Do you expect your opponent to follow the rule of 3?

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.

**Crimson**

Klickor wrote:
Im for RO3 to stop cheap broken units to take over. Most FW stuff that I see that is worth taking is quite expensive so dont see the different datasheets as a problem. Points is more of a limit there. At least for marine armies. Having more dreadnoughts in a list than 3 should only make your opponent happy. The most powerful stuff are relic options on top of that to even more limit the possibility to spam them. Dont think you would want 4 leviathan dreadnoughts even if you could since you would need 8 heavy support choices + HQs. Would have to be 2 spearhead detachments with 5 total cp and a really crappy list at 2000pts if you could even fit that in less than 2k pts

So you're basically saying that Ro3 is not needed.

**Ice_can**

Klickor wrote:
Im for RO3 to stop cheap broken units to take over. Most FW stuff that I see that is worth taking is quite expensive so dont see the different datasheets as a problem. Points is more of a limit there. At least for marine armies. Having more dreadnoughts in a list than 3 should only make your opponent happy. The most powerful stuff are relic options on top of that to even more limit the possibility to spam them. Dont think you would want 4 leviathan dreadnoughts even if you could since you would need 8 heavy support choices + HQs. Would have to be 2 spearhead detachments with 5 total cp and a really crappy list at 2000pts if you could even fit that in less than 2k pts

Are there any units that the extra FW datasheets allows to become a problem?

If someone wants to field 3+3 predators I wouldnt mind. Probably a much more interesting game than pure knights. You can already have 6 as a BA player without FW and I dont see anyone even playing 1.

Not really, outside of Custodes and the odd GW CA mistake with FW hellhounds most meta lists have esentially been bypassing FW all together for codex options, the exception that comes to mind is the wierd purge(IRCC) dreadnaught list that IMHO is more of a purge trait issue as before vigilous that list was nowhere.

What has been way more toxic is Alitoc Flyer spam, doom+haywire spam, 32 douchebags.

**Klickor**

No. RO3 is needed to stop the "undercosted" units that dont have dimishing returns on fielding them. Which means that it mostly just applies to units costing 100pts or so and less. Those more expensive than that usually have other limiting factors to them.

Except some very good self reliant HQs in factions with cheap troops like Tank Commanders in guard armies.

RO3 isnt there just to stop spamming datasheets. Its there to be a safe guard against having units break the game. Mortars are an undercosted unit but since you can only take 99pts of them it doesnt really matter. But if I could take 560pts of them in a 1500pts list its a huge problem and would warp the entire game. Having lists of purely tank Commanders, troops and mortars wouldnt be good for the game. Having 3 tank Commanders + 9LRBT like you can now might be a bit boring to play but it isnt gonna warp the whole meta and it would be crushed by some lists since it wont be better than a knights list

Edit: You could remove the rule of 3 for units that cost 200pts or more I think and it probably wouldnt change much. Make some more fun builds "legal" but you probably wouldnt take that to a Tournament and I dont see your opponent not allowing that in a casual game if asked so not really a problem. Cant fit too many of them in a 1500-2000pts list anyway. But for sub 100pts units it must be there.

**FezzikDaBullgryn**

I'm fairly sure I remember GW coming out and saying they watched a bunch of tournaments, where people where spamming units that were never intended to be spammed, ala Daemon Princes, Tau HQs, etc. It had not that much to do with cost, and more to do with the balance of spamming units that were intended to be 1-3 at most.

No one ever expected to see 6 Tau HQ suits, or 8 Daemon princes.

**Ice_can**

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'm fairly sure I remember GW coming out and saying they watched a bunch of tournaments, where people where spamming units that were never intended to be spammed, ala Daemon Princes, Tau HQs, etc. It had not that much to do with cost, and more to do with the balance of spamming units that were intended to be 1-3 at most.

No one ever expected to see 6 Tau HQ suits, or 8 Daemon princes.

Evey Tau player did when they looked at the index crisis suits costs and stats.

And Ironically they are still being punished by GW's 1 keyword per detachment rule unlike RO3. Which IRCC was their answe to an even with an avarage of 3 hivetyrents in every nid list and one which was 6 of the exact same model deepstriking in and going ham on the opponent with zero interaction from their opponents.

**Klickor**

If those spammed units were more expensive they probably wouldnt have been spammed since you would lose something else. Or if they werent HQs. If you have good and relatively cheap HQs for what they do you can spam them due to how detachment works. They are what allow you to take other units so there isnt really an opportunity cost in taking them in batallions or even supreme command detachments.

Elites, fast attack and heavy support are a bit more limited when you are buying more expensive units since you will still need HQs and troops too.

**Jidmah**

Klickor wrote:
If those spammed units were more expensive they probably wouldnt have been spammed since you would lose something else. Or if they werent HQs. If you have good and relatively cheap HQs for what they do you can spam them due to how detachment works. They are what allow you to take other units so there isnt really an opportunity cost in taking them in batallions or even supreme command detachments.

Elites, fast attack and heavy support are a bit more limited when you are buying more expensive units since you will still need HQs and troops too.

Without the Ro3 a single HQ is enough to add six of any unit you like.

The one store here which doesn't use Ro3 for their game nights is struggling with a Foetid Bloat-Drone meta, as they are cheap to buy ($$$) most people run at least six of them. The entire meta is basically measuring units in drones killed per turn.

Foetid Bloat-Drones are fast attack choices at 158 points and see next to no play in any other format. Any unit that has a synergy effect with itself (most commonly target saturation) will get better when spammed.

**Klickor**

Perfect example of a rather cheap unit that just gets better the more of it you have.

Most units more expensive than that are usually not as durable and thus not that good if spammed too much since you will have glaring weaknesses. But ++ save and fnp removes that weakness.

**Kanluwen**

Klickor wrote:
If those spammed units were more expensive they probably wouldnt have been spammed since you would lose something else. Or if they werent HQs. If you have good and relatively cheap HQs for what they do you can spam them due to how detachment works. They are what allow you to take other units so there isnt really an opportunity cost in taking them in batallions or even supreme command detachments.

Not even remotely relevant to the Tau Commander situation. Crisis Suits at the start of 8th saw two specific issues that made 'Commander Spam' a thing:
High points costs on weapons and the Suits themselves
and
Removal of scalable sizes(they required a unit that traditionally was 1-3 minimum to suddenly become 3 minimum)

Elites, fast attack and heavy support are a bit more limited when you are buying more expensive units since you will still need HQs and troops too.

Suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure they are.

**Blndmage**

Klickor wrote:

Elites, fast attack and heavy support are a bit more limited when you are buying more expensive units since you will still need HQs and troops too.

Not if you run Vanguards, Outriders, or Spearheads.
No troops required, 1 HQ per detachment.

**FezzikDaBullgryn**

Honest suggestion: Want feed back: If I were to tie this "rule" to battle-forged status, would anyone mind? Like, if you violate this you can still play your army, however that detachment generates zero CP and you cannot spend any CP on that detachment?

**Not Online!!!**

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Honest suggestion: Want feed back: If I were to tie this "rule" to battle-forged status, would anyone mind? Like, if you violate this you can still play your army, however that detachment generates zero CP and you cannot spend any CP on that detachment?

Spend is questionable, generate is ok imo, however what do you do when the unit is split over more then one detachment?

**Ice_can**

Not Online!!! wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Honest suggestion: Want feed back: If I were to tie this "rule" to battle-forged status, would anyone mind? Like, if you violate this you can still play your army, however that detachment generates zero CP and you cannot spend any CP on that detachment?

Spend is questionable, generate is ok imo, however what do you do when the unit is split over more then one detachment?

You have to do spend otherwise we end up with the same alied soup problem of 2 battalions of cheapest cheapness and the other 1640 points of utter spam tastic nonsence.

**Not Online!!!**

Ice_can wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Honest suggestion: Want feed back: If I were to tie this "rule" to battle-forged status, would anyone mind? Like, if you violate this you can still play your army, however that detachment generates zero CP and you cannot spend any CP on that detachment?

Spend is questionable, generate is ok imo, however what do you do when the unit is split over more then one detachment?

You have to do spend otherwise we end up with the same alied soup problem of 2 battalions of cheapest cheapness and the other 1640 points of utter spam tastic nonsence.

Also true, yet i'd say you just would get oldschool overly cheap unit spam back that way.

And then we are back at square 1

**Kanluwen**

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Honest suggestion: Want feed back: If I were to tie this "rule" to battle-forged status, would anyone mind? Like, if you violate this you can still play your army, however that detachment generates zero CP and you cannot spend any CP on that detachment?

Honest feedback?

This is as bad, if not worse, than "Rule of 3". It continues to favor the nonsense that is actually the problem rather than addressing the supposed 'issue' of unit spam.

**Ishagu**

Prior to RO3 the local DE players were spamming Razorwings... So many Razorwings.

Now they have way more interesting lists and everyone is having more fun.

Just one example...

**Not Online!!!**

Ishagu wrote:
Prior to RO3 the local DE players were spamming Razorwings... So many Razorwings.

Now they have way more interesting lists and everyone is having more fun.

Just one example...

Personal confirmation is not relevant.

**Stux**

Not Online!!! wrote:
Ishagu wrote:
Prior to RO3 the local DE players were spamming Razorwings... So many Razorwings.

Now they have way more interesting lists and everyone is having more fun.

Just one example...

Personal confirmation is not relevant.

Of course it is, it's the whole point of having a poll.

It's a data point.

**ccs**

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
But don't play Custodes and demand they cost 17ppm, and you should be able to field squadrons of Telemons.

Can you play Telemons in 40k?

**Ishagu**

ccs wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
But don't play Custodes and demand they cost 17ppm, and you should be able to field squadrons of Telemons.

Can you play Telemons in 40k?

Heck yeah. Go to FW and download the official rules. They are awesome.

**Kanluwen**

Ishagu wrote:
Prior to RO3 the local DE players were spamming Razorwings... So many Razorwings.

Now they have way more interesting lists and everyone is having more fun.

Just one example...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Razorwings don't have a requirement of a Beastmaster to be taken--correct?

Cause it seems like there's a pretty simple solution right there.

**Andykp**

Not read whole discussion but I voted no because it isn’t a rule.

**Jidmah**

Klickor wrote:
Perfect example of a rather cheap unit that just gets better the more of it you have.

Most units more expensive than that are usually not as durable and thus not that good if spammed too much since you will have glaring weaknesses. But ++ save and fnp removes that weakness.

The drone isn't that cheap compared to other options chaos soup can have. Pretty much everything in the Death Guard codex has a ++ save and FNP, including PBC, Mortarion, Blightlord and Deathshroud Terminators, Blighthaulers, LoC, Typhus...
You could have the exact same effect without spamming drones, yet people still spam them.

It pretty much contradicts everything you have claimed about units that are easily spammed.

**Crispy78**

Kanluwen wrote:
Ishagu wrote:
Prior to RO3 the local DE players were spamming Razorwings... So many Razorwings.

Now they have way more interesting lists and everyone is having more fun.

Just one example...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Razorwings don't have a requirement of a Beastmaster to be taken--correct?

Cause it seems like there's a pretty simple solution right there.

I'd guess the jets rather than the birds.

Then you just play 3 razorwings, 3 voidravens and 3 ravagers, right?

**Agamemnon2**

I don't really care that much what my opponent runs, since I tend to lose every single game anyway, so the difference between losing to a nice flavorful force and some tournament-breaking metagame BS is vanishingly small for me.

**Jidmah**

Something I just realized about the squadron-argument regarding LRBT spam...

Without the rule of 3, wouldn't you just run 9 tank commanders rather than bothering with regular russes?

**Klickor**

Jidmah wrote:
Klickor wrote:
Perfect example of a rather cheap unit that just gets better the more of it you have.

Most units more expensive than that are usually not as durable and thus not that good if spammed too much since you will have glaring weaknesses. But ++ save and fnp removes that weakness.

The drone isn't that cheap compared to other options chaos soup can have. Pretty much everything in the Death Guard codex has a ++ save and FNP, including PBC, Mortarion, Blightlord and Deathshroud Terminators, Blighthaulers, LoC, Typhus...
You could have the exact same effect without spamming drones, yet people still spam them.

It pretty much contradicts everything you have claimed about units that are easily spammed.[/

Have I? Sure if you take any single thing I have said without context it might look like I'm contradicting myself but that is just trying to strawman me. I have said that most of the spammed units are relatively cheap and dont have much of diminishing returns. Smash captains are a cheap unit capable of killing a knight in a single turn. But you dont want more than 3 of them anyway since you dont have enough good targets for them nor the CP to make the most out of them. A whole unit for 150ish points is quite cheap or a Tank Commander for the same points. Especially when you factor in what you get for the points.

The drones arent really that broken but they dont really get worse the more of them you have since they overload your opponents capability to take them out and are quite resilient against anything an opponent could throw at them. And they are quite mobile and enough attacks to threaten anything. They don't need CP or other supporting elements either so if 3 units are good then 9 units might actually be more than 3x as good as having 3. Sure other units could be even worse if taken in large numbers but it can still be a problem. Some list can still spam a "theme" like chaos with ++/+++ saves and be boring to play against with or without RO3. Not saying that isnt possible and I didnt mean to say that spamming drones is broken or so just that it can show the problem of spamming certain units. Its a unit that doesnt become worse the more you have of it and it shows that having RO3 in that case might be healthy for the game.

HQs are the easiest to exploit since you have 0 additional cost for them in your list. Depends a bit on what army you are playing but even if you soup in a detachment of "broken" Elite/Fast/Heavy units you still need to pay some points for a HQ that might do nothing. That would add some extra cost to your list. Not by much but it might be enough to make it an auto include. Especially if you want to have some units to help with scoring and CP you would still need probably 4+ HQs in your list for 2 battalions. If you have to buy 4 crappy HQs to spam those units it doesnt look that good suddenly but if you would want those anyway like if they were Tank Commanders, Hive Tyrants, Crisis suits and you also have some cheap troops then it isnt punishing at all.

If I want to spam Heavy support units in a space marine army and have some CP I would need to spend 500+ pts on 4 techmarines and 30 scouts outside of the tanks. If doing the same with guard I only need to pay 240pts for 6x10 guardsmen since I want the Tank Commanders anyway and have 250pts more than the marine army to spam that unit. The tank commanders dont even need any extra buffs since they bring their own it is even better than the marine army since they would probably need to pay even more points in HQs for at least a captain and a lieutenant to buff their spammed unit.

Very niche units like melta veterans(guard or marine) cant really be broken without RO3 since they do not get better the more of them you have since they need both support and good targets to be viable.

Cheap units like mortars that are cheaper than a marine while having more shots than a marine at twice the range of a marine while being about as tough point per point on the other hand can also be completely broken if spammed. Since they are so cheap and can even wound tough targets you dont really lose effectiveness the more you have. 180ish mortar shots a turn is gonna massacre anything that isnt t8 or 2+ and for that you can have the other 1400pts of your list tailored to kill.

Cheap or cheapish, sub 200pts isnt even 10% of a 2000pts list, units are most often the problem since other factors like points, CP, HQ/Troop tax and a few other things make it hard to just spam the more expensive units with our without RO3. And FW units usually falls in to that group. Only thing I can think of that doesnt is the Custodes vehicles but they only have beta rules so far and they will probably be nerfed a bit. And their problem isnt the amount of datasheets but just being very undercosted, especially the grav tank.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Jidmah wrote:
Something I just realized about the squadron-argument regarding LRBT spam...

Without the rule of 3, wouldn't you just run 9 tank commanders rather than bothering with regular russes?

You would. Since they are good units. Regular LRBT isnt really good enough to play 6-9 of with 3 tank commanders. They have too many weaknesses for their cost. That is why the meta isnt LRBT spam despite working around RO3. Its not just about being able to spam a certain unit, it must be good enough to be taken in the first place. If it isnt good enough to take 3 of it would most likely not be better with 4+ of them. But if a unit is good enough to take 3 off without too much trade off it is quite likely good with 4+ too. And risks being more and more broken the more off it you can take.

**Jidmah**

Klickor wrote:
Have I? Sure if you take any single thing I have said without context it might look like I'm contradicting myself but that is just trying to strawman me. I have said that most of the spammed units are relatively cheap and dont have much of diminishing returns. Smash captains are a cheap unit capable of killing a knight in a single turn. But you dont want more than 3 of them anyway since you dont have enough good targets for them nor the CP to make the most out of them. A whole unit for 150ish points is quite cheap or a Tank Commander for the same points. Especially when you factor in what you get for the points.

The drones arent really that broken but they dont really get worse the more of them you have since they overload your opponents capability to take them out and are quite resilient against anything an opponent could throw at them. And they are quite mobile and enough attacks to threaten anything. They don't need CP or other supporting elements either so if 3 units are good then 9 units might actually be more than 3x as good as having 3. Sure other units could be even worse if taken in large numbers but it can still be a problem. Some list can still spam a "theme" like chaos with ++/+++ saves and be boring to play against with or without RO3. Not saying that isnt possible and I didnt mean to say that spamming drones is broken or so just that it can show the problem of spamming certain units. Its a unit that doesnt become worse the more you have of it and it shows that having RO3 in that case might be healthy for the game.

HQs are the easiest to exploit since you have 0 additional cost for them in your list. Depends a bit on what army you are playing but even if you soup in a detachment of "broken" Elite/Fast/Heavy units you still need to pay some points for a HQ that might do nothing. That would add some extra cost to your list. Not by much but it might be enough to make it an auto include. Especially if you want to have some units to help with scoring and CP you would still need probably 4+ HQs in your list for 2 battalions. If you have to buy 4 crappy HQs to spam those units it doesnt look that good suddenly but if you would want those anyway like if they were Tank Commanders, Hive Tyrants, Crisis suits and you also have some cheap troops then it isnt punishing at all.

If I want to spam Heavy support units in a space marine army and have some CP I would need to spend 500+ pts on 4 techmarines and 30 scouts outside of the tanks. If doing the same with guard I only need to pay 240pts for 6x10 guardsmen since I want the Tank Commanders anyway and have 250pts more than the marine army to spam that unit. The tank commanders dont even need any extra buffs since they bring their own it is even better than the marine army since they would probably need to pay even more points in HQs for at least a captain and a lieutenant to buff their spammed unit.

Very niche units like melta veterans(guard or marine) cant really be broken without RO3 since they do not get better the more of them you have since they need both support and good targets to be viable.

Cheap units like mortars that are cheaper than a marine while having more shots than a marine at twice the range of a marine while being about as tough point per point on the other hand can also be completely broken if spammed. Since they are so cheap and can even wound tough targets you dont really lose effectiveness the more you have. 180ish mortar shots a turn is gonna massacre anything that isnt t8 or 2+ and for that you can have the other 1400pts of your list tailored to kill.

Cheap or cheapish, sub 200pts isnt even 10% of a 2000pts list, units are most often the problem since other factors like points, CP, HQ/Troop tax and a few other things make it hard to just spam the more expensive units with our without RO3. And FW units usually falls in to that group. Only thing I can think of that doesnt is the Custodes vehicles but they only have beta rules so far and they will probably be nerfed a bit. And their problem isnt the amount of datasheets but just being very undercosted, especially the grav tank.

I can agree with that. Thanks for that well-written response

Jidmah wrote:
Something I just realized about the squadron-argument regarding LRBT spam...

Without the rule of 3, wouldn't you just run 9 tank commanders rather than bothering with regular russes?

You would. Since they are good units. Regular LRBT isnt really good enough to play 6-9 of with 3 tank commanders. They have too many weaknesses for their cost. That is why the meta isnt LRBT spam despite working around RO3. Its not just about being able to spam a certain unit, it must be good enough to be taken in the first place. If it isnt good enough to take 3 of it would most likely not be better with 4+ of them. But if a unit is good enough to take 3 off without too much trade off it is quite likely good with 4+ too. And risks being more and more broken the more off it you can take.

That's what I thought. So one of the most common arguments against using Ro3 is actually one for using it.

**Klickor**

RO3 isn't there to just stop unit spam because it's boring. Still plenty of boring builds and it is more of a side benefit that it forces lists to be a bit more varied. It is mostly there as a safeguard for the most broken units. With it in play no single unit can suddenly take over the game from nowhere. Since it will probably not be more than 30% of a list. Gives them more time to decide if they need to do more changes to it in a FAQ/CA.

Since AM vehicle squadrons are not broken and they probably knew that when they made the RO3 rule they didn't care to limit them. Its an exception but as long as it doesnt go against what RO3 intended it doesnt really matter. Most units in the game would work fine even without a cap but its there to limit those that arent fine without it without having to do constant balancing and changes every time someone notice a broken build or having to go over every unit in every book and assign them an individual unit cap.

After all the game used to have much harder restrictions than just 3 of the same datasheet. You had a max of 3 Heavy Support units in total so it didnt need a cap in the same way. But now it is possible to have 18 units in the same slot so some cap is obviously needed. This also allows them to design units they want to see more of and let them be a bit undercosted to make sure they show up more in lists without them breaking the game if taken to many of. Like HWS in AM. They might actually want to see them taken a lot since they are so cheap to give the army a certain identity but without RO3 its hard to make them both attractive and not broken in large numbers. Probably part of what forced them to implement the rule in the first place. They wanted players to take certain units but didnt take into account that people would take so many of them.

**p5freak**

Klickor wrote:

Since AM vehicle squadrons are not broken and they probably knew that when they made the RO3 rule they didn't care to limit them.

Tell that to the horde player who faces 9 hellhounds