Switch Theme:

Force Org Restrictions  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Journeyman Inquisitor with Visions of the Warp






Dimmamar

Two ideas, let me know how they look and what potential problems they could raise.

ONE
Spoiler:

In matched play, if you have any Troops choices, you may only have n+1 HQ choices compared to Troops choices. For example, if you have 4 Troops, you may have a maximum of 5 HQs.


TWO
Spoiler:

In matched play, you may not take more CHARACTER units than you have other units.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/03 20:49:27


LVO 2017 - Best GK Player

The Grimdark Future 8500 1000 1500 3500

The Whimsical Alternate-Past

Elric Greywolf's Attempt to Make the 40k World a Better Place 
   
Made in us
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle




In My Lab

Option 1 makes the Spearhead, Vanguard, and Outrider detachments literally useless. Want to run Deathwing/Ravenwing? Too bad. Want to run Sisters of Silence, led by an Inquisitor? Too bad. Want to run tanks, tanks, and nothing but tanks? Too bad.

Option 2 I don't like, and don't see as necessary with the new Beta rules. But it doesn't immediately jump out at me as broken.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in au
Preparing the Invasion of Terra






Brisbane, Australia

Pre-beta rules I would have said 2 (hell, I implemented the same rule in a tournament I ran). It isn't perfect and Character spam is still a thing with it, but it decreases the abuse a bit.

The beta rule fixes the problem with Character spam much better.

Multiple thin coats are always better than one thick coat.
 
   
Made in us
Journeyman Inquisitor with Visions of the Warp






Dimmamar

Alright what about the update to #1? IF you have Troops, then the restriction applies. You can evade it by taking 0 troops.

And why will the beta Character targeting make Character spam less frequent?

LVO 2017 - Best GK Player

The Grimdark Future 8500 1000 1500 3500

The Whimsical Alternate-Past

Elric Greywolf's Attempt to Make the 40k World a Better Place 
   
Made in us
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle




In My Lab

 Elric Greywolf wrote:
Alright what about the update to #1? IF you have Troops, then the restriction applies. You can evade it by taking 0 troops.

And why will the beta Character targeting make Character spam less frequent?


Still awful.

It makes it so characters of less than 10 wounds cannot block for other characters.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in us
Huge Hierodule






If you want a more restrictive force org chart just use the HH ones. They are awesome. I wish 8th used them with Rites of War instead of this totally open madness.

   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Elric Greywolf wrote:
Alright what about the update to #1? IF you have Troops, then the restriction applies. You can evade it by taking 0 troops.


Eh. Still not a fan. Most of the time, this change wouldn't make a difference (I tend to run 1 Batallion and then one extra detachment of some sort OR 3 outrider/vanguard/spearhead type detachments). Those rare times where it would make a difference (say I want to take the minimum requirements for a batallion plus a spearhead of a different faction or something), it would prevent me from playing a reasonable, straight-forward arm just because I happened to want a bunch of shadow seers backing up my harlequins or whatever.

Am I correct in thinking that this is basically just a roundabout way of trying to nerf smite spam or assassin spam or something? I'm not aware of any major multiple HQ problems at the moment that the Beta rules aren't likely to address.
   
Made in us
Huge Hierodule






I think he might be trying to mitigate tau commanders?

   
Made in us
Skilled SDF-1 Pin-Point Barrier Jockey





Mississippi

It seems strange anyone would have more HQ units than troops (too many chiefs, not enough braves). Personally I would have gone for a 2:1 ratio (2 troops minimum per HQ choice).

Why does n+1 HQs break some lists? Sounds like that is an issue with the army.

It never ends well 
   
Made in us
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle




In My Lab

 Stormonu wrote:
It seems strange anyone would have more HQ units than troops (too many chiefs, not enough braves). Personally I would have gone for a 2:1 ratio (2 troops minimum per HQ choice).

Why does n+1 HQs break some lists? Sounds like that is an issue with the army.


Deathwing. Ravenwing. Sisters of Silence. Death Company.

You can build pretty much whole armies around those guys without any troops, they're perfectly fluffy, they're usually not game-breaking, and these restrictions (well, the first one) would feth them over royally.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in au
Regular Dakkanaut




I'd much prefer to see restrictions on when you can take a second detachment.
Something like having to take more than just the bare minimum in the first detachment.
As it stands right now, I feel like there's virtually no reason to ever take 3 heavy support (for example) in a battalion. Chuck in a cheap hq and gain another CP. Feels wrong to me.

Building a better 7th edition 40k Project Zeta Warseer thread Dakka thread 
   
Made in gb
Ragin' Ork Dreadnought





Not needed. In casual play, just agree to not "abuse" (whatever that means) detachments. In competitive play just "abuse" it right back.

All this does is make Tau players even weaker and punishes armies with few troop choices (Like Harlequins or Necrons).

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/15 20:10:37


   
 
Forum Index » 40K Proposed Rules
Go to: