Imperium Keyword is the most wide spread Keyword in the game, affecting hundreds of units.

Should Imperium be separated?

I have to say yes. The fact that Space Marines have multiple chapters and chapter specific units bothers me. Even the fluff states that much of the Imperium doesn't like itself.

Astra Militarum has a lot of sub-groups. You also have the Ministorum, the Inquisition, and Mechanicus which are all have their own sub-factions with their own goals.

I think there needs to be some overlap but it would be tricky to do so. Perhaps make it so in matched play, units within a detachment that has the IMPERIUM common keyword must also have a second faction keyword common.

e.g. I can include a detachment of Astartes and a Detachment of Guard but not Leman Russes in the Astartes detachment.

That being said, there has to be a way of including the small factions in with the large without too much penalty otherwise they become unusable. Assassins, Custodes and Auxiliary come to mind.

If I was running a tournament I would like to limit the scope of the keywords that you could employ in building your army, but I'm not sure how that works out in practice. If the Imperium is too big, then what about the Eldar or the Ynnari? What about Chaos?

There are too many clunky conglomerations in the game to say the Imperium is significantly more offensive than any of the others. I would prefer to just get rid of all of them, but that would require writing entire factions so it's obviously impractical as a tournament house rule.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
I think there needs to be some overlap but it would be tricky to do so. Perhaps make it so in matched play, units within a detachment that has the IMPERIUM common keyword must also have a second faction keyword common.

e.g. I can include a detachment of Astartes and a Detachment of Guard but not Leman Russes in the Astartes detachment.

That being said, there has to be a way of including the small factions in with the large without too much penalty otherwise they become unusable. Assassins, Custodes and Auxiliary come to mind.

There's no real limit to amount of Keywords a model has, Cypher and Fallen are a good example as they are in Chaos and Imperium
It would basically be the same


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Saber wrote:
If I was running a tournament I would like to limit the scope of the keywords that you could employ in building your army, but I'm not sure how that works out in practice. If the Imperium is too big, then what about the Eldar or the Ynnari? What about Chaos?

There are too many clunky conglomerations in the game to say the Imperium is significantly more offensive than any of the others. I would prefer to just get rid of all of them, but that would require writing entire factions so it's obviously impractical as a tournament house rule.

Eldar is 2 major factions and 2 minor factions
Chaos is 2 major factions and 1 minor faction

Imperium is like 8? major factions and 10? minor factions (exaggeration, but I bet the real number is fairly close)

no, no it shouldn't. chapter tactics are going to require pure detachments, and we're seeing everyone getting their ownm, taking the long view the fix is already coming.

If the game would remain as it is right now, then yes, they should be separated.

However, as we are pretty certain that Chapter Tactics will place some limits on this, and as similar rules for other factions might do that as well, I think it's a bit too early. If there are more benefits for taking a pure <Keyword> army instead of a mixed Imperium one, I don't really see the necessity.

I think it should be separated into those that see G-marines as heresy and those who do not. Who is the traitor? Hard to say.

Hell yes it should be separated. It's too big and ungainly, and it's destroying the special flavour of every army in it.

A few of the tiny faction should get absorbed for ease of use, but I don't mind humans having options. I do mind that non- humans have no such options but the community disapproves of getting more teamwork.

Feels odd that they can all intermingle so easily. An <Astartes> and <Imperium> split seems appropriate to me.

Yes. We need to go back to the pre-6th way of doing it. You have one FOC, taken from one codex, period. No allies, no mixing armies in a single detachment, you pick your faction and play that faction.

BrianDavion wrote:
no, no it shouldn't. chapter tactics are going to require pure detachments, and we're seeing everyone getting their ownm, taking the long view the fix is already coming.

I agree with this. As a starting point the 'IMPERIUM' keyword is fine, more flavour is on the way.

Yes, I think this really needs to happen. At the very least you should only get access to stuff like Chapter Tactics if your whole army has the right keyword, not just a detachment, because detachments are hardly restrictive at all. The reward for forgoing all of the options in other Imperium subfactions should be substantial to encourage players to actually do this, especially since that's probably what most of them want to do anyway.

Here's what strikes me as a major potential problem with the upcoming Marine codex, where we've been told that you access their special stratagems and Chapter Tactics just by having a pure detachment:

A pure Raven Guard list gets some nice bonuses. They get -1 to hit on a lot of stuff, which is great. It leaves them pretty vulnerable to CC and things like plasma drop squads, of course. And then they can probably pay 2 CP to infiltrate a unit. Probably this can only be used on Raven Guard units. They also have access to various other Marine stratagems, like an orbital bombardment. Presumably this is something like "nominate a unit and do mortal wounds around it". Probably a lot of these aren't going to care about keywords, or at best will require that a Marine unit be within some (fairly large) distance. These stratagems seem pretty powerful, but the Raven Guard player has to be careful with them because he probably only has 6 or 7 CP total at 2k points.

Meanwhile, a Guard player can take his normal tournament list, consisting of maybe a Brigade and a Vanguard detachment for extra drop squads and some Assassins or whatever, and tack on a cheap Marine detachment. Maybe just pay the 1 CP to take a single Raven Guard unit as an auxiliary. Maybe a nice Contemptor Mortis Dreadnought to stand behind a bunch of Guardsmen and shoot 4 BS2+ Lascannons while being hard to hit from past 12" (which is where everything has to be because of all the Guardsmen). Or maybe he takes a real detachment and includes some scary CC things. He's got 14 CP, so he doesn't have to think too hard about budgeting for these stratagems. He can drop 4 CP to infiltrate 2 scary units and then use 2 CP (or whatever) each round for three rounds on orbital bombardments, and he still has almost as much CP as the pure Marine army started with.

Basically, I worry that synergies between different subfactions make allying even more mandatory with Chapter Tactics, and also that stratagems are either going to be pretty lackluster in Marine armies or are going to be super-overpowered when used by allied Guard brigades with more than twice as much CP to spend.

 JJ wrote:
Feels odd that they can all intermingle so easily. An <Astartes> and <Imperium> split seems appropriate to me.

God forbid death watch and grey Knights work with the inquisition, aye?

 Jaxler wrote:

 JJ wrote:
Feels odd that they can all intermingle so easily. An <Astartes> and <Imperium> split seems appropriate to me.

God forbid death watch and grey Knights work with the inquisition, aye?

yeah or space marines and the imperial guard fight along side each other I mean that never happens

I think you should be able to make an army that's joint imperium but each faction needs it's own detatchment, with the exception of more minor factions like custodes, and assassins, who should have a special rule that allows them to just join to one army or another....

I like the idea of being able to play a small army without a lot of choices in tandem with units from other imperium factions to fill the gaps.

I don't like picking the best units from each codex and making a cheeseball army.

I'm not sure what the balance is between the two. Hopefully they offer some bonuses to each faction for making a "pure" detachment, with some minor exceptions (assassins, for example).

There's honestly not enough differences between Dark and Blood Angels to warrant their own codex.

Roll them up into the basic Vanilla codex, make certain options available to all Chapters, and them remove the bloat of unnecessary units (Sanguine Priests, Deathwing) but keep a couple, and then leave Space Wolves, Deathwatch, and Grey Knights as their own thing.

Also pretty sure everyone agrees Scions should never have gotten a codex for themselves.

I'm going to say yes, the Imperium keyword (and to a lesser extent the Chaos keyword) should not be a thing.

There's a reason GW got rid of the allies chart and system that existed in 6th and 7th. It broke the game. It made for insane combos that were never meant to exist and gave armies ways of plugging the holes they're designed to have (Tau getting access to psychic, SM getting access large numbers of bodies, Guard getting access to extremely durable and tanky characters/HQs, etc.). Ask players what the main problems with 6th and 7th were and you're almost guaranteed to hear "allies" in there somewhere. So GW made the right call and removed the whole thing from the game.

Except they didn't. They removed it for half the armies in the game, but left it in for the other half. Thanks to the Imperium keyword, Imperium armies still have access to allies. In fact, they have more access to it than ever before, as they don't have to worry about allied detachments or whatever, they just make an Imperium army and everything can go in the same detachment no problem! Xenos armies can't take anything but their own faction, but Imperium armies have access to half the factions in the game now. And before people try to argue "oh but humans work together in the fluff so its ok" pretty much every possible combination of factions and units has worked together in the fluff, that doesn't mean they can on the table. Blood Angels and Necrons worked together in the fluff, that can't exist on the table. Tau and Dark Eldar worked together in the fluff (for a short time), that can't happen on the table. Inquisition and Harlequins worked together in the fluff, that can't happen on the table. Fluff is propaganda meant to get you excited to play your army. It is not, and should never be, used to justify bad rules and game design. Nothing works on the table the way in works in fluff.

GW intended to remove allies from the game, they said so in the lead up to 8th and wrote the rules to reflect that. But they missed a spot here, intentionally or not. If allies are bad for the game, and 6th and 7th definitively proved that they are, then the Imperium keyword needs to go.

I don't know about "separated".

I do appreciate people's concerns that the "Imperium" keyword is too broad with how it seems to apply to detachments.

That said, I still think there should be ways to build thematic detachments that pull together units from across Imperial factions. It's fluffy and cool - when done right.

So I'm fine with that possibility remaining but being balanced differently - maybe with certain special requirements or drawbacks. The way chapter tactics seem to work in the upcoming marine 'dex looks like a step in the right direction. Guess we'll see how it goes.

At the end of the day though, I want to be able to field the auxiliary Imperial forces I'm collecting alongside my main armies. Being able to do so is the whole reason I have/want armies for factions I don't otherwise wish to invest heavily in such as Inquisitorial factions, Knight houses, the Mechanicum, etc.

Is it being broad an actual issue? Is it being abused and used to break the game like super friends was in last ed? If not then I don't think we've a problem.

Also other factions like xenos having less options than 'imperium' is fine so long as they get benefits for sharing more key words, or their key words do more and synergize more. Right new few units from larger factions seem to buff or interact with the 'imperium' tag so things seem fine IMO.

 Jaxler wrote:

 JJ wrote:
Feels odd that they can all intermingle so easily. An <Astartes> and <Imperium> split seems appropriate to me.

God forbid death watch and grey Knights work with the inquisition, aye?

You could have them have different core keywords and share a secondary smaller secondary keyword similar to how Fallen works for both Chaos and Imperium

BrianDavion wrote:
yeah or space marines and the imperial guard fight along side each other I mean that never happens

Eldar, Necron, and Tau have also fought alongside the Imperium multiple times

I guess they should also get the Imperium keyword then.

I think there needs to be ways to discourage it, which hopefully the codices will bring.

To me either the Imperium needs to be split, or the smaller factions need more answers and attention than they currently have. Imperium consists of half a dozen different kinds of marines, guard, sisters, ad mech, knights, etc... Everyone else is either on their own or at best three factions like Eldar and Chaos.

The problem is that just about any imaginable combination can be made with Imperium, any weakness in one sub faction covered by another, while the rest are simply out of luck.

Shas'O'Ceris wrote:
A few of the tiny faction should get absorbed for ease of use, but I don't mind humans having options. I do mind that non- humans have no such options but the community disapproves of getting more teamwork.

Well no, Space Marines and Astra Militarum working together is a very different thing in the lore than, say, Necrons and Tau. Frankly I think the problem is that the number of human "factions" have gone completely out of hand, the Xenos equivalent would be if the Canoptek Harvest and Destroyer Cults were their own factions separate from the main Necron stuff with over a dozen units each.

List of Major Factions in Imperium
Space Marines/Ultra Marines
Blood Angels
Dark Angels
Space Wolves
Grey Knights
Imperial Guard
Skitarii
Sisters of Battle

List of Minor Factions
Imperial Knights
Assassins
Custodes
Sisters of Silence
Death Watch
Inquisition

Am I missing anything?
Any in the wrong place?


List of Major Factions in Eldar
Eldar
Drew Carey

List of Minor Factions in Eldar
Ynnari
Harlequins


List of Major Factions in Chaos
Chaos Space Marines
Daemons

List of Minor Factions in Chaos
Chaos Knights

Yep.

9th should feature civil war in the imperium.

Each major faction should be aligned with a minor faction, and these allies can be combined in a single army through multiple detachments.

Yes, this we feth over a bunch of people who have created armies that can no longer be fielded as/is, but this is true of barkstar or taudar before.

 Talamare wrote:

 Jaxler wrote:

 JJ wrote:
Feels odd that they can all intermingle so easily. An <Astartes> and <Imperium> split seems appropriate to me.

God forbid death watch and grey Knights work with the inquisition, aye?

You could have them have different core keywords and share a secondary smaller secondary keyword similar to how Fallen works for both Chaos and Imperium

BrianDavion wrote:
yeah or space marines and the imperial guard fight along side each other I mean that never happens

Eldar, Necron, and Tau have also fought alongside the Imperium multiple times

I guess they should also get the Imperium keyword then.

Perhaps you could start by naming some of these power combinations you keep alluding exist but never naming?


I literally can't think of many game breaking combinations, certainly not ala 7th edition super friends.

BrianDavion wrote:

Perhaps you could start by naming some of these power combinations you keep alluding exist but never naming?


I literally can't think of many game breaking combinations, certainly not ala 7th edition super friends.

I'm not sure that people are complaining about power combinations. But the different Imperium subfactions have different strengths such that it's just kind of stupid not to take certain specific things from each of them, unless you're aiming at a very particular sort of spam list or one where you're planning on packing absolutely everything into the 6" around Guilliman or Azrael. I feel like many of these were obvious to everyone as soon as we saw the indices, but certainly we all know about them now that we've played a few games. Here are some that I think should be pretty uncontroversial; to the extent that most players are not taking advantage of the below, when applicable, it's because they're aiming at a very particular kind of cheese or because they don't want to feel dirty, or because they're bad:

1) Scion and Elysian command squads are completely broken. They bring fantastic anti- heavy infantry and anti-tank firepower to any Imperium list. Basically every Imperium list that isn't just Stormraven spam should include several of these. Certainly nobody should be taking lots of special weapons on tactical marines with these around.
2) Ratlings and Elysian sniper squads are by far the best snipers in the game. There is really no reason to take Space Marine Scouts with these available.
3) A unit of Conscripts is the best protection you can get for your gunline.
4) It is pretty much a no-brainer to slot Celestine and maybe a unit of Sisters into almost any Imperium army, because Acts of Faith are a fantastic force multiplier and operate at full efficiency on just those 2 units, and Celestine herself is significantly undercosted.
5) Several of the Assassins are extremely competitive choices in many lists. The Eversor and Culexus stand out as valuable inclusions in basically any Marine or Guard list. The Eversor in particular is an extremely reliable way to tie something up, and he does very well against infantry.
6) Space Marines themselves don't actually have a whole lot that everyone else wants, although their flyers outclass Guard flyers and a Guard list would have a lot of reason to take Xiphons or Contemptor Mortis Dreadnoughts if they want to shoot Lascannons at long range.

With the exception of command squads, none of these are really that bad as strong in-faction choices, although some could probably stand to be toned down. Acts of Faith add to the Sisters' identity. Guard should have lots of bodies protecting their guns. Marines should have really high-quality fire. But when you destroy all real distinctions between factions, except for some 6" auras, you destroy factions' identities. Acts of Faith are actually better for other Imperium armies that include just a couple Sisters than they are for Sisters armies. Everyone has access to cheap bodies to guard their guns. Everyone has access to ancient dreadnoughts that fire BS2+ lascannons. Obviously some of these are supposed to be showing up in other armies -- there's no other way to use Assassins. Likewise I really only want to see the occasional Knight in another army rather than lots of all-Knight armies. You've got to at least allow for these minor factions to show up somehow. But it's a problem when the clearly correct choice, other than obviously unintended things like Stormraven spam, is to play Imperial Soup. If the game is to be balanced then that has to work out to be about as good as what other factions can bring. Either Imperial Soup ends up being way overpowered or the individual subfactions like Space Marines end up being way underpowered.

Like I said, I don't think that fixing this requires saying that Marines can never be in the same army as Guard. But it does require that you give people a reason to take an army entirely from one subfaction. Detachment restrictions like Adeptus Mechanicus have don't really cut it -- detachments just aren't very limiting. They're definitely not very restrictive if it's only some of your units that need to be in pure detachments -- come the Marine codex you're still going to be able to take Celestine and command squads and Assassins in the same detachment no problem, and it's still going to be kind of stupid not to do this if you can get your Chapter Tactics and stratagems just by having your other 1 or 2 detachments be pure Marine. As well, like I said earlier I'm concerned about the potential for Marine stratagems and Tactics to actually favor mostly-Guard lists over pure Marine lists. I think most Marine players want to be playing Marine armies, and they should be meaningfully rewarded for forgoing the other Imperium options.

Oh no, whatever will we do if multiple armies take an objectively worse version of another army's unit. How could we possible survive.

The Keyword system for buffs and auras on HQ evades the Azrael making a concripst horde stubborn. So for now, having allies isn't a real issue.

When everybody has codex and they need all of their detachment (Or maybe even army) to share the most concrete keyword (Like a Chapter, or a Imperial Guard Regiment) then theres gonna be even less incentives to bring a min max of units.

The allies sistem of 8th is perfect. The solution is to make more allies to other factions.

Dionysodorus wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Perhaps you could start by naming some of these power combinations you keep alluding exist but never naming?


I literally can't think of many game breaking combinations, certainly not ala 7th edition super friends.

I'm not sure that people are complaining about power combinations. But the different Imperium subfactions have different strengths such that it's just kind of stupid not to take certain specific things from each of them, unless you're aiming at a very particular sort of spam list or one where you're planning on packing absolutely everything into the 6" around Guilliman or Azrael. I feel like many of these were obvious to everyone as soon as we saw the indices, but certainly we all know about them now that we've played a few games. Here are some that I think should be pretty uncontroversial; to the extent that most players are not taking advantage of the below, when applicable, it's because they're aiming at a very particular kind of cheese or because they don't want to feel dirty, or because they're bad:

1) Scion and Elysian command squads are completely broken. They bring fantastic anti- heavy infantry and anti-tank firepower to any Imperium list. Basically every Imperium list that isn't just Stormraven spam should include several of these. Certainly nobody should be taking lots of special weapons on tactical marines with these around.
2) Ratlings and Elysian sniper squads are by far the best snipers in the game. There is really no reason to take Space Marine Scouts with these available.
3) A unit of Conscripts is the best protection you can get for your gunline.
4) It is pretty much a no-brainer to slot Celestine and maybe a unit of Sisters into almost any Imperium army, because Acts of Faith are a fantastic force multiplier and operate at full efficiency on just those 2 units, and Celestine herself is significantly undercosted.
5) Several of the Assassins are extremely competitive choices in many lists. The Eversor and Culexus stand out as valuable inclusions in basically any Marine or Guard list. The Eversor in particular is an extremely reliable way to tie something up, and he does very well against infantry.
6) Space Marines themselves don't actually have a whole lot that everyone else wants, although their flyers outclass Guard flyers and a Guard list would have a lot of reason to take Xiphons or Contemptor Mortis Dreadnoughts if they want to shoot Lascannons at long range.

With the exception of command squads, none of these are really that bad as strong in-faction choices, although some could probably stand to be toned down. Acts of Faith add to the Sisters' identity. Guard should have lots of bodies protecting their guns. Marines should have really high-quality fire. But when you destroy all real distinctions between factions, except for some 6" auras, you destroy factions' identities. Acts of Faith are actually better for other Imperium armies that include just a couple Sisters than they are for Sisters armies. Everyone has access to cheap bodies to guard their guns. Everyone has access to ancient dreadnoughts that fire BS2+ lascannons. Obviously some of these are supposed to be showing up in other armies -- there's no other way to use Assassins. Likewise I really only want to see the occasional Knight in another army rather than lots of all-Knight armies. You've got to at least allow for these minor factions to show up somehow. But it's a problem when the clearly correct choice, other than obviously unintended things like Stormraven spam, is to play Imperial Soup. If the game is to be balanced then that has to work out to be about as good as what other factions can bring. Either Imperial Soup ends up being way overpowered or the individual subfactions like Space Marines end up being way underpowered.

Like I said, I don't think that fixing this requires saying that Marines can never be in the same army as Guard. But it does require that you give people a reason to take an army entirely from one subfaction. Detachment restrictions like Adeptus Mechanicus have don't really cut it -- detachments just aren't very limiting. They're definitely not very restrictive if it's only some of your units that need to be in pure detachments -- come the Marine codex you're still going to be able to take Celestine and command squads and Assassins in the same detachment no problem, and it's still going to be kind of stupid not to do this if you can get your Chapter Tactics and stratagems just by having your other 1 or 2 detachments be pure Marine. As well, like I said earlier I'm concerned about the potential for Marine stratagems and Tactics to actually favor mostly-Guard lists over pure Marine lists. I think most Marine players want to be playing Marine armies, and they should be meaningfully rewarded for forgoing the other Imperium options.

well right now we've not got special chapter tactics etc for the IoM factions and that'll make a differance I think. for example Scout Marines may swing ahead with raven gaurd CT and stratigiums. (Scouts are also troops, and I suspect getting lots of command points is suddenly going to be a lot more important when you have a codex) over all these power combinations aren't. certainly not nearly as bad as compared to the super friends age of 7th edition.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galas wrote:
The Keyword system for buffs and auras on HQ evades the Azrael making a concripst horde stubborn. So for now, having allies isn't a real issue.

When everybody has codex and they need all of their detachment (Or maybe even army) to share the most concrete keyword (Like a Chapter, or a Imperial Guard Regiment) then theres gonna be even less incentives to bring a min max of units.

The allies sistem of 8th is perfect. The solution is to make more allies to other factions.

I agree. I'm just not seeing the problem here. and 90% of the issues are eaither issues with a particular unit, (if Imperial assasins, for example, are too good they're too good) or simply mild quirks that will be ironed out in time as we go into "phase 2" of 8th edition.

Yeah. This is the same as the Spam problem.

If every Imperial army brings 50 conscripts+Commisar or 5 Tempestus Scions command squads the problem is with those troops, not with the allies system.

Plus, saying that the Assasins are good and fit in every Imperial List... yeah. Thats how Assasins are supposed to work. Did anyone want a 100% Imperial Assasin army? If you want a Vindicare in your Imperial Guard, Sororitas, or Space Marines force, you bring one because they are the definition of "auxiliary Imperial" made unit. Just make them balanced for their point costs.

 Galas wrote:
Yeah. This is the same as the Spam problem.

If every Imperial army brings 50 conscripts+Commisar or 5 Tempestus Scions command squads the problem is with those troops, not with the allies system.

Plus, saying that the Assasins are good and fit in every Imperial List... yeah. Thats how Assasins are supposed to work. Did anyone want a 100% Imperial Assasin army? If you want a Vindicare in your Imperial Guard, Sororitas, or Space Marines force, you bring one because they are the definition of "auxiliary Imperial" made unit. Just make them balanced for their point costs.

This seems to badly misunderstand the way different factions work. They're good at different things. It is a good thing that Tyranids have some of the most efficient CC units around. That's part of faction identity. Sure, command squads are overpowered, but a lot of this stuff isn't, particularly. It's just that Marines are good at certain things and Guard are good at certain things and Sisters are good at certain things, and Sisters additionally have a weird rule where the fewer of them you have the more efficient they are. If you can freely sample from each of these then there are going to be obvious things to take if each faction has distinct advantages and disadvantages.

Actually, larger Sisters squads benefit more from acts of faith than smaller ones. It's just that acts of faith don't scale well with army size-- the only way to make it scale is to include celestine and/or add in 40-point elite options known as Imagifiers (banner-carriers to everyone else), and the latter are only a 50% chance each turn of getting another act of faith to a single sisters squad within 6".

 Melissia wrote:
Actually, larger Sisters squads benefit more from acts of faith than smaller ones. It's just that acts of faith don't scale well with army size-- the only way to make it scale is to include celestine and/or add in 40-point elite options known as Imagifiers (banner-carriers to everyone else), and the latter are only a 50% chance each turn of getting another act of faith to a single sisters squad within 6".

Right, this is what I meant. They're more efficient the fewer units of them you have, but you're right that you want the units themselves to be big.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Actually, larger Sisters squads benefit more from acts of faith than smaller ones. It's just that acts of faith don't scale well with army size-- the only way to make it scale is to include celestine and/or add in 40-point elite options known as Imagifiers (banner-carriers to everyone else), and the latter are only a 50% chance each turn of getting another act of faith to a single sisters squad within 6".

Right, this is what I meant. They're more efficient the fewer units of them you have, but you're right that you want the units themselves to be big.

In practice...not really, SoB are primarily a MSU mech army believe it or not. AoFs are more for seraphim+Celestine movement shenanigans than use on footsloggers. Until the late game where you start AoFing people who have disembarked.

Also the whole 'it doesn't scale' thing is something that is carried over from when the indexes were leaked and actually is only true for 3000+ point games. At 2k it's pretty rare to actually have 2 valid targets until things start dying.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 Galas wrote:
Yeah. This is the same as the Spam problem.

If every Imperial army brings 50 conscripts+Commisar or 5 Tempestus Scions command squads the problem is with those troops, not with the allies system.

Plus, saying that the Assasins are good and fit in every Imperial List... yeah. Thats how Assasins are supposed to work. Did anyone want a 100% Imperial Assasin army? If you want a Vindicare in your Imperial Guard, Sororitas, or Space Marines force, you bring one because they are the definition of "auxiliary Imperial" made unit. Just make them balanced for their point costs.

This seems to badly misunderstand the way different factions work. They're good at different things. It is a good thing that Tyranids have some of the most efficient CC units around. That's part of faction identity. Sure, command squads are overpowered, but a lot of this stuff isn't, particularly. It's just that Marines are good at certain things and Guard are good at certain things and Sisters are good at certain things, and Sisters additionally have a weird rule where the fewer of them you have the more efficient they are. If you can freely sample from each of these then there are going to be obvious things to take if each faction has distinct advantages and disadvantages.

Oh, I can understand this. Thats why I think the form to balance this isn't just banning allies for factions that are fluffy and coherent to be allied. Is to make "faction bonuses" that are lost if you mix different factions.
This way you can play in two ways: You min-max for the better units but lose the sinergies, or you take a specific faction and you are better at something at the expense of loosing flexibility.
Like AoS.
The tricky balancing factor is to make those bonus good enough to make playing a single faction competitively worthwile, but not so good that a mixed faction army just can't compete. Or so useless that theres no reason to have an army of only one faction.

For example, if Taus with their special rules are the best shooting army, ok, they are much less flexible than a Imperium army that mixes Imperial Guard artillery and chaff with Space Marine Elite Units, some Assasins and Sisters of Battle. In a ideal system, the special rules of the Tau should be good enough to have a balanced game agains't that varied Imperial army.

 Galas wrote:

Oh, I can understand this. Thats why I think the form to balance this isn't just banning allies for factions that are fluffy and coherent to be allied. Is to make "faction bonuses" that are lost if you mix different factions.
This way you can play in two ways: You min-max for the better units but lose the sinergies, or you take a specific faction and you are better at something at the expense of loosing flexibility.
Like AoS.
The tricky balancing factor is to make those bonus good enough to make playing a single faction competitively worthwile, but not so good that a mixed faction army just can't compete. Or so useless that theres no reason to have an army of only one faction.

For example, if Taus with their special rules are the best shooting army, ok, they are much less flexible than a Imperium army that mixes Imperial Guard artillery and chaff with Space Marine Elite Units, some Assasins and Sisters of Battle. In a ideal system, the special rules of the Tau should be good enough to have a balanced game agains't that varied Imperial army.

To be clear, this sounds like exactly what I was proposing earlier in the thread. I think it's fine that Marines can take Guard allies. I just think there should be some reward for taking a pure Marine army. Supposedly Chapter Tactics only work if you have a pure Marine detachment, but I don't think that the detachment system is very limiting and so I doubt this meaningfully addresses the issue. I was suggesting that you should only get Chapter Tactics if the whole army is from the same Chapter, and then likewise for Regiments and everything else. So I'm even fine with Assassins being really appealing as individual units, but including Assassins or Knights or Conscripts in your Marine army, and benefiting from being able to find these synergies across the entire Imperium, means you're giving up a rule like 6+ FNP on all your infantry.

ERJAK wrote:
In practice...not really, SoB are primarily a MSU mech army believe it or not. AoFs are more for seraphim+Celestine movement shenanigans than use on footsloggers. Until the late game where you start AoFing people who have disembarked.

And that logic is why you and numerous other Sisters players are really not using acts of faith to their fullest potential.

 Melissia wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
In practice...not really, SoB are primarily a MSU mech army believe it or not. AoFs are more for seraphim+Celestine movement shenanigans than use on footsloggers. Until the late game where you start AoFing people who have disembarked.

And that logic is why you and numerous other Sisters players are really not using acts of faith to their fullest potential.

To be fair, the best thing about them last edition was cheap to acquire Special Weapons. Load those Elites with like 4 Melta Guns and a Combi, your minimum troops with a Heavy Flamer and regular and Combi, and then buy as many Exorcists as you can. I proxied it to excellent effect. The army didn't run like it had the option for Acts Of Faith haha!

Kinda ran more like a pure Scion army but with Exorcists instead of something else. And more expensive but less offensive transports.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
To be fair, the best thing about them last edition was cheap to acquire Special Weapons. Load those Elites with like 4 Melta Guns and a Combi, your minimum troops with a Heavy Flamer and regular and Combi, and then buy as many Exorcists as you can. I proxied it to excellent effect. The army didn't run like it had the option for Acts Of Faith haha!

Kinda ran more like a pure Scion army but with Exorcists instead of something else. And more expensive but less offensive transports.

And this edition the cheapest special weapons are storm bolters, which are super-cheap and super-efficient. For the cost of a flamer you could instead add another battle sister.

But think about it this way. In another thread, I calculated that a 15-girl battle sister squad could get around 72 bolter rounds off in a single turn. Now, most situations won't allow them to get this many shots off of course. But it still shows you the offensive potential of large sisters squads over smaller ones, when you use acts of faith on them. A ten-girl squad in a rhino could output a LOT of firepower on the turn they disembark-- more than a 5-girl squad of dominions with storm bolters, in fact.

 Melissia wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
To be fair, the best thing about them last edition was cheap to acquire Special Weapons. Load those Elites with like 4 Melta Guns and a Combi, your minimum troops with a Heavy Flamer and regular and Combi, and then buy as many Exorcists as you can. I proxied it to excellent effect. The army didn't run like it had the option for Acts Of Faith haha!

Kinda ran more like a pure Scion army but with Exorcists instead of something else. And more expensive but less offensive transports.

And this edition the cheapest special weapons are storm bolters, which are super-cheap and super-efficient. For the cost of a flamer you could instead add another battle sister.

But think about it this way. In another thread, I calculated that a 15-girl battle sister squad could get around 72 bolter rounds off in a single turn. Now, most situations won't allow them to get this many shots off of course. But it still shows you the offensive potential of large sisters squads over smaller ones, when you use acts of faith on them. A ten-girl squad in a rhino could output a LOT of firepower on the turn they disembark-- more than a 5-girl squad of dominions with storm bolters, in fact.

I'd rather Melta Guns on Dominions, but I understand the point.

Meltaguns on dominions are nice, but only really useful against big multi-wound models. If you need to chew through a horde, you call upon the Bolter Brigade.

 Melissia wrote:
Meltaguns on dominions are nice, but only really useful against big multi-wound models. If you need to chew through a horde, you call upon the Bolter Brigade.

My friend has Flamers on all his models, but I'm used to trying to run those up the field so I'll stick with them in the meantime.

Flamers... eh. I'm really not sold on them, given that they're nine points each for 8" range, compared to two points for storm bolters for 24" and getting better at 12".

 Melissia wrote:
Flamers... eh. I'm really not sold on them, given that they're nine points each for 8" range, compared to two points for storm bolters for 24" and getting better at 12".

Don't forget though it DOES force shooting, as when some people are super aggressive and want to really off a unit they didn't kill, they'll charge. Flamers might cause 1-2 more wounds that way.

I am imagining the Storm Bolter is gonna go back to 5 points again, but at least it's worth it this time.

 Talamare wrote:
List of Major Factions in Imperium
Space Marines/Ultra Marines
Blood Angels
Dark Angels
Space Wolves
Grey Knights
Imperial Guard
Skitarii
Sisters of Battle
Inquisition

List of Minor Factions
Imperial Knights
Assassins
Custodes
Sisters of Silence
Death Watch

Am I missing anything?
Any in the wrong place?


List of Major Factions in Eldar
Eldar
Drew Carey

List of Minor Factions in Eldar
Ynnari
Harlequins


List of Major Factions in Chaos
Chaos Space Marines
Daemons

List of Minor Factions in Chaos
Chaos Knights

Sorry but inquisition is basically 4 units and some characters. If anything Knights deserve to be major more than them because of forge world support and Knights can field an army that actually does something unlike inquisition army which beyond inquisitors only has 8 point gaurdsmen.

 Jaxler wrote:


Sorry but inquisition is basically 4 units and some characters. If anything Knights deserve to be major more than them because of forge world support and Knights can field an army that actually does something unlike inquisition army which beyond inquisitors only has 8 point gaurdsmen.

I mean, I was asking because I straight up wasn't sure. I'll put Inquisition as a Minor.

Any other changes?

I would like to see the Imperium split into 3:
1) All the Space Marine armies.
2) Imperial Guard, SoB, Telepathica and the like.
3) Knights and Assassins (which can be used by either of the above.)

Space Marines alone already have more units than any other amry even before you factor in the more specialised SM units from DAs, BAs, SWs, GKs etc. I don't think it's unreasonable to limit their choices to allies from other SM armies.

I wouldn't really want to split up SoB, Inquisition and IG. SoB include Priests and Celestine (both of which have buffd for the guard, which would seem reason enough to let them ally). Inquisition seems in dire need of allies given how few units it has. And really, SoB and/or Inquisition commanding IG units just seems very fluffy in general.

The only tricky one is GKs - which seems like it should have access to Inquisition stuff. Maybe have an exception for that?

 vipoid wrote:
I would like to see the Imperium split into 3:
1) All the Space Marine armies.
2) Imperial Guard, SoB, Telepathica and the like.
3) Knights and Assassins (which can be used by either of the above.)

Space Marines alone already have more units than any other amry even before you factor in the more specialised SM units from DAs, BAs, SWs, GKs etc. I don't think it's unreasonable to limit their choices to allies from other SM armies.

I wouldn't really want to split up SoB, Inquisition and IG. SoB include Priests and Celestine (both of which have buffd for the guard, which would seem reason enough to let them ally). Inquisition seems in dire need of allies given how few units it has. And really, SoB and/or Inquisition commanding IG units just seems very fluffy in general.

The only tricky one is GKs - which seems like it should have access to Inquisition stuff. Maybe have an exception for that?

You can have SoB and Inquisition have the same primary keyword, let's say Inquisition for now.

Space Marines will have the Space Marines Keyword
Grey Knights will have the Space Marine and the Inquisition Keyword
Imperial Guard would have Imperial Guard Keyword
We can even make standard Imperial Guard, but not Tempests, have the Inquisition Keyword

Hell, we could have like a Space Marine Chapter like maybe Iron Hands that has Imperial Guard Keyword
We could also have maybe Black Templars have Inquisition.

The Keyword system has so many robust, easy to understand options for creating intricate webs of Alliances...

 Talamare wrote:

You can have SoB and Inquisition have the same primary keyword, let's say Inquisition for now.

Space Marines will have the Space Marines Keyword
Grey Knights will have the Space Marine and the Inquisition Keyword
Imperial Guard would have Imperial Guard Keyword
We can even make standard Imperial Guard, but not Tempests, have the Inquisition Keyword

Hell, we could have like a Space Marine Chapter like maybe Iron Hands that has Imperial Guard Keyword
We could also have maybe Black Templars have Inquisition.

The Keyword system has so many robust, easy to understand options for creating intricate webs of Alliances...

I think that's a good idea, though I'd actually use 'Imperium' for the Inquisition, SoB and IG ('Inquisition' is a bit too narrow and giving it to IG just feels wrong).

I'm also not sure about separating Scions from the Inquisition and SoB. Does their authority not extend to Scions?

 vipoid wrote:

I think that's a good idea, though I'd actually use 'Imperium' for the Inquisition, SoB and IG ('Inquisition' is a bit too narrow and giving it to IG just feels wrong).

I'm also not sure about separating Scions from the Inquisition and SoB. Does their authority not extend to Scions?

Yea, Imperium would work
As far as Tempest are concerned it was a bit of an example, it might have been a poor example.

However it might be good balance?
As in you can go in different direction when list building
IG and Imperium to use God as Aid
IG and Tempest to use Elites as Support
IG and ... Auxiliary to use "mutants" as Support

Aye aye, on the Aux! Just another example* I threw out XD

*bad

I would be tempted to just have a blanket rule for matched play that states, all units in a detachment must share their most specific keyword.

This would still allow Marines to mix with other marines or guard, etc. But each faction would need to be in its own detachment.

This is not a huge restriction, but it helps a bit.

Then if needed certain factions could be allowed to ignore this restrictions, maybe things like assassins.

Eh. I'm okay with how it currently is. Actually I think other factions need to be able to ally easier.

Orks need a Freebooter detachment that can be allied to just about anyone (even genestealers cults!), with say 1 hq, 1 elite, 2 troops, 1 fa, 1 hs available to it. Eldar need a Corsair Mercenaries detachment that can do the same. And so on. Maybe if you want them to have a price, have them cost 1cp, similar to an auxiliary detachment.

Breng77 wrote:
I would be tempted to just have a blanket rule for matched play that states, all units in a detachment must share their most specific keyword.

This would still allow Marines to mix with other marines or guard, etc. But each faction would need to be in its own detachment.

This is not a huge restriction, but it helps a bit.

Then if needed certain factions could be allowed to ignore this restrictions, maybe things like assassins.

I think that would be too much

I would be cool if it was they must share -2- Keywords.

Edit - Okay, I can see how 2 would be less of a problem than most specific. So, nevermind this whole post. Yours was better

Breng77 wrote:
I would be tempted to just have a blanket rule for matched play that states, all units in a detachment must share their most specific keyword.

This would still allow Marines to mix with other marines or guard, etc. But each faction would need to be in its own detachment.

This is not a huge restriction, but it helps a bit.

Then if needed certain factions could be allowed to ignore this restrictions, maybe things like assassins.

Now go ahead and define what "Most specific" means. You'd need a table a mile long.

Suddenly you can't take anything but infantry.

 Peregrine wrote:
Yes. We need to go back to the pre-6th way of doing it. You have one FOC, taken from one codex, period. No allies, no mixing armies in a single detachment, you pick your faction and play that faction.

Except that the current philosophy at GW is to allow players to buy whatever models that want, and then be able to field whatever models that have as a valid army.

Seriously, 10 years ago if I had told my buddies at my FLAGS "I'm going to play an army made up of nothing but two HQs and six Devestator squads" then would have laughed at me. A few of them would have thrown dice at me. Now, it's a valid army.

Yeah I'm gonna have to say no to that, too. The game is better for its current detachment design. If a unit is broke, fix the unit.

tl;dr: as usual, Peregrine, you're looking at a loose screw and thinking the best way to "fix" it is to chop it in half with an axe,

phydaux wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
Yes. We need to go back to the pre-6th way of doing it. You have one FOC, taken from one codex, period. No allies, no mixing armies in a single detachment, you pick your faction and play that faction.

Except that the current philosophy at GW is to allow players to buy whatever models that want, and then be able to field whatever models that have as a valid army.

Seriously, 10 years ago if I had told my buddies at my FLAGS "I'm going to play an army made up of nothing but two HQs and six Devestator squads" then would have laughed at me. A few of them would have thrown dice at me. Now, it's a valid army.

That said, there's nothing much wrong with allies now due to how characters work. Now we just have to deal with Scion Command Squads that you can shove 6 of them in literally any army Imperium-wise. That's a unit issue, though, and not an allies issue.

phydaux wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
Yes. We need to go back to the pre-6th way of doing it. You have one FOC, taken from one codex, period. No allies, no mixing armies in a single detachment, you pick your faction and play that faction.

Except that the current philosophy at GW is to allow players to buy whatever models that want, and then be able to field whatever models that have as a valid army.

Seriously, 10 years ago if I had told my buddies at my FLAGS "I'm going to play an army made up of nothing but two HQs and six Devestator squads" then would have laughed at me. A few of them would have thrown dice at me. Now, it's a valid army.

But the guy with 4 HQ and 6 Tacticals has double the CP.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
I would be tempted to just have a blanket rule for matched play that states, all units in a detachment must share their most specific keyword.

This would still allow Marines to mix with other marines or guard, etc. But each faction would need to be in its own detachment.

This is not a huge restriction, but it helps a bit.

Then if needed certain factions could be allowed to ignore this restrictions, maybe things like assassins.

Now go ahead and define what "Most specific" means. You'd need a table a mile long.

Furthest to the Right on the Faction Keyword section.

I don't think the 'most specific keyword' thing is a good idea.

It would, for example, ban DE players from including Incubi models in their normal detachments - which makes no sense.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

phydaux wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
Yes. We need to go back to the pre-6th way of doing it. You have one FOC, taken from one codex, period. No allies, no mixing armies in a single detachment, you pick your faction and play that faction.

Except that the current philosophy at GW is to allow players to buy whatever models that want, and then be able to field whatever models that have as a valid army.

Seriously, 10 years ago if I had told my buddies at my FLAGS "I'm going to play an army made up of nothing but two HQs and six Devestator squads" then would have laughed at me. A few of them would have thrown dice at me. Now, it's a valid army.

That said, there's nothing much wrong with allies now due to how characters work. Now we just have to deal with Scion Command Squads that you can shove 6 of them in literally any army Imperium-wise. That's a unit issue, though, and not an allies issue.

The issue with Allies is that people will always gravitate towards the best option presented.

Today you're saying "Scion is the problem, but that's a unit issue."
Tomorrow they nerf Scions
The next day someone else will be saying "Retributor is the problem, but that's a unit issue."

When the truth is, if you're presented with a "no catch" offer of taking $5 or $10. You will basically always take the $10.

What different faction provides is trade offs.
Okay Army A, your melee units are 10% better than others, but your ranged units are 10% worse than others.
and Army B, your melee units are 10% worse than others, but your ranged units are 10% better than others.

Essentially what 8th edition did was continue those Trade Offs in stats while also basically saying you can take both units with no catch.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:
I don't think the 'most specific keyword' thing is a good idea.

It would, for example, ban DE players from including Incubi models in their normal detachments - which makes no sense.

Yea, the problem is that the different groups are a little inconsistent.

Imperium is a fairly unique Super Keyword thatother armies can't really relate to.

Then the next keyword basically divides the 2 major books between Space Marines and Imperial Guard.
While Imperial Guard is already on it's overarching Army Specific Keyword.
Space Marine are still 1 tier higher. Only Eldar are basically the only army with an equivalent here.

Then Space Marines divides into the standard armies that we are familiar.

Simplified Explanation.

1 - Imperium
- 2 - Space Marines
- - 3 - Blood Angels
- - 3 - Space Wolves
- - 3 - Grey Knights

- - 3 - Imperial Guard
- - 3 - Skittari
- - 3 - Sisters of Battle

- 2 - Aeldari
- - 3 - Craftworld
- - 3 - Drew Carey

Haven;t you, Talamare admitted, by your own admission you haven't taken a very hard look at a lot of these indexes?

yes there are a few useful combinations, but at the same time we're also seeing GW is taking their own steps to address this issue, and unlike your proposal, GW is using a carrot instead of a stick. case in point, you're concerned about space marine players taking ratling snipers over scout snipers?
Lemme tell ya, wuith the stratigiums etc we've seen leaked from codex space marines already? I would MUCH rather have space marine scouts the extra CPs are a BIG thing

To many armies exist right now as a mix. It'd be really bad for most players in the Imperium.

Also would really screwe over Imperial Knights players.

 Talamare wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
I would be tempted to just have a blanket rule for matched play that states, all units in a detachment must share their most specific keyword.

This would still allow Marines to mix with other marines or guard, etc. But each faction would need to be in its own detachment.

This is not a huge restriction, but it helps a bit.

Then if needed certain factions could be allowed to ignore this restrictions, maybe things like assassins.

Now go ahead and define what "Most specific" means. You'd need a table a mile long.

Furthest to the Right on the Faction Keyword section.

This idea doesn't work at all, and ruins armies that have been working LONG before 8th.

For example, by using only the furthest right Keyword:

- Death Company cannot be taken alongside normal Blood Angels forces.
- Deathwing, Ravenwing and normal Dark Angels can't be taken together.
- Militarum Tempestus units can't be taken alongside normal Guardsmen.
- Valkyries, all Psykers, and abhumans can't be taken in AM armies.
- Daemonhosts can't be taken in Inquisition lists (they lack the Ordo Keyword), like how Sister Hospitallers can't be taken (no Order Keyword).
- Priests can't be taken in SoB armies, because their most specific keyword is Astra Militarum (but they can't be taken in there anyway, because they don't have the Regiment Keyword)

So yeah. Doesn't really work too well, and that's just Imperial lists, not even including all the Eldar varieties.

 Talamare wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

phydaux wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
Yes. We need to go back to the pre-6th way of doing it. You have one FOC, taken from one codex, period. No allies, no mixing armies in a single detachment, you pick your faction and play that faction.

Except that the current philosophy at GW is to allow players to buy whatever models that want, and then be able to field whatever models that have as a valid army.

Seriously, 10 years ago if I had told my buddies at my FLAGS "I'm going to play an army made up of nothing but two HQs and six Devestator squads" then would have laughed at me. A few of them would have thrown dice at me. Now, it's a valid army.

That said, there's nothing much wrong with allies now due to how characters work. Now we just have to deal with Scion Command Squads that you can shove 6 of them in literally any army Imperium-wise. That's a unit issue, though, and not an allies issue.

The issue with Allies is that people will always gravitate towards the best option presented.

Today you're saying "Scion is the problem, but that's a unit issue."
Tomorrow they nerf Scions
The next day someone else will be saying "Retributor is the problem, but that's a unit issue."

When the truth is, if you're presented with a "no catch" offer of taking $5 or $10. You will basically always take the $10.

What different faction provides is trade offs.
Okay Army A, your melee units are 10% better than others, but your ranged units are 10% worse than others.
and Army B, your melee units are 10% worse than others, but your ranged units are 10% better than others.

Essentially what 8th edition did was continue those Trade Offs in stats while also basically saying you can take both units with no catch.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:
I don't think the 'most specific keyword' thing is a good idea.

It would, for example, ban DE players from including Incubi models in their normal detachments - which makes no sense.

Yea, the problem is that the different groups are a little inconsistent.

Imperium is a fairly unique Super Keyword thatother armies can't really relate to.

Then the next keyword basically divides the 2 major books between Space Marines and Imperial Guard.
While Imperial Guard is already on it's overarching Army Specific Keyword.
Space Marine are still 1 tier higher. Only Eldar are basically the only army with an equivalent here.

Then Space Marines divides into the standard armies that we are familiar.

Simplified Explanation.

1 - Imperium
- 2 - Space Marines
- - 3 - Blood Angels
- - 3 - Space Wolves
- - 3 - Grey Knights

- - 3 - Imperial Guard
- - 3 - Skittari
- - 3 - Sisters of Battle

- 2 - Aeldari
- - 3 - Craftworld
- - 3 - Drew Carey

Which one is the retributor?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Talamare wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
I would be tempted to just have a blanket rule for matched play that states, all units in a detachment must share their most specific keyword.

This would still allow Marines to mix with other marines or guard, etc. But each faction would need to be in its own detachment.

This is not a huge restriction, but it helps a bit.

Then if needed certain factions could be allowed to ignore this restrictions, maybe things like assassins.

Now go ahead and define what "Most specific" means. You'd need a table a mile long.

Furthest to the Right on the Faction Keyword section.

This idea doesn't work at all, and ruins armies that have been working LONG before 8th.

For example, by using only the furthest right Keyword:

- Death Company cannot be taken alongside normal Blood Angels forces.
- Deathwing, Ravenwing and normal Dark Angels can't be taken together.
- Militarum Tempestus units can't be taken alongside normal Guardsmen.
- Valkyries, all Psykers, and abhumans can't be taken in AM armies.
- Daemonhosts can't be taken in Inquisition lists (they lack the Ordo Keyword), like how Sister Hospitallers can't be taken (no Order Keyword).
- Priests can't be taken in SoB armies, because their most specific keyword is Astra Militarum (but they can't be taken in there anyway, because they don't have the Regiment Keyword)

So yeah. Doesn't really work too well, and that's just Imperial lists, not even including all the Eldar varieties.

It's a horriable idea to fix a problem that doesn't really exist anyway.

League here says everyone has to share the same sub-faction Keyword, for competitive games.

Pretty straightforward that way, though it does preclude Talons of the Emperor, Inquisition, Assassinorium, etc. from forming lists.



In casual match ups, bringing a IG artillery battery in support of my Sisters of Battle with a detachment of Custodians and Sisters of Silence all lead by an Inquisitor Lord of the Ordos Malleus isn't a big deal at all.

What about sharing two faction keywords within the same detachment?

sossen wrote:
What about sharing two faction keywords within the same detachment?

Screws Chaos. Screws chaos HARD.

BrianDavion wrote:
Haven;t you, Talamare admitted, by your own admission you haven't taken a very hard look at a lot of these indexes?

I admitted that I haven't really deeply gazed into Inquisitor. I'll also admit I haven't deeply gazed into Skitarii and Blood Angels, probably a few others. Have you read and studied every unit in every codex?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
This idea doesn't work at all, and ruins armies that have been working LONG before 8th.

For example, by using only the furthest right Keyword:

- Death Company cannot be taken alongside normal Blood Angels forces.
- Deathwing, Ravenwing and normal Dark Angels can't be taken together.
- Militarum Tempestus units can't be taken alongside normal Guardsmen.
- Valkyries, all Psykers, and abhumans can't be taken in AM armies.
- Daemonhosts can't be taken in Inquisition lists (they lack the Ordo Keyword), like how Sister Hospitallers can't be taken (no Order Keyword).
- Priests can't be taken in SoB armies, because their most specific keyword is Astra Militarum (but they can't be taken in there anyway, because they don't have the Regiment Keyword)

So yeah. Doesn't really work too well, and that's just Imperial lists, not even including all the Eldar varieties.

Aye, Most Specific will just cause a ton of issues with very specific units that have an extra keyword.
Tho Forcing 2 Keywords won't really affect Space Marine Armies, but might break a few Xeno ones who lack excessive Faction Keywords.

Basically, Space Marines need to be Forced 3 Keywords.
Chaos, Imperial Guard, and Eldar need to be Forced 2 Keywords.

A ton of potential exceptions need to be made.

For not only the basic ones like Assassins, but also for thing like Cypher and the Fallen.

Which is another problem, we are trying to modify the rules to an existing set. That's a pretty difficult thing to do since a small hiccup here and there can leave the suggestion seeming poor.

BrianDavion wrote:

sossen wrote:
What about sharing two faction keywords within the same detachment?

Screws Chaos. Screws chaos HARD.

No, it really doesn't.

Chaos would be your 1st Keyword. Easy
If you choose CSM as your 2nd, you get the entire CSM section of the Codex.
If you choose Daemon as your 2nd, you not only get the entire Daemon section of the Codex. You even get a few units from CSM.
You could even choose a specific God, such as Tzeentch. Which will give you huge chunks of both books.

BrianDavion wrote:
no, no it shouldn't. chapter tactics are going to require pure detachments, and we're seeing everyone getting their ownm, taking the long view the fix is already coming.

Is there any evidence to the fix is already coming? If so what do you mean? No more "alliances" between any Imperial armies? What about Eldar, and Chaos? Where did you read or hear that there is going to be a fix and what does that mean?

usmcmidn wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
no, no it shouldn't. chapter tactics are going to require pure detachments, and we're seeing everyone getting their ownm, taking the long view the fix is already coming.

Is there any evidence to the fix is already coming? If so what do you mean? No more "alliances" between any Imperial armies? What about Eldar, and Chaos? Where did you read or hear that there is going to be a fix and what does that mean?

no, rather then "punish" people from taking allied imperial lists (which is a pretty normal fluffy thing) they are rewarding people for taking purer lists. sure you COULD take ratling snipers along side your space marines, but with chapter tactics and stratigiums you're proably gonna wanna look more at scout snipers for those other benifits.

BrianDavion wrote:

usmcmidn wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
no, no it shouldn't. chapter tactics are going to require pure detachments, and we're seeing everyone getting their ownm, taking the long view the fix is already coming.

Is there any evidence to the fix is already coming? If so what do you mean? No more "alliances" between any Imperial armies? What about Eldar, and Chaos? Where did you read or hear that there is going to be a fix and what does that mean?

no, rather then "punish" people from taking allied imperial lists (which is a pretty normal fluffy thing) they are rewarding people for taking purer lists. sure you COULD take ratling snipers along side your space marines, but with chapter tactics and stratigiums you're proably gonna wanna look more at scout snipers for those other benifits.

Ah, so you're saying that Eldar and Tau should return?

Part of the problem is an "Imperium" army has two full books to pick through, chaos has one, eldar have most of one, tyranids have around the same including GSC and allied guard. Then tau, orcs and necrons have a third of a book or less.

That's a big gap in how many options a given army has, and it is particularly favorable for the imperium. An imperial army can really have anything it wants, there will never be gaps they can't fill in their army.

Well, 4 books for the Imperium, really. Then 2 for Chaos. Probably something like 1.5 for Tyranids if you're counting allied Guard. About 1 for Eldar. Maybe a bit more than 1/2 a book for each of the others.

Dionysodorus wrote:
Well, 4 books for the Imperium, really. Then 2 for Chaos. Probably something like 1.5 for Tyranids if you're counting allied Guard. About 1 for Eldar. Maybe a bit more than 1/2 a book for each of the others.

Counting forgeworld you'd be correct, which kinda just makes the gap even more glaring.

IG really should just have a generic version for all renegade factions, not just chaos. That'd work as an allied addition to the Tau and help a bit. Or turn kroot into a full army or something.

Lord knows what you could do with orks or necrons though.

 Talamare wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

usmcmidn wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
no, no it shouldn't. chapter tactics are going to require pure detachments, and we're seeing everyone getting their ownm, taking the long view the fix is already coming.

Is there any evidence to the fix is already coming? If so what do you mean? No more "alliances" between any Imperial armies? What about Eldar, and Chaos? Where did you read or hear that there is going to be a fix and what does that mean?

no, rather then "punish" people from taking allied imperial lists (which is a pretty normal fluffy thing) they are rewarding people for taking purer lists. sure you COULD take ratling snipers along side your space marines, but with chapter tactics and stratigiums you're proably gonna wanna look more at scout snipers for those other benifits.

Ah, so you're saying that Eldar and Tau should return?

if you mean Taudar lists, no fears of that, people stopped running that when they became Battle brothers. for the most part 8th edition avoids that problem of 6th/7th. in that I can't use a Librarian to buff my guardsmen while also giving them a aura advantage from Kaldor Dragio

The imperium is the largest organized instituion in the 40k universe..it makes sense to have dozens of sub factions..there is no reason to split it up..that would actually make even less sense...the stupidity of the 40k fandom never ceases to amaze

Mesokhornee wrote:
The imperium is the largest organized instituion in the 40k universe..it makes sense to have dozens of sub factions..there is no reason to split it up..that would actually make even less sense...the stupidity of the 40k fandom never ceases to amaze

And it's riddled with people who hate each other, factions who don't get along, and in general, rivalries of the most bitter nature.

Plus, mechanically, it's a massively unfair advantage to the Imperium players.

Imperium keyword isnt a problem in this edition, buffs only affecting a single 'chapter' 'regiment' etc keyword fixes shenanigans. In a ruleset which I think is fairly devoid of cool/fluffy rules, not allowing say to run a combined SM and IG defense would suck.

What broken lists are people afraid of that the Imperium keyword specifically exploits that is not available (or done to better effect) in a single faction? SM flyer/girlyman spam doesnt need allies.

Also, are people feeling that other factions are weak this edition? Orks and Tyranids are off the chain. Necrons are extremely strong and the Chaos faction keyword has almost as many options situationally as the Imperium one does. Even Ynarri is fine.

People who think Imperium is overpowered, what armies do you run?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mesokhornee wrote:
The imperium is the largest organized instituion in the 40k universe..it makes sense to have dozens of sub factions..there is no reason to split it up..that would actually make even less sense...the stupidity of the 40k fandom never ceases to amaze

I agree 100%

 JNAProductions wrote:

Mesokhornee wrote:
The imperium is the largest organized instituion in the 40k universe..it makes sense to have dozens of sub factions..there is no reason to split it up..that would actually make even less sense...the stupidity of the 40k fandom never ceases to amaze

And it's riddled with people who hate each other, factions who don't get along, and in general, rivalries of the most bitter nature.
.

which proably explains how I can sit down with my buddy and play a game where my space marines fights his Imperial guard

Mesokhornee wrote:
The imperium is the largest organized instituion in the 40k universe..it makes sense to have dozens of sub factions..there is no reason to split it up..that would actually make even less sense...the stupidity of the 40k fandom never ceases to amaze

While true, the Universe is massive.
Chapters tend to be millions of miles apart from each other.
The vast majority of people have never seen, and never will see a Space Marine.
I would estimate that the average human doesn't even know that Space Marines exist.

So yea, they are allied with each other in dozens of sub factions.

However seeing even 2 different Chapters on a Warzone is an extremely rare event.
Within Individual Battles, such as what is usually represented in a tabletop match, it becomes an even rarer event.

Remember
The Chapters have their own vastly different fighting styles.
They are living in a Grimdark Universe in which the other Chapters are potentially traitors.
They haven't seen other Chapters in perhaps YEARS and are never sure what the intention of the other Chapter might be.
Every Guardsman has the potential to be perhaps a Genestealer or a Chaos Cultist.
You seem to think that the Imperium is 1 giant hug.

By the way...
We are talking about 0.1% of Warzones will see 2 Chapters fighting.
and 0.1% of Battles will see 2 Chapters fighting.

Separating them makes 100% sense.
If you want to play an extremely rare event in which there are like 5 different Chapters from 5 different corners of the UNIVERSE are somehow all together for 1 minor battle...
Well there is always Open Play.

you're moving the goal posts. suddenly you're talking about Multiple chapters fighting together (for the record I'd be fine with a "1 chapter only" rule for space marines. limit confusion) except thats not what you started with. you're running around claiming the universe is broken because people can run mxied guard and space marine armies. guess what... THAT'S PRETTY NORMAL FOR THE SETTING. yes plenty of Guardsmen fight and die without ever seeing space Marines (partly because space marines aren't in every theatre of war) but when the Space Marines are about, it's not terriably uncommon to see the guard deploy in conjunction with the Marines. obviously this depends on the chapter but Ultramarines fighting along side Imperial guard? Iron Hands deploying with the forces of the admech? they're common eneugh. it seems pretty clear to me GW is going to make running "mono armies" a pretty good thing.

as for the advanatges or not of Imperium having a deeper amount of troops to draw from... so what? Some armies having more varity then others is hardly some new sin of 8th edition, it's not even a new sin of 6th edition which introduced allies.

Grey Knights have far less options then standard Space Marines, should space marine players have been shamed into only using half their codex?

BrianDavion wrote:
you're moving the goal posts. suddenly you're talking about Multiple chapters fighting together (for the record I'd be fine with a "1 chapter only" rule for space marines. limit confusion) except thats not what you started with. you're running around claiming the universe is broken because people can run mxied guard and space marine armies. guess what... THAT'S PRETTY NORMAL FOR THE SETTING. yes plenty of Guardsmen fight and die without ever seeing space Marines (partly because space marines aren't in every theatre of war) but when the Space Marines are about, it's not terriably uncommon to see the guard deploy in conjunction with the Marines. obviously this depends on the chapter but Ultramarines fighting along side Imperial guard? Iron Hands deploying with the forces of the admech? they're common eneugh. it seems pretty clear to me GW is going to make running "mono armies" a pretty good thing.

as for the advanatges or not of Imperium having a deeper amount of troops to draw from... so what? Some armies having more varity then others is hardly some new sin of 8th edition, it's not even a new sin of 6th edition which introduced allies.

Grey Knights have far less options then standard Space Marines, should space marine players have been shamed into only using half their codex?

No goal post has been moved
The topic of the thread and the only thing stated on the opening post is

"Should the Imperium be separated?"

As well as many Space Marines do not fight with the Imperial Guard. Again, Imperial Guard have different Tactics than Space Marines do. Space Marines don't have much reason to trust Imperial Guard either.
Fighting in the same Warzone is different than Fighting in the same Battle.

Talamare, one thing I think you're missing here:

Imperial armies are far more likely to fight TOGETHER than against one another.
Yes, there's plenty of area to Forge the Narrative about Ultramarines fighting Astra Militarum, but the vast majority of the time, they're fighting together.

It's why cases like the Months of Shame are so, well, shameful. If the Imperium fought itself more times than it actually worked like an Empire, it would never have stood and won/drew/bought time for themselves at:
Armageddon
Damocles Gulf
Cadia
Macragge
Vraks
Kastorel-Novem
Orpheus Sector
Sabbat Worlds Crusade
Etc etc...

There's plenty of opportunity for Imperial armies to fight other Imperial armies. Nothing stops that. However, that's clearly NOT the norm, and clearly not intended.
By ONLY allowing forces to have their "Chapter Tactics" equivalent if the army is PURELY one faction, it allows for the player to decide "do I want rerolls to Hit and Wounds for all of my units every Shooting and Fight phase, or would I rather pay to have these Custodes?"

PDF PDF PDF

They also deserve some love and attention

 Peregrine wrote:
Yes. We need to go back to the pre-6th way of doing it. You have one FOC, taken from one codex, period. No allies, no mixing armies in a single detachment, you pick your faction and play that faction.

This please.

As an answer to the original question:

No.

I think the game has received a much greater depth after allowing allies. Sure, there have been missteps(Taudar, psychic powers working across factions), but overall it has allowed for much more interesting matchups and made for a much more expansive world.

People really have to stop looking at the past with some rose-colored glasses. Sure, 2nd edition was fun for its time(24" inch Shuriken Catapults were fun), but ultimately it isn't what it used to be.

Although to be fair at this point I really don't care if they nix the ally system personally. They have thankfully, and permanently, made all of Aeldari(with the exception of covens) a single force. Would be very entertaining playing the only faction that can work together while the Imperium is in shambles.

BrianDavion wrote:
no, no it shouldn't. chapter tactics are going to require pure detachments, and we're seeing everyone getting their ownm, taking the long view the fix is already coming.

Have we seen proof of this

My only real issue with the allies system is that it's so horribly unequal. As a base concept, it's a decent one, there are factions that should be able to work together. The problem comes when these ten factions can all work together, but this one has no one else it can work with.

 General Orange wrote:
PDF PDF PDF

They also deserve some love and attention

Well aren't conscripts basically the pdf?

Oldmike wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
no, no it shouldn't. chapter tactics are going to require pure detachments, and we're seeing everyone getting their ownm, taking the long view the fix is already coming.

Have we seen proof of this

Codex Space Marines

Oldmike wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
no, no it shouldn't. chapter tactics are going to require pure detachments, and we're seeing everyone getting their ownm, taking the long view the fix is already coming.

Have we seen proof of this

Codex Space Marines leaks, and statements from the GW team themselves. Yes, it won't be immediate, but everyone will have their own tactics that require pure detachments.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Oldmike wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
no, no it shouldn't. chapter tactics are going to require pure detachments, and we're seeing everyone getting their ownm, taking the long view the fix is already coming.

Have we seen proof of this

Codex Space Marines leaks, and statements from the GW team themselves. Yes, it won't be immediate, but everyone will have their own tactics that require pure detachments.

Honestly, pure detachments isn't that much of a restriction. You can still cover all the weaknesses of one force by adding a detachment of another. And that's the issue. Every individual force has it's weaknesses, but the Imperium, and to a much lesser extent Chaos and Eldar have the ability to take forces from another army to cover that.

The problem is not that you can put Grey Knights and Guardsmen in the same army, it's that you can use Imperial soup to cover the low model count issue of Grey Knights with a blob of conscripts and a commisar. Sure, that commisar won't effect the Paladin squad, but it doesn't have to. It's doing it's job by keeping the conscripts around. It's like if they allowed Tau and Khorne to team up. The two have nothing in common, and that's the strength of it. People would take the best close combat units from Khorne and the best shooting from Tau, and leave behind anything in the middle.