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.

the_scotsman 773741 10410046 wrote:

I mean, I'd say an average army tends to be battleforged, have at least one detachment, and have a warlord, so you'd be starting from 3CP for your pre-game stratagems.

Want more pregame stratagems, bring more detachments? I don't know about you but I haven't seen too many armies that MUST spend more than 5CP pre turn 1 to exist and also are particularly good for the game.

GK spend 4 minimum per turn. And more often then not it is 5. you always use heed and you always use psybolts.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
A fairly simple fix to alter the CP maxing problem would be to bump a Battalion requirements to include at least 1 fast, 1 elite and 1 heavy support choice. If a damn brigade has to take 3 of each of those, a battalion should at least require 1. This would at least make the Loyal 32 add some mortars, a sentinel, etc. It doesn't completely eliminate the problem (some armies have super cheap options in these slots), but it does change the dynamic somewhat and make a detachment look more like a cohesive force.

Then Scions can’t be run in battalions. They don’t have those.

As a former IG player, I would humbly submit that Scions were never meant to be a stand alone army. They are part and parcel to IG. Maybe a sole detachment, but never a sole army.

Well some of us want to run Storm Trooper Strike Forces. I intermittently hear people on Dakka complain how stormtrooper armies can’t be run like they used to.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
A fairly simple fix to alter the CP maxing problem would be to bump a Battalion requirements to include at least 1 fast, 1 elite and 1 heavy support choice. If a damn brigade has to take 3 of each of those, a battalion should at least require 1. This would at least make the Loyal 32 add some mortars, a sentinel, etc. It doesn't completely eliminate the problem (some armies have super cheap options in these slots), but it does change the dynamic somewhat and make a detachment look more like a cohesive force.

Then Scions can’t be run in battalions. They don’t have those.

As a former IG player, I would humbly submit that Scions were never meant to be a stand alone army. They are part and parcel to IG. Maybe a sole detachment, but never a sole army.

The same thing can be said about Grey Knights, Custodes, Inquisition, and probably quite a few other things.

Yeah, they absolutely were intended to be a sole army. It's why they shoehorned in the Commissars everywhere to boot, so that players could run the army without needing a Command Squad+Tempestor Prime.

I think it's insane to even float the idea of trashing entire army lists when points changes can do most of the work.

 Galef wrote:
Personally, I think the best solution for CP generation is the following:

Return Battalions to 3CPs, Brigaded to 9CPs per the start of 8E.
Allow Detahcments that share 2+ Faction keywords (or 1 Keyword that is NOT Imperium, Chaos, Aeldari, etc) with the Army's Warlord to generate double CPs.

Now Battalions that share enough Keyword with you WL give 6CPs, thus encouraging Faction focus without being too detrimental to Soup.
Loyal 32 would still be needed for Knight lists for the bodies and would still grant 3CPs to them, while the Knight detachment (which would have the Army WL) would get double CPs. Although admittedly, this might require the Knights special detachment CPs reworked alongside.

For Soup, this might be a wash, or just slightly less CPs than now, but it would be a big bonus for lists that focus on a single Faction.

-

You know what doesn't give enough CP right now? A guard brigade. Definitely needs at least 1/3 more CP.

Remember folks: Knights get warlord traits without BEING your warlord for 1cp. You do not magically fix the knight+soup problem by limiting detachment CP generation to the warlord's faction.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Karol wrote:

the_scotsman 773741 10410046 wrote:

I mean, I'd say an average army tends to be battleforged, have at least one detachment, and have a warlord, so you'd be starting from 3CP for your pre-game stratagems.

Want more pregame stratagems, bring more detachments? I don't know about you but I haven't seen too many armies that MUST spend more than 5CP pre turn 1 to exist and also are particularly good for the game.

GK spend 4 minimum per turn. And more often then not it is 5. you always use heed and you always use psybolts.

OK. in 2000 points, can you make a Grey Knight army that fills 3 detachments that are not auxiliaries? Because I can. A lot more easily than I can make a GK army that can spend 5CP per turn without allies under the current system.

3 patrols, maybe two patrols and a Vanguard or Outrider if you're using a bunch of interceptors or dreadnoughts/paladins?

Just make IK strats and relic inaccessible in the AUX deatchment. Done. Castellan instantly becomes average.

Martel732 wrote:
Just make IK strats and relic inaccessible in the AUX deatchment. Done. Castellan instantly becomes average.

I strongly suspect in ITC it would still be worth bringing along with a pair of helverins. In regular GW rules, you would probably be right, since the power of quasi-deathstars is decreased already with the lack of old school kill points in the missions.

I'd take my chances. The lvo list would lose its screens or indirect shooting. Raven doesnt do much for helverins unless i misremember.

I don't like having a limited pool of CP, because it makes it even more plug and play. "I have 2 top tier stratagems, I will build to use them every turn I can, the rest might as well be ignored".

I mean arguably we are in that situation already, due to some stratagems being game defining, and others mediocre to the point of being forgotten, but thats not a reason to almost inevitably take them away.

The problem is soup (pls nerf) and having the same detachments for every army. Now this could get gimmicky and overpowered real quick - and the one example of this (DE triple patrol) was DOA - but it could work. There is no reason why say Custodes should only get 5 CP for a batallion while IG can 5 CP for a fraction of the price.

Now every codex is out (some odds and ends remain) it would be relatively easy to look at all the armies holistically and apply some ups and downs. But this is more a chapter approved thing than a FAQ change.

My number 1 FAQ change is a major blow to soup - any of the changes suggested would be good for a try - but I have little hope of it happening.

Martel732 wrote:
Raven doesnt do much for helverins unless i misremember.

You could run and gun with the Warglaives, but Helverins have no use for the trait, really. 340+ points off a Castellan list into Helverins is a decent chunk. I'd be interested in seeing the lists that spring from that change.

I still dont think soup is the culprit as much as access to miscosted models. My ba wouldnt get a huge boost if ig were properly costed.

 Apple Peel wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
A fairly simple fix to alter the CP maxing problem would be to bump a Battalion requirements to include at least 1 fast, 1 elite and 1 heavy support choice. If a damn brigade has to take 3 of each of those, a battalion should at least require 1. This would at least make the Loyal 32 add some mortars, a sentinel, etc. It doesn't completely eliminate the problem (some armies have super cheap options in these slots), but it does change the dynamic somewhat and make a detachment look more like a cohesive force.

Then Scions can’t be run in battalions. They don’t have those.

So don't run a full scions army as a battalion. You can make a Vanguard with command squads legally or take patrols. Sorry, but some armies don't get all they want. I can't play a Ravenwing or Deathwing army as battalions, so woe is me right? If your army is specialist like scions then it's not really a battalion is it? Kind of the same with Custodes....probably shouldn't be fielded as a battalion so go for Outrider etc.

A way around this would be to increase Battle Forged CP to +5, drop battalion back to +3 (requiring 1 fast, elite, heavy) and Brigade +9. Vanguard, Outrider and Spearhead remain +1.

My Ravenwing and Deathwing armies automatically increase in CPs, and would allow armies to field Vanguards etc.

A battalion should require support elements, period.

If it's disparity in detachment costs, then one answer would be for detachments to grant 1CP per 100pts of units in that detachment, capped at their current values. The benefit of cheap troops then becomes lessened as your tax becomes cheaper as opposed to just cheap.

Or make cheap troops less cheap.

Any fix needs to be simple, not convoluted and complicated. Inevitably, someone somewhere will be butt-hurt as it will change their specific army, but if it improves the overall gameplay then it's worth it.
The detachment system currently doesn't work well. It over rewards minimum battalions and cripples specialist, elite forces with minimun to no CP. I still adhere to my point that a battalion should have to have support elements, it can't simply be just 2 HQ and 3 troops. That's barely more than a patrol and yet it yields +5CP. To gain that bonus, you should have to add some real meat to the detachment in support elements. Until that happens, the system is broken.If this applies to a Brigade, how are some of those similar requirements left out for a Battalion? And the truth of the matter is that not all armies can and should be able to field battalions. You just have to find a way to reward more CPs for the other options and I agree with Galef that the base Battle Forged points should be 5, not 3. This would really help the smaller, elite armies (that already suffer in the game) make up some CP without having to ally in a cheap, fake battalion.
And if this seems so ridiculous, then knights need to be stripped of there huge CP bonuses down to 0 for an Auxiliary, and +3CP when you bring at least 3 large knights. Currently, the fact that they get such hugfe CP incentives when other small elite armies get nothing is a slap in the face.

 bullyboy wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
A fairly simple fix to alter the CP maxing problem would be to bump a Battalion requirements to include at least 1 fast, 1 elite and 1 heavy support choice. If a damn brigade has to take 3 of each of those, a battalion should at least require 1. This would at least make the Loyal 32 add some mortars, a sentinel, etc. It doesn't completely eliminate the problem (some armies have super cheap options in these slots), but it does change the dynamic somewhat and make a detachment look more like a cohesive force.

Then Scions can’t be run in battalions. They don’t have those.

So don't run a full scions army as a battalion. You can make a Vanguard with command squads legally or take patrols. Sorry, but some armies don't get all they want. I can't play a Ravenwing or Deathwing army as battalions, so woe is me right? If your army is specialist like scions then it's not really a battalion is it? Kind of the same with Custodes....probably shouldn't be fielded as a battalion so go for Outrider etc.

A way around this would be to increase Battle Forged CP to +5, drop battalion back to +3 (requiring 1 fast, elite, heavy) and Brigade +9. Vanguard, Outrider and Spearhead remain +1.

My Ravenwing and Deathwing armies automatically increase in CPs, and would allow armies to field Vanguards etc.

A battalion should require support elements, period.

Vanguard-2 HQ max.
-3 elite minimum
Therefore Scions can run vanguard, because one command squad per Tempestor Prime.
I’m building a Scion army consisting of two battalions.
Why should some armies that currently can be run fine be ruined because you’re salty that you can’t run a ridiculous amounts of bikes or terminators.

 bullyboy wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
A fairly simple fix to alter the CP maxing problem would be to bump a Battalion requirements to include at least 1 fast, 1 elite and 1 heavy support choice. If a damn brigade has to take 3 of each of those, a battalion should at least require 1. This would at least make the Loyal 32 add some mortars, a sentinel, etc. It doesn't completely eliminate the problem (some armies have super cheap options in these slots), but it does change the dynamic somewhat and make a detachment look more like a cohesive force.

Then Scions can’t be run in battalions. They don’t have those.

So don't run a full scions army as a battalion. You can make a Vanguard with command squads legally or take patrols. Sorry, but some armies don't get all they want. I can't play a Ravenwing or Deathwing army as battalions, so woe is me right? If your army is specialist like scions then it's not really a battalion is it? Kind of the same with Custodes....probably shouldn't be fielded as a battalion so go for Outrider etc.

Are you seriously going to try to say that Scions are a "specialist" army like Deathwing or Ravenwing?

Scions are a Troops choice, not an Elite or Fast Attack.

A way around this would be to increase Battle Forged CP to +5, drop battalion back to +3 (requiring 1 fast, elite, heavy) and Brigade +9. Vanguard, Outrider and Spearhead remain +1.

My Ravenwing and Deathwing armies automatically increase in CPs, and would allow armies to field Vanguards etc.

A battalion should require support elements, period.

An even simpler way is to give these specialist armies traits that increase the CPs generated when fielded in their thematic lists.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
A fairly simple fix to alter the CP maxing problem would be to bump a Battalion requirements to include at least 1 fast, 1 elite and 1 heavy support choice. If a damn brigade has to take 3 of each of those, a battalion should at least require 1. This would at least make the Loyal 32 add some mortars, a sentinel, etc. It doesn't completely eliminate the problem (some armies have super cheap options in these slots), but it does change the dynamic somewhat and make a detachment look more like a cohesive force.

Then Scions can’t be run in battalions. They don’t have those.

As a former IG player, I would humbly submit that Scions were never meant to be a stand alone army. They are part and parcel to IG. Maybe a sole detachment, but never a sole army.

The same thing can be said about Grey Knights, Custodes, Inquisition, and probably quite a few other things.

Yeah, they absolutely were intended to be a sole army. It's why they shoehorned in the Commissars everywhere to boot, so that players could run the army without needing a Command Squad+Tempestor Prime.

The difference between Scions and GK/Knights/Custodes/Inquisition, is that they all have their own Codexes, and Scions are a unit within another unit's codex. When Scions have their OWN Codex, you can say they are a legitimate army/force/faction. Until then, all you have is 3 different models (Tempestor Prime, Scions, and Taurox Prime) and a "Start Collecting" kit. They are a gimmick to sell boxes, not an actual faction.

 bullyboy wrote:
Any fix needs to be simple, not convoluted and complicated. Inevitably, someone somewhere will be butt-hurt as it will change their specific army, but if it improves the overall gameplay then it's worth it.
The detachment system currently doesn't work well. It over rewards minimum battalions and cripples specialist, elite forces with minimun to no CP. I still adhere to my point that a battalion should have to have support elements, it can't simply be just 2 HQ and 3 troops. That's barely more than a patrol and yet it yields +5CP. To gain that bonus, you should have to add some real meat to the detachment in support elements. Until that happens, the system is broken.If this applies to a Brigade, how are some of those similar requirements left out for a Battalion? And the truth of the matter is that not all armies can and should be able to field battalions. You just have to find a way to reward more CPs for the other options and I agree with Galef that the base Battle Forged points should be 5, not 3. This would really help the smaller, elite armies (that already suffer in the game) make up some CP without having to ally in a cheap, fake battalion.
And if this seems so ridiculous, then knights need to be stripped of there huge CP bonuses down to 0 for an Auxiliary, and +3CP when you bring at least 3 large knights. Currently, the fact that they get such hugfe CP incentives when other small elite armies get nothing is a slap in the face.

Lots of Scion armies don’t just take Scions for CP.
We also take Taurox Primes and Valkyries. Those are points heavy. Is that a heavy enough contribution for you? Those are our fast attack and heavy support. Heck, Taurox Primes used to be fast attack options.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
A fairly simple fix to alter the CP maxing problem would be to bump a Battalion requirements to include at least 1 fast, 1 elite and 1 heavy support choice. If a damn brigade has to take 3 of each of those, a battalion should at least require 1. This would at least make the Loyal 32 add some mortars, a sentinel, etc. It doesn't completely eliminate the problem (some armies have super cheap options in these slots), but it does change the dynamic somewhat and make a detachment look more like a cohesive force.

Then Scions can’t be run in battalions. They don’t have those.

As a former IG player, I would humbly submit that Scions were never meant to be a stand alone army. They are part and parcel to IG. Maybe a sole detachment, but never a sole army.

The same thing can be said about Grey Knights, Custodes, Inquisition, and probably quite a few other things.

Yeah, they absolutely were intended to be a sole army. It's why they shoehorned in the Commissars everywhere to boot, so that players could run the army without needing a Command Squad+Tempestor Prime.

The difference between Scions and GK/Knights/Custodes/Inquisition, is that they all have their own Codexes, and Scions are a unit within another unit's codex. When Scions have their OWN Codex, you can say they are a legitimate army/force/faction. Until then, all you have is 3 different models (Tempestor Prime, Scions, and Taurox Prime) and a "Start Collecting" kit. They are a gimmick to sell boxes, not an actual faction.

Cool, so we can dump Grey Knights and Custodes into an Agents of the Imperium book and move on?

Militarum Tempestus had its own Codex. Skitarii had their own Codex, Cult Mechanicus had their own Codex. For whatever reason these armies were bunched together with others rather than fleshed out.

Difference is that Tempestus, while being part of the Guard Codex, is a "legitimate" subfaction within the Guard book. They have 4 different units tied to them(Command Squads, Tempestor Primes, Taurox Prime, and Scions) that allow for them to potentially field a viable force right now.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
A fairly simple fix to alter the CP maxing problem would be to bump a Battalion requirements to include at least 1 fast, 1 elite and 1 heavy support choice. If a damn brigade has to take 3 of each of those, a battalion should at least require 1. This would at least make the Loyal 32 add some mortars, a sentinel, etc. It doesn't completely eliminate the problem (some armies have super cheap options in these slots), but it does change the dynamic somewhat and make a detachment look more like a cohesive force.

Then Scions can’t be run in battalions. They don’t have those.

As a former IG player, I would humbly submit that Scions were never meant to be a stand alone army. They are part and parcel to IG. Maybe a sole detachment, but never a sole army.

The same thing can be said about Grey Knights, Custodes, Inquisition, and probably quite a few other things.

Yeah, they absolutely were intended to be a sole army. It's why they shoehorned in the Commissars everywhere to boot, so that players could run the army without needing a Command Squad+Tempestor Prime.

The difference between Scions and GK/Knights/Custodes/Inquisition, is that they all have their own Codexes, and Scions are a unit within another unit's codex. When Scions have their OWN Codex, you can say they are a legitimate army/force/faction. Until then, all you have is 3 different models (Tempestor Prime, Scions, and Taurox Prime) and a "Start Collecting" kit. They are a gimmick to sell boxes, not an actual faction.

They had their own codex. Just like Black Templars. Are Balck Templars not a faction? They are a sub faction, as are Scions. And, sub factions can make armies.

 Apple Peel wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
A fairly simple fix to alter the CP maxing problem would be to bump a Battalion requirements to include at least 1 fast, 1 elite and 1 heavy support choice. If a damn brigade has to take 3 of each of those, a battalion should at least require 1. This would at least make the Loyal 32 add some mortars, a sentinel, etc. It doesn't completely eliminate the problem (some armies have super cheap options in these slots), but it does change the dynamic somewhat and make a detachment look more like a cohesive force.

Then Scions can’t be run in battalions. They don’t have those.

As a former IG player, I would humbly submit that Scions were never meant to be a stand alone army. They are part and parcel to IG. Maybe a sole detachment, but never a sole army.

The same thing can be said about Grey Knights, Custodes, Inquisition, and probably quite a few other things.

Yeah, they absolutely were intended to be a sole army. It's why they shoehorned in the Commissars everywhere to boot, so that players could run the army without needing a Command Squad+Tempestor Prime.

The difference between Scions and GK/Knights/Custodes/Inquisition, is that they all have their own Codexes, and Scions are a unit within another unit's codex. When Scions have their OWN Codex, you can say they are a legitimate army/force/faction. Until then, all you have is 3 different models (Tempestor Prime, Scions, and Taurox Prime) and a "Start Collecting" kit. They are a gimmick to sell boxes, not an actual faction.

They had their own codex. Just like Black Templars. Are Balck Templars not a faction? They are a sub faction, as are Scions. And, sub factions can make armies.

So it;'s possible to run a brigade of Scions? Because you sure can for Templars, Word Bearers, and every other "sub faction". I'm not shifting the goal posts here either. The original point was my assertion that Scions were never meant to be a pure army. Because you can't take ten squads of Scions, a couple Taurox primes, and run matches. I say again, based off the way GW wrote their rules, my opinion is that GW NEVER intended Scions to be a stand alone army.

Now, as to the "back in my day" argument, who cares? What does that have to do with the point? Super heavies never used to be allowed in none apoc games. That doesn't mean anything to now. The rules now are the only rules that matter now.

Sorry, but scions are elite units of the Imperium, they're better than basic troops. The fact that they occupy a troops slot doesn't change that fact. They should have been an Elites choice and maybe that change needs to happen.

It doesn't change the way I feel the CP detachment bonus should change. Perhaps there are some armies that need an addendum that could be addressed in a WD (Index Scion Strikeforce for example) that would give them an opportunity to field lone armies without too much of a hamstring. As it stands, I don't see why you should be rewarded with +10CP by bringing 2 battalions when it's just a few Troops choices. Not when other armies that are just as thematic but can barely bring +2CP.
Change Scions to Elite choices, I don't care, the system needs change. Or you could just take Astra Militarum options in your list to make up for those slots. Not much different to me hearing how I should just take scouts in my Ravenwing force.

I still stand by a battalion requiring one each of the elites, fast and heavy options.

 bullyboy wrote:
Sorry, but scions are elite units of the Imperium, they're better than basic troops. The fact that they occupy a troops slot doesn't change that fact. They should have been an Elites choice and maybe that change needs to happen.

It doesn't change the way I feel the CP detachment bonus should change. Perhaps there are some armies that need an addendum that could be addressed in a WD (Index Scion Strikeforce for example) that would give them an opportunity to field lone armies without too much of a hamstring. As it stands, I don't see why you should be rewarded with +10CP by bringing 2 battalions when it's just a few Troops choices. Not when other armies that are just as thematic but can barely bring +2CP.
Change Scions to Elite choices, I don't care, the system needs change. Or you could just take Astra Militarum options in your list to make up for those slots. Not much different to me hearing how I should just take scouts in my Ravenwing force.

I still stand by a battalion requiring one each of the elites, fast and heavy options.

I agree, this is a good idea.

 bullyboy wrote:
I still stand by a battalion requiring one each of the elites, fast and heavy options.

I still hold that it's probably a bad idea to make Battalions functionally unavailable to some armies below a certain points limit, esp. when they're the armies that probably need the most help.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

So it;'s possible to run a brigade of Scions? Because you sure can for Templars, Word Bearers, and every other "sub faction". I'm not shifting the goal posts here either.

Ehhh...the bit about "brigades" is a bit of a sticky situation.

You can't run "brigades" of Haemonculi Coven, Wych Cults, or Cult Mechanicus or Skitarii. You can't run "brigades" of Imperial/Renegade Knights.

The original point was my assertion that Scions were never meant to be a pure army. Because you can't take ten squads of Scions, a couple Taurox primes, and run matches. I say again, based off the way GW wrote their rules, my opinion is that GW NEVER intended Scions to be a stand alone army.

Except for where their Regimental rule literally requires them to be ran as a standalone army, right?

Now, as to the "back in my day" argument, who cares? What does that have to do with the point? Super heavies never used to be allowed in none apoc games. That doesn't mean anything to now. The rules now are the only rules that matter now.

We're not talking about 3rd edition or anything here. It was the last iteration of the game.

 bullyboy wrote:
Any fix needs to be simple, not convoluted and complicated. Inevitably, someone somewhere will be butt-hurt as it will change their specific army, but if it improves the overall gameplay then it's worth it.
The detachment system currently doesn't work well. It over rewards minimum battalions and cripples specialist, elite forces with minimun to no CP. I still adhere to my point that a battalion should have to have support elements, it can't simply be just 2 HQ and 3 troops. That's barely more than a patrol and yet it yields +5CP. To gain that bonus, you should have to add some real meat to the detachment in support elements. Until that happens, the system is broken.If this applies to a Brigade, how are some of those similar requirements left out for a Battalion? And the truth of the matter is that not all armies can and should be able to field battalions. You just have to find a way to reward more CPs for the other options and I agree with Galef that the base Battle Forged points should be 5, not 3. This would really help the smaller, elite armies (that already suffer in the game) make up some CP without having to ally in a cheap, fake battalion.
And if this seems so ridiculous, then knights need to be stripped of there huge CP bonuses down to 0 for an Auxiliary, and +3CP when you bring at least 3 large knights. Currently, the fact that they get such hugfe CP incentives when other small elite armies get nothing is a slap in the face.

I think it is one of the universal inconvenient truths of the modern era that "simpler does not equal better" when it comes to solutions.

You are calling out the current problem of

"Armies with cheap troops and HQs are too easily able to use cheap battalions to feed CP to elite souped allies, while elite armies' battalions cost more because the minimum cost of their HQs and Troops is higher."

and advocating a solution of

"Require everyone to take 1 Fast, 1 Elite, and 1 Heavy Support to make a Battalion."

Do you not see how this exacerbates, rather than solves, the problem? A current minimum Guard battalion is 180pts. A current minimum Marine battalion is somewhere in the realm of 245 I think?

This is enough to make marine battalions less efficient in competititve play.

You are now advocating to make that guard battalion around 300 points, and that marine battalion upwards of 550. in other words, widening the gap, and making battalions from the "we've got cheap stuff" armies MORE vital to the function of competitive armies.

It's a simple fix (well, it is until you go "And for knights we'll do this different thing! And for Battleforged we'll do this other thing!") but it's...quite frankly, so simple that it doesn't actually fix anything.

It's like the "let's make detachments with your warlord's faction double the CP" suggestion - threads like this make me honestly pretty appreciative that we don't make writing the rules for 40k into some sort of crowdsourced living ruleset.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
A fairly simple fix to alter the CP maxing problem would be to bump a Battalion requirements to include at least 1 fast, 1 elite and 1 heavy support choice. If a damn brigade has to take 3 of each of those, a battalion should at least require 1. This would at least make the Loyal 32 add some mortars, a sentinel, etc. It doesn't completely eliminate the problem (some armies have super cheap options in these slots), but it does change the dynamic somewhat and make a detachment look more like a cohesive force.

Then Scions can’t be run in battalions. They don’t have those.

As a former IG player, I would humbly submit that Scions were never meant to be a stand alone army. They are part and parcel to IG. Maybe a sole detachment, but never a sole army.

That might be how you feel, but they were always treated as a stand-alone army due to having a separate codex prior to being rolled into AM at the dawn of 8th.

 bullyboy wrote:
Sorry, but scions are elite units of the Imperium, they're better than basic troops. The fact that they occupy a troops slot doesn't change that fact. They should have been an Elites choice and maybe that change needs to happen.

It doesn't change the way I feel the CP detachment bonus should change. Perhaps there are some armies that need an addendum that could be addressed in a WD (Index Scion Strikeforce for example) that would give them an opportunity to field lone armies without too much of a hamstring. As it stands, I don't see why you should be rewarded with +10CP by bringing 2 battalions when it's just a few Troops choices. Not when other armies that are just as thematic but can barely bring +2CP.
Change Scions to Elite choices, I don't care, the system needs change. Or you could just take Astra Militarum options in your list to make up for those slots. Not much different to me hearing how I should just take scouts in my Ravenwing force.

I still stand by a battalion requiring one each of the elites, fast and heavy options.

Sorry, but the SOB are just the elite guardians of the Imperium. They should just be an elite option.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, it’s troops, elites, transports, and flyers. Plus

the_scotsman wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
Sorry, but scions are elite units of the Imperium, they're better than basic troops. The fact that they occupy a troops slot doesn't change that fact. They should have been an Elites choice and maybe that change needs to happen.

It doesn't change the way I feel the CP detachment bonus should change. Perhaps there are some armies that need an addendum that could be addressed in a WD (Index Scion Strikeforce for example) that would give them an opportunity to field lone armies without too much of a hamstring. As it stands, I don't see why you should be rewarded with +10CP by bringing 2 battalions when it's just a few Troops choices. Not when other armies that are just as thematic but can barely bring +2CP.
Change Scions to Elite choices, I don't care, the system needs change. Or you could just take Astra Militarum options in your list to make up for those slots. Not much different to me hearing how I should just take scouts in my Ravenwing force.

I still stand by a battalion requiring one each of the elites, fast and heavy options.

Sorry, but the SOB are just the elite guardians of the Imperium. They should just be an elite option.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, it’s troops, elites, transports, and flyers. Plus

Um, ACTUALLY, space marines are the elite guardians of the imperium, so they should be elites.

Well HOLD ON, Primaris marines are the elite guardians of the imperium, so they should be elites.

Uh, EXCUSE ME, but Grey Knights are the elite guardians of the imperium, so they should be elites.

Oh, I'M SORRY, but Custodes are the elite guardians of the imperium, so they should be elites.

Checkmate, Atheists.