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.

How do?

So not completely sure I’ve got the rule’s name right, but it’s the bonus Space Marines get if they’re a mono-Codex army, and forego Soup.

It’s a nice bonus, and rather than dissuade Soup as such, provides an advantage to mono-Codex play.

Now, I’m not saying it’s perfect, again I’m just not game experienced enough to make such a declaration. But, it does seem interesting. And so far as I’m aware, it’s an entirely new rule, rather than say, the equivalent of a free stratagem each turn.

As GW’s approach to countering Soup, I’m wondering what equivalent rule you think might suit other armies?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
How do?

So not completely sure I’ve got the rule’s name right, but it’s the bonus Space Marines get if they’re a mono-Codex army, and forego Soup.

It’s a nice bonus, and rather than dissuade Soup as such, provides an advantage to mono-Codex play.

Now, I’m not saying it’s perfect, again I’m just not game experienced enough to make such a declaration. But, it does seem interesting. And so far as I’m aware, it’s an entirely new rule, rather than say, the equivalent of a free stratagem each turn.

As GW’s approach to countering Soup, I’m wondering what equivalent rule you think might suit other armies?

This proves GW suck as rules writing. Angels of Death is just shorthand for four other special rules. The rule you're thinking of is Combat Doctrines.

That aside, while I like the theory, all it's done is layer on more special rules not on the datasheets based on the level of "purity" of an army, which just causes confusion. I do like the idea that Mono-Codex gets additional buffs while soup get to have unit variety, but the problem right now is that soup generates more CP which is more valuable than any piddly bonus to AP.

Right now a SM army can be:
Pure Single Chapter w/ Single Chapter Detachments: Chapter Trait, Combat Doctrines and Combat Doctrine Extension (for UM and WS right now).
Pure Space Marines w/ Single Chapter Detachments: Chapter Trait, Combat Doctrines
Pure Space Marines w/ Mixed Chapter Detachments: Combat Doctrines
Soup w/ Single Chapter Detachments: Chapter Trait.
Soup w/ Mixed Chapter Detachments: Nothing.

Add to that the rules about successors not getting Ancestor relics unless they also pay for them and it's just a total fustercluck.

It’s still something to give an option against Soup.

Consider Loyal 32. Whilst not to my taste, I cannot blame people who use it. For minimal points, you get some back field objective holders, and a poop load of CPs, which enable the rest of your force to punch above its weight.

Combat Doctrines however offer a reason not to just take Loyal 32, without swinging it too far in the other direction. I think what I’m grasping at is it not being a ‘no more loyal 32’ thing, so much as ‘mono-Codex is a serious option now’.

Of course, it will all depend on what’s exactly in your army.

I can see monochapter becoming a thing thanks to doctrines.
I can build decently cheap detachments with scouts or tacticals, and retain all of the doctrine stuff, or I can save a few points by using an IG detachment and lose all of the ap.

An extra ap-1 on all of your rapid fire bolters is nothing to shrug at for turn two. Same goes for autocannons being ap-2 on turn one. It's not "piddly"

aren't the doctrines just a reboot of one of the many suspect idea's from the tail end of seventh ?

and whilst the buffs are interesting I suspect more access to stratagems via CP farms are still more fluid, as they fixed nature of doctrines does allow, in theory, some counterplay, wheres beside Vect strats are pretty unstopple

Don't forget that SPACE MARINE =/= Space Marines =/= Adeptus Astartes (Blood angels + Ravenguard = no doctrine while ravenguard + iron hands = doctrine)

An important thing to remember is that outside of UM and WS, as BCB kind of highlighted, we don't have the full rules for doctrines yet for everyone. Those super doctrine rules are the true prize here.

Lemondish wrote:
An important thing to remember is that outside of UM and WS, as BCB kind of highlighted, we don't have the full rules for doctrines yet for everyone. Those super doctrine rules are the true prize here.

The super doctrines activate only if you don't soup marine chapters, so it's another level of codex purity.

If you do a list with WS and UM, you only get normal doctrines.

It's a quite elegant system to make every choice viable, and one i would like expanded for all factions. Too bad that means that we will have a lot of supplements.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Thinking about it, it is more likely that we are going to see only 2 sub factions per faction for now, and that will be as part of the psy awakening campaign.

The awakening video mentioned "Tyranids amassing on the Angels of Baal", so Leviathan is a given. What other tendril is in that area?

Spoletta wrote:

Lemondish wrote:
An important thing to remember is that outside of UM and WS, as BCB kind of highlighted, we don't have the full rules for doctrines yet for everyone. Those super doctrine rules are the true prize here.

The super doctrines activate only if you don't soup marine chapters, so it's another level of codex purity.

If you do a list with WS and UM, you only get normal doctrines.

It's a quite elegant system to make every choice viable, and one i would like expanded for all factions. Too bad that means that we will have a lot of supplements.

I think it's just unfortunate that they're introducing that system now when they hinted at that right from the beginning of 8th edition. Makes every codex released in 8th up until SM 2.0 feel like a Beta Codex (even CSM 2.0).
However, if it's done though campaign books I'm kind of okay with it. And if they keep it reasonably balanced like in Vigilus. So far Marines don't seem to be decurion Necrons from 7th edition and that's a good thing. Put something like Combat doctrines on Dark Eldar or Imperial Guard and the picture might change.

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
aren't the doctrines just a reboot of one of the many suspect idea's from the tail end of seventh ?

No. you're thinking the space Marine doctrines from 6th and 7th edition. you likely only became aware of them in 7th when you where given access to them if you took a Gladius (it was the reason to take a non battle company gladius) but they'd been around since the start of 6th edition as the Ultramarines chapter tactics. the gladius giving more uses of doctrines (it was back then a 1 time thing) no one even noted it as the doctrines where... eh. they COULD be potent but where oft forgot about TBH.

Just a reminder this is about speculating what other races may receive as their equivalent for not souping, not whether this specific rule is any good or well written.

With that in mind, we’re now seeing how Iron Hands and Raven Guard get specific boosts, to better reflect their background intended play styles.

How does that feed into the general braintank’s speculation?

I suspect other factions get nothing for not souping for the next 3 months, GW thought chapter tactics 1 faction at a time was a good idea. Then we might see a twinkle of mono-codex buffs for DA, BA and GK. Then CSM mono-codex buffs and Xenos mono-codex buffs. I don't think we'll see mono sub-faction buffs before 2021, instead they'll try to fix their mistakes with errata and faq and xenos will probably get a decent amount of love in releases that look like Vigilus.

Alternatively, we might get 1 sub-faction bonus for each participating faction in a given campaign book, randomly scattering these bonuses around if you choose to dedicate an entire army to it. It's not going to be well thought out and the game won't be balanced for a long time to come is my grim prophecy. GW really screwed over the matched play community and the GK/BA/DA/CSM community in particular with this ill-thought-out release. It'd have been so easy to give a nerf to soup by something tiny or large like -1/-5 CP and replace combat doctrines and legion focus with a few more Stratagems or just 10 more WL traits, one for each company.

I hope every faction bonus will be split into 2: a few small specialized boni you always get, and 1 game changer but which you get if every model in the army is from the same [Faction].

 Shadenuat wrote:
I hope every faction bonus will be split into 2: a few small specialized boni you always get, and 1 game changer but which you get if every model in the army is from the same [Faction].

So you want soup armies to get more rules? So if you are playing CSM/Renegades/Daemons you get 3 new rules?

That's completely opposite of what I said.

So if someone takes a unit, he gets the stock rules. More or less what is on the unit page, and some over laping big stuff, like all marines get the bolter and +1A thingy. Maybe all elder would get something else, as all tau/necron/orcs etc. Then armies played mono would always get one big bonus, like having the 3 doctrins, and those then could be modified what ever you play a specific sub faction. Am I understanding this right ?

 Shadenuat wrote:
That's completely opposite of what I said.

Can you try to explain what you actually want with other words? You said that you wanted new rules for all factions regardless of anything, so I supposed that was including soup. Then you said you wanted a second part to those new rules if they were mono-faction.

Is that you don't want shared combat doctrines for all Hive Fleets for example but instead you want specific combat doctrines for each fleet if they don't take AM/GSC and then a bonus part of the doctrine if it's the only hive fleet?

Ok, since this thread calls for random speculation, that is exactly what i'm going to do!

Tyranids: (This is all assuming that the hyve fleet trains remain identical)

If you have only hive fleet models in your army, then shadow in the warp also decreases Ld by 1 for non tyranid models and models under synapse coverage get a +1 Str and +1 to charge and advance rolls. (Perfect synapse web, so empowered shadow in the warp and can strain more the bugs)

Also, if all the models in the army have "Hive Fleet: Leviathan" then: Extend the 6+++ save to 12" from synpatic creatures and the units under synapse coverage can reroll a single dice per phase.

If all the models in the army have "Hive Fleet: Kraken" then: Units under synapse coverage can advance and charge. Also, those units can ignore the hit penalty for advancing and shooting with assault weapons.

If all the models in the army have "Hive Fleet: Behemoth" then: Units under synapse coverage gain +1 WS in a turn where they succesfully charged an enemy unit. Also, those models can fire assault weapons as if they were Pistol weapons.

If all the models in the army have "Hive Fleet: Gorgon" then: Units under synapse coverage gain a +1 bonus on melee and shooting wound rolls.

If all the models in the army have "Hive Fleet: Jormungar" then: Units without fly that enter from reserves can do so 3" inches closer to enemy models than normally allowed. Also, reduce the range of shooting weapons by 6" (Minimum 6") when targeting models with this trait that are under synapse coverage and completely in or within a terrain element.

 vict0988 wrote:

 Shadenuat wrote:
That's completely opposite of what I said.

Can you try to explain what you actually want with other words? You said that you wanted new rules for all factions regardless of anything, so I supposed that was including soup. Then you said you wanted a second part to those new rules if they were mono-faction.

Is that you don't want shared combat doctrines for all Hive Fleets for example but instead you want specific combat doctrines for each fleet if they don't take AM/GSC and then a bonus part of the doctrine if it's the only hive fleet?

He means he wants to see more bonuses like Space Marines get - a significant bonus for playing Mono Faction instead of bringing in allies, while still having a few flavour rules regardless.

An example for Craftworlds:

Saim-Hann units re-roll charges and bikes ignore to hit penalty for heavy weapons. (Current rule)

If every unit in the army shares Saim-Hann keyword, they get +1S on charge.

How should the balance lay between the portions and win-rates of armies that are single sub-faction, single faction, double faction and 3+ factions? Should the fluff of different armies determine how good their mono codex and mono faction rewards are or should all armies be equally pushed in the direction of going single faction or single sub-faction. The Harlequins, for example, seem more likely to ally with Drukhari than Drukhari would be to ally with Harlequins. Grey Knights are under the administration of the daemon hunter inquisitors, while the Salamanders don't have someone they answer to or work as closely with in the same way except perhaps Roubute Guilliman. Should these things will be considered, should certain alliances get similar buffs to what single faction or single sub-factions get?

Also if you want to suggest or discuss possible house rules rather than make predictions for GW might do then I made a thread for that. https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/780052.page

 Shadenuat wrote:
An example for Craftworlds:

Saim-Hann units re-roll charges and bikes ignore to hit penalty for heavy weapons. (Current rule)

If every unit in the army shares Saim-Hann keyword, they get +1S on charge.

Do you wish for a Craftworld bonus as well? A benefit for not allying with Drukhari or Harlequins or is that not something you want, just all the available "power space" or whatever you want to call it into making singular Craftworld abilities powerful instead of diverting part of it into something like Combat Doctrines?

I still think nerfs would have been the better route for balancing soup, you won't see a single Iron Hands Assault Squad despite the number of Iron Hands players becoming much higher in the coming months, that's despite the Iron Hands having more than 200 Assault Marines when they are at full strength. I don't think that's fluffy. With all the Stratagems, Relics and Traits GW has still massively shaped how different chapters are, but each person's Iron Hands will look very similar to the next.

It's very much like Yugioh when they around GX decided to make a certain archetype have very tight chemistry, but little chemistry with cards outside that little core archetype. That isn't really fun for anyone in my amateur opinion, it is not fun for people that play because every Iron Hands list will look similar, matchups will quickly begin to feel the same. It's not fun for IH players that brew lists because innovation will not be rewarded. It's not fun for collectors because you'll want to stack up on the same few units that have good chemistry with the rules that the subfaction gets and units that don't fit within that scheme might never get buffed because they might be fine or even OP within the scheme of a different sub-faction. The only people that might feel that it is rewarding is those that build meta buster lists since if every player is doing their own unique thing there won't be any meta to break.