Topic: "Mixed" Regiments: Sacrilege?

[PaxImperator]

As I've been painting my Demolisher of late, I've been pondering the question of just how my Imperial Guard regiment got its armoured vehicles, e.g. were they permanently assigned them from another - armoured - regiment? Do they just fight alongside an autonomous armoured regiment all the time? Did they get them at their founding?

The question then: How plausible would it be for a regiment from a hive world like Thracian Primaris to be made up of 7 infantry companies, 2 mechanized infantry companies and 2 armoured companies at its founding?

I'm well aware that regiments tend to be either infantry, mechanized infantry or armoured, but ideally I'd like to have it all in one.

[[dixon]]

The question then: How plausible would it be for a regiment from a hive world like Thracian Primaris to be made up of 7 infantry companies, 2 mechanized infantry companies and 2 armoured companies at its founding?

Considering Krieg armoured regiments consist of 4 Armoured Companies, 4 Mechanised Infantry companies, and a slew of other more specialized companies according to IAv1, having several different companies in your Regiment seems hardly out of the ordinary.  So long as your Hive World has the means to produce Leman Russes and Chimeras, that is.

A Regiment is supposed to be the basic block of an army, and it would make sense for it to be more diverse than the fluff usually portrays it.

[Larandil]

I'm well aware that regiments tend to be either infantry, mechanized infantry or armoured, but ideally I'd like to have it all in one.

In today's armies - at least as far as I know - there are no regiments consisting of exclusively one type of soldiers. I served with a tank battallion that was part of a mechanized infantry brigade, meaning that the brigade had three battallions of mechanized infantry, one battallion of tanks and one battallion of self-propelled artillery. A tank brigade, on the other hand, had three battallions of tanks and one battallion each of mechanized infantry and SPA's. The idea is to have different soldiers for different challenges working side by side, giving support to each other. A bunch of tanks without infantry is pretty much lost when it has to move through villages and faces well-hidden infantry with anti-tank gear. With "combined arms", you send in the infantry to flush them out, and if the task proves too much, you draw them back and ask the artillery boys to "shake loose" the defenders and their positions.
Of cause you need vehicles for the infantry to keep up speed.

[TDB]

I've been pondering the question of just how my Imperial Guard regiment got its armoured vehicles, e.g. were they permanently assigned them from another - armoured - regiment? Do they just fight alongside an autonomous armoured regiment all the time? Did they get them at their founding?

If memory serves armour is a seperate organisation to infantry and is attached to infantry units on a case-by-case basis.  So you'd have the 32nd Generic Infantry Regiment with the 4th Standard Armoured Core attached to it (which could very well change).  I don't think the infantry has permanently allocated armour (except transports i would assume).

Of course this is a generalisation. 

[Kage2020]

I'm stepping way out of familiar territory, here, but I've always felt that the 'regiment' isn't really the right operational 'unit' for the Imperial Guard.  It just seems that way because of the inherently limited skirmish nature of the 40k wargame.  For me you need to up the numbers somewhat...

That's also one of the reasons that only Epic would ever tempt me back into the wargaming hobby.  40k just isn't, well, big enough.

Kage

[Gromash]

If memory serves armour is a seperate organisation to infantry and is attached to infantry units on a case-by-case basis.  So you'd have the 32nd Generic Infantry Regiment with the 4th Standard Armoured Core attached to it (which could very well change).  I don't think the infantry has permanently allocated armour (except transports i would assume).

i think it would vary from regiment to regiment, EPIC: Armageddon says of attatchments/loaned units "A temporary field assignment can easily become permanent", and infact also specifically states that the bulk of regiments raised on Armageddon consist of a mix of infantry/armour/artillery/mechanised infantry companies (also the Horus Heresy Imperial Guard Regimental list for the original EPIC only required about 3/5ths of a Regiments platoons to be of regiments core type)

[TDB]

i think it would vary from regiment to regiment, EPIC: Armageddon says of attatchments/loaned units "A temporary field assignment can easily become permanent", and infact also specifically states that the bulk of regiments raised on Armageddon consist of a mix of infantry/armour/artillery/mechanised infantry companies

Can become permanent yes, but two 'regiments' could also merge, it doesn't change the fact that they were different regiments though.  As for Armageddon, they may well contain a mix of units, that doesn't mean they are the same organisation though or on the same TO&E (at least on the level we are talking about).

Armour is a seperate organisation from infantry so if an IG unit is raised it won't include armour (except maybe transports).  The armour unit will be raised seperately, even if it is later merged due to necessity.

For the purposes of this topic though, no, regiments will not have armoured companies at founding since they are seperate organisations.

[Gromash]

As for Armageddon, they may well contain a mix of units, that doesn't mean they are the same organisation though or on the same TO&E (at least on the level we are talking about).

Armour is a seperate organisation from infantry so if an IG unit is raised it won't include armour (except maybe transports).  The armour unit will be raised seperately, even if it is later merged due to necessity.

For the purposes of this topic though, no, regiments will not have armoured companies at founding since they are seperate organisations.

uh-huh.. so why does EPIC: Armageddon state "Regiments raised on Armageddon consists of twelve companies made up of a mix of infantry, artillery, armour and mechanised infantry companies. Although some regiments only include one type of company, the bulk are combined arms forces that include a mix of companies." ?

[Mechanicus]

uh-huh.. so why does EPIC: Armageddon state "Regiments raised on Armageddon consists of twelve companies made up of a mix of infantry, artillery, armour and mechanised infantry companies. Although some regiments only include one type of company, the bulk are combined arms forces that include a mix of companies." ?

Because they were raised on Armageddon, and due to the conflict, they were joined permanently to ease logistics. It says they were founded on Armageddon, but it doesn't say they were founded as mixed regiments, just that most now are.

[[dixon]]

Because they were raised on Armageddon, and due to the conflict, they were joined permanently to ease logistics. It says they were founded on Armageddon, but it doesn't say they were founded as mixed regiments, just that most now are.

You're clutching at straws and pretending the article says things it doesn't.  There's plenty of support for combined arms regiments, as there is for single troop type formations.

[Parak]

Combined forces are the natural order of things. Infact if you read ghostmaker you find that even the stealthy tanith had armour in part of their regiments before the fall. 

[Superguy]

Of course the Imperium is going to have mixed regiments of Infantry and Armour, since it's easier to control the various aspects of the armies when their under one leadership.

[TDB]

uh-huh.. so why does EPIC: Armageddon state "Regiments raised on Armageddon consists of twelve companies made up of a mix of infantry, artillery, armour and mechanised infantry companies.

...because Armageddon is an atypical world that values mechanised armies and tanks in general perhaps? 

Looking at the Lexicanum website and my old WDs most regiments seem to be titled by what they contain.  So you have the 1st Krieg Armoured Regiment, 23rd Krieg Mechanised Infantry Regiment and 18th Krieg Armoured Regiment for example.  An IG army generally operates at a multi-regiment level (EoT campaign for example, if an extreme one) so this organisation isn't a problem for diversity and keeps all similar units in the one place.

[legionnaire]

Well when I think of it all depends on the situation you are in. For one it could be the organization of your homeworlds army. Another is if your in lets say your on a planet and well not getting reinforcement due to a navel blockade or warp storm the regiments have a chance to band together to focus on the different strenghts and weaknesses needed for the upcoming battles.

[PaxImperator]

Thank you all for your input. A mixed regiment it will be!

Now, given the fact that I'm going with 7 infantry companies, 2 mechanized infantry companies and 2 armoured companies (also, change of plan: a recce company will be added to this all), how should I go about this in more detail?

Infantry Companies: made up of Infantry Platoons
Mechanized Infantry Companies: made up of Infantry Platoons with Chimeras
Armoured Companies: made up of LRMBTs, Exterminators, Vanquishers, Conquerors, Destroyer Tank Hunters
Recce Company: made up of Sentinels and Salamanders

That was all pretty plain sailing, but leaves me with two tanks unspoken for: Hellhounds and Demolishers. I was going to incorporate Hellhounds into the recce company and Demolishers into the armoured companies. But then it was brought to my attention that these two belong in a siege tank company. What's your take on that?

[[dixon]]

I think you know my take on Siege Companies. 

I'd personally limit the amount of Vanquishers and Destroyer Tank Hunters your army has, preferably no more than a Squadron of each.  Both are incredibly rare pieces of equipment in terms of the Guard, so unless you have a very good reason as to why you have more of a handful (of the three ForgeWorlds known to produce Vanquishers, two have been destroyed, and Destroyer Tank Hunters are just as uncommon.).

[Andro Ist Keine Schwedischen]

Demolishers are infantry support tanks, and are usually attached directly to Infantry Companies.  I would imagine the same applies to Hellhounds.

However, if you want a distinct seperation theme, then maybe you can attach both to Mechanised Companies.  They are both extremely useful for that sort of formation.

~Andromidius

[wper34]

Hmmm... I think it would be justified enough to make Hellhounds and LR Demo as part of Siege Companies. That is if you want them to be in a position where they are flexible for being deployed along with other companies when they are needed or not fixed to any of the specific existing companies.

Units/vehicles being specifically assigned to certain companies often work & function with the companies they are in. So when there is a demand or a request for support from other companies beside the ones which Hellhounds & LR Demo are assigned to, it would be quite hard for that the companies (which originally has these 2 vehicles in their organisations) to dispatch them in accordance to such demand. The main reason is those companies (which originally have these 2 such vehicles) would then not be able to function properly as they may have long relied on the vehicles for support.

In other words, any units being assigned to any specific companies would then become important parts of those organisations thus they should not leave them to support other companies.

Also, don't forget about Bassies, Griffons, and Thunderer Siege Tanks. They are also vehicles which are often presented in Siege Companies. So Hellhounds and LR Demo are not the only vehicles you need to think about for such companies. However, it is another story if you want to specifically state that these 2 vehicles are the only vehicles commonly presented in your mixed regiments for fluff reasons.

[PaxImperator]

I'd personally limit the amount of Vanquishers and Destroyer Tank Hunters your army has, preferably no more than a Squadron of each.  Both are incredibly rare pieces of equipment in terms of the Guard, so unless you have a very good reason as to why you have more of a handful (of the three ForgeWorlds known to produce Vanquishers, two have been destroyed, and Destroyer Tank Hunters are just as uncommon.).

Oh definitely. I think I'll have all I need with two Vanquishers as the company command vehicles, and a single Destroyer as part of one of the command squadrons.

Also, don't forget about Bassies, Griffons, and Thunderer Siege Tanks. They are also vehicles which are often presented in Siege Companies. So Hellhounds and LR Demo are not the only vehicles you need to think about for such companies. However, it is another story if you want to specifically state that these 2 vehicles are the only vehicles commonly presented in your mixed regiments for fluff reasons.

I've considered Basilisks and Thunderers, but I absolutely revile Basilisks and don't see much use for Thunderers if I could get Demolishers instead. So those won't be making any appearances in my regiment. Griffons however I do like. Thanks for bringing them to my attention.

I'm still on the fence about where to place the Demolishers and Hellhounds (and Griffons now too), but thanks for the feedback so far. Any other opinions?