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.

You know what would fix a majority of 40k issues; Limiting Armour.

Say you decide on a total 'Amour pool". Say---60 for example. Armies add all of the highest AV value from their mechanized units---and that cannot exceed that cap.

LR: 14
2 Razors: 22
2 Speeders: 20
56 total

After that---no more armor. This stops Razorback spam, Chimera Spam, Vendetta Spam and other crotch kicking lists that are a real joy to play against. I think it would shift the meta in a good way.

*I know the total of 60 might be seen as too limiting (Or too gracious)----I'm simply throwing out a number to illustrate the idea.




To OP;

That kind of limiting would be very difficult---as you are expecting that each codex only has two unbalancing factors. Take your SM ban on Vulkan----I would consider TH/SS Terminators one of the strongest parts of that codex (and something I see frequently). Space Wolves----I consider Rune Priests stronger than TWC---as many people just run lone Wolf Lords with Wolf wounds. And there will be people that agree with me (and disagree with me).

Would be pretty tough to do.

This is just asinine, it is a few people picking on units that serve a purpose for a particular army that someone thinks it OP. Each of the units listed as "banned" and such serve a purpose and have an anathema, just because you are not playing a force that has that anathema does not mean they should go. If that was the case we all need to start playing the same army and list.

Not a fan. Leave the game as unbalanced as it is. At least its the devil you know...

Why not just cut all the HQ, elites, fast & heavies down to 1 slot each and only half your troops can have transports. That's easier and much less selective.

Bat Manuel wrote:Why not just cut all the HQ, elites, fast & heavies down to 1 slot each and only half your troops can have transports. That's easier and much less selective.

Oww. That's even more restrictive. IG wins.

Still supporting Dante and Mephiston for BA?

BA should be:

Banned: Mephiston
0-1: Predators

IG should be:
Banned: Manticore
0-1: Chimera

And you should have a tournament wide:

0-1: Razorback
0-1: HQ units

Your list thus far has crowned BA as the king of the untouched.

Now you don't get razorback spam, which the rules are encouraging. SW lose the workaround of taking 4 runepriests with living lightning (cheap and effective if losing longfangs). Since you're forcing people out of mech, banning the manticore is imperative, or guard lists are going to be a bunch of foot-mounted HWTs with triple manticores to "lol" their way through every opponent army. Vendettas are no longer relevant and don't need to be banned. Triple lascannons....but you've equally nerfed everyone's armour, not just screwing with Necrons and DE. So what if people bring Vendettas now?

And as Mike said (and you really should listen), if you're going to impose the same requirements on Necrons, make it trivial. Most competitive players can laugh a Necron army off the table. You don't need to nerf them further. If you want to ban Tau units, then hit the ones that actually would hurt them. Broadsides and crisis suits. So what if hammerheads are 0-1? Most competitive Tau lists use broadsides for anti-tank duty, and suits for anti-infantry duty. If your "ban" is intended to hit "auto-include" units, then ban crisis suits and make broadside battle suits 0-1.

When you compare something like IG vs. Necron in the ruleset you're imposing....Necrons have 4 useful units, and 2 of them share the same slot. Both of them rely on monoliths to stay alive. And you've put them 0-1. People who bring the current Necron codex to tournaments should be applauded for bravery treated with care because they are *not* expecting to win. Now you're just kicking them while they're down. Compare that to IG, with an entire codex full of useful units...and you're only touching one of them.

The armour pool would be useful as well.

What about scaling up Combat Patrol? Nothing with more than two wounds, no AV total of more than 32 for any vehicle or walker and standard FOC.

Exceptions have to be made for 1) Tau Commanders and 2) letting Necrons have the Monolith because, well, otherwise it's just not cricket, old boy...

The unit you really need to ban/restrict is razorbacks.

I hate imposed restrictions on army lists. Many tournament organizers believes they are doing a great service by balancing the environment when in reality they are doing more harm. In the past, I've seen tournament organizers try to impose restrictions such as no special characters or limit to 2 wound models. A unit ban and 0 - 1 on a specific choice makes it difficult for players who have a set innovatory of models.

SabrX wrote: A unit ban and 0 - 1 on a specific choice makes it difficult for players who have a set innovatory of models.

That's a good point too.

My Necrons....my close combat necrons....

I have exactly what I need to run the army. I traded out my destroyers for wraiths, sold off the spare stuff...this would literally be a "Well, your army isn't welcome" moment.

Yeah, but you have other armies, right? I mean, if literally the only models you had were those required to build one specific list, that'd be quite rare.

Can I just point out that Comp is just a holdover from an earlier time where there were armies that needed to be held back, and is completely unneeded?

Dumb idea.

Polonius wrote:Yeah, but you have other armies, right? I mean, if literally the only models you had were those required to build one specific list, that'd be quite rare.

For old veterans, sure. But what about newbies? Vets have it easy. We can go to another army or change things up. Some new guy probably fields what he has.

Dronze wrote:Can I just point out that Comp is just a holdover from an earlier time where there were armies that needed to be held back, and is completely unneeded?

Because it hasn't been posted recently:

The OP's post is motivated by the desire to have a LOCAL one-off tournament, with the described system used to shake up the LOCAL metagame.

It sounds like everyone is playing the same builds every game, and the idea is to spark a little variety. In that context, I like the idea, though I question some of the choices. I can wish he hadn't labeled it "Composition," as that brings out a lot of knee-jerk reactions.

Miraclefish wrote:What about scaling up Combat Patrol? Nothing with more than two wounds, no AV total of more than 32 for any vehicle or walker and standard FOC.

Exceptions have to be made for 1) Tau Commanders and 2) letting Necrons have the Monolith because, well, otherwise it's just not cricket, old boy...

Tyranids don't have an HQ option with fewer than 3 wounds.

well, the OP suggested this was based on community support, so I'm imagining that not too many newbies are running "banned" units or mutiple restricted units while having no other options.

And if so, and they're running at say 1850pts, how is this any different than when they run hard boys? In both cases, some people might not have enough stuff.

Deadshane1 wrote:Dumb idea.

So, do you feel the OP is so off base that his idea requires a response of that kind-----or are you attempting to state you cannot think of any constructive way to improve/edit his idea of encouraging variety at his local scene?

Because, to be honest, just reading your post without context----it looks pretty inflammatory/rude.

I thought it was fine until you banned Ravagers and 0-1'd Trueborn.
Yes. Try to play DE without some decent amount of AT.
This is dumb. Just...no.

AgeOfEgos wrote:

Deadshane1 wrote:Dumb idea.

So, do you feel the OP is so off base that his idea requires a response of that kind-----or are you attempting to state you cannot think of any constructive way to improve/edit his idea of encouraging variety at his local scene?

Because, to be honest, just reading your post without context----it looks pretty inflammatory/rude.

Not being rude, its just a dumb idea, and its been stated why 1000 times in this forum.

This sort of thing is a crutch for people that get frustrated after facing things like multiple purifier units, 3xLoota Squads, multiple vendetta's, 3xLong Fangs, whatever. Impose a restriction so that you don't have to deal. Whimpy.

When you impose restrictions like this, theres no reason other than "I hate facing off against 15 Missle Launcher Space Wolf armies". There's no reason other than that to do this, and you're not playing 40k anymore when you do. You're playing "So and so's idea of what 40k should be."

If that sounds rude, sorry, but whatever...grow a thicker skin.



EDIT

Oh yea, and since these restrictions are generally imposed by folks who cannot handle these common combo's, you know, folks that really just arent as skilled at 40k as other more regular tournament players who really know what they're doing....

....The restrictions in question are generally imbalanced.

When you impose restrictions like this, theres no reason other than "I hate facing off against 15 Missle Launcher Space Wolf armies". There's no reason other than that to do this, and you're not playing 40k anymore when you do. You're playing "So and so's idea of what 40k should be."

Not that I agree with the OPs idea, but always facing crap like that over and over is just plain boring. I think it has nothing to do with whether or not his locals can handle those armies, but to inject some newness to the game. Is it the right way to do it? I'm not so sure.

Super competitive 40k can be boring at times because everyone is taking the same crap. It reminds me of a tournament I played in about 2 months ago. I literally had to run the boredom gauntlet of the same SW army in rounds 2 and 3. Eventually, it stops becoming fun playing the same damn armies all the time. Again, is this a good solution? That's ultimately his gaming group's decision to adopt it. He's just looking for feedback on what units would/ should be recommended for banning/ 0-1.

Or perhaps he is very skilled---and his local scene is simply looking for a way to encourage variety in lists so they can play different----and perhaps he stated that in his original post.

the players in my area of having a tournament that forces different list builds than the typical competitive lists

Now, no doubt 40k is an uncommonly deep, strategic affair that only an advantaged few can wrap their intellect around. However, rather than assuming he is one of the meandering proles that fail to grasp the innumerable nuances of 40k----perhaps you can take his OP at face value when he states he's looking for a way to encourage variety in his local scene.

Or you can reply "Dumb idea, get thicker skin".

I think banning things from codex is stupid. I can run a space marine army with a ton of missiles. Also banning deamon princes and limiting oblits? Why limit a book that isn't that great. Also fire prisms 0-1? Ya that won't fly. No big mek? 0-1 battlewagon. Why not say you can only play one army and one list and that's it.

I'm fine with having no battlewagon *Cough*greentide* cough*.

If anything were to be banned, make it Nob Bikers.

Most of the 5th edition codices (and Orks) would not suffer from banning one unit (apart from DE if you picked the Ravager, and Tyranids have a pretty hard time as it is, without stealing their Tervigons). There are more than enough possible builds in the newer books to make the ban ineffective, and players can just choose the type of spam that you haven't banned.

The really old codices would suffer big time: when you only have so many units to choose from in the first place, and some of them are automatically ruled out from being crap, every further restriction is like clogging an artery.

I think that the 4th edition books would benefit most from this type of restriction. Eldar and Tau both have a few good builds left in them, but they're really not set in stone and there is a clear dependence on Wave Serpents, Hammerheads, etc that could be replaced by skillful use of other units. If that is the type of intuitive thinking you are trying to bring out, then I could see where it would be useful.

The problem is that the oldest rulesets are terrible and limited, and the newest would laugh off the restrictions because there is so much diversity in the available options.

Nightwatch wrote:Most of the 5th edition codices (and Orks) would not suffer from banning one unit (apart from DE if you picked the Ravager, and Tyranids have a pretty hard time as it is, without stealing their Tervigons). There are more than enough possible builds in the newer books to make the ban ineffective, and players can just choose the type of spam that you haven't banned.

This is the POINT, actually.

It's not a "Let's run GTs this way" suggestion; it's just an attempt to provoke some variety in what sounds like a very static local metagame.

I'm sorry Oaka, but... I WOULD LIKE TO RANT AGAINST YOUR IDEA, UNDER THE MISTAKEN IMPRESSION THAT YOU ARE ADVOCATING SOMETHING OTHER THAN A FUN VARIANT TO SHAKE UP YOUR LOCAL METAGAME.

I am somewhat mystified at how many people feel the need to post responses in this thread which seem intended for some other thread, and don't seem to reflect the situation as described in the original post.

Bad, bad, idea.

I could see banning certain SCs and/or maybe some extremely OP units, but the OP's proposal is just weird.

This is a horrible idea, imo. I wouldn't play in any tourney that ran it and would probably avoid that place in the future, as they would have demonstrated that they have no idea what they are doing. Going codex by codex to pick the stuff the TO doesn't personally like? Stinks of douchebaggery and people will just play around it anyway. You can't bully people into "comp."

Skarboy, where are you getting any of that from what the OP wrote?

He seems to have clearly expressed that this format is a change of pace based on the collective local group's opinion. Not one TO being a bully.