Switch Theme:

Saim hann change  [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
Dakka Veteran





For Saim hann. Wind riders should count as troops. You can’t get CP for crap without this. Unless you just break the spirit of the army and start taking many squads worth of troops which are all going to be on foot. Yes I know you can mount them in a wave serpent but it ruins the feel of the army. They are supposed to be all jetbikes and grav tanks. Their troop is the wind rider. If you stick to a fluff list it becomes painfully difficult to have many CP at all.

   
Made in us
Chaplain with Hate to Spare





Sioux Falls, SD

Only if my Crimson Fists count Sternguard as Troops. Blood Angels count Assault Marines and Death Company as Troops. Deathwing count Deathwing Terminators as Troops. White Scars bike squads as Troops. And so on and so forth.

Sometimes playing to the fluff has consequences.

5250 pts
3850 pts
Deathwatch: 1500 pts
Imperial Knights: 375 pts
30K 2500 pts 
   
Made in il
Warplord Titan Princeps of Tzeentch






Yea, the troop transformations were taken out of the game for a reason.

You got the detachments to play troopless armies if you want, but you don't have CPs if you dont have the backbone of the army.

can neither confirm nor deny I lost track of what I've got right now. 
   
Made in gb
Hooded Inquisitorial Interrogator






Just because Saim Hann like their bikes doesn't mean they don't need something capable of actually capturing and holding objectives. I don't really see what's wrong with taking some Guardians in Wave Serpents, or Dire Avengers in Falcons, or some Rangers to scout ahead etc. They are all good options to take.

As much as I like thematic armies, part of the idea behind command points, detachment powers, objective secured etc. is to encourage people to play balanced lists; overly specialised lists should come at a trade-off, and come with risks, because they also come with the possibility of opponents struggling to deal with them (e.g- the sheer speed of jet bikes can make a mockery of enemy deployment).

If you want to play thematic and fluffy games then have a chat with your opponent first; see if there's a scenario they'd like to play with a high speed raider type enemy, give them a chance to tweak their list if they can, or start in a good defensive location or just play Unbound and agree on a pool of CPs. For balanced pick-up play though troops tweaking was dropped for a reason.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/15 10:41:09


   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





I do think the vanguard/etc formations should be 3-6 of the given slot instead of what they are, which would help (for instance, if you want to play a Spirit Host with 5 units of Wraithguard).

Saim Hann love them their bikes. But they certainly have Guardians (and some DAs, too). And even Saim Hann has more tactical flexability with some boots on the ground (Guardians/DAs/Rangers) than pure Windrider squads from a fluff perspective (although mechanized, almost certainly). Have you ever tried to ride your bike into a building to take control of the imperial naval cannons? Have you tried gathering spirit stones strewn about the ground while zooming through? And that's before getting into the actual crunch of warfare - holding a position and establishing presence simply requires bodies.

So you can play a Clan out for a fun afternoon of space-elf Biker mischief (Sons of Aeldari style!). But a Battle Company or a Tau Firewarrior-cored force are going to have a lot more tactical flexability. Sure, your entire force can zip around them. But good luck actually holding territory or getting the "job done".

And that's represented now, in part, by CP. I liked that only Troops could score way back when, and would have loved to have it say "only Infantry troops" on that rule or ObSec. But the mechanic has changed.
   
Made in us
Powerful Phoenix Lord





Dallas area, TX

It took me a really long time to adjust to Windriders not being troops. They were Troops, as in full fledged regular Troops that did not require special conditions to be Troops, for an entire decade prior to 8th.

I see the merit in making them Fast attack now that the Outrider detachment exists, but it is rather annoying that I had to go buy 2 additions whole Troop units I didn't own before just to have enough to field a legal Battalion to get the appropriate amount of CPs. Windriders were always my mandatory Troops, so when they change to Fast Attack, I could no longer field a legal Battalion without buy more models.

Alaitoc Rangers or Gaurdians are acceptable choices, but the fact that Saim-hann players had to drastically alter their play-style to fit these in (again with regards to acquiring adequateCPs) is disappointing.
Having said that, I don't think altering bike to be Troops just for Saim-hann is a can of worms you don't want to get into.

-

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/06/15 14:13:59


   
Made in us
Stoic Grail Knight






Yendor

Bharring wrote:


Saim Hann love them their bikes. But they certainly have Guardians (and some DAs, too). And even Saim Hann has more tactical flexability with some boots on the ground (Guardians/DAs/Rangers) than pure Windrider squads from a fluff perspective (although mechanized, almost certainly). Have you ever tried to ride your bike into a building to take control of the imperial naval cannons? Have you tried gathering spirit stones strewn about the ground while zooming through? And that's before getting into the actual crunch of warfare - holding a position and establishing presence simply requires bodies.

And that's represented now, in part, by CP. I liked that only Troops could score way back when, and would have loved to have it say "only Infantry troops" on that rule or ObSec. But the mechanic has changed.


You know, your fluff explanation doesn't really make a lot of sense. You know there were actually motor cycle troops in World War 2. They drove their motorbikes to the location, then they dismounted, and fought on foot. It was basically an infantry transport- which coincidentally is how cavalry was generally used in WW2 as well. I suppose what I'm getting at is a Saim Hann Windrider can hop off his bike, draw his shuriken catapult, and storm the building. He is only glued to his bike on the table top! Its also worth noting that this is the first edition since the 4th edition codex that has not had Windriders as troops. That is 4 editions of Warhammer 40K where Jetbike Players could take them as troops, and now its been inexplicably taken away.

Also having different options for troop choices adds a lot of flavor to the armies. One of the unfortunate side effects of 8th edition is that armies start to look very samey. This is in part due to how important command points are, and in part due to how good cheep screening units are. Chaos does a good job with this, with the dedicated legions unlocking their cult marines as troops, which leads to more varied armies and distinctly World Eaters or Emperor's Children armies on the table (obviously T Sons and D Guard have their own books at this point). But to that same note, it might be actually more fun if more factions could actually build armies around their fluffy choice and not be horribly gimped. Crimson Fists should get Sternguard as troops, White Scars should get bikers as troops. It would let players make fun fluffy armies for those groups and help players to break away from the monotony of 8th edition imperial list building which staples an Imperial Guard Battalion and 3 Costodes Bike Captains to EVERY LIST.

Wouldn't it be fun to see more varied armies on the table, and players being given more options to build armies which suit their groups fluff on the battlefield. Would a Farsight Enclave getting Crisis Suits as a Troop be broken? Would Saim Hann with Jetbikes as troops honestly be enough to compete with Alaitoc? Do you think Emperor's Children getting Noise Marines as troops is unrealistic and narrative breaking? Do you think that armies getting more fluffy force organization charts would actually have any effect on competitive lists just souping in guard for cheap obsec and command points?

The truth is it will only help add variety to the game and make armies feel more unique on the tabletop. MORE SPECIALTY TROOPS, not less.


Xom finds this thread hilarious!

My 5th Edition Eldar Tactica (not updated for 6th, historical purposes only) Walking the Path of the Eldar 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Yes, basically era-appropriate dragoons/cav. It really bothered me in 6th grade to see a painting of the Rough Riders charging up a hill with the caption about it being Roosevelt's volunteer *cavalry*. I just didn't get that until a decade later when I read up on how cav worked in the age of firearms. It's for mobility, but you fight on foot.

(Sidenote - it's also one of the reasons I don't like the all-bikes-are-T+1 rules. A Biker is going to be easier to take out of the battle than an infantry if you hit them, even if the bike isn't as fragile as the rider.)

A Windrider can hop off his bike, grab a 3rd Catapault, then walk into the building. But you have far fewer Windriders than infantrymen. Similarly, Alexander's Compainions (cav) could pick up a shield and hop on the phalanx. But, to win the battles the way he did, he needed to leverage his Companions as Cav. This translates into, yes, Windriders can do that, in theory. But you're now paying a lot more points for a lot fewer bodies. And saturation of bodies does actually matter.

I don't necessarily disagree with Windriders as the core of the army. Troops, if that's what the rules need to be. I just don't see a Windrider-core army as having the same tactical options and capacity as a Guardian-core or Tac-core or Guardsman-core army.

That actually seems fitting, to me, of a Windrider host. Sure can move a hell of a lot. Some good firepower, too. But you don't have boots on the ground. You don't have a well-rounded force. In some ways, you can force the engagement to go the way you want, with your mobility.

I like the idea of a Crimson Fist force with Sternies as their core. But they don't need to be troops. They don't get many CP at all if they go with Vanguard instead, but fewer CP seems right. Same with White Scars.

As I think about it, though, these specialty armies are overly constrained. I'd rather Vanguard/etc be:
1-2 HQ
3-6 Elite
0-3 Troop/FA/HS
So, basically, a Battalion, but swap Elite and Troops.

The other problem they have is that, especially now that Battalion/Brigade have gone up on CP, the cost in CP is too much. I don't want them to overcorrect either, though, because we should still see infantry Troops as core, too.

Consider Spirit Hosts. Like Windrider Hosts, they will typically have some infantry Troops in them now. And fluffwise, both would actually have infantry troops. But players should be able to play each. Windrider Hosts can mostly spam FA and maybe HQ/HS. If a Spirit Host wants to bring a Wraithlord, it needs to bring 3 or take Aux. It makes any potential Spirit Host army very demanding about what you actually bring.

There are really 2 ways to do allow for these "specialist troops": make them Troops or make the alternate CADs viable. I like the idea that the specialist armies have fewer CPs, and really like the idea of "traditional" troops (as in infantry) having the slot. So I think CAD changes would probably be better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Specifically, my counterproposal of trying to accomplish what all of us seek:

Vanguard/Outrider/etc become:
1-4 HQ
3 manditory [Slot]
0-3 [Slot]/Troop/FA/HS
+2 CP

Essentially a Brigade with the core slot swappable, but for fewer CP. Not perfectly dialed in, certainly.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/15 15:09:50


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Only if my Crimson Fists count Sternguard as Troops. Blood Angels count Assault Marines and Death Company as Troops. Deathwing count Deathwing Terminators as Troops. White Scars bike squads as Troops. And so on and so forth.

Sometimes playing to the fluff has consequences.

Plenty of those actually need to move back to the troop section so I fail to see how this is an argument

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





To me, the issue isn't so much that certain units aren't troops as it is that vanguards, outriders, and spear heads give so few command points compared to batallions.

I'm not sure if the increase to 5CP for batallions was meant to increase the overall number of CP in the game or if it was meant to incentivize troops over vanguards, etc. If the former, I don't think there would be much harm in raising the CP for vanguards etc. to 2 or 3 CP. If the latter... I sitll don't think there would be much harm in raising the CP to 2 or 3.


It feels like there are competing, non-complimentary objectives when it comes to CP, detachments, and unit roles. The core assumption seems to be that troops will generally be less efficient combatants than non-troops (i.e. your heavy support will kill more stuff than your troops will) and that players who take lots of points-inefficient troops should be rewarded for it by getting extra CP.

The problem there is that some armies have troops that are more useful than others. A tactical marine basically only exists for obsec and CP. A couple of guardsmen squads are a pretty good include in any army because they also give you obsec and CP, but they do it cheaply while giving you enough bodies to screen reasonably well. Necron warriors are actually a fantastic tool in the 'cron toolbox (despite being less flashy than other options). In 7th edition, scatbikes were troops and were also one of the most points efficient things out there.

So it feels like troops are being assumed to be less "good" than other options and that CP are sort of an apology for them.

But stratagems are fun and powerful, so you want players to have enough of them to actually use a range of stratagems, thus the increase to 5CP for batallions.

But then you have perfectly fluffy armies such as a bike-heavy Saim-Hann force that got left in the dust on CP generation because they don't get the "apology CP" for taking troops.

Just making your preferred units troops is weird. On one hand, it basically solves the CP problem. A Saim-Hann army with biker troops will have plenty of CP and look very fluffy. On the other hand, you're discarding the notion that troops might be less efficient than their specialized counterparts.

I kind of feel like the "troops are worse than specialists" thing is an artefact of the era of the force org chart. Ideally, each individual troop unit would be points-efficient and viable in its own right, perhaps with special rules or stratagems that give them abilities non-troops lack. And at that point, you could divorce CP from troops entirely. I have 1,000 points of X. You have 1,000 points of Y. Presumably we should each be getting enough out of our points investments that we don't need to receive a second resource (command points) to balance out how bad some of our units are.


ATTENTION
. Psychic tests are unfluffy. Your longing for AV is understandable but misguided. Your chapter doesn't need a separate codex. Doctrines should go away. Being a "troop" means nothing. This has been a cranky service announcement. You may now resume your regularly scheduled arguing.
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




Except Windriders were always troops and it's silly they don't have the option anymore. It's literally making them unviable along with them being mildly expensive.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in es
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain




Vigo. Spain.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Except Windriders were always troops and it's silly they don't have the option anymore. It's literally making them unviable along with them being mildly expensive.


Weren't they changed to troops in 4th edition? But having biker troops goes agaisnt the notion of having Fast Attack.

I could understand it in the context of a faction that only has bikers, but Eldar have many other things.

 Crimson Devil wrote:

Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.

ERJAK wrote:
Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.

 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 Galas wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Except Windriders were always troops and it's silly they don't have the option anymore. It's literally making them unviable along with them being mildly expensive.


Weren't they changed to troops in 4th edition? But having biker troops goes agaisnt the notion of having Fast Attack.

I could understand it in the context of a faction that only has bikers, but Eldar have many other things.

As someone that hates how the Eldar Codices have been, I still feel it's unfair how that went about. Same with Marines not getting troop Bikers either.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Powerful Phoenix Lord





I believe they 100% should be considered Fast Attack, but I think a huge missed opportunity is that factions should have each received a custom detachment which would give them decent CP even while not amassing a Battalion - much in the way the Dark Eldar have that random "three patrols" thing.

This was a real missed step with the way the game is currently designed. It would have taken two extra pages per codex. Just one detachment per faction, and books such as Dark Angels could have one for green wing, one for deathwing, and one for ravenwing. These detachments could even be more specific.

A sample: "Ghostwalkers of Iyanden"
-This detachment consists of 3-5 units of Wraithguard, led by a Spiritseer, etc. This generates 3 CP.

Something very simple like this could have worked a lot of these issues out without actually changing anything in the book itself.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





With Ghostwalkers, here's what I'd do:
3CP
1 Spiritseer
0-1 HQ
3 Wraithguard/blades
0-2 Troops/FA/Elite/HS

With no rule restricting the other HQ or Elite slots from being more SpiritSeers/Wraithguard.

This way, you can build out your detatchment as the core of your army. Because if the detatchment only allowed SpiritSeers or Wraithguard, adding a Wraithlord or 2 gets odd.

Similarly, Windirder Host:
3CP
1 HQ on a bike
0-1 HQ
3 Windriders
0-2 Troops/FA/Elite/HS

SM Biker (not necessarily White Scars):
3CP
1 HQ on a bike
0-1 HQ
3 SM Bike Squads
0-2 Troops/FA/Elite/HS

Numbers can obviously be tweaked, but the same core format with variances as appropriate could be applied to Sternies and more, while still requiring Outriders for FA/etc that would never be core (Shining Spears, Centurions, Incubi, etc).
   
Made in us
Deathwing Terminator with Assault Cannon






 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Sometimes playing to the fluff has consequences.
Except when you have a AM CP battery on a SM list.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




Bharring wrote:
With Ghostwalkers, here's what I'd do:
3CP
1 Spiritseer
0-1 HQ
3 Wraithguard/blades
0-2 Troops/FA/Elite/HS

With no rule restricting the other HQ or Elite slots from being more SpiritSeers/Wraithguard.

This way, you can build out your detatchment as the core of your army. Because if the detatchment only allowed SpiritSeers or Wraithguard, adding a Wraithlord or 2 gets odd.

Similarly, Windirder Host:
3CP
1 HQ on a bike
0-1 HQ
3 Windriders
0-2 Troops/FA/Elite/HS

SM Biker (not necessarily White Scars):
3CP
1 HQ on a bike
0-1 HQ
3 SM Bike Squads
0-2 Troops/FA/Elite/HS

Numbers can obviously be tweaked, but the same core format with variances as appropriate could be applied to Sternies and more, while still requiring Outriders for FA/etc that would never be core (Shining Spears, Centurions, Incubi, etc).

Hello formations!

Nah just move stuff where appropriate. Windriders For Troops 2020

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





But I want my Sternies to be elites. But I don't want to hamstring Crimson Fists players.

Same could be said of Wraithguard, Windriders, and SM Bikers.

A big difference between the above and formations is that:
-They are alternate CADs with manditory Troops replaced with manditory X. This means lots of options, instead of a very rigid FOC.
-No special rules were added to the detatchments - in fact, they "pay" for the option in that they get fewer CP than Troops-based lists.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




Bharring wrote:
But I want my Sternies to be elites. But I don't want to hamstring Crimson Fists players.

Same could be said of Wraithguard, Windriders, and SM Bikers.

A big difference between the above and formations is that:
-They are alternate CADs with manditory Troops replaced with manditory X. This means lots of options, instead of a very rigid FOC.
-No special rules were added to the detatchments - in fact, they "pay" for the option in that they get fewer CP than Troops-based lists.

Sternguard were NEVER an option as troops. What Kantor did was make them scoring in 5th and then Objective Secured in 6th/7th. It was a bad argument to support that narrative.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Deathwing Terminator with Assault Cannon






I wish Sammy made bikes troops so my RW army has 18 CP's.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/18 19:27:39


 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Fine.

"But I want my [SM Bikes|Wraithguard|Windriders] to be [Elites|FA]. But I don't want to hamstring [White Scars|Aspect Host|Saim Hann] players."

Same statement, with the picked nit removed.
   
Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







To my mind the whole "(X) as Troops!" thing was overdone and unhelpful in earlier editions, because it ended up pushing a weird vision of some armies. A fluffy White Scars list will contain Tactical Marines in Rhinos, a fluffy Saim-Hann list will contain Guardians in Wave Serpents, a fluffy Black Legion list will contain Chaos Marines, etc.

The suggestion that "because this thing is used more frequently by this army it needs to be Troops so I can take only that thing" is silly. A Saim-Hann jetbike-only force exists. It uses Outrider detachments and has fewer command points than a balanced force that's taking some Guardians. Deal with it.

Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using.
Homebrew oldhammer project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/790996.page#10896267
Meridian: Necromunda-based 40k skirmish: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/795374.page 
   
Made in fi
Locked in the Tower of Amareo





 akaean wrote:
The truth is it will only help add variety to the game and make armies feel more unique on the tabletop. MORE SPECIALTY TROOPS, not less.



Ah yes let's have more powerful models and not even have to pay tax of being non-troop. Yes that's a great idea.

Also people have weird idea that just because some faction likes X it means it's fluffy to be all X. like white scars and all bike armies that are horribly unfluffy as most of white scars in battle would actually be tacticals in rhinos...

2024 painted/bought: 109/109 
   
Made in gb
Mekboy on Kustom Deth Kopta






Here's the thing with this discussion - it absolutely doesn't need to happen.

Someone said earlier (and were right) that this change wouldn't affect the competitive builds that people take. Making windriders troops for saim hann wont suddenly push them in front of Alaitoc or Ulthwe in terms of competitive strength. Hence Mr TopTournamentGoer isn't going to take the list anyway, over what is currently considered top tier Aeldari.

So the change isn't proposed for competitive play. So why bother with it at all? Concerns around CP are only for competitive play - just take an outrider detachment or home brew extra CP for your pure bike list with your mates.

I guess my point is that there is no value to GW making this ruling official, in this particular case I don't think it would change the top lists and the rules are a lot more flexible in job-competitive play anyway.
   
Made in us
Powerful Phoenix Lord





I appreciate people wanting to run Jetbike Guardians as troops for Saim Hann, but I don't think that - at all - justifies arbitrarily making them troops (something they should have never been). So you need a Saim Hann exception, not a blanket Craftworld change.

There is a reason we have a "Fast Attack" entry and have for a long time.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 Elbows wrote:
I appreciate people wanting to run Jetbike Guardians as troops for Saim Hann, but I don't think that - at all - justifies arbitrarily making them troops (something they should have never been). So you need a Saim Hann exception, not a blanket Craftworld change.

There is a reason we have a "Fast Attack" entry and have for a long time.

Except it needs to be a blanket change. That's how it's been for probably a dozen years. Making them a Fast Attack was just one of several nerfs that didn't need to happen to appease the Scatterbike moaners.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
tneva82 wrote:
 akaean wrote:
The truth is it will only help add variety to the game and make armies feel more unique on the tabletop. MORE SPECIALTY TROOPS, not less.



Ah yes let's have more powerful models and not even have to pay tax of being non-troop. Yes that's a great idea.

Also people have weird idea that just because some faction likes X it means it's fluffy to be all X. like white scars and all bike armies that are horribly unfluffy as most of white scars in battle would actually be tacticals in rhinos...

Only in your mind.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/19 15:53:13


CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Deathwing Terminator with Assault Cannon






Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Except it needs to be a blanket change. That's how it's been for probably a dozen years. Making them a Fast Attack was just one of several nerfs that didn't need to happen to appease the Scatterbike moaners.
Neither was special HQ's making non-troop units into Troop choice.

This whole CP starvation situation for specialist unit army is somewhat blown out of proportion - typically, when you make a specialist armies, you are looking to end the game within 2 turns, or at the least make a enough impact to eliminate significant retaliation to drag the game out. This roughly translates to spending anywhere from 8~10 CP's within two turns. If we compare this CP expenditure, the only thing specialist armies with typically 6 (or 10 if you brought a CP battery) CP misses out is spamming command reroll in every phase or going through less than competitive stratagems because you have CP left over. As specialist army playing in matched play, you generally only need and can only spend 4~5 CP per turn for those game changer stratagems.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/06/19 16:12:18


 
   
Made in us
Powerful Phoenix Lord





Dallas area, TX

But the re-roll strat is by far the most useful. Not having enough CPs to do your special strats and the re-roll one per phase can have a dramatic affect on the game.

I have stated in many threads since 8th edition that I love all the changes made to Windriders ... except making them FA. Having a fast Troop just FEELS right for Eldar and was want got me interesting in them as an army in 4th ed.
By making them FA, they now compete with other choices in that slot, meaning Windriders will never be taken over Spears.

I've made peace with WRs being FA, but the sad truth is that it just encourages Shining Spear spam as player with 7th ed Scatterbike spam just slap spears on them and run them as Shining Spears.
If Spears did not exist, than WRs being FA would make sense, but it is clear by their design that WRs are supposed to be a far more common unit than Spears. They are too similar to occupy the same slot.

I'd even be happy if Spears went to Elites, or if the Outrider detachment was 2 or more CPs.

-

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/06/19 16:35:49


   
Made in us
Deathwing Terminator with Assault Cannon






 Galef wrote:
But the re-roll strat is by far the most useful. Not having enough CPs to do your special strats and the re-roll one per phase can have a dramatic affect on the game.

I have stated in many threads since 8th edition that I love all the changes made to Windriders ... except making them FA. Having a fast Troop just FEELS right for Eldar and was want got me interesting in them as an army in 4th ed.
By making them FA, they now compete with other choices in that slot, meaning Windriders will never be taken over Spears.

I've made peace with WRs being FA, but the sad truth is that it just encourages Shining Spear spam as player with 7th ed Scatterbike spam just slap spears on them and run them as Shining Spears.
If Spears did not exist, than WRs being FA would make sense, but it is clear by their design that WRs are supposed to be a far more common unit than Spears. They are too similar to occupy the same slot.

I'd even be happy if Spears went to Elites, or if the Outrider detachment was 2 or more CPs.

-
I personally think improving Battle Forged command benefit from 3 CP to 5 CP is the first step in balancing the CP discrepancy rather than bumping up CP's for specialist detachments.

Battalion and brigade will benefit from the change as well but not as significantly as it will be surplus CP's.

CP's shouldn't be squandered in a specialist armies - it should be used sparingly and decisively.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/06/19 17:38:05


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 skchsan wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Except it needs to be a blanket change. That's how it's been for probably a dozen years. Making them a Fast Attack was just one of several nerfs that didn't need to happen to appease the Scatterbike moaners.
Neither was special HQ's making non-troop units into Troop choice.

This whole CP starvation situation for specialist unit army is somewhat blown out of proportion - typically, when you make a specialist armies, you are looking to end the game within 2 turns, or at the least make a enough impact to eliminate significant retaliation to drag the game out. This roughly translates to spending anywhere from 8~10 CP's within two turns. If we compare this CP expenditure, the only thing specialist armies with typically 6 (or 10 if you brought a CP battery) CP misses out is spamming command reroll in every phase or going through less than competitive stratagems because you have CP left over. As specialist army playing in matched play, you generally only need and can only spend 4~5 CP per turn for those game changer stratagems.

Special Snowflake? In what manner? Biker Marine HQ was generic. Windriders were generic for all Craft World armies. In fact, more people wanted generic HQ units to unlock different choices because they want the core of the Army to fit a specific theme. Formations from 7th helped achieve that in a sense, and players were only annoyed at the weird rules that formations entailed.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K Proposed Rules
Go to: