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.

Then you need to give up thinking about the game competitively because your assumption is demonstrably false.

You want an example of points being worthless Khorne Lord of Skulls is 888 points. You mean to tell me this point cost has anything to do with balance, and is not just a cost based on fluff?

So if in your theory for the game to be taken seriously as a competitive exercise, the value of 1 point spent on a unit MUST be equivalent to 1 point spent on a different unit.

Then in that scenario the game is provably not competitive.

So lets prove it.

So If the game is competitive, then points costs must always be of the same value.

Counter example :BA tactical Marine is costed differently than Codex Space Marine Tactical Marine, despite having largely the same exact war gear stat line and special rules.

Thus 1 Point BA Tac marines =/= to 1 point SM tac marines.

Thus by proof by contratidiction we can say that the game is not competitive.

QED

 IK Viper wrote:
But you must operate under that assumption in order for the ENTIRE GAME to be considered a fair game, worthy of being played at a competitive level.

I agree with you that in practice 1 point of Eldar is not worth 1 point of BA. But from a conceptual level, in order for the game to be taken seriously as a competitive exercise, this MUST be true, specially within the same codex.

So you agree they aren't, but say that they should be? I'm not sure I understand.

Codex creep has skewed the relative value of 1 point. GW does this to sell models, and all but proves that they are intending to UNBALNCE the game by not remaining consistent in their unit costs. When DA came out, GW did not FAQ all Marine tactical equivalents to the same point cost but they should have. As soon as the DA book came out, all marines should have gone down to 14 points in an attempt to balance the game. GW was to lazy to do it.

I firmly believe that 40k cannot be considered a truly competitive game for this very reason. Because points values do not carry the same weight across all races. I like the game though and like a challenge so I play in events with the understanding that the game is by design, unbalanced. That does not stop me from wanting things like Comp/ Mission to attempt to fight against this in an attempt to take the game in a more balanced direction in order to make it at least semi-credible as a competitive game instead of just accepting whatever crap GW gives us (since it has been quantitatively proven that they intentionally create imbalance in the game).

My point with the Skyblight issue is that we are not even comparing 2 different codicies, we are comparing units from the same book. 1 point worth of Harpy should be worth 1 point of Gaunt, Hive Crone, Flyrant, etc...

A Gargoyle should cost more if it has Objective Secured and the unit respawns on a 4+ but this is not the case. This is clearly a case of getting better rules at no greater in game points cost, simply because you bout a Dataslate (and presumably some more FMC kits)

The issue is that is not even true at all. 500 points of Pyrovore probably aren't worth 1 point of Flyrant.

Would you at least stipulate that what ever the points cost of a unit is, if you add more rules to it, the resulting unit should cost more?

Breng77 wrote:
The issue is that is not even true at all. 500 points of Pyrovore probably aren't worth 1 point of Flyrant.

10 pyrovores on a promethium relay would be pretty boss.

 IK Viper wrote:
My point with the Skyblight issue is that we are not even comparing 2 different codicies, we are comparing units from the same book. 1 point worth of Harpy should be worth 1 point of Gaunt, Hive Crone, Flyrant, etc...

But that's demonstrably not true.

Genestealers. Pyrovores. Vespid. DA flyers.

There are plenty of units that are simply worse than other options in their codex - even worse than other options in the same FOC slot. Denying that fact might make you feel better, but it doesn't make it any less true.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 IK Viper wrote:
Would you at least stipulate that what ever the points cost of a unit is, if you add more rules to it, the resulting unit should cost more?

Sure. And it does - by taxing you with crappy units that aren't worth their original point cost.

A unit is worth 5, but costs 10. Another unit is worth 3 and costs 3.

You can add a special rule to unit B at no cost, but you must take one of unit A to get that special rule. How is that not okay?

Do models that have auras piss you off? They add special rules to other units at no cost - other than their own. And they're often not worth anything on their own...

Auras are a fixed ability that can be leveraged in a very predictable and consistent way. I have no problem, with auras, though I agree they can be used to affect very few units and be therefore useless, or affect lots of stuff and be really good. Aura buffs function in a similar way to most blessing, they are more powerful on larger units/ more models, and it is up to a skilled player to use the bubble/ power in the most efficient way possible.

Auras are roughly the same a any other unit based buff (usually a psychic power) and most if not all armies have access to these type of abilities so I see no real problem.

This conversation will always get out of hand. Summoning tons of daemons every game with every unit you possibly can will be tedious and fairly unpleasant for a fairly high # of players, and I think most will agree with that.

The army can't win every mission helter skelter, and it's not rewarding or reinforcing to play for that reason - namely, putting lots of models down every turn while your opponent is miserable is probably even worse than picking up lots of models of your opponent's army with wave serpents / etc.

Again, realistically, summon spam isn't so much a concern b/c I think it's inherently self-limiting: an onerous, difficult-to-play army that also does not win. So ... you'd have to have the outlook of: "I go to tournaments in order to spend most of my time 'thematically' placing daemon models down on the table before scoring myself with an L of some sort." Most people that go for purely the "who cares what happens" fun of the game {(and that's I think most tournament attendees)} don't seem like the types to want to spend all game placing models down and rolling psychic dice while their opponent looks languidly on. Most people that go for pure WAAC wins (which isn't really the majority but non-tourney-players still think it is) probably aren't going to spend thousands of dollars painting up and fielding a losing army that depends on having a massive bench of painted models.

All the conversation about whether it's totally balanced to summon new units in a game where every unit can't target multiple units to begin with ... and whether that's the same as shooting a unit with a powerful shooty unit ... seems a needless discussion to have.

The problem is, your assertion for your thesis is rather inaccurate. This is far from the first time we've seen units being spawned mid game. Remember nids in 3rd ed? How about never ending tides of guard later? This is a different mechanism, and is more flexible..... but you have to tie up your units in order to do it. I honestly don't see it as all that powerful. There WILL be games where you will get really lucky, not miss very many rolls to summon, and curb stomp just about anyone. But you will also have games where you kill yourself. Literally.

This army is a crap shoot. If played very well it will let you tailor your list to your opponent mid game. That actually gives the deamons some strength that they really need to be competitive. But you will have to make a HUGE investment in models... worse than orks playing green tide, and you will have to really know your army and your opponents.

If played badly or with insufficient models, it will just spawn random deamons that will sometimes work well for you and sometimes not.... If you're really scared of the high school kids that will try to abuse this (which honestly, it's really only armies built around survive-ability that are going to struggle) then just don't allow proxies and force wyswyg. Force Painted with minimum 3 colors, no primer showing, models must be based kind of rules.

I feel the biggest consideration regarding summoning is the time it takes to summon loads of daemons. It's not fair to your opponent to bring an army that might possibly consume inordinate amounts of limited time. TO's and organizers need to be clear that, even if Summoning armies are allowed, slow-play is not welcome.

MVBrandt wrote:
This conversation will always get out of hand. Summoning tons of daemons every game with every unit you possibly can will be tedious and fairly unpleasant for a fairly high # of players, and I think most will agree with that.

The army can't win every mission helter skelter, and it's not rewarding or reinforcing to play for that reason - namely, putting lots of models down every turn while your opponent is miserable is probably even worse than picking up lots of models of your opponent's army with wave serpents / etc.

Again, realistically, summon spam isn't so much a concern b/c I think it's inherently self-limiting: an onerous, difficult-to-play army that also does not win. So ... you'd have to have the outlook of: "I go to tournaments in order to spend most of my time 'thematically' placing daemon models down on the table before scoring myself with an L of some sort." Most people that go for purely the "who cares what happens" fun of the game {(and that's I think most tournament attendees)} don't seem like the types to want to spend all game placing models down and rolling psychic dice while their opponent looks languidly on. Most people that go for pure WAAC wins (which isn't really the majority but non-tourney-players still think it is) probably aren't going to spend thousands of dollars painting up and fielding a losing army that depends on having a massive bench of painted models.

All the conversation about whether it's totally balanced to summon new units in a game where every unit can't target multiple units to begin with ... and whether that's the same as shooting a unit with a powerful shooty unit ... seems a needless discussion to have.

I have to second this as it parallel's my sentiment exactly.

Daemon Factory isn't broken. It won't be the dominant list. It is unreliable. It has many points of failure. It is expensive. It is time consuming. And due to the nature of the list will be self limiting. A knee jerk extreme reaction is uneccessary and a slippery slope.

Let's save our time and energy for fixing real potential problems. Predominantly Invisibility and the 2+/2++ Rerollable mechanic. We can even add in FOC concerns as well. Those are what should concern us, not the hyped Daemon Factory.

On a side note, I got to watch a Daemon Factory in action today, even after the Blue Scribes summoned a Lord of Change for free T2, the Daemon player lost to Tau. There were a lot of factors involved, but it left a clear impression that Daemon Factory is an effective list design or style, but it won't inherently break this edition. We won't see Daemon Farm sweeping GTs, plain and simple the rest will sort itself out.

emmagine wrote:
Remember nids in 3rd ed?

No. Years of therapy had finally enabled me to block out the horror of the Numbers Without End rule. Thanks emmagine. Now I have to go back to my psychiatrist and start all over again.

And for what it's worth, I think Demon Factory lists are going to be WAY less nasty than Numbers Without End was.

 IK Viper wrote:
Would you at least stipulate that what ever the points cost of a unit is, if you add more rules to it, the resulting unit should cost more?

Where were you when Vendettas went from skimmers to flyers in 6th edition or the big rules changes with FMC? The fact is that this always happens with a new edition because when the rules change some units will always get better and some get worse but their points don't change. Snikrott and Wolf Scouts can't assault out of reserves any more in 6th, but did they get a point reduction? I think you need to work on your coping skills.


As to demon summoning taking a lot of time that always happens with a new edition as well. Casualties, saves, and model removal took a long time at the beginning of 6th edition (how soon we forget). With practice the psychic phase should take less time. In fact, I am not sure it does take more time since it is taking the place of their shooting phase and Tzeentch shooting took forever to resolve.

Conjuration is powerful, but it's becomes uncompetitive when spammed. The flaw of the average net list can be summed up with the number 1,030.
4 lvl 3 heralds + Be'Lakor + Fateweaver=1,030 points with stock heralds. It gets even more expensive with gifts or discs of Tzeentch. That leave the rest of the army strapped for points and vulnerable to aggressive armies or alpha strikes.

Without Fateweaver the army is going to suffer average an army wide deamonic instability roll once per tournament and the grimoire will backfire an average of twice per game. Without Be'Lekor the army will only have access to a single telepathy roll from fateweaver unless it wants to give up lvl 3 Tzeentch heralds.

1,030 is prohibitively expensive and ends up crippling the factory. The factory can survive being hobbled early in the game if it's allowed to have Tzeentch units G2G for a 2+ rerollable cover and will roll over any army that is unable to deny it the 2+ rerollable cover save. The problem is tons of armies can deny the 2+ rerollable by closing range fast, barrage, ignore cover, or charging into melee turn 2. The list of hard counters is a mile long.

That being said summoning is really powerful, but needs to be taken in moderation say only 1 or 2 Tzeentch heralds, Fateweaver, and the blue scribes while leaving Be'Lekor out of the list. A balanced list with plenty of soul grinders and other solid units will really benefit from horrors casting cursed earth for a 4+ invo. The balanced list won't summon a lot of units, but it will have enough summoning units to get rid of any and all excess warp charges. 8D6 shots is better than summoning 90 points of deamons, but summoning 90 points of deamons is better if the 8D6 shots are out of range or don't have a good target. Cursed earth and sacrifice are more warp charge efficient than 2D6 shots.

Conjuration is good, but less is more, it doesn't need a ban, and it doesn't need a nerf.

 Blackmoor wrote:

 IK Viper wrote:
Would you at least stipulate that what ever the points cost of a unit is, if you add more rules to it, the resulting unit should cost more?

Where were you when Vendettas went from skimmers to flyers in 6th edition or the big rules changes with FMC? The fact is that this always happens with a new edition because when the rules change some units will always get better and some get worse but their points don't change. Snikrott and Wolf Scouts can't assault out of reserves any more in 6th, but did they get a point reduction? I think you need to work on your coping skills.


As to demon summoning taking a lot of time that always happens with a new edition as well. Casualties, saves, and model removal took a long time at the beginning of 6th edition (how soon we forget). With practice the psychic phase should take less time. In fact, I am not sure it does take more time since it is taking the place of their shooting phase and Tzeentch shooting took forever to resolve.

I am not talking about the rules change from edition to edition. I am pointing out how ridiculous it is for the exact same model, in the exact same edition, from the exact same codex entry, getting more rules without a cost increase just because the model happened to be bought for a formation.

The only variable that changes is the special rules. Allowing such things makes the same amount of sense as saying " 4 + 1 = 4" You cannot add to something and end up with the same value.


Also, and this thread has seemed to forget. My initial statements pointed out that I am not saying that any list/ build is or is not broke. What I am saying is that the whole concept of units being added to the game mid-stream seems wrong. Yes it has been around for a while, but never on this scale. Yes I have always opposed this game mechanic, I am simply reaffirming my belief in light of the new changes with 7th Edition. Multiple posters have like to point out "well did you forget about X back in X edition," To address your question, no I have not. I hated it then, I hate it now, and will always hate anything that adds point to an army mid-game.

I played a very good CD player this weekend and won the game, despite his summoning. I agree that the army has a limited return after a certain point for sure and I don't think summoning is a huge game breaker He only summoned 3 units during the game but that is still 270 more points than I ever had to work with. My point still remains, the CD player did not have to be as smart/tactical as I because he had the luxury of just creating units when he needed them. I see summoning units as a cop out. Rather that planning out in advance how to use your limited resources, you get to create stuff as you go when problems arise. Not saying the army plays itself, but it certainly allows someone to cover their weakness in long term planning with a primaris power they can build into their list.

Aside from the free points issue, summoning scoring units mid-game (and specially late game when both armies are depleted) decreases the skill required to insure your units are in position late game, because they can just be pooped out at any point. This does nothing but help less skilled players beat/ compete with skilled players, this is a bad thing last time I checked... Why do we want to encourage this trend?

So you must Hate codex supplements, FOC changing characters, Grand Strategy, and the Space marine codex too right?

Because all of those add rules for no additional cost to the unit.

I.e. a white scars bike squad is the same points as a templar bike squad.

 IK Viper wrote:

 Blackmoor wrote:

 IK Viper wrote:
Would you at least stipulate that what ever the points cost of a unit is, if you add more rules to it, the resulting unit should cost more?

Where were you when Vendettas went from skimmers to flyers in 6th edition or the big rules changes with FMC? The fact is that this always happens with a new edition because when the rules change some units will always get better and some get worse but their points don't change. Snikrott and Wolf Scouts can't assault out of reserves any more in 6th, but did they get a point reduction? I think you need to work on your coping skills.


As to demon summoning taking a lot of time that always happens with a new edition as well. Casualties, saves, and model removal took a long time at the beginning of 6th edition (how soon we forget). With practice the psychic phase should take less time. In fact, I am not sure it does take more time since it is taking the place of their shooting phase and Tzeentch shooting took forever to resolve.

I am not talking about the rules change from edition to edition. I am pointing out how ridiculous it is for the exact same model, in the exact same edition, from the exact same codex entry, getting more rules without a cost increase just because the model happened to be bought for a formation.

The only variable that changes is the special rules. Allowing such things makes the same amount of sense as saying " 4 + 1 = 4" You cannot add to something and end up with the same value.


Also, and this thread has seemed to forget. My initial statements pointed out that I am not saying that any list/ build is or is not broke. What I am saying is that the whole concept of units being added to the game mid-stream seems wrong. Yes it has been around for a while, but never on this scale. Yes I have always opposed this game mechanic, I am simply reaffirming my belief in light of the new changes with 7th Edition. Multiple posters have like to point out "well did you forget about X back in X edition," To address your question, no I have not. I hated it then, I hate it now, and will always hate anything that adds point to an army mid-game.

I played a very good CD player this weekend and won the game, despite his summoning. I agree that the army has a limited return after a certain point for sure and I don't think summoning is a huge game breaker He only summoned 3 units during the game but that is still 270 more points than I ever had to work with. My point still remains, the CD player did not have to be as smart/tactical as I because he had the luxury of just creating units when he needed them. I see summoning units as a cop out. Rather that planning out in advance how to use your limited resources, you get to create stuff as you go when problems arise. Not saying the army plays itself, but it certainly allows someone to cover their weakness in long term planning with a primaris power they can build into their list.

Aside from the free points issue, summoning scoring units mid-game (and specially late game when both armies are depleted) decreases the skill required to insure your units are in position late game, because they can just be pooped out at any point. This does nothing but help less skilled players beat/ compete with skilled players, this is a bad thing last time I checked... Why do we want to encourage this trend?

7 power dice have about a 77% chance of passing a psychic test for a WC3 power
2 power dice have about a 75% chance of passing a psychic test for a WC1 power

Those 3 conjuration powers required as much warp charges as 10.5 psychic shrieks.

I would make the argument that attempting to win by summoning 270 points of units is a more skill intensive and difficult rout to victory than just shooting someone in the face with 10.5 psychic shrieks.

Breng77 wrote:
So you must Hate codex supplements, FOC changing characters, Grand Strategy, and the Space marine codex too right?

Because all of those add rules for no additional cost to the unit.

I.e. a white scars bike squad is the same points as a templar bike squad.

did you even read my previous post?

Taking a special character to buff units with rules is pretty standard stuff. It is also an ability that most, if not all armies have in some form or another. Khan being your Warlord gives buff X, Y, and Z to bikes. Dante grants the buff of Objective Secured to Sang. Guard. You buy a Grandmaster to gain Grand Strat. I am sure there are examples, but I am having a hard time coming up with armies that don't have IC's that buff units in this way. Usually these IC's take up a needed HQ slot and their buff should be factored into their unit cost. The so called "tax units," linked to formations are not like this, they have a set cost and set rules THAT DO NOT INCLUDE THE FORMATION BUFFS, and then the formation buffs the exact same units for free. The "Harpy Tax," makes you take units that are in theory, already correctly costed within the context of the codex and the greater game of 40k. Your paying the normal points for the unit, therefore it is not a tax, if the Harpy was more expensive, sure, call it a tax because it does in fact cost you more then a normal Harpy out of the codex.

With the bikes example, chapter tactics aside (because each chapter gets their own) the difference is based around the IC, not the bikes themselves.

Not sure how which powers you cast has any bearing on the skill of a player as each situation is different from game to game. What is good in one situation is terrible in another so you can't really judge the "skill" of spell casting in a vacuum. My point is that most generals don't have the extreme luxury of looking across the table on turn 4, thinking "of crap I am running out of troops," and then create more of them. They must plan their game based on finite resources and concern themselves with keeping those resources alive for the whole game instead of popping units out late game. Sure you have to protect your summoning units, but the point remains, no one else gets to pop out new stuff late in the game when both sides are depleted and scrambling for objectives. This is a huge advantage similar to the ever cowardly and laughably cheap/broken Eldar Jetbikes that hide in the back all game safe from fire and then boost forward at the last minute or the Necron turn 5 air drop. It is really powerful to be able to safely hide all your troops unit the end of the game instead of actually fighting with them. Conjurations are yet another means of doing this, skimping on troops, hiding what pitifully cheap troops you did take in the back, in reserves, or now in your carry case, until all the real fighting is over then hopping out and scoring.

Which is why these progressive mission are such a needed thing in 40k right now. Go Go mission catalog. Make people actually fight with their scoring units!

 IK Viper wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
So you must Hate codex supplements, FOC changing characters, Grand Strategy, and the Space marine codex too right?

Because all of those add rules for no additional cost to the unit.

I.e. a white scars bike squad is the same points as a templar bike squad.

did you even read my previous post?

Taking a special character to buff units with rules is pretty standard stuff. It is also an ability that most, if not all armies have in some form or another. Khan being your Warlord gives buff X, Y, and Z to bikes. Dante grants the buff of Objective Secured to Sang. Guard. You buy a Grandmaster to gain Grand Strat. I am sure there are examples, but I am having a hard time coming up with armies that don't have IC's that buff units in this way. Usually these IC's take up a needed HQ slot and their buff should be factored into their unit cost. The so called "tax units," linked to formations are not like this, they have a set cost and set rules THAT DO NOT INCLUDE THE FORMATION BUFFS, and then the formation buffs the exact same units for free. The "Harpy Tax," makes you take units that are in theory, already correctly costed within the context of the codex and the greater game of 40k. Your paying the normal points for the unit, therefore it is not a tax, if the Harpy was more expensive, sure, call it a tax because it does in fact cost you more then a normal Harpy out of the codex.

With the bikes example, chapter tactics aside (because each chapter gets their own) the difference is based around the IC, not the bikes themselves.

Not sure how which powers you cast has any bearing on the skill of a player as each situation is different from game to game. What is good in one situation is terrible in another so you can't really judge the "skill" of spell casting in a vacuum. My point is that most generals don't have the extreme luxury of looking across the table on turn 4, thinking "of crap I am running out of troops," and then create more of them. They must plan their game based on finite resources and concern themselves with keeping those resources alive for the whole game instead of popping units out late game. Sure you have to protect your summoning units, but the point remains, no one else gets to pop out new stuff late in the game when both sides are depleted and scrambling for objectives. This is a huge advantage similar to the ever cowardly and laughably cheap/broken Eldar Jetbikes that hide in the back all game safe from fire and then boost forward at the last minute or the Necron turn 5 air drop. It is really powerful to be able to safely hide all your troops unit the end of the game instead of actually fighting with them. Conjurations are yet another means of doing this, skimping on troops, hiding what pitifully cheap troops you did take in the back, in reserves, or now in your carry case, until all the real fighting is over then hopping out and scoring.

Which is why these progressive mission are such a needed thing in 40k right now. Go Go mission catalog. Make people actually fight with their scoring units!

Too long, best summed up with the fact you don't like armies that can hide or produce last minute objective snatchers like guardian jetbikes, necrons jumping out of a scythe, and conjured deamons.

The problem in that case isn't conjuration, its objectives only being worth points at the end of the game. If some of the games have objectives that generate points every turn that problem is solved.

 IK Viper wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
So you must Hate codex supplements, FOC changing characters, Grand Strategy, and the Space marine codex too right?

Because all of those add rules for no additional cost to the unit.

I.e. a white scars bike squad is the same points as a templar bike squad.

did you even read my previous post?

Taking a special character to buff units with rules is pretty standard stuff. It is also an ability that most, if not all armies have in some form or another. Khan being your Warlord gives buff X, Y, and Z to bikes. Dante grants the buff of Objective Secured to Sang. Guard. You buy a Grandmaster to gain Grand Strat. I am sure there are examples, but I am having a hard time coming up with armies that don't have IC's that buff units in this way. Usually these IC's take up a needed HQ slot and their buff should be factored into their unit cost. The so called "tax units," linked to formations are not like this, they have a set cost and set rules THAT DO NOT INCLUDE THE FORMATION BUFFS, and then the formation buffs the exact same units for free. The "Harpy Tax," makes you take units that are in theory, already correctly costed within the context of the codex and the greater game of 40k. Your paying the normal points for the unit, therefore it is not a tax, if the Harpy was more expensive, sure, call it a tax because it does in fact cost you more then a normal Harpy out of the codex.

With the bikes example, chapter tactics aside (because each chapter gets their own) the difference is based around the IC, not the bikes themselves.

Not sure how which powers you cast has any bearing on the skill of a player as each situation is different from game to game. What is good in one situation is terrible in another so you can't really judge the "skill" of spell casting in a vacuum. My point is that most generals don't have the extreme luxury of looking across the table on turn 4, thinking "of crap I am running out of troops," and then create more of them. They must plan their game based on finite resources and concern themselves with keeping those resources alive for the whole game instead of popping units out late game. Sure you have to protect your summoning units, but the point remains, no one else gets to pop out new stuff late in the game when both sides are depleted and scrambling for objectives. This is a huge advantage similar to the ever cowardly and laughably cheap/broken Eldar Jetbikes that hide in the back all game safe from fire and then boost forward at the last minute or the Necron turn 5 air drop. It is really powerful to be able to safely hide all your troops unit the end of the game instead of actually fighting with them. Conjurations are yet another means of doing this, skimping on troops, hiding what pitifully cheap troops you did take in the back, in reserves, or now in your carry case, until all the real fighting is over then hopping out and scoring.

Which is why these progressive mission are such a needed thing in 40k right now. Go Go mission catalog. Make people actually fight with their scoring units!

Do you read what you are saying?

So taking an IC to give x unit objective secured, is ok but needing to take 2 harpies and a crone is not? Chapter tactic are ok because it's the same codex, but I get free special rules for no points (presumably not all special rules are equal.). You have a giant double standard about what is ok an what is bad. Ok = things that have been going on for a while. New = bad..

I love asymmetrical missions, but they don't stop last turn grabs, they just force more strategy into doing them. As for stuff popping out last turn, sure, other armies pop things out of transports which add durability to units,, or keeps them hidden, some other armies (nids, crons) can generate units/models.

 IK Viper wrote:

I played a very good CD player this weekend and won the game, despite his summoning.

I thought that this was funny. That is how good you are that you are able to beat a good player using broken rules eh?

You still not not realize that the summoning player is using valuable resources to summon demons. All of those warp charges are not being used for anything other than to summon demons.

Again, summoning takes the place of shooting. If he is summoning he is not shooting. I find if funny that you are ok with him using his warp charges to shoot you off of your objectives, but you do not like him summoning units to claim his own.

it comes down to you not liking units that are created mid-game other than the fact that you just don't like it. Do you know what I do not like? I do not like that Wave Serpents can only be glanced with the Serpent Shield. I do not like Fortune, I do not like Necrons that can move 24" and be able to disembark on objectives. I could go on, but most armies have rules unique to them that everyone has to deal with.

 IK Viper wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
So you must Hate codex supplements, FOC changing characters, Grand Strategy, and the Space marine codex too right?

Because all of those add rules for no additional cost to the unit.

I.e. a white scars bike squad is the same points as a templar bike squad.

did you even read my previous post?

Taking a special character to buff units with rules is pretty standard stuff. It is also an ability that most, if not all armies have in some form or another. Khan being your Warlord gives buff X, Y, and Z to bikes. Dante grants the buff of Objective Secured to Sang. Guard. You buy a Grandmaster to gain Grand Strat. I am sure there are examples, but I am having a hard time coming up with armies that don't have IC's that buff units in this way. Usually these IC's take up a needed HQ slot and their buff should be factored into their unit cost. The so called "tax units," linked to formations are not like this, they have a set cost and set rules THAT DO NOT INCLUDE THE FORMATION BUFFS, and then the formation buffs the exact same units for free. The "Harpy Tax," makes you take units that are in theory, already correctly costed within the context of the codex and the greater game of 40k. Your paying the normal points for the unit, therefore it is not a tax, if the Harpy was more expensive, sure, call it a tax because it does in fact cost you more then a normal Harpy out of the codex.

The problem with buffs to various units is when/where the points are paid, and how can they possibly be balanced all the time no matter what you're buffing.

For example, where do Assault Squads pay their chapter tactics points? They get nothing under eg Imperial Fists, but buffs under Ultramarines. ARe they costed correctly for Imperial Fists or for Ultramarines?
Or a blessing, Say Endurance. This blessing is worth a lot more if you cast it on a large squad or an already durable squad. If I paid 100pts for the psyker, does that mean the blessing is worth 100pts no matter if I cast it on the lone psyker himself or a unit of 10 paladins?
Or a Tau buff commander. His Tank Hunter ability is worth a lot more if he joins a unit of Broadsides, than a unit of fire warriors, and more in a unit of 3 broadsides than a unit of 1. In both cases the points cost is the same. Does that mean the broadsides already have inflated points cost just in case the commander joins them??

Some buffs, and especially multiple stacking buffs, can quickly become too extremely points efficient. A very simple example is re-rolling saves. A unit with a re-rollable 2+ invulnerable can eat six times the amount of wound as a unit with only a 2++, but does not cost anywhere near 6 times the amount of points. Is giving that unit the re-roll really significantly different than instead summoning additional models in to the unit?

Not sure how which powers you cast has any bearing on the skill of a player as each situation is different from game to game. What is good in one situation is terrible in another so you can't really judge the "skill" of spell casting in a vacuum. My point is that most generals don't have the extreme luxury of looking across the table on turn 4, thinking "of crap I am running out of troops," and then create more of them. They must plan their game based on finite resources and concern themselves with keeping those resources alive for the whole game instead of popping units out late game. Sure you have to protect your summoning units, but the point remains, no one else gets to pop out new stuff late in the game when both sides are depleted and scrambling for objectives. This is a huge advantage similar to the ever cowardly and laughably cheap/broken Eldar Jetbikes that hide in the back all game safe from fire and then boost forward at the last minute or the Necron turn 5 air drop. It is really powerful to be able to safely hide all your troops unit the end of the game instead of actually fighting with them. Conjurations are yet another means of doing this, skimping on troops, hiding what pitifully cheap troops you did take in the back, in reserves, or now in your carry case, until all the real fighting is over then hopping out and scoring.

The Daemon summoning army has at least 50% of its points tied up in 3 T3 5++ save units. These are the resources for the Daemon general that he must focus on keeping alive. They have no offensive capability on the first turn, probably not much on the second turn. Any dice they spend creating offensive units are dice not spent creating more summoning power, so if they DO try to create some offence on the first turn you can take out their summoners; and if they do create summoners you're safe another turn of damage. The majority of increases in casting power come from summoning a W2 T3 5++ model that can't join a unit until the next turn - something a combat squad of space marines should be able to pick off easily. The Daemon player can't hide his troops (at least, not his Objective Secured ones) as these must be on the board turn 1 to summon.

If the Daemon army is depleted, they stop summoning. Every warp charge is precious; and they need at least 20 warp charges to maintain even a chance of summoning and getting the other buffs they need. Even 20 is low - that's only 2 attempts at WC3 spells. To have a decent chance of getting new units on the board, they need 6-8 dice to cast (2 Tzeralds and 2 units of horrors), which can still fail or perils. Or they might not even have a unit on the board that still has a summoning spell, if you're smart with targeting.

Which is why these progressive mission are such a needed thing in 40k right now. Go Go mission catalog. Make people actually fight with their scoring units!

What do Daemons bring to the table in their troops slots?
Daemonettes and Bloodletters: T3 5+ save combat troops
Pink Horrors: without undue psychic spam, they effectively have a single heavy bolter.
Plaguebearers: T4 5+ save combat troops that are slow.
Some armies just don't have troops that can win games.

If you have frail troop units, not that I would consider a Shrouded unit in cover, or a potentially Grimmed up unit of PH or an Invisible Daemonette unit frail, do what most armies do... bring more of them, They are cheap for a reason and you get what you pay for.

Everything scores now any way so this is not nearly as big an issue as it was in the past though.

I do not oppose new stuff simply on principle, I honestly believe that it makes and already unbalanced game even more unbalanced when more and more rules/abilities are added into the game that allow one army to do things no one else can do. How can anyone balance a game where each army does not operate with similar sets of tools?

Skyblight is apparently completely fair and reasonable, I am way, way, off the mark, but for some reason every high placing Nid player I know uses Skyblight in every event they can. It is hard to argue with the results, and by purchasing a $5 download the Nids are magically a lot better. It surely has nothing to do with the powerful new rules/ FOG slots they gain from the formation.

Forget the Nids, all Nid players feel under privileged because they did not get an Eldar Broke codex so they universally whine when formations are not allowed because they feel that GW owes them. How many other armies with a 6th Ed Codex are stuck without formations to catapult their power level? Why is it fair for Nids to have Formations to boost them but SoB, DA, CSM are stuck with useless or generic formations that other, stronger armies can take as well. Is that fair? If every army had a "Skyblight equivalent," then sure, allow all formations, because each army has equal access to free rules at no cost but right now that is not the case.

Lets look at the Tau Firebase. What "tax" is being paid to gain Tank Hunter for free? What terrible unit are the Tau forced to take that makes it reasonable for them to pay the same points for their Broadsides and Riptides, and now gain one of the most powerful shooting USR's in the game. Hell, why not give them Ignores Cover too... After all, who really thinks that you should pay points for such useful buffs, specially now that the Buffmander can't join a Riptide.

Do you honestly not see the core problem with formations? They offer more rules, at no cost, and the formation love has not been evenly distributed across all armies. Until each army has access to similarly broken formations, they have no place in competitive play. This is essentially the same argument that has been used to oppose Forgeworld for years.

 IK Viper wrote:
Skyblight is apparently completely fair and reasonable, I am way, way, off the mark, but for some reason every high placing Nid player I know uses Skyblight in every event they can. It is hard to argue with the results, and by purchasing a $5 download the Nids are magically a lot better. It surely has nothing to do with the powerful new rules/ FOG slots they gain from the formation.

It absolutely does. That's not the point - it takes a codex from mediocre to competitive, but that doesn't mean Skyblight is bad. The downside to it is of you can handle FMCs, Skyblight will lose.

If every army had a "Skyblight equivalent," then sure, allow all formations, because each army has equal access to free rules at no cost but right now that is not the case.

So when did you move from "Conjuration" to "Skyblight is the deevil"?

Lets look at the Tau Firebase. What "tax" is being paid to gain Tank Hunter for free? What terrible unit are the Tau forced to take that makes it reasonable for them to pay the same points for their Broadsides and Riptides, and now gain one of the most powerful shooting USR's in the game. Hell, why not give them Ignores Cover too... After all, who really thinks that you should pay points for such useful buffs, specially now that the Buffmander can't join a Riptide.

The Tau Firebase is a crap Formation - it's overpowered. I absolutely agree.

Do you honestly not see the core problem with formations? They offer more rules, at no cost, and the formation love has not been evenly distributed across all armies. Until each army has access to similarly broken formations, they have no place in competitive play. This is essentially the same argument that has been used to oppose Forgeworld for years.

There is a cost to many Formations... I noticed you didn't complain at all about the Helbrute ones, or the Nid Artillery one...

What do you expect me to do? Create an exhaustive list of all the things I disagree with in 40k? How is the fact that I have not mentioned these formations relevant when there are obviously other formations at are more powerful and widely used.

 IK Viper wrote:
What do you expect me to do? Create an exhaustive list of all the things I disagree with in 40k? How is the fact that I have not mentioned these formations relevant when there are obviously other formations at are more powerful and widely used.

Because it shows it's not the formations you hate, it's the power granted by those formations.
So it's not a, quote, "core problem with formations", it's a problem you have with some formations.

More or less you argue that its "Unfair that Nids get access to the powerful Skyplight Formation" Should we write a list of powerful things other books have access to that nids don't? Allies (other than CTA), Book Psychic powers, Vehicles, Wave Serpents, codex supplements, AP 1 weapons (do they have any I don't recall but I'm pretty sure they don't)....The point is simply this the game is unbalanced at its core, so unless you want to tear down the whole game and write a new one, accept what is out there a little more.

Somehow it seems "fair" to you that Eldar get super powerful units in their codex, but nids don't but have access to a power-up through a formation.

Your argument is flawed on many levels.

1.) Not all codices are equal, so if this is true why does it matter why they are not?

2.) Even the Powerful Tau formation pays a price in opportunity cost (sure it is composed of powerful units, and is over powered, but so are other things in the game.), in that it limits what other units you can take because you run out of points. This assumption that you need to take a terrible unit as cost is false, Draigo is hardly terrible, Azreal = not terrible, Chaptermaster on bike to unlock bikes etc. The cost is not "I buy this terrible unit" its "I cannot buy something else because I spent points on x."

3.) It makes an assumption that codices were written with balance in mind.

Breng77 wrote:
AP 1 weapons (do they have any I don't recall but I'm pretty sure they don't)

Nope. Our only AP1 (Warp Lance) was nerfed with the new codex.
And now that I say that I'm not sure it was AP1 in the old codex - I never ran Zoeys.

2.) Even the Powerful Tau formation pays a price in opportunity cost (sure it is composed of powerful units, and is over powered, but so are other things in the game.), in that it limits what other units you can take because you run out of points. This assumption that you need to take a terrible unit as cost is false, Draigo is hardly terrible, Azreal = not terrible, Chaptermaster on bike to unlock bikes etc. The cost is not "I buy this terrible unit" its "I cannot buy something else because I spent points on x."

That's only true if you weren't going to take those units in the first place.
Can you honestly say that you wouldn't take the Broadsides and a Riptide?

A codex contains all the rules for a given army. That is the golden standard for what those units should cost. Is it not reasonable to make every one play out of their codex until and unless everyone has access to formations tailor made for them?

Some formations are not as bad as others, but that is not the point, Codexes should not require a formation/ dataslate to be competitive. Formations (all of them) are at their core a GW money grab that generate sales by offering new rules abilities for units. If these rules/ abilities were intended for the core codex, they should have been in there. If these formations were play tested and points correctly they should be in the codex. If every codex gets formations of roughly the same power then sure, play with them. As it stands, formations are great for casual play, but not in a competitive environment where equality, or as near equality as we can achieve, is important. Play what is in your book and be happy, until everyone has formations of equal power. That is what all the other 6th Ed. codexes do and many of them are weaker then Nids without formations. Examples include: SoB, DA, non-beast pack/Eldar side kick DE (in relation to the Meta, though they do well against Nids head to head by nature of Poison weapons), CSM.

The one constant in 40k is that each army has a codex. All the other bolt on supplements and add-ons are a craps shoot at best. Forgeworld, Escalation, Dataslates, Formations, and Supplement Codexes are all over the place. Some armies benefit greatly, others benefit not at all. There is not even an attempt to fairly represent each army in these add-ons. Without equal distribution how/why would we allow these in competitive events?

Note: I have left out Stronghold Assault on purpose because each army except Nids has access to these rules. I think that Stronghold could be allowed in tournaments fairly, so long as[u] Nids are allowed to use them in the same way the other armies in the game do. That way every army has equal access.