WH40k Imperial Guard vs SW Stormtroopers

[Talk738kno]

I just wanted to point that out, I don't think I've ever read anything indicating that they ever do counter battery fire. This is further supported by in Straight Silver, where they was never a mention of an attempt to neutralize the enemy's largest guns in a largely static, immobile, and exposed guns in WW1 type situation, instead opting for a commando operation.

[Black Admiral]

On the subject on Imperial Guard artillery, it seems their is they lack of counter battery fire, as in Gunheads the commander opted to have his literally plow threw an Ork Horde to get to their artillery, rather then opting to use counterybattery fire, as they had artillery as well(And given Ork accuracy, i think it would had a favorable outcome.)

That would be because Maj. Gen. Bergen's orders from his commander (Gen. deViers, boss of Operation Thunderstorm) explicitly forbade him from doing any more damage than absolutely necessary to the outpost at Karavassa (so, counter-battery fire at targets very close to the walls thereof, or dropping indirect fire inside the outpost, could be safely assumed to be contraindicated).

If his orders had given him any leeway at all in that respect, it's pretty clear from his actions later on that Maj. Gen. Bergen would have used that leeway to the full.

]I just wanted to point that out, I don't think I've ever read anything indicating that they ever do counter battery fire. This is further supported by in Straight Silver, where they was never a mention of an attempt to neutralize the enemy's largest guns in a largely static, immobile, and exposed guns in WW1 type situation, instead opting for a commando operation.

You mean the (presumably shielded, given that void shield generators were relatively common in defensive works on Aexe Cardinale) superheavy guns out of range of any artillery pieces the Aexegarian Alliance had? Those guns?

[Talk738kno]

Sorry, my memory has been a bit fuzzy.

[Gunhead]

The only "rigidness" comes from whatever officers they have in charge, and officer quality and capabilities is an unknown variable. Otherwise you have to do a better job of qualifying your statement than saying "I've read this, they seem rigid to me."

IG codex description of the IG in general. Slow and ponderous vs. mechanized forces

While mix and matching does happen, we're still talking about infantry with tank support as IFVs and APCs will not magically appear in great numbers if they were not present in the first place. Combined arms require armored transport for the infantry so they can support advancing armor. Having a coordinated attack of armor and infantry at the same time, it's not the same as having integrated infantry support for tanks, which is a cornerstone of combined arms operations.

I do not see where you keep getting these broad generalizations from. They do both "coordinated attacks" and have "integrated support." There are fully mechanised regiments and armoured companies with an incorporated mechanised component (as depicted in Imperial armour 3, for example.) There are even regiments that may have all three (as shown in the novels like Storm of Iron or Only in Death.) although the why that they have them can be various: they were raised that way, they were formed from the remnants of other veteran regiments, etc.) This is again a variable that is entirely up in the air, unless you mysteriously have more information available than what the fandom itself has. The same is even true when it comes to artillery, storm trooper/grenadier/drop troopers, and even the occasional bits of integrated air support (valkyries and Vultures are sometimes part of a regiment organically in one manner or another.)

IG codex. Go read it. It states in terms that are quite clear mech inf. is rare in the IG and the fact they separate different arms to different regiments.

The stated speed for a leman russ would make it more of an infantry support tank anyway so maybe it's intended, but it would still have far greater endurance over infantry so the need for armored transport is still there.

Except that Russ speed is not fixed, nor is the tank's role. Both are variable. It can depend on the kind of engine, whether it has been modified or not (They can be modified for greater speed, as I have pointed out before.) it can depend on the fuel available, etc. And we have seen them employed in roles other than just "infantry support" so your generalization is flawed anyhow, unless you're deliberately choosing to ignore evidence.

I only remember the speed it was given in imperial armor and that's why I said maybe it's intended. The speed is somewhat irrelevant anyway, the point being they dole out tanks to support infantry which still is not a good idea.

IG mix and matching is somewhat hodgepodge as there is no guarantee the regiment is constantly supplied with tank support in any great numbers, or even artillery. It's all in the hand of the overall commander who deals these assets. Not to mention all artillery and tank assets are inherently part of the regiment they were raised in, so if the commander of said regiment wants them concentrated to make maintenance or just because he hates infantry, he can easily make the case as they're his troops to begin with.

Yes, I already pointed out that both logistics and the officer quality/capability is a highly variable issue and has drawbacks. I do not see why you are choosing to reiterate this point. Are you trying to tell me politics, personal feelings and other stupid shit that happens in the IG does not happen IRL? Or that RL military forces always have perfect logistics that are never threatened, challenged, or ever face shortcomings?

I also am not exactly clear what you are trying to say with your "example" - are you saying that Tank commanders automatically outrank generals, and other higher officers who would handle the dispositions of army forces (if and/or how they are mixed and matched, deployed, etc.) because that is what you are coming across as saying.

To put it in simple terms: what guard giveth, they easily taketh away. If a tank regiment commander wants to concentrate his forces for whatever reason, he can argue his case before anyone who put them apart in the first place since he is the one who has to maintain them anyway and he ultimately is their commanding officer.

Again by IG codex they have little or no infantry in tank regiments, though if they do have some it probably is mech inf. Dispersing tank forces amongst infantry is not a good idea anyway. Infantry should be supporting the tank, not the other way around. Not only does it cause poor concentration of armor, it causes logistical problems as normal inf regiments do not have the means to maintain tanks properly.

So you're basing broad generalzations on your interpretations of a single source? That's an incredibly fucked up way of doing things, especially on this board. Sorry, you're going to have to try much harder if you're trrying ot make a specific point.

Sorry I still don't give a shit what you think, the IG codex describes the guard in general terms, which is what this thread is about. Unless you really think the novels are somehow a representative take on the guard. I'm sure we'll get dozens of quotes from novels xyz now where you try to prove me wrong. I even went back on my promise to never read a 40K novel. A decision I've come to regret, it was "Last command" if you must know and copious amounts of alcohol lost their lives so I could forget ever reading that PoS.

-Gunhead

[Todeswind]

Here's the thing dude, the IG codex gives you a narrow view of the Imperial Guard. Even within the codex itself there are numerous examples of armies that are mechanized, airborne, and anything between even in the codex itself. Moreover there used to be a separate "armored company" IG list that included nothing but tanks.

The armies of 40k in the fluff will always be more flexible in their organization and disposition than the armies in the codices because the codices are designed to be balanced fighting forces. Just because a tank is given a "slow and ponderous" rule in the 40k rulebooks does not mean that the tank is going to be universally slow and ponderous in the fluff.

You've clearly never read any of the Black Library books which are as much cannon 40k as the various codices and tend to give infinitely more elaborate explanations of what the codices only have space to touch base on. Even within the codex itself there is a great to do about the variation and lack of universality between IG regiments, legions, and technological advances. Whereas some IG tanks are barely above the standard of a WWII panzer some IG legions (notably the Merican Guard) have skimmer tanks with advanced plasma weaponry at their disposal.

[Serafina]

The notion that the Imperial Guard in general is a highly mobile force is ludicrous. They are generally only motorize (using trucks to get from A to B, but not in combat), and even that is not always the case - in many situations they will march to their goal on foot, just like armies in WW I and II always/often did.

There ARE some highly mobile guard regiments. The Elysian Drop Troopers are a completely air-mobile force, and there are others that use droppods or orbital transports to great effect. Those forces are superior to modern forces in mobility, and mechanized infantry is generally comparable to them. However, the majority of the imperial guard is on a level of strategic mobility comparable to World War II or even WW I.

[Todeswind]

Ghetto Edit: Ah, you have read last command, well that's something at least. And really? You didn't enjoy a Dan Abnett novel? Seriously? You're the first I've met who didn't like Dan Abnett's work. Hell, there are people I know who only got into the game because of those books.

[Night_stalker]

The notion that the Imperial Guard in general is a highly mobile force is ludicrous. They are generally only motorize (using trucks to get from A to B, but not in combat), and even that is not always the case - in many situations they will march to their goal on foot, just like armies in WW I and II always/often did.

There ARE some highly mobile guard regiments. The Elysian Drop Troopers are a completely air-mobile force, and there are others that use droppods or orbital transports to great effect. Those forces are superior to modern forces in mobility, and mechanized infantry is generally comparable to them. However, the majority of the imperial guard is on a level of strategic mobility comparable to World War II or even WW I.

To be fair, the Guard isn't known for being mobile. Rather it's been known for being the "Hammer of the Emperor", and is focused on smashing their enemies to bits with tanks, artillery, masses of soldiers, and more tanks. They know they aren't mobile, and they make up for it with sheer, unadulterated firepower.

[Brother-Captain Gaius]

Gunhead doesn't like novels and likes to cite the Imperial Guard codex, so I took a gander at mine:

Page 9

Support units, such as heavy weapons platoons and much valued specialist units, such as battle tanks, artillery, and abhuman squads, may be attached to a company for a single battle or entire duration of a campaign. These are rarely permanent additions and are attached as needed by the regimental commanders. It is a common practice, especially amongst armoured and artillery regiments, to break down several companies and second them to infantry forces, in exchange for platoons to provide close support from the attentions of enemy troops. If serving together for extended durations attached units tend to adopt their foster-regiment's uniform and unit markings. This not only has the practicality of helping to avoid friendly-fire incidents, but it aids in promoting comradeship with the soldiers they will be fighting and dying alongside.

In other words: Strictly segregated combat arms regiments (infantry regiments, armor regiments, artillery regiments, etc) are an administrative distinction, not a practical combat-zone one.

[Azron_Stoma]

If memory serves, even in the Clone Wars they had plenty of indirect Artillery that, at least to me, appeared on the order of a Basilisk,
The AV-7 Antivehicle Cannon. Whether the SPMA's indirect fire counts as only a game mechanic or as C Canon is anyone's guess, but since they have firepower on the order of an SPHA- series Artillery piece which can be cranked up to Teraton level firepower if need be...

[Gunhead]

Administrative considerations do impact how armies fight as they define how an army is organized during war and peace time. Heavy handed segregation in the IG is justified by their fear of rebellion / corruption and segregating the forces prevents a single regiment from having all the needed weapons to conduct an effective campaign. How much it impacts the guard under combat circumstances is a matter of time, rate of loss and to extent personal relations. IG armies are slapped together from a variety of places and sent to do battle, given time they iron out the kinks between different units or as we say "Shoot the organization into order".
However, if losses are excessive, new units are constantly put together and may not have the time to get things going smoothly. It's not a not a crippling flaw as the guard is in it for the long haul when they do finally deploy but combat wise it's nowhere as effective as having all the elements in place from the start. There are units that get to have all of their toys as integrated elements, but this seems to be the exception not the rule and quite possibly it's units that have proven themselves that get to do this. Like Cadians for example.

I didn't care for the novels before and after reading one I've gone from that to really not liking them. If I wanted to read bad war fiction, I'd read Sven Hassel.

-Gunhead

[Bluewolf]

Iregardless of how sepeate regiments are, I have the distinct feeling that the Imperial Army/Stormtroopers etc will suffer greatly with their lack of veichles. The Imperial Guard, even in a standard infantry squad tends to have the occasional flamer, grenade launcher, plasma gun. Add in special weapons teams and Stormstroopers of their own and you have a much high proportion of IG men fielding heavy weapons compared to the Imperials. Now this is not an instant battle winner but I'd assume, with what limited knowledge I have that this would allow the IG to be able to inflict a greater ratio of kills, damage morale and ultimately push back the Imperials.

Now the Imperials are not totally lost. I recall that they have fun little devices such as thermal detenators, regular grenades, flamerthrowers too, mounted rifles and heavy blasters etc but this seems to be far fewer in number. When you add armor and artillery into this mix it just gets worse (though it's not like, given the amount of rubbish stuffed into the EU, that the Imperials lack ground equipment). I am wondering how important it would be for the Imperials to be able to use air power to inflict causalities onto the IG's armored elements.

[Connor MacLeod]

IG codex description of the IG in general. Slow and ponderous vs. mechanized forces

Prove it. You made a claim, you're expected to PROVE IT. You've been here long enough to know you cant' get away with this kind of shit.

IG codex. Go read it. It states in terms that are quite clear mech inf. is rare in the IG and the fact they separate different arms to different regiments.

Wrong! When asked to provide evidence to back up your claims, you do not tell the person to "go look up the information themselves." You claimed it, you post the proof from the codex, rather than vaguely trying to shift the burden of proof.

I only remember the speed it was given in imperial armor and that's why I said maybe it's intended. The speed is somewhat irrelevant anyway, the point being they dole out tanks to support infantry which still is not a good idea.

Prove it.

To put it in simple terms: what guard giveth, they easily taketh away. If a tank regiment commander wants to concentrate his forces for whatever reason, he can argue his case before anyone who put them apart in the first place since he is the one who has to maintain them anyway and he ultimately is their commanding officer.

So military forces are subject to the whims of a higher authority, which may or may not neccesarily be intelligent. How is this fact unique to the Guard, rather than being something any military has to face? As I said, officers are variable. some are good and some are shit.

Sorry I still don't give a shit what you think, the IG codex describes the guard in general terms, which is what this thread is about. Unless you really think the novels are somehow a representative take on the guard. I'm sure we'll get dozens of quotes from novels xyz now where you try to prove me wrong. I even went back on my promise to never read a 40K novel. A decision I've come to regret, it was "Last command" if you must know and copious amounts of alcohol lost their lives so I could forget ever reading that PoS.

-Gunhead

Am I supposed to feel guilty that you had to read anything 40K just so you can argue something? If you hate reading the novels that's fine. Just don't act like the stuff you do read is the only evidence out there and that you can just make broad, unqualified statements of capability. Had you phrased it more speculatively (eg "may" or "based on the evidence") that would have been better. I mean for fuck's sake, you didn't even bother specifying which codex, or a page number! Are we supposed to guess your mind? Or are you immmune to board rules and I just don't know it?

Frankly, the above you just posted makes it sound like you are bitter and have something against 40k (or at least "the novels") which makes me wonder why you're debating this at all then, since you clearly knew evidence you did not like was going to be involved and probably would counter what you claimed.

[Connor MacLeod]

In other words: Strictly segregated combat arms regiments (infantry regiments, armor regiments, artillery regiments, etc) are an administrative distinction, not a practical combat-zone one.

Similar into "Tactica Imperialis" Page 56

The Regiment is the only formation that remains even vaguely consistent in size regardless of the world form which it is drawn, though even then, there exists no small degree of variance. It is the basic building block from which all other formations are built, regardless of the naming conventions in use.

...

If the Regiment can be combined with others in many and varied forms, so too can it be sub-divided. All Regiments are divided into a number of Companies, sometimes as few as five and sometimes as many as twenty five - the number might depend upon the number of troopers in the company or might be fewer if they are well appointed, larger if they are rudely equipped. Regardless, they will be considered of equal strength. Invariably, a Regiment will be organised into administrative groupings, sometimes called Battalions, sometimes Brigades, but frequently other terms are used dependent upon the REgiment's planet of origin. In battle, these administrative divisions are not used in a tactical sense, but instead the Regiment's officers will divide the force into temporary formations, each of which will be assigned a specific tactical task. Again the terms for these formations vary, as do their exact application, but the Regimental Battle Group is a common formation, as is the Task Group or the Assault Group. These groups often work alongside units from different arms, forming a combined- or all-arms grouping. An example of this is a battle group consisting of chimera-mounted mechanised infantry, working alongside Leman Russ of an armoured Regiment, perhaps with a detachment of Basilisk self-propelled artillery to act as front line assault guns.

Sadly I seem to have erred as to what it stated, for which I apologize. It does not flat out STATE regiments are administrative formations (but it states other units are, like battalions. Which is sometimes used.) but it does indicate that becuaes a REgiment is basically treated as a building block (to be added to other regiments for larger formations, or broken down into smaller formations as needed) and that regiments can be highly variable and yet are considered "equal" as far as assignment and allotment goes (which can cause problems, as a under-strength regiment may be deployed to a warzone under the belief it is full strength. Such is the absurdity of the Imperium's bureacracy.) Which I suppose is close enough to what I meant, but still

As I already said, there is no definite in HOW they are used. Some officers are pretty rigid thinkers and may use them the same way against all opponents time and again. Others may actually think and try to tailor their tactics accordingly. Some may be brilliant. Others may be somewhere in between. I'm not even going to bother trying to generalize which is more common, since its a very nebulous and hard to quantify issue. Sufficed to say you will find Imperial forces operating in a vareity of ways, from WW1 (or soemtimes even napoleonic) formations and static warfare (although IA5 suggests that trench warfare is highly "specialised" which is why the Krieg are supposed to be so valuable.) Or they may engage in more mobile warfare (The Pardus forces working with the Ghosts in Honour Guard, or the Gunheads/Cadian force that struck at the Orks in the novel of the same name.) again it depends.

The "Mobility" issue - obviously, it can mean strategic, or tactical, or something similar. Tactically it varies. Some are highly mobile (for the guard) others aren't. Tactically it can also be quite relative (even the Tau look sluggish mobility-wise compared to the Eldar.) And of course you get the oft-commented "static warfare" examples.

Strategically, they can be ponderous too, and this is most often commented on I suspect. The Imperial Guard is known for being massive with huge numbers of soldiers, vehicles, artillery, etc. So naturally, being so big, it will not be easy to amass huge numbers of them for a given task (millions to billions that is) because of all that is involved in supplying, transporting, and amassing such a force to begin with. Troops may be infinite, but logistics and transport capability are not, but the Guard does seem to prefer the "hammer" approach (as it is known) of concentrating massive amounts of overkill.

They can, however, speed things up somewhat. Rather than waiting til their forces are all gathered at once, they may send in forces piecemeal to support/bolster a defending force. Such responses are typically smaller (a few regiments or less, say) and not as coordinated, but they can be assembled more rapidly (especially if troops are dispatched from multiple nearby planets.) This is quite probalby one reason why they establish garrisons to begin with, so hat there are always at least some forces on hand - the Munitorum has been known to sometimes keep a "reserve" of troops on hand at the subsector and esctor levels (I believe) to dispatch to any sudden crises as well.

They can even do both. Send out reserves/garrisons to help fend off the enemy and buy time for the larger response to arrive, which has been done (EG Necropolis.)

One last fun point I thought worth pointing out. The Guard DOES have the ability to requisition from PDF or local forces supplies they need (in theory at least.) The most notable example would be from the first printing, 3rd edition IG Codex (Which I believe I recently covered) that shows a garrison regiment was able to amass sublight vessels, skimmers, ground vehicles of all kinds (including for transporting troops) and the like from the planet in question to suit their needs (despite, IIRC, not having vehicles of their own.) It also depicted the Regiment as having split its forces up at the company level to cover different parts of the planet and different duties (including having some of them operating in space, hence the starship.)

[Brother-Captain Gaius]

The "Mobility" issue - obviously, it can mean strategic, or tactical, or something similar. Tactically it varies. Some are highly mobile (for the guard) others aren't. Tactically it can also be quite relative (even the Tau look sluggish mobility-wise compared to the Eldar.) And of course you get the oft-commented "static warfare" examples.

Strategically, they can be ponderous too, and this is most often commented on I suspect. The Imperial Guard is known for being massive with huge numbers of soldiers, vehicles, artillery, etc. So naturally, being so big, it will not be easy to amass huge numbers of them for a given task (millions to billions that is) because of all that is involved in supplying, transporting, and amassing such a force to begin with. Troops may be infinite, but logistics and transport capability are not, but the Guard does seem to prefer the "hammer" approach (as it is known) of concentrating massive amounts of overkill.

I think the important thing to distinguish here is that the Imperial Guard is generally sluggish and immobile in a grand strategic sense. In a tactical or operational sense, the Imperial Guard as a whole is no more or less mobile than any other typical human military force. They have infantry units which march around or are driven with trucks on one end of the spectrum, and air-mobile light infantry, special forces, and mechanized units on the other end of the spectrum with a high degree of tactical mobility.

The notion that the Imperial Guard is an inherently lethargic and particularly cumbersome formation should only really apply to matters of grand strategy; campaigns covering entire clusters of systems and the like. Once actually deployed, they run the gamut of human military operational doctrine.

[Gunhead]

IG codex description of the IG in general. Slow and ponderous vs. mechanized forces

Prove it. You made a claim, you're expected to PROVE IT. You've been here long enough to know you cant' get away with this kind of shit.

What? You want a fucking page reference now? I don't have the codex with me at the moment, so I can't give it to you. Then again, if you had one you could read it for yourself. It is stated in no uncertain terms, regular foot regiments are bolstered with mech inf. units if available, with a description saying IG formations are slow and ponderous.

IG codex. Go read it. It states in terms that are quite clear mech inf. is rare in the IG and the fact they separate different arms to different regiments.

Wrong! When asked to provide evidence to back up your claims, you do not tell the person to "go look up the information themselves." You claimed it, you post the proof from the codex, rather than vaguely trying to shift the burden of proof.

IG codex, talking about armageddon steel legions, mech inf is rare in IG. Again I cannot give a direct page quote as I'm currently several hundred km from the source.

I only remember the speed it was given in imperial armor and that's why I said maybe it's intended. The speed is somewhat irrelevant anyway, the point being they dole out tanks to support infantry which still is not a good idea.

Prove it.
[/quote]

IG codex and all that. For the given speed, I still don't have my sources handy at the moment.

To put it in simple terms: what guard giveth, they easily taketh away. If a tank regiment commander wants to concentrate his forces for whatever reason, he can argue his case before anyone who put them apart in the first place since he is the one who has to maintain them anyway and he ultimately is their commanding officer.

So military forces are subject to the whims of a higher authority, which may or may not neccesarily be intelligent. How is this fact unique to the Guard, rather than being something any military has to face? As I said, officers are variable. some are good and some are shit.

It's not unique to the guard and I never claimed so. You just cannot or will not grasp the concept of being subordinated to someone and how it can affect things. It is a point worth bringing up which I did, with personal experience and understanding how it might affect people involved.

Sorry I still don't give a shit what you think, the IG codex describes the guard in general terms, which is what this thread is about. Unless you really think the novels are somehow a representative take on the guard. I'm sure we'll get dozens of quotes from novels xyz now where you try to prove me wrong. I even went back on my promise to never read a 40K novel. A decision I've come to regret, it was "Last command" if you must know and copious amounts of alcohol lost their lives so I could forget ever reading that PoS.

-Gunhead

Am I supposed to feel guilty that you had to read anything 40K just so you can argue something? If you hate reading the novels that's fine. Just don't act like the stuff you do read is the only evidence out there and that you can just make broad, unqualified statements of capability. Had you phrased it more speculatively (eg "may" or "based on the evidence") that would have been better. I mean for fuck's sake, you didn't even bother specifying which codex, or a page number! Are we supposed to guess your mind? Or are you immmune to board rules and I just don't know it?

Frankly, the above you just posted makes it sound like you are bitter and have something against 40k (or at least "the novels") which makes me wonder why you're debating this at all then, since you clearly knew evidence you did not like was going to be involved and probably would counter what you claimed.

I don't give a fuck how you feel, about me, 40K or this board. I would have posted exact page numbers if I felt there was a reason to do so. So in that regard, if you still want them, I can post them at some point after 17th of january this year. Not that I'm going to skip more important things over this, like doing fucking nothing. You might think the novels are hot shit, to me they're just shit. I really don't consider them as authorative sources and why would I? They describe a handful of regiments in the IG, where hundreds of regiments are small scale shit. The latest IG codex is what I've been reading, which gives us a wide variety of troops with good overall picture how the guard operates. I may dislike several things about 40K, but as it happens IG is not one of them. The IG is one of the few reason I keep myself up to date about GW material at all.

-Gunhead

[Darth Hoth]

Seeing as how Gunhead apparently does not have the Codex currently available: I do, and can thus perhaps be of assistance.

IG codex. Go read it. It states in terms that are quite clear mech inf. is rare in the IG and the fact they separate different arms to different regiments.

Wrong! When asked to provide evidence to back up your claims, you do not tell the person to "go look up the information themselves." You claimed it, you post the proof from the codex, rather than vaguely trying to shift the burden of proof.

IG codex, talking about armageddon steel legions, mech inf is rare in IG. Again I cannot give a direct page quote as I'm currently several hundred km from the source.

I believe that would be this, and possibly other references:

[quote="Codex: Imperial Guard (5th Edition), p. 19, "Armageddon Steel Legions""]Mechanised infantry companies are normally quite rare in the Imperial Guard. This is because it is difficult for most Imperial Commanders and Planetary Governors to obtain and maintain enough of the vehicles needed for such a formation. Amongst those rare few regiments that can equip their companies so, the most famous and celebrated are those raised on Armageddon. This hive world is one of the chief manufacturing planets for Chimeras, producing countless numbers for use across the Imperium.[/quote]

Most planets can apparently not produce the vehicles for fielding mechanised formations of company strength or up for the Guard regiments, according to this passage. The same source gives that different arms are usually separated between different regiments:

[quote="p. 9, "Regimental Organisation""]An Imperial Guard regiment is largely uniform in its composition. Infantry regiments, for example, are unlikely to contain much or any heavy artillery, whilst tank regiments contain little or no infantry. Success requires Imperial Guard regiments to work together. Whilst this interdependence may at first seem like an inherent weakness, it is a necessary precaution. Should a regiment rebel against the Emperor, the traitors will not have access to the supporting units needed to prosecute a full-scale war.[/quote]

[Simon_Jester]

However, the same section goes on to point out that this kind of organization is an abstraction- the units wind up getting parcelled out and swapped around in the field Kampfgruppe-style. Which does support the way the Guard is actually represented as fighting whenever anyone associated with 40k tries to represent them as fighting.

So the infantry support will be present when the 52193rd Ganymedan Armored Regiment or whatever shakes out and deploys its troops... but unless they're relatively lucky, they'll wind up with truck-borne or straight leg infantry and be forced to either fight as infantry support tanks (common in the novels, too), or fight a highly mobile force but without the infantry backing them up. Exceptions will tend to occur when supporting Guard regiments that are relatively heavy on mechanized infantry of their own, at which point the 'mix and match' approach to assembling field formations will give them more mobile ground troops and support a more mobile approach.

Gunhead, I'd like to add that I find your "I'm right because I don't give a shit" approach to debate to be... well, distasteful to the point of being deliberately stupid. It's not a problem on account of you being legitimately busy, or just not reading books you don't like; those are normal. But it's ridiculous for you to act as if this places you in a superior debating position.

[Simon_Jester]

However, the same section goes on to point out that this kind of organization is an abstraction- the units wind up getting parcelled out and swapped around in the field Kampfgruppe-style. Which does support the way the Guard is actually represented as fighting whenever anyone associated with 40k tries to represent them as fighting.

So the infantry support will be present when the 52193rd Ganymedan Armored Regiment or whatever shakes out and deploys its troops... but unless they're relatively lucky, they'll wind up with truck-borne or straight leg infantry and be forced to either fight as infantry support tanks (common in the novels, too), or fight a highly mobile force but without the infantry backing them up. Exceptions will tend to occur when supporting Guard regiments that are relatively heavy on mechanized infantry of their own, at which point the 'mix and match' approach to assembling field formations will give them more mobile ground troops and support a more mobile approach.

Gunhead, I'd like to add that I find your "I'm right because I don't give a shit" approach to debate to be... well, distasteful to the point of being deliberately stupid. It's not a problem on account of you being legitimately busy, or just not reading books you don't like; those are normal. But it's ridiculous for you to act as if this places you in a superior debating position.

[Darth Hoth]

However, the same section goes on to point out that this kind of organization is an abstraction- the units wind up getting parcelled out and swapped around in the field Kampfgruppe-style. Which does support the way the Guard is actually represented as fighting whenever anyone associated with 40k tries to represent them as fighting.

That is not quite how I read it. The section also says that

Each regiment is raised from a single planet and because of this troopers of the Imperial Guard regard themselves as belonging first and foremost to their regiment rather than the army or battle group to which they are assigned.

On their home worlds, the forces who serve to defend the planet may have been split into battalions, divisions, cohorts, militia groups, geno-corps and a host of other formations, but, in the Imperial Guard there is only the regiment.

I would not call the regiment an abstraction. The soldiers are recruited, organised and trained on regimental basis, and those ad-hoc cross-regimental formations that are set up are built on forces being impermanently detached from their parent regiments, "for a single battle or [the] entire duration of a campaign." The regiment is the basic formation, with combinations being improvisations in the field. This assuming that the Codex is an accurate source, of course, but I cannot see why it would not be.

While the presence of "combined" formations is attested (it would, after all, be abysmally stupid to use "tank-only" formations without any kind of infantry or light armour support in most/all cases), I cannot but imagine that the co-ordination between these elements will suffer under such circumstances. For one thing, one might wonder how much training the forces in the respective regiments have in co-operation with each other, since training is done in the regiment.

Gunhead, I'd like to add that I find your "I'm right because I don't give a shit" approach to debate to be... well, distasteful to the point of being deliberately stupid. It's not a problem on account of you being legitimately busy, or just not reading books you don't like; those are normal. But it's ridiculous for you to act as if this places you in a superior debating position.

Was that what he said, though? I got it that his argument was that the novels were not representative of the Guard in general, and hence should not be used as evidence for the state of the Guard in general.

[Gunhead]

Was that what he said, though? I got it that his argument was that the novels were not representative of the Guard in general, and hence should not be used as evidence for the state of the Guard in general.

You're correct. IG is organized to be transported to a battlefield in regiment sized segments. IG codex pretty much gives us a set of basic building blocks and a good idea how common they are. Knowing what made up the army of 4th battle at Bumfuckville is pretty immaterial, as it was most likely pieced together from what was available and more importantly what was available to take it there. Regiment distribution is not uniform in the imperium and composing a balanced fighting force can be time consuming, expensive or even impossible. IG codex also states quite clearly it forces it's regimental organization to units recruited into it.
Which has been in place since..... I forget horus heresy or the age of apostasy. Maybe Hoth can check. Anyway it's been this way for a long fucking time so I'd be surprised if PDF units weren't organized in guard fashion or at least have a ready made plan how to reorganize them as one of the major functions of the PDF is to a reserve force for the guard. I previously said IG can field fully mechanized armies if someone can scrounge them together, it's the IG codex that says such a thing is pretty unlikely and I just don't suddenly go assuming they have all their best toys available. I rather find out what kind of forces are likely to get fielded and go from there.

-Gunhead

[OmegaChief]

It's nigh impossible to guess what exactly you'd randomly have on hand though, as some regiments (Most noticable Cadian) are deployed all the way from the Eye of Terror to beyond Maccrage, while others (Such as the Tanith First and Only) never leave a specific warzone.

[Keevan_Colton]

Most of the current structure of the guard dates from the age of apostasy, the split away from the marines and fleet occured with the Heresy, when a combined command made rebellion far easier. The reforms with the age of apostasy helped to standardise organisation on a certain level, with the allocation of centrally trained commissars to regiments and the departmento munitorum organisation at the sector/subsector level overseeing raising and deployment of regiments. The notion of how this sort of fight would play out would really vary depending on where the regiments were raised. While a feral world might deploy 25 companies to a regiment to account for lackluster equipment (just the standard that the munitorum would dole out as a minimum) a regiment raised from a prosperous industrial world might be five companies to a regiment, but equipped with top of the line gear. The notion given is that the combat strength of a regiment is fairly standardized, even if the specific size and capabilities are not.

[white_rabbit]

You're correct. IG is organized to be transported to a battlefield in regiment sized segments. IG codex pretty much gives us a set of basic building blocks and a good idea how common they are. Knowing what made up the army of 4th battle at Bumfuckville is pretty immaterial, as it was most likely pieced together from what was available and more importantly what was available to take it there. Regiment distribution is not uniform in the imperium and composing a balanced fighting force can be time consuming, expensive or even impossible. IG codex also states quite clearly it forces it's regimental organization to units recruited into it.
Which has been in place since..... I forget horus heresy or the age of apostasy. Maybe Hoth can check. Anyway it's been this way for a long fucking time so I'd be surprised if PDF units weren't organized in guard fashion or at least have a ready made plan how to reorganize them as one of the major functions of the PDF is to a reserve force for the guard. I previously said IG can field fully mechanized armies if someone can scrounge them together, it's the IG codex that says such a thing is pretty unlikely and I just don't suddenly go assuming they have all their best toys available. I rather find out what kind of forces are likely to get fielded and go from there.

I'm a little unclear as to exactly what you are saying, and where you are going with this ? I mean, the Imperial Guard have a vast array of equipment, and they fight in innumerable locations and scenarios, against various foes. Expedience and practicality are always involved, but that pretty much applies to any side in a debate.

Speaking in the same vague terms you are fond of, the Guard will classically have vast quantities of infantry, supported by huge piles of mobile artillery, and assaults will be lead by massed armour formations. Recon elements will be Sentinels, light armour, aircraft. During the initial phases of planetary assaults orbital fire is used against enemy formations and fortifications whilst the Guards various formations drop into combat in various types of dropship. Heavily armed and armoured ones for those directly into combat, and less capable versions otherwise.

[Connor MacLeod]

My my, this thread has changed since I last posted, and we actually see some proof being posted. Not enough to make grand pronoucnements, but its a start. But two can play that game:
From the 5th edition codex:
Page 7

"I have at my command an entire battle group of the Imperial Guard. Fifty Regiments, including specialised drop troops, stealthers, mechanised formations, armoured companies and mobile artillery. Over half a million fighting men and thirty thousand tanks and artillery pieces are mine to command.

Page 8

For a hive worl dsuch as Armageddon, caught in the throes of an all-consuming war, a draft of at least a hundred million men at arms and several million armoured vehicles is typical, a tiny fraction of the totla populace which numbers in the hundreds of billions.

\
Page 9

The basic principle held by the Departmento Munitorum is that regardless of number of men at arms or the exact composition of armoured vehicles, the overall fighting strength - and hence combat effectiveness, of one regiment is equivalent to any other. This is clearly a gross over-simplification but a necessary one when organising wars on a galactic scale.

Page 19

Armageddon has a massive population and is capable of raising a large number of Imperial Guard regiments. Indeed, at the height of the second War for Armageddon more regiments were being raised each year from the population of Armageddon than from any two other worlds in the entire Segmentum Solar combined.

Page 38

The Chimera is the Imperial Guard's most commonly used armoured troop carrier. These ubiquitous vehicles are extremely durable and practical...

Page 38

An infantry regiment does not typically include any mechanised troops, it being difficult for most planetary governors to obtain and maintain the vehicles needed for such formations. BEcause of this, it is quite common for commanders to attach individual Armoured Fist squads from fully mechanised regiments in order to provide fast-moving armoured transport.

Page 51

Manufactured on hundreds of Forge worlds, the Hydra is a common sight in the Imperial Guard, freuqently deployed in support of armoued tank columsn, fixed emplacements and infantry regiments who would otherwise be a threat from enemy bomber strikes and strafing runs.

Ah, but I can do more than just post from the 5th edition Codex, I can post from other (non novel) sources as well. Such as:
Previous IG codex
Page 11

An infantry regiment is often supplied with a number of Chimera transports. They allow a commander the option of mounting a number of squads to provide Armoured Fist units for greater tactical flexibility. In addition, they are used to transport command squads which can make good use of the long-range vox casters they carry. Some regiments are entirely mounted in Chimeras but this is relatively rare.

IA
PAge 11

As sole guardians of technology, the Adeptus Mechanicus have no difficulty in regulating what vehicles ar made for whom. Whilst Leman Russ and Chimeras are manufactured in huge numbers for the Imperial Guard, the largest vehicle entrusted to Imperial Guard commanders (whose loyalty has sometimes proved questionable) are the superheavy tanks and the Leviathan command vehicle.

Page 143

The Trojan is the workhorse used by Imperial Guard armoured regiments as a tractor for towing weapons platforms and as an armoured munitions carrier, ferrying extra ammunition to the platforms once in position or to frontline units in need of supplying.

The Trojan is not a combat vehicle and rarely sees service at the frongline. Behind the lines it is a common sight, trundling to and from supply dumps to forwar dunits. Using the basic Chimera chassis and engine, it is quick to manufacture and efficient in its role, with good road and cross-country performance.

Page 143

Although it is not meant to be committed to battle there have been many examples of Trojans being converted in field workshops for use in combat. As an (all be it weakly) armoured vehicle, it can be pressed into forntline service by desperate commanders. Some examples of such expedient field conversions are: Adding autocannons to create a makehsift anti-aircraft weapon, bolting on extra armour plates to crete a small personnel carrier, packing the rear with communications equipment to create a headquarters comm hub, and creating ad-hoc engineering vehicles by adding minesweepers or even a light bridge layer. These vheicles are never as successful as their authentic counteparts, but most commanders would rather explain themselves to an irate Adeptus Mechanicus Enginseer than be seen to fail in the eyes of their superiors or Commissar.

I could go on. I could point out specific examples from the IA books (they cover breakdowns and how mechanised formations are used in specific regiments, like the Cadian 114th or in armoured regiments/companies, etc.) I could cite earlier material even more, since its long established that GW, BL, or any author will never restrict him or herself to "current" stuff - they happily recycle older materia if it suits them (much of 5th edition is recycled material.) I could also make declarations based my quotes, or generalize about the structure of the Guard. But I won't, because it would be silly and would just degenerate into semantics nitpickery (Hell it's already heading that way.) .

The problem is, though, that posting a few exercpts doesn't prove much unless you're making a specific point (EG a calc, and even then you have some numbers.) We might make some ratios from a couple of the quotes I posed from the 5th edition codex, or from the previous codex edition (Cadian 8th's makeup) but that's not going to settle matters either. Using Hoth's quotes or any of the qualitative quotes I posted is not going to tell us anything (how the fuck do we attach numbers to words like "ubiquitous" or "rare"? In terms of even vague precision they're useless.)

To make this work would need more data, and more data from a greater variety of sources. Which isn't likely to happen, since this really isn't a debate. There's the aformentioned limited data set. Further, what little data we do have lacks any actual analysis. No verifiable comparisons or contrasts, no numbers, no examples, no citations or detailed explanations... see to actually do an analysis you have to do at least one, preferrably more of the above. Even more hilarious is how vague most of the data being posted (including myself) is and the myriad interpretations it offers. I mean, we haven't even broken down logistical issues at ALL, or the financial/economic side of things. We haven't touched on the structure or duties of the Guard (EG what are all those troops usually used for? Invasions and defending planets is one, but garrison and guard duty is another.) It doesn't deal with strategy or tactics much beyond "IG is slow hur hur" which as pointed out is simplistic in the extreme. I could go on and on listing qualifiers, and it still doesn't change that we're still dealing too many unknowns, and yet we have people trying to generalize about functioning of the guard Guard from a couple paragraphs (or rather, vague recollections of some stuff soem guy read.)

Oh and to top it all off, there's the whole "I don't give a fuck I'll debate this how I want" attitude, despite the reality of how debates are SUPPOSED to happen on the board (EG read the rules, especially the bits on burden of proof.) Hell, Simon already addressed this little problem and got brushed off.

So yeah, this thread has already become a trainwreck like alot of other IG oriented threads, but whether it can be salvaged is the question, which I honestly doubt.