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.

I was thinking on the brigade and battalion changes..and it was a bit of a massive oversight to only buff those. Its the ones that ALREADY get too much cp that can farm them, while things like the vanguard, and spearheads are left 1 cp, basically making it worthless to take. An even larger mistake is not boosting the super heavy detachment, something that IK could desperately need unless their codex gives them troops or other cp options.

No. Absolutely no.

No. The game needs LESS CP farming, not more.

Drives the value of troops up, which distracts for the ability to spam stuff from the "almost-as-efficient" specialized detachments.

Now instead of spamming specialized detachments of elites, fast, or heavy (read as: better than troops), people are incentivized to bring those troops. There is actually a penalty for focusing on elite detachments, which is a good thing.

It also gives CP starved factions extra CP for dropping in their battery detachments, which is a good thing. It only incentivizes soup more, but at least the CP starved codices receive some much needed relief to their CP without getting a ridiculous boost to their desire to bring things that are much more specialized.

Have you been seeing army lists? Specials have never been good this edition. Its a edition that makes hordes of infantry thrive. If you want to bring bikes, tanks, dreadnaughts, etc., youre getting basically nothing for taking them. Yet taking the already better troop choices is now apparently rewarded. The top adepticon list was literally nothing but troops and HQs for christ sake.

No. If you want CP you pay the HQ and Troop tax. The problem is that Guard outright ignore those taxes.

And before you think im salty for my own sake, most of my lists are loaded with troops. Im far from CP starved myself, but I still see a bad imbalance.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
No. If you want CP you pay the HQ and Troop tax. The problem is that Guard outright ignore those taxes.

200 points is still a tax. Maybe not much of one, but 3 infantry squads and 2 company commanders is not going to do much to change the outcome of the game outside of doing what guard do in the fluff: die impressively!

Saying that guard ignores the tax is really hyperbole.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vaklor4 wrote:
And before you think im salty for my own sake, most of my lists are loaded with troops. Im far from CP starved myself, but I still see a bad imbalance.

Troops are good for 8th Edition... err Horde Edition because.... well, at least they don't cost much when they die. And at the rate stuff dies...

I mean, it clearly isn't for objective secured, right? Games going to 3-4 turns means that objectives are worth just a small bit more than nothing? The only other thing they have going for them is that they are disposable? And that's what they're used for. 3-4T 5-6+ saves... aimlessly shifting around on the table tossing poorly aimed fire at anything that comes into their range. Yup, sounds like grunts to me

And along comes a Hive Tyrant who slams a squad a round, and now we have a problem...

GW is clearly trying to push people to make armies that look like an "army" in their mind.

Troops. Some HQ's. Some transports. A good mix of units. Pretty much every game of 8th has been a better experience for me than most games of 7th.

No, but as several people have said, they should have FAQ'ed DE's 3/6 patrol thing to 6/12 CP when they upgraded battalion and brigade, since the point was to provide the same HQ/Troop incentive while also allowing DE to retain their unique flavor.

 vaklor4 wrote:
And before you think im salty for my own sake, most of my lists are loaded with troops. Im far from CP starved myself, but I still see a bad imbalance.

Consider the fact that even with the rhino tax for our berserker troops, they nearly always make their points back and then some. For this reason I've gone from 2 squads default to 3. But for increasing the CP of other detachments seems like a bad idea. Giving the incentive to bring troops, I feel like their trying to water down the amount of elite or heavy stuff on the board. Which may be a good thing for armies like WE.

I wouldn't be opposed to it, but I think I'd like to see how lists look later this summer to say for sure. It might be needed, but its probably a change well suited for the Sept FAQ. I do think Patrols should give some CP now.

In general, the "specials" detachments are just that: Special
They are meant to allow for certain types of armies that deviate for the norm, ergo you should get as many CP as the "normal" detachment.

As for CP farming, this is an issue that needs to be solved by fixing the units that are cheap enough to allow farming in the first place. Making easier access to CP through the special detachments only makes it easier to farm CP and does nothing to dissuade players for doing so with the Battalion or Brigade.

-

 Galef wrote:
In general, the "specials" detachments are just that: Special
They are meant to allow for certain types of armies that deviate for the norm, ergo you should get as many CP as the "normal" detachment.

As for CP farming, this is an issue that needs to be solved by fixing the units that are cheap enough to allow farming in the first place. Making easier access to CP through the special detachments only makes it easier to farm CP and does nothing to dissuade players for doing so with the Battalion or Brigade.

-

Nobody is successfully farming CP with a special detachment. They're looking to spam something powerful from an ally without having to pay a troop tax.

 LunarSol wrote:

 Galef wrote:
In general, the "specials" detachments are just that: Special
They are meant to allow for certain types of armies that deviate for the norm, ergo you should get as many CP as the "normal" detachment.

As for CP farming, this is an issue that needs to be solved by fixing the units that are cheap enough to allow farming in the first place. Making easier access to CP through the special detachments only makes it easier to farm CP and does nothing to dissuade players for doing so with the Battalion or Brigade.

-

Nobody is successfully farming CP with a special detachment. They're looking to spam something powerful from an ally without having to pay a troop tax.

Exactly, but if you bump up the CPs on those special detachments, you create situation in which players can farm for CPs AND spam those special choices without the Troop tax

-

I actually agree with the OP, but not for the same reasons. By making battalions and brigades worth more, they actually reduce the cost of taking Vanguards and other similar detachments. From what I've seen, Command Points are a threshold mechanic - once you have enough of them to reliably perform your plan for the first 2 turns of the game, any excess Command Points tend to have VASTLY lower value, as you start using them for less and less crucial moments of the game. As such, Battalions and Brigades now bring you to this threshold SOONER than before, which actually makes the marginal cost of including a Vanguard or Spearhead or similar detachment LOWER than it was before.

In essence, I believe we'll see Battalion + other detachments (in standard 3-detachment max tourney play) be even more common than they already are.

No. I would also go further to put a cap on CP that are regenerated passively.

"Free stuff" was a problem in 7th, it's a problem now. CP absolutely cost points. You can quantify it easily by the requirements to fill out a formation.

I'd rather get more stratagems I want to actually use. Some of these just aren't worth their cost, so I'd rather see them buffed to cost more so that I feel like I never have enough CP to use everything I want.

No..... just no

No

I don't know why CPs aren't treated like anything else. We each play with the same amount of points so why aren't we playing with the same amount of CPs?

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
I don't know why CPs aren't treated like anything else. We each play with the same amount of points so why aren't we playing with the same amount of CPs?

Because if you bring 3 baneblades to a game, you should not get as many as the person who brings a well rounded, non-minimumed brigade.

 McMagnus Mindbullets wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
I don't know why CPs aren't treated like anything else. We each play with the same amount of points so why aren't we playing with the same amount of CPs?

Because if you bring 3 baneblades to a game, you should not get as many as the person who brings a well rounded, non-minimumed brigade.

Why? It wouldn't be OP. It's purely a play-style preference.

Using more Troops was the point of this change.

 vaklor4 wrote:
I was thinking on the brigade and battalion changes..and it was a bit of a massive oversight to only buff those. Its the ones that ALREADY get too much cp that can farm them, while things like the vanguard, and spearheads are left 1 cp, basically making it worthless to take. An even larger mistake is not boosting the super heavy detachment, something that IK could desperately need unless their codex gives them troops or other cp options.

Seeing troops are more of tax unit on their own they need some help to even out. Even if it\s strategems

As a player who routinely plays Ravenwing and Iyanden wraiths, yes, the lack of CPs hurt. Now I have to add unfluffy "tax" units just to get some CPs

I opin that they should have deducted CP from many formations to reduce the amount of CP in a game. I think 6-8 cp is about where the game seems to work well, and that getting to 10+ works better when your making some real sacrifices to get to that high.

 bullyboy wrote:
As a player who routinely plays Ravenwing and Iyanden wraiths, yes, the lack of CPs hurt. Now I have to add unfluffy "tax" units just to get some CPs

Or don't, and just play with less CP?

 Galas wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
As a player who routinely plays Ravenwing and Iyanden wraiths, yes, the lack of CPs hurt. Now I have to add unfluffy "tax" units just to get some CPs

Or don't, and just play with less CP?

Which I have routinely done already. There was zero reason to increase CPs for Batts and Brigades.

CP are a meaningless mechanic after awhile. Their real issue is that since they are a "countdown" resource of magic buffs, they're a "use them or lose them" tool that rewards using them to obtain an early T1 advantage. Their availability should be much lower, in exchange for replenishing over turns.