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.
A thought. With soup being so prevalent i was trying to think of an easy and fair way to boost Mono-armies. What if when your army contains only 1 <Chapter> or equivalent, your restriction of 1 use of a stratagem per phase is boosted to 2 per phase. Doesn't hamper soup any but gives mono a bit of boost. (And makes it a bit more fair as soup can be pulling stratagems from multiple books thus getting to use more.)
Its simple and easy to implement. (Units the don't break <Chapter> equivalent bonuses wouldn't break it here as well. Ex. Bullgryns, Servitors, etc.)
I'd suggest instead that mono-faction armies should double their battle forged CP from 3 to 6.
Much easier to implement.
Bedouin Dynasty: 10000 pts
The Silver Lances: 4000 pts
The Custodes Winter Watch 4000 pts
MajorStoffer wrote:
...
Sternguard though, those guys are all about kicking ass. They'd chew bubble gum as well, but bubble gum is heretical. Only tau chew gum.
iGuy91 wrote: I'd suggest instead that mono-faction armies should double their battle forged CP from 3 to 6.
Much easier to implement.
This is much more in line with what I would do, which is:
Bring Battalions & Brigades back to 3/9CPs respectively, but give any detachment that shares 2 of more Faction Keywords with your army WL double CPs
That way, things like the "Loyal 32" will only give 3CPs unless one of the Commanders is the WL, which would deny other factions access to Relics/WL traits
This would encourage "mono-faction" list without utterly neutering allies.
techsoldaten wrote: It's an interesting idea, but soup armies will typically have a CP advantage. Allowing a mono-army to burn CPs faster isn't going to make them better.
I would disagree. Most mono armies can easily generate 10+ CP. This re-insentivizes all troops (Rather then just the loyal 32). And being able to use Big Stratagems like Veterans of the Long War, Rotate Ion shields, Even just being able to reroll 2 dice in a phase makes a big difference.
I don't know if we even need to do that. Just make it so different detachments give different bonuses depending on the codex. Maybe an Astartes Battalion gives 8 CP, while a Guard Battalion gives 5. Maybe an Astartes Brigade gives 15 CP instead of 12.
Maybe a Grey Knights Brigade should give like 20 CP, since they're super hungry for command points, and you're never going to field 2 detachments of GK if you have a Brigade.
1 Battalion of Guard or AdMech at 180 pts or fewer should not be considered equivalent in command points to a 400 pt Battalion of Astartes, or Grey Knights.
Horst wrote: I don't know if we even need to do that. Just make it so different detachments give different bonuses depending on the codex. Maybe an Astartes Battalion gives 8 CP, while a Guard Battalion gives 5. Maybe an Astartes Brigade gives 15 CP instead of 12.
Maybe a Grey Knights Brigade should give like 20 CP, since they're super hungry for command points, and you're never going to field 2 detachments of GK if you have a Brigade.
1 Battalion of Guard or AdMech at 180 pts or fewer should not be considered equivalent in command points to a 400 pt Battalion of Astartes, or Grey Knights.
My only problem with this is that it creates too much opportunity for imbalance/arbitrary disparity. While GK detachments having more CPs than Guard ones could make sense, what's the magic numbers? What criteria do we use to decide what factions should have more.
As I've stated in several thread, just allow detachments that share 2+ keywords with the Warlord generate double CPs. Now mono-factions can thrive because ALL their detachments should be getting more CPs. Obviously Battalions should go back to 3CPs (6CPs for those sharing keywords with the WL) for this change to work.
-
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/02/13 22:21:23
Otherwise, if you're looking to level the playing field, armies should get CP based on the number of points/PL in play
3 per 500 points.
Detatchments just exist at that point to allow souping
Bedouin Dynasty: 10000 pts
The Silver Lances: 4000 pts
The Custodes Winter Watch 4000 pts
MajorStoffer wrote:
...
Sternguard though, those guys are all about kicking ass. They'd chew bubble gum as well, but bubble gum is heretical. Only tau chew gum.
iGuy91 wrote: Otherwise, if you're looking to level the playing field, armies should get CP based on the number of points/PL in play 3 per 500 points.
Detatchments just exist at that point to allow souping
That could certainly work too, although the issue that may bring is that some Factions either pay less CPs for similar strats, or straight up have better ones. Eldar, for example, have some very, very good Strats, but in isolation would not have access to very many CPs. It's rather hard to get 1-2 Battalions filled and still have room to take the toys to use those Strats on. But a cheap DE Battlions "fixes" this.
If CPs becomes a 3 per 500pts and nothing to do with detachments, Eldar benefit more than most.
I truly think a combined change needs to happen. Lower Battalions/Brigades back down to 3/9CPs so that the desparity is not so great between those and other detachments that only give 1CP, but than do one of the following:
Spoiler:
A) As above, any detachment that shares 2+ keyword with your WL (or rather 1+ non-Battle Brother keyword) gains double the CP bonus or B) Just bump Battle Forged to 5-6CPs, or even 2 CPs per 500pts along with detachment CPs or C) Battle Forge stays are 3CP, but generates those at the beginning of each Battle Round as long as you WL is alive.
With A, there is a clear incentive to take mono-faction lists, or at least mostly mono-faction. Why take a Gaurd Battalion for 3CPs when you can take another Marine Battalion for 6CPs? With B, all factions get a healthier amount of CPs regardless of their access allies. There will still be a desparity, but not nearly as high as now With C, maxing out on specific detachments matters even less, because each player will get 3CPs every battle round until their WL dies. This will help mitigate when one army runs out of CPs but their opponent still has buckets. It should also help prevent one player from dumping all their CPs into a single turn, as they don't actually has access to all their CPs at once.
What is frustrating about all this, is that there are so many options that could work, but haven't been implimented by GW yet
-
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/02/14 14:37:52
techsoldaten wrote: It's an interesting idea, but soup armies will typically have a CP advantage. Allowing a mono-army to burn CPs faster isn't going to make them better.
I would disagree. Most mono armies can easily generate 10+ CP. This re-insentivizes all troops (Rather then just the loyal 32). And being able to use Big Stratagems like Veterans of the Long War, Rotate Ion shields, Even just being able to reroll 2 dice in a phase makes a big difference.
Barring DE and the obvious usual suspects, most armies are composed of one battalion and two specialist detachments. Unless you have a named character with +X CP for being warlord, most armies run with MAX 10 CP.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/02/14 16:36:51
techsoldaten wrote: It's an interesting idea, but soup armies will typically have a CP advantage. Allowing a mono-army to burn CPs faster isn't going to make them better.
I would disagree. Most mono armies can easily generate 10+ CP. This re-insentivizes all troops (Rather then just the loyal 32). And being able to use Big Stratagems like Veterans of the Long War, Rotate Ion shields, Even just being able to reroll 2 dice in a phase makes a big difference.
Barring DE and the obvious usual suspects, most armies are composed of one battalion and two specialist detachments. Unless you have a named character with +X CP for being warlord, most armies run with MAX 10 CP.
Yep.
Most games, I play a single Black Legion Battalion with Abaddon for 10 CPs. Doubling my ability to use Stratagems each turn doesn't matter, I don't have the CPs to use them.
My Daemons army is 2 Battalions for 13 CPs. I use 3 before the game starts for Denziens of the Warp and usually use the rest for rerolls over the first 2 turns. Maybe there would be a marginal benefit in getting to reroll a dice twice a phase. I'd probably never do it because I'm used to never doing it.
My Grey Knights army list allies with a loyal 32 for 13 CPs. Would not consider dropping the Guard to go monodex, that would cripple my army. Would not consider going straight Guard, because they are Guard.
The double CP with the WL sounds good, if a little bit on the CP heavy side. A few things i would suggest though
Make Specialist detachments 2CP, this would at least make them somewhat viable against battalion/Brigade, since both are quite good for what they do. Along with current missions battalions are actually really good.
Secondly, make it that your WL allows you to gain an extra amount of CP per turn, i would suggest 2CP for a <10 wound Character, 4CP for a >10 wound character cause they will be the biggest target you'll have in your army.
Third, make it that Detachments that don't share the same keywords with your warlord only generate half the CP that they would normally produce. This would incentivize more detachments that share the keywords of your warlord.
If you implemented these three things, i would say you might see soup less, of course there will be moments that people will soup for points, but souping comes with it's own restrictions
While the double stratagem per turn idea is interesting, I tend to agree that it would not be much of a boost for CP starved mono factions. I think the double CP for shared Warlord faction idea using original CP values would better achieve narrowing the disparity between mono and soup armies, which should be the main point of any mono faction buff.
ikeulhu wrote: I think the double CP for shared Warlord faction idea using original CP values would better achieve narrowing the disparity between mono and soup armies, which should be the main point of any mono faction buff.
Yep. And it makes fluff sense too. A Space Marine Commander would have much greater ease instructing Space Marine Troops than Guard Troops, because those Marines have a better understanding of what the Marine Commander is commanding.
And vice verse, Guard would better execute a Guard commanders orders due to the familiarity of them.
Increased CP based on shared WL factions gives mono-faction lists a boost that doesn't necessarily over-nerf Soup
It also help make Vanguards/Spearheads/Outriders a bit more appealing to play if they share the WLs keywords
So many birds with one simple stone
Brigades are just a mess for too many armies, even when they mono codex. I don't think they're a bad idea but they need to be significantly rethought, IMO.
Brigades are just a mess for too many armies, even when they mono codex. I don't think they're a bad idea but they need to be significantly rethought, IMO.
I think a lot of that goes back to GW's need to carve out as many Codices as possible to sell as independent "factions" that don't have a sufficient model line. A lot of "armies" that struggle with brigades shouldn't really have been put out completely on their own, but that isn't really an easy fix, either. Unless you just consider some books more "supplemental" rather than stand alone.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/02/15 19:55:25
A Battalion cuold give 1 CP for every 100 Points it is composed, a Brigate 2 every 150 and so on.
This will push to play Brigate or Battalion for the best CP/points rate they have, and a 500 points SM Battalion would give the same CP than a couple of AM battalion of 200+300 points.
fraser1191 wrote: I think CP generation should be a fixed number regardless. Why should one player be rewarded for having cheaper base troops?
I believe that the principle was that armies with cheaper units will not get as big an effect as armies with expensive units.
EG if a guard squad fires twice, it's normal. If a Knight shoots twice, it's a much bigger thing.
so elite armies hav eless CP but can use them more effectively.
This is then crapped upon by letting armies share CP, so generating loads with cheap units and then using them on the elite army who is supposed to have less CP because they can use them better, thereby making any attempts at balance go out of the window.
just restrict CP to the detachment (or faction, that way 2 detachments of orks or ultramarines can share CP) which generated them. soup all you want, but a knight only gets knight CP, you brought the guardsmen, now use them.
a small amount more bookkeeping, a lot more balance.
12,300 points of Orks
9th W/D/L with Orks, 4/0/2
I am Thoruk, the Barbarian, Slayer of Ducks, and This is my blog!
fraser1191 wrote: I think CP generation should be a fixed number regardless. Why should one player be rewarded for having cheaper base troops?
I believe that the principle was that armies with cheaper units will not get as big an effect as armies with expensive units.
EG if a guard squad fires twice, it's normal. If a Knight shoots twice, it's a much bigger thing.
so elite armies hav eless CP but can use them more effectively.
This is then crapped upon by letting armies share CP, so generating loads with cheap units and then using them on the elite army who is supposed to have less CP because they can use them better, thereby making any attempts at balance go out of the window.
just restrict CP to the detachment (or faction, that way 2 detachments of orks or ultramarines can share CP) which generated them. soup all you want, but a knight only gets knight CP, you brought the guardsmen, now use them.
a small amount more bookkeeping, a lot more balance.
While I get waht your saying, their is a counter argument that boosting battalion and brigade CP only made the CP imbalance worse not better.
I have to say the more I play and the more strategums and other CP fuelled craziness GW release, the more I belive the CP system needs to be rebalanced, as it currently favours codex's with cheap, good troops way too heavily, while screwing elite troop lists.
See GK, crons both have points heavy troops and are bad Codex's.
If battalions/ brigades weren't half as manditory as they currently feel people might actually be able to stretch the meta a bit with some more unusual builds which might just be enough to unstagnate it. I'm sorry but Aysurani soup and AM with a castellen or don't bother for 6+ months just isn't a fun meta.
While I get waht your saying, their is a counter argument that boosting battalion and brigade CP only made the CP imbalance worse not better. I have to say the more I play and the more strategums and other CP fuelled craziness GW release, the more I belive the CP system needs to be rebalanced, as it currently favours codex's with cheap, good troops way too heavily, while screwing elite troop lists. See GK, crons both have points heavy troops and are bad Codex's. If battalions/ brigades weren't half as manditory as they currently feel people might actually be able to stretch the meta a bit with some more unusual builds which might just be enough to unstagnate it. I'm sorry but Aysurani soup and AM with a castellen or don't bother for 6+ months just isn't a fun meta.
From what I've heard, Eldar have powerful stratagems but don't become overpowered until they soup with dark eldar. stopping the deldar CP from being used by the eldar would completely eradicate the problem.
some codexes will need redoing either way - it sounds like GK are just a bad army now, and there's no single fix for it. in fact, stopping them from leeching CP from a guard detachment may hurt them more than help them. but it's the first step in fixing what's fast becoming an out-of-control gaming system, which is blatantly being abused.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/02/18 12:18:12
12,300 points of Orks
9th W/D/L with Orks, 4/0/2
I am Thoruk, the Barbarian, Slayer of Ducks, and This is my blog!
Brigades are just a mess for too many armies, even when they mono codex. I don't think they're a bad idea but they need to be significantly rethought, IMO.
I think a lot of that goes back to GW's need to carve out as many Codices as possible to sell as independent "factions" that don't have a sufficient model line. A lot of "armies" that struggle with brigades shouldn't really have been put out completely on their own, but that isn't really an easy fix, either. Unless you just consider some books more "supplemental" rather than stand alone.
Then you get to my scenario where there is, say, a player trying to play Militarum Tempestus only, and you have just cut 13 command points he or she had to 8 command points, as Militarum Tempestus can't make brigades.
If the truth can destroy it, then it deserves to be destroyed.
Brigades are just a mess for too many armies, even when they mono codex. I don't think they're a bad idea but they need to be significantly rethought, IMO.
I think a lot of that goes back to GW's need to carve out as many Codices as possible to sell as independent "factions" that don't have a sufficient model line. A lot of "armies" that struggle with brigades shouldn't really have been put out completely on their own, but that isn't really an easy fix, either. Unless you just consider some books more "supplemental" rather than stand alone.
Then you get to my scenario where there is, say, a player trying to play Militarum Tempestus only, and you have just cut 13 command points he or she had to 8 command points, as Militarum Tempestus can't make brigades.
TBF: Militarum Tempestus could've been filled easily, with some analogue charachters / as an upgrade for units for a set ammount of points and then turned into a side regiment.
Beyond that the minidex shenanigans are a logical point for GW since more reccuring money from the veterans that allready have an established collection.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
While I get waht your saying, their is a counter argument that boosting battalion and brigade CP only made the CP imbalance worse not better.
I have to say the more I play and the more strategums and other CP fuelled craziness GW release, the more I belive the CP system needs to be rebalanced, as it currently favours codex's with cheap, good troops way too heavily, while screwing elite troop lists.
See GK, crons both have points heavy troops and are bad Codex's.
If battalions/ brigades weren't half as manditory as they currently feel people might actually be able to stretch the meta a bit with some more unusual builds which might just be enough to unstagnate it. I'm sorry but Aysurani soup and AM with a castellen or don't bother for 6+ months just isn't a fun meta.
From what I've heard, Eldar have powerful stratagems but don't become overpowered until they soup with dark eldar. stopping the deldar CP from being used by the eldar would completely eradicate the problem.
some codexes will need redoing either way - it sounds like GK are just a bad army now, and there's no single fix for it. in fact, stopping them from leeching CP from a guard detachment may hurt them more than help them. but it's the first step in fixing what's fast becoming an out-of-control gaming system, which is blatantly being abused.
I think actually removing AMCP spam from the meta will actually allow the genuine issues to surface without being obfuscated by the raw cheapness of Astra Militarum and dialling strategum spamming upto 11 for imperium factions. Aeldari soup needs some more nuanced finessing once the dumpster fire that is Yhannari is fixed.
10000 pts
4000 pts
