Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

endlesswaltz123 wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:

Gryphonne wrote:
There is no access to command points (which is outright stupid for an elite army supposed to rely on strats); the strategems have now been entirely spoiled in the codex review and they are incredibly lackluster.

This is pretty much a universal problem for all the elite armies. I think the theory is that elite armies spend their fewer points on more meaningful rolls, but in practice, a Guard Brigade gets more quality rolls anyway and the elite army is really in need of the extra CP. I'm not sure how to actually write a system that works that way, but I do think the Patrol detachment should be worth at least 1 CP if not 2. Trying to make a Battalion happen in an army with troops and HQs that start at 100 points without gear is pretty crippling. Patrols are lot more manageable, but 0 CP just compounds the issue that lead you to a Patrol in the first place.

I'd suggest reducing the amount of points certain detachments give, and replace those missing CP's by stating you automatically get say 1 or 2 per complete 500 points of game play, so each army gets 4 at 1000pts, 8 at 2000 etc, then your detachments etc give less. Brigades will still reward by giving more CP points than an elite army using a smaller detachment(s), but smaller elite armies will have substantial access to a decent amount of CP's that they struggle to have now.

I think they should have come out with faction specific replacements to the baseline force orgs.

How much more balanced would AM be if THEIR version of the brigade had to take 3 baseline leman russ battletanks.

you kniw maybe fir small armies they should give them relics or warlord traits, or even an army wide rule to get CP back on a 3-4+. that way even with very few command points we would stretch them out way longer. maybe steal too. that way even though we have so few it would multiply our CP count but not have to shift a ton of rules around. this goes for grey knights too

Spartan117xyz wrote:
you kniw maybe fir small armies they should give them relics or warlord traits, or even an army wide rule to get CP back on a 3-4+. that way even with very few command points we would stretch them out way longer. maybe steal too. that way even though we have so few it would multiply our CP count but not have to shift a ton of rules around. this goes for grey knights too

elite armies should ALL have a char with a rule ala abbaddon, gulliman and calgar.

Actually a straight up given rule to highly elite armies should allow command point regen rather than a specific special character, special character crutches are far too common at the minute

 Mantle wrote:
Actually a straight up given rule to highly elite armies should allow command point regen rather than a specific special character, special character crutches are far too common at the minute

make it a bonus some generic HQs get.

raises the question, do we know what kinda "buff bubble" trajan and the sheild captains have?

Trajan is re-roll 1's to Hit and Wound. Shields are re-roll 1's to Hit.

Audustum wrote:
Trajan is re-roll 1's to Hit and Wound. Shields are re-roll 1's to Hit.

So space marine captains and chapter master then. makes sense.

Trajan also has the "one use per game" hability from 3 choices. Attacking another time in the same round, regen D3 CP from a Stratagem (Maximun the CP spend in that stratagem) and the third one I can't remember what whas it.

Are you all mental? CP are one of the ways the game is somewhat balanced.

You want to run all spearhead/vanguard/outrider detachments but have all the CP too?

There is a reason it is set up that way.

Run your super elite armies, but you know you have less flexibility.

Run your troops and have more tricks.

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
Are you all mental? CP are one of the ways the game is somewhat balanced.

You want to run all spearhead/vanguard/outrider detachments but have all the CP too?

There is a reason it is set up that way.

Run your super elite armies, but you know you have less flexibility.

Run your troops and have more tricks.

uhh you must not have played elite armies then. also what you said is kinda exactly whats the problem.

with large armies they out number, out gun, and out trick small armies. small armies dont have anything. yeah we are more elite. but when you have way more models. and can use your powerful stratagems more then a small army its like the small army is handicapped.

BrianDavion wrote:

Audustum wrote:
Trajan is re-roll 1's to Hit and Wound. Shields are re-roll 1's to Hit.

So space marine captains and chapter master then. makes sense.

Actually, Trajan combines a Captain and Lieutenant. Technically Shield Captain's provide the same bonus as a Chapter Master (everything is 2+ to hit, so they reroll all misses).

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Audustum wrote:
Trajan is re-roll 1's to Hit and Wound. Shields are re-roll 1's to Hit.

So space marine captains and chapter master then. makes sense.

Actually, Trajan combines a Captain and Lieutenant. Technically Shield Captain's provide the same bonus as a Chapter Master (everything is 2+ to hit, so they reroll all misses).

Only if you don't have -1 on your hit roll. You can't reroll a 2.

Spartan117xyz wrote:

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
Are you all mental? CP are one of the ways the game is somewhat balanced.

You want to run all spearhead/vanguard/outrider detachments but have all the CP too?

There is a reason it is set up that way.

Run your super elite armies, but you know you have less flexibility.

Run your troops and have more tricks.

uhh you must not have played elite armies then. also what you said is kinda exactly whats the problem.

with large armies they out number, out gun, and out trick small armies. small armies dont have anything. yeah we are more elite. but when you have way more models. and can use your powerful stratagems more then a small army its like the small army is handicapped.

I coulda sworn that elite armies were balanced by objective play and mobility. Honestly I think command points are just a really bad idea as a mechanic. I already abhor limited use per game abilities (single fire, old combi weapons, and now CPs), CPs force elite armies into taking mass units they don't need or can't use properly in order to get put into a balanced situation with much cheaper forces. While those same cheaper forces actually benefit from taking thier base troops en masse in addition to the CP benefits.

Hordes already have a sizeable advantage in forcing rolls, holding objectives, and outlasting casualties, CPs are just another boost they don't need.

 nordsturmking wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Audustum wrote:
Trajan is re-roll 1's to Hit and Wound. Shields are re-roll 1's to Hit.

So space marine captains and chapter master then. makes sense.

Actually, Trajan combines a Captain and Lieutenant. Technically Shield Captain's provide the same bonus as a Chapter Master (everything is 2+ to hit, so they reroll all misses).

Only if you don't have -1 on your hit roll. You can't reroll a 2.

That is true. It is one of the weird side effects of how those modifiers are placed. But that would be the case of it was a Chapter Master affecting a Marine with a 2+ as well.

 Mantle wrote:
Actually a straight up given rule to highly elite armies should allow command point regen rather than a specific special character, special character crutches are far too common at the minute

Say hello to group of custodians giving regenerating CP's for non-elite armies as well then.

Of course this has to be a rule that is only in place if all your detachments have the Custodes keyword.

So that would then be special snowflake custodes rule only...Not likely happening. If GW would be inventing special rules you get by having all detachments have that they would have done that long time ago.

I cannot see them doing this as well. We will likely only get points changes. But filling a brigade detachement will be next to impossible in a standard sized game.

Crimson_ wrote:
I cannot see them doing this as well. We will likely only get points changes. But filling a brigade detachement will be next to impossible in a standard sized game.

the obvious idea is to create a rule for "Primary detachment" that reflects where the bulk of your points are. so "if your primary detachment is X you get Y"

BrianDavion wrote:

Crimson_ wrote:
I cannot see them doing this as well. We will likely only get points changes. But filling a brigade detachement will be next to impossible in a standard sized game.

the obvious idea is to create a rule for "Primary detachment" that reflects where the bulk of your points are. so "if your primary detachment is X you get Y"

I would go for bulk of units, not points. For example, a Guard Leman Russ spearhead is going to cost more than the supporting basic brigade brought alongside it, yet it'll have dramatically less model count, effect and "footprint".

Kdash wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Crimson_ wrote:
I cannot see them doing this as well. We will likely only get points changes. But filling a brigade detachement will be next to impossible in a standard sized game.

the obvious idea is to create a rule for "Primary detachment" that reflects where the bulk of your points are. so "if your primary detachment is X you get Y"

I would go for bulk of units, not points. For example, a Guard Leman Russ spearhead is going to cost more than the supporting basic brigade brought alongside it, yet it'll have dramatically less model count, effect and "footprint".

except that's not really fair because I could take a tinsy portion of guard to augment my custodes and suddenly I'm playing guard despite only 250 points of them on the table

BrianDavion wrote:

Crimson_ wrote:
I cannot see them doing this as well. We will likely only get points changes. But filling a brigade detachement will be next to impossible in a standard sized game.

the obvious idea is to create a rule for "Primary detachment" that reflects where the bulk of your points are. so "if your primary detachment is X you get Y"

GW gave already "army" rule. It's called warlord. They don't go for point calcuation to decide what free rules you get.

Crimson_ wrote:
Of course this has to be a rule that is only in place if all your detachments have the Custodes keyword.

This is actually a wonderfully elegant way of balancing the power disparity between Soup armies and ‘Pure’, one-Codex armies. Instead of having rules like traits, stratagems and relics require your entire detachment share a certain keyword, make it so they require your entire army to share it.

You could very easily set this up for something like everything having the Imperium keyword gets you Battleforged, Space Marine keyword gets you Codex Stratagems, Relics and Warlord Traits, Raven Guard gets you Chapter Tactics and their specific Relic/Warlord Trait/Stratagem.

Yeah there’s need to be exceptions like Inquisition and Harlies, but they’re just that - exceptions.

So, the first comparison pics are in of the new Terminator models. They are actually smaller than the Guardians. This makes me rather sad.

ERJAK wrote:
I think they should have come out with faction specific replacements to the baseline force orgs.

How much more balanced would AM be if THEIR version of the brigade had to take 3 baseline leman russ battletanks.

How would it be balanced?

Most IG armies wouldn't care, as they take them anyway, you'd just feth all over original, fluffy armies that take something unusual, forcing them to take something ill-fitting their concept. Not to mention, cookie cutter mandatory units for bonuses were such big part of crap that was 7th they should die with it. No more 'sale boosters', just NO.

BrianDavion wrote:
elite armies should ALL have a char with a rule ala abbaddon, gulliman and calgar.

You know, I was wondering about such solution too... But then you'd see elite armies spamming HQ detachments (specifically, captains on bikes/GK NDGM, acting like untargettable tanks) to gain 10+ CP each game. Smells of 7th ed dekurions, unfluffy and gamey.

kombatwombat wrote:
This is actually a wonderfully elegant way of balancing the power disparity between Soup armies and ‘Pure’, one-Codex armies. Instead of having rules like traits, stratagems and relics require your entire detachment share a certain keyword, make it so they require your entire army to share it.

You could very easily set this up for something like everything having the Imperium keyword gets you Battleforged, Space Marine keyword gets you Codex Stratagems, Relics and Warlord Traits, Raven Guard gets you Chapter Tactics and their specific Relic/Warlord Trait/Stratagem.

Yeah there’s need to be exceptions like Inquisition and Harlies, but they’re just that - exceptions.

<insert Archer guy>Do you want to kill all smaller factions? Because that's how you kill weaker factions</Archer guy>

It makes very little sense, too, why would Ultramarines suddenly forgot how to fight? That IG squad next to them makes them nervous or something? What? If you want to do something, pure factions should give you extra bonus, not PENALIZE you for every slightest transgression. Actually, Sigmar ally rules are already a good system, no idea why GW didn't added it to 40K yet.

ERJAK wrote:

endlesswaltz123 wrote:


I think they should have come out with faction specific replacements to the baseline force orgs.

How much more balanced would AM be if THEIR version of the brigade had to take 3 baseline leman russ battletanks.

This is a great idea. Very, very interesting.

 cuda1179 wrote:
So, the first comparison pics are in of the new Terminator models. They are actually smaller than the Guardians. This makes me rather sad.

Got a link? I want to be sad, too!

 Geifer wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
So, the first comparison pics are in of the new Terminator models. They are actually smaller than the Guardians. This makes me rather sad.

Got a link? I want to be sad, too!

So terminators just suck, then. :(

wtf, why are terminators smaller. what is this....