like High Elves their units are freaking expensive and because of that their armies are small.

I still assault them because prior to me doing that I would have shot them up and put Templates on them.

Guardians are still just Guardians, sure they have a better BS now but their armor still in only a 5+ and they are still only toughness 3, and their weapon is still the worst in the game.

[Sainhann]

I don't camp objectives with ANYTHING. I don't get on objective until just before the game ends specifically so I don't get them wasted by Drop & Pops or whatever else they want to fire at it. Until I actually MUST move toward an objective or get out of a vehicled, I don't do it. :)

Thing is many players do and with the number of Aegis Walls in the games today something will be camping.

[legalsmash]

IDK man I'm looking forward to doing a multicolored, multirole mob of guardians with warlocks, wave serpents, walkers, artillery with warlocks, and anything else I can stick in with trolltastic rules. True they may not be the BEST troop choice... but who's gonna defend the craftworld when marneus gets all aggro?

[Kyban]

IDK man I'm looking forward to doing a multicolored, multirole mob of guardians with warlocks, wave serpents, walkers, artillery with warlocks, and anything else I can stick in with trolltastic rules. True they may not be the BEST troop choice... but who's gonna defend the craftworld when marneus gets all aggro?

Wraithguard? Str10 ap2...bye Marneus!

[infinite]

"Guardians are still just Guardians, sure they have a better BS now but their armor still in only a 5+ and they are still only toughness 3, and their weapon is still the worst in the game."

>Implying every other weapon is better than the Shuriken Catapult.
>BS4 Assault 2 rending on basic troops is the worst weapon in the game.

You must be new.

[legalsmash]

My bs 3 guardsmen with a laser pointer and pants begs to differ sir.

[cebalrai]

Mathhammering this out... Correct me if I'm wrong but a squad of 11 Guardians w/Starcannon and its Wave Serpent can wipe a whole squad of Terminators. About 4.5 dead Termis, right?

[DarkLink]

Closer to 4.

[cebalrai]

Closer to 4.

A little less close to 4 if the Serpent throws it's shield. Either way that's pretty great.

Scatter lasers twin link the shield weapon too.

[DarkLink]

Oh, you're counting the Wave Serpent, too.

[chicop76]

Mathhammering this out... Correct me if I'm wrong but a squad of 11 Guardians w/Starcannon and its Wave Serpent can wipe a whole squad of Terminators. About 4.5 dead Termis, right?

Sadly that squad cost as much as a terminator squad. I would go starcannons on the squad and lance on the serpent due to twin linked.

[Sainhann]

"Guardians are still just Guardians, sure they have a better BS now but their armor still in only a 5+ and they are still only toughness 3, and their weapon is still the worst in the game."

>Implying every other weapon is better than the Shuriken Catapult.
>BS4 Assault 2 rending on basic troops is the worst weapon in the game.

You must be new.

If you want to consider 1988 being new then yes.

Imperial Guard with their Flashlight get the same number of shots when at 12", but they can also shoot one shot out to 24", the same goes for Marines the Dark Eldar 24" in range and the Tau are 30".

Yes I do consider a weapon that can only fire 12" to be crap when it was once a 24" range weapon.

There are a lot of Eldar players who only know that Guardians have a 12" weapon and have no clue that they were hit with the nerf bat nearly 15 years ago.

In 5th Edition GW gave the Dire Avengers another 6" because at 12" they were crap and no one was ever going to use them.

So in 6th Edition to get individuals to consider using Guardians they got a BS4 and a mini-rending rule that will stop you from using any armor saves on any 6 to wound roll. It still doesn't stop invulnerable saves or cover saves.

So they got these two new rules and many players will put them into a Wave Serpent and rush them forward and shoot and then run them behind the Wave Serpent afterwards.

But they are only toughness 3 and there armor doesn't stop anything.

Now I really doubt that you will run with 6 x units of 20 Guardians with two weapon platforms and a Warlock in each squad. Total 138 models but the point cost will be 1410 points so not leaving a lot of points left over for other units.

Nope at best you will use one of these units or maybe two, because you really do want to field some of those elite, fast attack & heavy units because Warp Spiders do rock in 6th Edition as do Warwalkers and the BS4 for the Vypers makes them viable as well.

[Sainhann]

My bs 3 guardsmen with a laser pointer and pants begs to differ sir.

Yes I would love to run my 2000 point Imperial Guard unit against Eldar because with nearly 200+ models on the table I love to go up against an army that will have at most around 80 models.

It has enough strength 6 weapons to cause issues for Eldar vehicles only need to glance them and they are gone. Plus it has 19 Flamers, 20 Grenade Launchers and 15 Snipers.

Eldar have to close the distance because they just do not have enough firepower to sit back and shoot.

Yes against certain armies they will do the hit & run and it will work. Against other armies they will not be able to kill enough or be able to get out of the way.

[Sainhann]

Mathhammering this out... Correct me if I'm wrong but a squad of 11 Guardians w/Starcannon and its Wave Serpent can wipe a whole squad of Terminators. About 4.5 dead Termis, right?

So can a Squad of 10 Imperial Guard or 10 Grots if they roll good and the Terminators roll bad.

[DarkLink]

If 10 Guardians in range roll well (it's 'roll well', not 'roll good':p) and the Terminators roll poorly, a lot more will die than if it's Grots rolling well. And on average dice, Grots or Guardsmen won't kill 4.5 or whatever Terminators. Statistics matter.

The trick is the 'in range' part. Kind of a big deal. You're not likely to get such idealized performance out of Guardians because of their short range, and Battle Focus only helps a little bit.

[chicop76]

I am worried about the flame guard. Too bad you can't disembark after 6" lol. However I wouldn't under sell Eldar shooting. Damn waveserpents now have about 12 strength 6-7 shots it can throw at you for starters. Dark reapers and wark spiders can do the same.

I used to play with 200 plus guard and the problem with that many models leaves your deployment zone congested and vulnerable to pie plates. Lucky for you eldar large pie plates are mostly shoved in one place. Would be grand if the support platform heavy was in a differant slot.

However if I was to field nothing, but guardians and nothing, but guardsmen and say fight. My money is on the guardians. Simply due to you hitting on 4s wounding on 4s and the guardsman have a save vs hiting on 3s wounding on 3s and negating saves.