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.

Hi guys, Ive been thinking about how the new army design rules seem to basically allow for almost the equivalent of last editions unbound system, and was thinking about how if this resulted in 8th edition spam fest, how this could be avoided while not making it impossible for anyone to play an army theme that they think is particularly cool.

Slightly inspired by highlander events, but without a fully enforced rule of one My proposal would be for a 'spam tax'.

The simple concept would be that if your army includes more than one of a unit, then those units increase in price (after upgrades) by 10% per unit after the first.

For example a 100 point unit is taken 3 times, these three units are increased in cost by 20% making the total for these three units 360 pts.

Obviously this is just a basic idea at present, so the cost of the tax and if any units should be exempt from this (Im guessing troops and dedicated transports), but I think it could be a cool idea for encouraging diverse army builds, while not making it impossible for die hard fans of certain units to field them in the quantities that they want.

What are your thoughts?

I think it's better to let people play what they want to play without punishing them for it, especially in tournament settings.

Some armies have to "spam" to even exist (harlequins, DA Termies, etc) and this edition feels like it is likely to be the least spammy one yet since most units are good and playable.

I'd give the new edition a good 6 months or so to level out meta wise before messing with rules and restrictions.

I agree, that its too early to start saying that anything is broken. But the rules definitely do as written allow for massive spamming of that broken thing once it is discovered.

And as said, there should probably be exceptions (if for example an army doesn't have a troops unit) / tweaking if 10% is too much.

It's a bit early for highlander shenanigans as it can cut out some former armies turned mini. A custodes army has to spam compared to others.

I don't think this is particularly an issue as you give up things like command points if you want to go this way. Furthermore, GW has said (and we'll see how this goes) that they will be updating points if things are broken. SO far I think that there are far more viable options than in the past and that specific weapons and units are better at some things than others. So it seems unlikely that super spam will be an issue.

Spam is not a bad thing.

Don't fix something that isn't a problem.

Plus, you'd be punishing Guard players for taking their basic troop choice.

Horrible idea