|
chutche2 posted:So reading my guard codex, what is up with unit organization? But guard companies are like 300 men? Only marines use the 100 man company in 40k.
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 14:12 |
|
|
Artum posted:But guard companies are like 300 men? Only marines use the 100 man company in 40k. I see what you did there 
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
Artum posted:But guard companies are like 300 men? Only marines use the 100 man company in 40k. The organization chart shows a company as being 3 platoons + a command squad, each platoon being 3 squads + a command squad. That's what a guard company has always been on the tabletop, too. It's possible that 1 silhouette represents 10 men, but then it wouldn't still show 5 for a command squad. The chart also gives you 20 commissars to look over ~350 guardsmen, 9 wyrdvanes, and 3 squads of ogryns. They must constantly be looking over their shoulder. chutche2 fucked around with this message at 18:49 on Oct 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
I just grabbed FM 100-60 and Rule Zeroed that my guys are combined arms. Which means I'm stuck playing counts-as DKoK now if I want carapace guys to be able to have the same <REGIMENT>. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
Lovely Joe Stalin posted:This is why I don't particularly want women marines. I don't trust the motives of the vast majority of gamers who say it would be progressive or whatever. I think most of them just want wank-bait. Me personally, I'd rather not compromise the eunuch space monk nazi Robert Z'Dar aesthetic to appeal to Doctor Thunder. I think this whole concept of a bunch of (I presume) guys angrily debating representation of women in a tabletop game is a little bit absurd. There are basically two motives here: One is that we want female models to be included for our own sakes. This is fine, but often really creepy. The other is that we want the game to appeal more to women. For that, I think we need the input of actual women. Do women think female Space Marines are an awesome idea? These guys are the male ideal taken to a parody level of extreme, but I'm sure many players self-identify with them anyway. Would women do the same if we stick female heads (and boobs) on those absurd genetic hyper males? I doubt it, but again, what the hell do I know?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
HardCoil posted:I think this whole concept of a bunch of (I presume) guys angrily debating representation of women in a tabletop game is a little bit absurd. I said this a couple pages ago. There's two things that need to happen to get what is a legitimate representation issue fixed- Firstly, we all need to help to make the culture at our local stores less insular and less (dare I say) toxic. We all know it's a problem- this is why a lot of us don't even play at the local stores. The lovely thing is that an FLGS is one of the best places to get new blood interested in the hobby so this is a major issue for the long term. The onus for this is ultimately on us, and something as simple as calling people out for casual racism misogyny can help a lot. People are generally a lot less inclined to say poo poo lik that when they know the views aren't shared by everyone around them. The other side of the coin is that GW really need to get some more diverse people in decision making positions in their company if they haven't already worked to do so. Victoria Miniatures is an excellent example of the sort of work that happens if you have an actual woman with some input in the creative process,in their case doing the actual sculpting work. A bunch of what I assume are mostly men arguing on the internet about this stuff isn't how the problem is fixed. It can only be fixed by uplifting and then actually listening to the voices of those who are not included.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
chutche2 posted:The organization chart shows a company as being 3 platoons + a command squad, each platoon being 3 squads + a command squad. That's what a guard company has always been on the tabletop, too. It's possible that 1 silhouette represents 10 men, but then it wouldn't still show 5 for a command squad. Already said, mate, but no one who writes that stuff has any military experience, or any more knowledge than you'd get from a general-audience history book, or indeed, probably, any personnel management experience. Actually organising manning means a lot of attachments/detachments, specialist formations tacked on, individuals with specialisations who are there to support the main effort, and then everyone being 75% strength for a variety of reasons and half the vital posts are left empty. The codex explanation is a cartoon version for children, they think it could actually work if some regiments are 100k infantry with nothing but rifles, and some are just a dozen humongous tanks. They constantly talk of these 'regiments' being deployed as discrete formations, and think that about a thousand men could somehow affect the outcome of wars to conquer entire built up planets. 40k scale is hosed, just don't think about it too much.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
chutche2 posted:The organization chart shows a company as being 3 platoons + a command squad, each platoon being 3 squads + a command squad. That's what a guard company has always been on the tabletop, too. It's possible that 1 silhouette represents 10 men, but then it wouldn't still show 5 for a command squad. That checks out to 315 soldiers plus commissars and sundry so yeah, ~300 men to a guard company.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
Science Rocket posted:
Yeah I have these but I haven't assembled them yet since I'm not using noise marines at the moment. Rad parts though, wish GW would put out some new noise marines.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
Artum posted:That checks out to 315 soldiers plus commissars and sundry so yeah, ~300 men to a guard company. No, that's for the regiment. 35 guardsmen per platoon. 3 platoons + command squad per company is 110. 3 companies + command squad for the regiment is 335, plus other support.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
Genghis Cohen posted:Already said, mate, but no one who writes that stuff has any military experience, or any more knowledge than you'd get from a general-audience history book, or indeed, probably, any personnel management experience. Actually organising manning means a lot of attachments/detachments, specialist formations tacked on, individuals with specialisations who are there to support the main effort, and then everyone being 75% strength for a variety of reasons and half the vital posts are left empty. Yeah 40k is very much a heroic fantasy game which happens to be set IN SPACE. In much the same way as numbers for opposing forces in pre-modern history are basically made up, GW just put in whatever sounds like a really big or really small number. Interestingly I read Mary Beard's SPQR the other day and she mentioned in passing that classical Romans used "about 40,000" to describe enemy troops as a shorthand in the same way we'd say "millions." So to Julius Caesar we're all playing Warhammer Fuckloads, I Guess.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
chutche2 posted:So reading my guard codex, what is up with unit organization? Your confusion stems from the way the British classify their corps. What we know as a "battalion" is often (but not always) called a "regiment." They call their regiments "brigades."
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:04
|
|
|
Pendent posted:The other side of the coin is that GW really need to get some more diverse people in decision making positions in their company if they haven't already worked to do so. Victoria Miniatures is an excellent example of the sort of work that happens if you have an actual woman with some input in the creative process,in their case doing the actual sculpting work. A bunch of what I assume are mostly men arguing on the internet about this stuff isn't how the problem is fixed. It can only be fixed by uplifting and then actually listening to the voices of those who are not included. I've been going to GW events and HQ if not often, then at least regularly and consistently for over a decade. And while it's anecdotal, I can say that there are a lot more women in every visible department, from sales to design and painting, now than ever before. GW is very openly pushing to entice and embrace customers from outside the (often awful and exclusionary) traditional wargaming demographic of greasy boys and rancid men. I have faith that they will continue on their current trajectory and we will see genuinely cool women represented in our toy games. I don't think they need to necessarily change any fundamentals of the existing fluff or aesthetic to accomplish that, nor do I think it's my place as a man to say that the way to achieve it is by just making another spaceman but with tits.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
Genghis Cohen posted:Already said, mate, but no one who writes that stuff has any military experience, or any more knowledge than you'd get from a general-audience history book, or indeed, probably, any personnel management experience. Actually organising manning means a lot of attachments/detachments, specialist formations tacked on, individuals with specialisations who are there to support the main effort, and then everyone being 75% strength for a variety of reasons and half the vital posts are left empty. You're not giving GW enough credit. This is how England historically classifies their military structure, and they do have armoured battalions, now called regiments.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
Phyresis posted:Your confusion stems from the way the British classify their corps. What we know as a "battalion" is often (but not always) called a "regiment." They call their regiments "brigades." Huh. That's dumb but I accept this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
Lovely Joe Stalin posted:I completely agree. I've been going to GW events and HQ if not often, then at least regularly and consistently for over a decade. And while it's anecdotal, I can say that there are a lot more women in every visible department, from sales to design and painting, now than ever before. GW is very openly pushing to entice and embrace customers from outside the (often awful and exclusionary) traditional wargaming demographic of greasy boys and rancid men. That's legitimately heartening to hear. The Naeve Blackheart sculpt for AoS was pretty great, and the character in Shadespire looked pretty decent as well. Hopefully they're a sign of some cool stuff coming for 40k.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
So what's with the Cadian 8th? It's a regiment but is supposed to have 8000 guardsmen in 24 companies, and each of those companies is 300+ guardsmen compared to the ~100 guardsmen in the example of the Cadian 180th
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:16
|
|
|
The Cadian 8th is a fictional group of space soldiers, and the rules of logic and logistics don't apply to numbers some dude pulled out of his rear end.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:21
|
|
|
GW people have never understood numbers or scale
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:22
|
|
|
Lovely Joe Stalin posted:There's a decent looking guide to dark flesh in the Stealer Cults painting book. I think there might be a video from the sainted Dunc as well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ukcg7vS-GTE
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:22
|
|
|
Im the necron pullover.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:24
|
|
|
This looks pretty fantastic, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
Schadenboner posted:Im the necron pullover. I'm mad that thing costs like $80 it looks cool. Edit: gently caress me it's actually like $160
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
mango sentinel posted:I'm mad that thing costs like $80 it looks cool. Oh, is it an actual thing?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
At some point are DKoKs going to get a Regimental Doctrine? Any word from FW?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
Schadenboner posted:Im the necron pullover. That's a weird way to spell jumper. <-not british
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
It's neither. It's a hoody.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
Schadenboner posted:Oh, is it an actual thing? https://www.musterbrand.com/en/necron-knitted-hoodie.html
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Lovely Joe Stalin posted:It's neither. It's a hoody. I considered that possibility but I decided it was a zip-up turtleneck (maybe because I need to get a new one before it gets too cold?) Full communism now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
Schadenboner posted:At some point are DKoKs going to get a Regimental Doctrine? Any word from FW?  they get all of their stuff and a free Doctrine, seems fair
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
mango sentinel posted:I'm mad that thing costs like $80 it looks cool. E: nvm, already linked
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
Phyresis posted:
No Tauroxes Prime though, Storm Chimerae only.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
Speaking of Taurox Primes what are people gearing them with? I guess the answer is to use them to cover whatever other gap is in your list, but idk if there's a preferred option.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:46
|
|
|
gatling cannon + hot-shot volley guns is criminally cheap at 95 points, might as well add a storm bolter for 2 more lots of S4 fire if you don't want to be lame and spam mortars everywhere
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
I desperately need to see somebody sufficiently shameless to wear this in public https://us.musterbrand.com/en/brands/warhammer/commissar-long-coat-1688.html 
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
mango sentinel posted:GW people have never understood numbers or scale Or Newtonian physics. MY IMMERSION!!! 
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
Phyresis posted:
Pete Foley says the FB community manager was mistaken, krieg and elysians have to wait for a forgeworld release
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
chutche2 posted:Pete Foley says the FB community manager was mistaken, krieg and elysians have to wait for a forgeworld release good, now they just need to fix the DG faq
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:54
|
|
|
Pendent posted:I desperately need to see somebody sufficiently shameless to wear this in public I have. Several times. The loving smell.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 14:12 |
|
|
Phyresis posted:gatling cannon + hot-shot volley guns is criminally cheap at 95 points, might as well add a storm bolter for 2 more Yeah that's what I was looking at, for 95pts they throw out a ton of anti-infantry fire. I've made the main guns swappable anyway, so I can use any of them if needed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 20:08
|
|