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.

My mind is back on this subject again, trying to work out ways to counterbalance CP. Some of the issues I perceive are:

Soup for CP. no issues with themed allies, but when it's just for CP, it's a problem.
CP being more use to some armies than others
no reward for themed armies

My suggestions to fix this without punishing people who want to mix their armies:

1: Implement a dual value CP for detachments. One detachment get's the first value, subsequent ones get the second. EG Battalion would be 5/2, Brigade would be 8/3, spearheads etc would be 1/0, so you only gain the additional slots, but not the CP.
Combined with this - reduce the HQ tax on battalions to 1, like it used to be. it won't be an issue with the reduced CP output of soup.

2: Bid CP for the first turn, each battle round. This gives a tactical advantage to players with armies which function without spending CP, and means you can bid high late-game for a double turn. Bids are secret - put dice in your hand equal to the amount of CP you wish to bid, and then reveal simultaneously. If a tie, whoever had the last turn loses (it keeps alternating).

Not 100% on the themed armies, aside from bringing back formations tor themes (EG a dreadmob doesn't need troops, but has no access to fast attack or flier options). Dedicated detachments for army themes, which can only be used by specific armies, would work for this. rules like "must contain at least 3 units of deff dreads or killa kans" can be added, thus restricting the design but allowing you to build themed lists and still get CP for it.

Thoughts?

My thoughts are the same as always.

Have CP tied to Point values. For example, either 1 cp / 100 pts = 15 cp pool for 1500 points at start of game, or 1 cp + 1/500 pts per turn = 4 points per turn at 1500 points.

Then, rebalance stratagems to reflect in-game power. A stratagem that gives effect “A” to one IG Infantry Unit costs 2 cp, but a stratagem that gives effect “A” to one Marine unit costs 3 cp, and a stratagem that gives effect “A” to a single Knight costs 5 cp... as you’re leveraging ever-larger units with the same effect.

In the end, CP should be translatable to “points” you spend in-game for certain effects that only are useable when you pay the cp for them. “Re-roll Charge Distance - X cp” could be right on a unit’s data card. Basic Assault Marines? 1 cp. Elite Jump Troops? 2 cp... because you’re getting a more valuable effect from an elite blender unit making its charge than a “tie-up” troop making cc.

“Summon Daemon Swarm - X” Summon X cp times 20 points of Daemonic infantry units, anywhere on the battlefield more than 9” away from enemy units. Make a note of unused points. These may be used on future summoning attempts. - So 5 cp = 100 points of deep striking Daemon Infantry, for example. One could extrapolate the value of cp from that. Again, just examples and not well thought out specific values.

The game desperately needs help in focusing on the missions and away from list building.

By wagering CP's to take advantage favors those who can afford to start with a lot of CP's. If this was implemented, the "optimal" list building would be to always have more than 6 CP than your opponent and bet 6 CP's or equal to opponent's current CP pool to either run his CP dry or always take 1st turn after the 1st round.

I do like the idea of making stratagems cost a different amount depending on what you're using it on - basing it on power level would be an easy way to go about it, I think, as there are too many individual units to be writing a stratagem for each of them.

I'm still not sold on CP being exclusively based on the points of the game - there would be no reason for an army to bring anything but their best CP-users to a battle. I don't like the idea of a spam army being equal in command structure to an army with an actual command structure.

One way to change this, and make it work to have the CP tied to points, would be to tie stratagems to specific models, in the same way as imperial guard orders work. The unit leaders would be able to use stratagems depending on a keyword that they would have, EG "Warlord", "Commander", "Sub-Commander" and "Squad Leader".

Then we have these 4 categories, as well as one for army-wide and pre-deployment ones, which mean that the structure of your forces means a lot more to how you use the CP, rather than how you gain it.

For example, the squad leader stratagems would likely have a 6" range, and generally target infantry/bikes. Warlord ones would have much bigger effects and ranges, and would offer more effect for your CP, as only the warlord can do them, and if he dies you'll lose access to them.

One of the Squad Leader ones could be to give Objective Secured to a troops unit within 6", and then we remove it from all troops (but give all armies this stratagem).

Veteran squads could have sub-commander leaders, meaning they get more stratagems

Minor HQ units would be sub-commanders (ork painboys/meks, crypteks, etc)

HQ units would be commanders

only your warlord would be a warlord (obviously)

Units without leaders (Necrons in general, lootas, etc) would have to adapt the rule - I would allow necrons to have squad-leader on all their models (as none of their units have leaders) so they can always access their basic strats. I'd have lootas perhaps have a dedicated strat that they can use but they will need support to get anything else. Same story with Gretchin (thinking "Hide" for 1CP for +3 for cover, but lose D6 models for gretchin sneaking off/getting stuck)

Details of the stratagems aside, what do you all think?

 some bloke wrote:
1: Implement a dual value CP for detachments. One detachment get's the first value, subsequent ones get the second. EG Battalion would be 5/2, Brigade would be 8/3, spearheads etc would be 1/0, so you only gain the additional slots, but not the CP.
Combined with this - reduce the HQ tax on battalions to 1, like it used to be. it won't be an issue with the reduced CP output of soup.

So super-heavy detachment + battalion + spearhead gets the same as they do currently but a double vanguard gets 1 less? Bad idea, non-Battalion lists are already bad enough I think. If it's full CP for the first and then less for the following it's just going to be a huge nerf to any multi-detachment army, which would be fine, except Guard Brigades are cheap as socks and then you can still put whatever else you want on top. So still no real punishment for soup.

2: Bid CP for the first turn, each battle round. This gives a tactical advantage to players with armies which function without spending CP, and means you can bid high late-game for a double turn. Bids are secret - put dice in your hand equal to the amount of CP you wish to bid, and then reveal simultaneously. If a tie, whoever had the last turn loses (it keeps alternating).

I don't like it, I think it's going to determine too many games in a one-two by hiding and going second. You spend 6 CP turn 2 and if your opponent also spends 6 CP you'll do the same thing next turn for a double turn.

Not 100% on the themed armies, aside from bringing back formations tor themes (EG a dreadmob doesn't need troops, but has no access to fast attack or flier options). Dedicated detachments for army themes, which can only be used by specific armies, would work for this. rules like "must contain at least 3 units of deff dreads or killa kans" can be added, thus restricting the design but allowing you to build themed lists and still get CP for it.

Just take a spearhead with a Big Mek. Nobody should get extra CP or special detachment requirements except where required like with Assasins, look at how good triple Knight lists are. Give them specialist detachments instead, let them pay for more options don't just pay them more because of one specific list that was featured in some fluff piece. You could write a new fluff piece for every type of list composition to justify getting more benefits, let people forge their own narratives or if they want to do cool things they see in the fluff give them specialist detachments so they can pay for those benefits.

Rules for 2k games: max 3 detachments 15 CP at the start.

Brigade, Fortification Network -0 CP
Auxiliary Support -1 CP
Battalion, Super-heavy Auxiliary -2 CP
Air Wing, Patrol, Outrider, Super-heavy, Supreme Command, Spearhead, Vanguard -3 CP

If all units in your army have the Angels of Death ability or a similar ability granted by only having models from a single codex -3 CP

If units in your army have the Devastating Charge ability or another similar ability gained by only having models from a single sub-faction - 1 CP

As far as armies with bad Stratagems vs armies with good Stratagems, I'd just nerf the OP ones and buff the UP ones instead of replacing Stratagems with double turns for factions with UP Stratagems, also, more specialist detachments, fewer sub-faction codexes. Nerfs could just be increased cost for high-PL units if you wanted Endless Cacophony to be used on smaller squads.