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.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
Step 1: Listen to absolutely no one on Dakka.

That includes you, you know. So you telling them not to listen won't be listened to.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:
Step 1: Listen to absolutely no one on Dakka.

That includes you, you know. So you telling them not to listen won't be listened to.

Haha wow you really epic memed me xD

 ServiceGames wrote:
What factions are considered minor? Aren't all codex armies big enough to form their own army?

To varying degrees custodes, deathwatch, knights, and harlequins are all highly limited. Beyond them you have the various non-codex factions that range from poor with(out) allies (sisters) to worthless as anything but allies (inquisition sisters of silence, etc).

There are numerous ways to fix it, and we've seen GW tackle some bizarre issues lately, so I'd say there is some minor hope - but...the main issue is obviously soup, and soup sells models. So, it's likely to not be properly addressed, possibly ever.

Soup should have been a fluffy, cool, option which offered little in the way of benefits. Instead it's an all-powerful, game changing meta-shift which is absolutely a bonus.

Mono-codex armies are punished.

Early mono-codex armies are punished doubly so with the slow but inevitable power creep in codex writing, etc.

Could it be fixed? Absolutely. Will it? No, I don't think so.

Simply start running mono codex tourneys......

it is that simple, let the competitive cheesy soup players have their lists.

just have mono codex nights (Like my local shop) and events, its that simple.

 Peregrine wrote:

KurtAngle2 wrote:
Honestly I've had enough of these topics, it's always ends as a cointainer of worst ideas ever suggested by non gamers and casuals alike. Soup is fine and if you want to keep playing limiting yourself to mono codices it's YOUR PROBLEM, so don't force others to limit themselves like you do.

7TH was completely free in terms of Alliances yet 90% of lists never relied on them because units were so broken by themselves that not spamming them and instead bringing on things from other armies always resulted in lowering the strenght of your army

Soup is only "fine" if you're GW's marketing department and want to sell the latest space marine release to everyone regardless of what faction they actually play.

soup is also needed if you are a fan of some of the interesting minor factions or particular interesting but non-competitive forces. like say, an inquisition strike team. that DOESN'T WORK without soup being a thing. Yes I play it in narrative, but being able to take it to events for a good time is a bonus I would not gladly relinquish. I would however gladly give up some of the benefits of the "allies" detachments in order to keep it as a viable idea.

There was a T'au player in the top 8 of LVO so I think they are in a pretty good spot. Nick piloting Orks lost his game to Alex who took second at LVO with yanarri by 1 point. I feel like that has more to do with mistakes he made rather than the strength of the codex. Orks have also made a decent showing at other tourneys leading many top tier players thinking that they would do pretty well in LVO. I still don't think they were wrong there could have easily been an Ork win had Nick won that game. The only mono codex that needs help IMO is Necrons. They are the only ones that have consistently done poorly since getting a codex. The thought of a mono codex tourney sounds interesting. However, I'm pretty sure it would just be dominated by DE, Orks, and T'au. This is of course all speculation because soup is not going anywhere soon. The only reason this keeps coming up is because there are a couple codexes out there that cannot actually ally with anything right now. I do think this will change with future releases but in the mean time its really just people yelling "ThEy HaVe MoRe ToYs ThAn Me!!!!11111

Wayniac wrote:
Here is an unorthodox, extreme and altogether unrealistic idea: Matched Play only allows for the 3 basic stratagems in the core rulebook and, if applicable, any stratagems allowed by the mission (e.g. some Maelstrom missions give you a stratagem to pick new cards).

.

this makes GK even worse, GK have all their good rules put in to stratagems. If GW decides to move ammo and heed in to unit rules, then it is ok. But without those GK are even worse DW, theya re right now.

Well if we postulate that current soup will be hardly removed, I prefer the idea to encourage mono-codex list rather to impair soup lists. More options the better as far as I'm concerned.

Or maybe just fix factions that doesn't have the possibility to soup (Mainly xenos) ?

Something like adding a particular keyword ([mercenary], [rogue], [freelancer], whatever) to some xeno units, which allow to allt in a subset of factions (Necron, Tau, Orks, as they are the ones missing). I'm no rule lawyer but you get the idea.

And voilà, anyone has access to soup and you get to build crazy lists.

Fluff problem ? Well if you consider current soup lists as fluffy I don't know what to tell you...

All these subfaction/must have 2 keyword in common still foesnt help orks and hinders us even more into taking mono clan so we will definitely left doingnone trick ponies(evil sunz teleyporta/badmoon loota spam nonesense).
Orks are designed to use multiple clans in one list.
All these approaches are to macro scale, cant fix issues like this with sweeping changes for everyone. Need to tackle each 'grand alliance' faction and each xeno race individually. Imperium needs less bonuses for allying up and eldar need more limitations in how they team up(mainly doom and yannari need a tweak) and i am clueless to what chaos needs

 IronSlug wrote:
I'm no rule lawyer but you get the idea.

Yeah I guess I'm talking of a rule of the GSC / Imperial Guard kind

 Cephalobeard wrote:
Step 1: Listen to absolutely no one on Dakka.

Then how about we listen to the Cults codex and just impose a 50% penalty on non-primary faction CP generation? It's simpler than most suggestions by a mile and they've already done it once.

If you want to encourage mono-codex armies you need to give people a reason to run them over soup. At the moment there is absolutely no incentive for anyone capable of running allies not to do so. There need to be restrictions placed on what soup armies have access to and the most reasonable suggestions for this seem to be to do with restricting CPs and stratagems. It needs to be a genuine choice at the list building stage as to whether you soup or not, otherwise Imperium will likely continue to dominate. There's simply no way to compete with an army that has literally 20 times more choice than your army does, simply because it's an Imperium force and you're stuck with Necrons.

YeOldSaltPotato wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:
Step 1: Listen to absolutely no one on Dakka.

Then how about we listen to the Cults codex and just impose a 50% penalty on non-primary faction CP generation? It's simpler than most suggestions by a mile and they've already done it once.

Doesn't stop Loyal 32, as they'll just be declared the Primary Faction. The others combo'd with them only generate 1CP, so aren't otherwise affected by the '50% rounded up' rule.

If your list contains units from multiple factions then it is considered a Battleforged Alliance.

A Battleforged Alliance starts with 2CP and every detatchment in the Alliance provides 2CP. Even your Outrider/Vanguard/Spearhead/Air Wing that normally provide 1CP provide 2, but the benefits of a Battallion or Brigade are mitigated.

This way the maximum CP available to soup armies is 8. Which is a reasonable amount I think.

How about just reformatting army codices? There would be Codex Necron, Codex Tau, Codex Orks, Codex Chaos, Codex Alderi (sp?) and Codex Imperium.

There, mono codex armies are fixed. Then GW might be able to balance units within each codex to help with that aspect of the game as well.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
How about just reformatting army codices? There would be Codex Necron, Codex Tau, Codex Orks, Codex Chaos, Codex Alderi (sp?) and Codex Imperium.

There, mono codex armies are fixed. Then GW might be able to balance units within each codex to help with that aspect of the game as well.

That likely will never happen, and that's really just ignoring the issue anyways and saying "Look soup is now one faction gg". So it doesn't even address the problem.

Let's be honest there are two major issues with soup:

1) CP farming from a cheap battalion (e.g. Loyal 32) to power things with powerful stratagems (e.g. Castellan) built around the concept their CP will be limited therefore stratagems should be more powerful
2) Allowing you to completely ignore your army weakness by taking units from another faction to circumvent it e.g. taking a guard gunline and then taking Blood Angels to have a CC punch, negating the weakness of Guard (lots of weak bodies)

#1 can be fixed by having something like the Brood Brother rule, but even that has issues (just make the L32 your primary). So I think it has to be something like limiting what stratagems you have access to. First and foremost I think the whole "take a detachment, unlock their stratagems" rule needs to be reversed' you should only get stratagems for your primary detachment, not be able to take let' say a Guard battalion, Blood Angels Supreme Command and Castellan Superheavy Auxiliary and get access to Guard, Blood Angels and Knight stratagems. You should have to declare a primary detachment (don't you already have to do this? I'm not sure anymore) and you only get the stratagems from that detachment. Combine with the Brood Brother rule to limit CP generation in general, and I think that alone might solve the issue as it would mean you can't do both. If you make the L32 your primary, you don't get Rotate Ion shields or the knight bonuses (extra traits and whatnot). If you make the Knight your primary you get half CP from the L32.

#2 is the bigger issue because you can't easily fix it without preventing soup period which can hurt people who aren't doing it only to min/max. The easiest solution would be to expand "Battle Brothers" to be what it should have been from the start: The army's keywords can't be Imperium/Chaos/Aeldari/Tyranid rather than the detachment (which let's face it, that rule is meaningless since nobody was taking a mixed detachment, it was mixed armies with multiple detachments with different keywords), but this is something that has to be looked at further to see all of the potential issues with it, which there seems to be several brought up for any suggestion (usually involving "Ynnari can ignore this and still dominate")

KurtAngle2 wrote:
Honestly I've had enough of these topics, it's always ends as a cointainer of worst ideas ever suggested by non gamers and casuals alike. Soup is fine and if you want to keep playing limiting yourself to mono codices it's YOUR PROBLEM, so don't force others to limit themselves like you do.

7TH was completely free in terms of Alliances yet 90% of lists never relied on them because units were so broken by themselves that not spamming them and instead bringing on things from other armies always resulted in lowering the strenght of your army

how you gonna call other people casuals and then post the most casual statement of all in this thread

Counting "shared Faction keywords" is going to be very hard, because not all Faction keywords nest to the same depth.

"The *army's* keywords can't be Imperium/Chaos/Aeldari/Tyranid rather than the detachment" has the problem of banning Ynnari, limiting Agents, Corsairs, etc to be practically useless, and stopping very fluffy and reasonable lists with Marines, Harlies, GSCs, and more. And force Knights to only be playable in their most unfun configuration (I'd rather face IoM Soup than a pure Knight list, even though the later is easier to beat).

Ideally, the game should incentivise not souping, but not to the point of making it impossible. Some things can't really be taken without soup. Others make a lot more sense as Soup than mono.

To that end, my favorite Soup fix remains the "Detatchments Cost CP - even Bat/Brig/Patrol". It incentivises playing fewer codexes, while not making playing multiple impossible.

Bharring wrote:
Counting "shared Faction keywords" is going to be very hard, because not all Faction keywords nest to the same depth.

"The *army's* keywords can't be Imperium/Chaos/Aeldari/Tyranid rather than the detachment" has the problem of banning Ynnari, limiting Agents, Corsairs, etc to be practically useless, and stopping very fluffy and reasonable lists with Marines, Harlies, GSCs, and more. And force Knights to only be playable in their most unfun configuration (I'd rather face IoM Soup than a pure Knight list, even though the later is easier to beat).

Ideally, the game should incentivise not souping, but not to the point of making it impossible. Some things can't really be taken without soup. Others make a lot more sense as Soup than mono.

To that end, my favorite Soup fix remains the "Detatchments Cost CP - even Bat/Brig/Patrol". It incentivises playing fewer codexes, while not making playing multiple impossible.

I'd like to see something in between. Still grant CPs via detachments, but fewer that those given for just being BF. And more Cps should be given for detachments sharing 2+ Faction keywords as your WL.
If Battalions, for example, only granted 3CPs, but Battle Forged granted 5CP, that would go far in reducing Soup abuse compared to armies that cannot.

Then give +1CP to any detachment that shares 2+ Faction Keywords with your WL (or more than just Imperium/Chaos/Aeldari/Tyranid).
These 2 VERY simple changes give a very decent boost to mono-faction lists without completely gutting taking allies

This would be easy enough to manage as it would follow the same Battle Bros guidelines for taking detachments in Matched play already
There will always be weird exceptions, like Ynnari, that need special attention to make them work, but that is expected for such a complicated game

-

Would there be anything wrong with not allowing you to get stratagems from other detachments with different factions?

E.g. right now if you had a guard battalion and a knight superheavy aux, you'd get access to both guard stratagems and knight stratagems (which is where the problem lies, using cheap CP from the L32 to use on knight stratagems)

What if that went away? To get knight stratagems you would have to make the knight detachment primary, which would then use the Brood Brothers rule where the guard battalion gets no traits and gives only half CP. If you made the guard battalion primary, you wouldn't get the knight stratagems.

I think the solution from the new GSC codex is very good. just ass it for guard regiments that are not part of a mono guard army.

But i still think the easiest and most effective solution is to just ban the sharing of CP between detachments. Take that super "fluffy" knight castalin in your army it simply doesn't have any CP support. It even makes sense from a lore perspective. CP is supposed to show an army using special things only that army can do. The more of that army the more special stuff it can do. Why should a guard detachment unlock special tricks for BA, knights or whatever?

The bonus is it also removes cross-contamination of codexes and you can change strategem cost to a fair level knowing soup cant exploit its cost


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Wayniac wrote:
Would there be anything wrong with not allowing you to get stratagems from other detachments with different factions?

E.g. right now if you had a guard battalion and a knight superheavy aux, you'd get access to both guard stratagems and knight stratagems (which is where the problem lies, using cheap CP from the L32 to use on knight stratagems)

What if that went away? To get knight stratagems you would have to make the knight detachment primary, which would then use the Brood Brothers rule where the guard battalion gets no traits and gives only half CP. If you made the guard battalion primary, you wouldn't get the knight stratagems.

I like this quite a bit aswell

Also just because people seem to cry about Ynnari here's a proposed solution:

Give them something like the AOS Khorne Blood Tithe. Each time a unit dies, they get a soul tithe. They can spend 3 soul tithes on something: Soul Burst for one unit (limit to infantry probably), maybe a save or an FNP or something for one unit, something else maybe. When you spend tithes, you spend all you have (so you can't say get 5, spend 3 and have 2 left)

It's fluffy, it means you can't just soul burst all the time (since you need at least 3 units have to die to get the tithes) and it tones down Ynnari since IMHO their main "faction bonus" is letting you ignore the normal soup restrictions.

Alternatively, literally make their bonus Strength From Death: If one of your units die, another unit can get a buff or something like that.

'Ynnari since IMHO their main "faction bonus" is letting you ignore the normal soup restrictions.'
That *was* true. But now, Ynnari don't do that anymore (aside from allowing you to take the Ynnari SCs).

Ynnari don't do anything to help DE and CWE or Harlies (or Corsairs) play together anymore. You can't have both DE and CWE in the same detatcment, even if it's a Ynnari detatchment.

I agree that SfD should be changed, although that deserves a thread of it's own in Proposed Rules. I agree Soup needs a nerf, but think Ynnari need a seperate nerf as well.

Bharring wrote:
'Ynnari since IMHO their main "faction bonus" is letting you ignore the normal soup restrictions.'
That *was* true. But now, Ynnari don't do that anymore (aside from allowing you to take the Ynnari SCs).

Ynnari don't do anything to help DE and CWE or Harlies (or Corsairs) play together anymore. You can't have both DE and CWE in the same detatcment, even if it's a Ynnari detatchment.

I agree that SfD should be changed, although that deserves a thread of it's own in Proposed Rules. I agree Soup needs a nerf, but think Ynnari need a seperate nerf as well.

I would absolutely agree with that.

 WindstormSCR wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
Ban soup. Problem solved.

and feth up quite a lot of decent army ideas. better to give allies the "Brood Brothers" treatment from the new GSC codex:

no named characters
no obsec
no relics
no warlord
no chapter tactics/regiments/equivalent
detachments only generate half the normal CP value

its a great way to reign in the abuses without killing soup entirely, which would make the game a lesser thing.

That's a remarkably good set of ideas GW had there, they should absolutely apply those to all allied detachments.

Here is the fix i want. You get CP for points. Your first Detachment determines your main faction.

15 CP for 2k points.
-1 CP for each Detachment beyond the first detachment.
-1 for each detachment not of the main faction in the army.

A 3 detachment 3 faction soup force would have 11 CP. A single faction double detachment force would be 14 CP. A mono-faction single detachment, would be 15 CP.

Play on.

You wanna make Mono Codex appealing? Make all the options in a codex appealing in the first place.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You wanna make Mono Codex appealing? Make all the options in a codex appealing in the first place.

Maybe not all, but if a codex can build 2 lists that aren't carbon copies of each other, they are in a perfect spot to be played. Expecting all units too be good is nice idea, but I don't think it will ever happen.

-Makes all the IK options playable
-Makes all the IG options playable
-Doesn't get why IK+IG still beats IK lists and IG lists