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 think a lot of things would be better if GW actually brought out a new edition (hehe, I said it) that fixes assault and makes it dangerous again.

You know the system is broke when every single assault unit needs assault grenades and a reliable transport and needs to be fielded with plenty other assault units at the same time or its not worth fielding at all.

 krodarklorr wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:
My girlfriend wanted to play a 500 point game last night to help her ease back into the game after not playing for a few months. I had to make a 750 point list and persuade her to up the limit because it wasn't possible as Decurion. Yet another downside, if you could call it that.

Haha, your girlfriend wants a nice calm game to ease into 40k again, and you can't just give her a 500p game, because you refuse to play even the absolute pinnacle of what anyone would call a "friendly game" without Decurion.
Holy Cruddace, am I the only one that finds that hilarious?
There has to be something we can learn from that.

Is that game in your : 20/4/1 ?

It is not, no. Call it what you want, I just prefer to use Decurion. I won't lie, I don't even remember what it's like to build a list otherwise.

But you made the claim that you couldn't field a Decurion for 500 points, which is completely false. I believe the minimum cost for the Reclamation League is around 350 points. You just can't take a Reclamation League and one of the more desirable detatchments, such as the Canoptek Harvest for 500, but I believe the RL and the harvest can fit in 750....that's a good way to be single

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:
My girlfriend wanted to play a 500 point game last night to help her ease back into the game after not playing for a few months. I had to make a 750 point list and persuade her to up the limit because it wasn't possible as Decurion. Yet another downside, if you could call it that.

Haha, your girlfriend wants a nice calm game to ease into 40k again, and you can't just give her a 500p game, because you refuse to play even the absolute pinnacle of what anyone would call a "friendly game" without Decurion.
Holy Cruddace, am I the only one that finds that hilarious?
There has to be something we can learn from that.

Is that game in your : 20/4/1 ?

It is not, no. Call it what you want, I just prefer to use Decurion. I won't lie, I don't even remember what it's like to build a list otherwise.

But you made the claim that you couldn't field a Decurion for 500 points, which is completely false. I believe the minimum cost for the Reclamation League is around 350 points. You just can't take a Reclamation League and one of the more desirable detatchments, such as the Canoptek Harvest for 500, but I believe the RL and the harvest can fit in 750....that's a good way to be single

Base cost of just the Reclamation legion with no upgrades is 479. And you're still required to bring an auxiliary. >.>

But you made the claim that you couldn't field a Decurion for 500 points, which is completely false

Absolute minimum for a decurion (reclaimation + flayed one detachment) is 544.

 krodarklorr wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:
My girlfriend wanted to play a 500 point game last night to help her ease back into the game after not playing for a few months. I had to make a 750 point list and persuade her to up the limit because it wasn't possible as Decurion. Yet another downside, if you could call it that.

Haha, your girlfriend wants a nice calm game to ease into 40k again, and you can't just give her a 500p game, because you refuse to play even the absolute pinnacle of what anyone would call a "friendly game" without Decurion.
Holy Cruddace, am I the only one that finds that hilarious?
There has to be something we can learn from that.

Is that game in your : 20/4/1 ?

It is not, no. Call it what you want, I just prefer to use Decurion. I won't lie, I don't even remember what it's like to build a list otherwise.

This would seem to indicate a major balance issue if a traditional CAD is such a poor alternative that it's forgotten altogether.



As for the 500pt game discussion going on, 500pts has always been awkward and never a particularly recommended level to play at. In the past, Necrons used to only barely be able to play 500pt games with two minimum units of Warriors and a Lord with a Res orb. The idea that there's a major drawback to the Decurion not being able to play 500pt games because it won't fit is kinda silly because the game really just is not meant for that points level and just does not function well there at all.

 Sir Arun wrote:
I think a lot of things would be better if GW actually brought out a new edition (hehe, I said it) that fixes assault and makes it dangerous again.

You know the system is broke when every single assault unit needs assault grenades and a reliable transport and needs to be fielded with plenty other assault units at the same time or its not worth fielding at all.

Highly agreed.

 Big Blind Bill wrote:

But you made the claim that you couldn't field a Decurion for 500 points, which is completely false

Absolute minimum for a decurion (reclaimation + flayed one detachment) is 544.

My mistake, I forgot about the requirement auxilery unit.

If it helps, I think the Decurion and the Khorne thingie are models of things to come and that other armies will get the same treatment. Which I am all for.

Yoyoyo wrote:

lustigjh wrote:
I think you're severely underestimating Wraiths. I had a 20 cultist blob with Dark Apostle get mulched in two turns (something like 17 died in round 1 so the Wraiths got to stay locked during my shooting phase). I even tried to get the charge but unfortunately beasts are much more likely to be getting charges than massed infantry.

Not getting the charge is going to hurt, that's another tactical problem. As for their damage potential, you want to stay away from throwing a 100pt unit into combat with them, only 3-5pt bodies. They need to kill 43x 5pt models to make their points back. Obviously getting something like Invisibility or Mental Fortitude into them would help a lot, so keep looking for solutions. They will be out there.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I literally stopped reading after you talked about catching Tomb Blades in melee.

Suit yourself.

I agree, you're severely underestimating the strength of Wraiths.

You can't tarpit Wraiths with cheap units. They mulch them way too quickly. You can't bash Wraiths with awesome melee units because they have high initiative, hit hard in return, and they still have a 3++ to survive all your power-fists or other nasty melee abilities. You can't shoot Wraiths because they're high toughness, again with a 3++, and will often have a 4+ RP roll after that. You can't ignore Wraiths because they're too dangerous. You can't avoid Wraiths because they're too fast.

For most armies, the "solution" to Wraiths is a unit that costs 2-3 times as much as a Wraith unit does, and for some armies EVEN THEN you will lose to the Wraiths, or you will lose to the rest of the Necron army because you had to devote 300 points to killing a unit that only cost your opponent 120 points.

They are a completely unbalanced unit, plain and simple.

 MajorStoffer wrote:


Tactical marines don't get better. You either chose the right chapter tactics which elevate them from bad to "meh," or they're gak. Necron Warriors start of good, better than most standard troops I'd argue, somewhere around Guard Veterans and Fire Warriors, but being the most durable troops in the game rather than having especially high firepower. The Decurion makes them as durable, if not slightly more durable than Tactical Terminators, and tomb blades? Ignore cover jetbikes with guns which would make Tau jealous.

Doesn't sound like a tax to me, and certainly not an opportunity cost. What would you be taking instead of the Decurion options?

Warriors outside the Decurion are pretty much exactly as durable as Tactical Marines...

vs. lasguns

Marine 1/3 x 1/3 = 1/9
NW 1/3 x 1/2 x 2/3 = 1/9

vs. bolters

Marine 1/2 x 1/3 = 1/6
NW 1/2 x 1/2 x 2/3 = 1/6

vs. heavy bolters

Marine 2/3 x 1/3 = 2/9
NW 2/3 x 2/3 = 4/9

vs. plasma

Marine 5/6
NW 5/6 x 2/3 = 5/9

I.e. Marines are more durable vs. AP4, Necrons vs. AP2 and 3. Vs. standard small arms they are identical.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Murrdox wrote:

Yoyoyo wrote:

lustigjh wrote:
I think you're severely underestimating Wraiths. I had a 20 cultist blob with Dark Apostle get mulched in two turns (something like 17 died in round 1 so the Wraiths got to stay locked during my shooting phase). I even tried to get the charge but unfortunately beasts are much more likely to be getting charges than massed infantry.

Not getting the charge is going to hurt, that's another tactical problem. As for their damage potential, you want to stay away from throwing a 100pt unit into combat with them, only 3-5pt bodies. They need to kill 43x 5pt models to make their points back. Obviously getting something like Invisibility or Mental Fortitude into them would help a lot, so keep looking for solutions. They will be out there.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I literally stopped reading after you talked about catching Tomb Blades in melee.

Suit yourself.

I agree, you're severely underestimating the strength of Wraiths.

You can't tarpit Wraiths with cheap units. They mulch them way too quickly. You can't bash Wraiths with awesome melee units because they have high initiative, hit hard in return, and they still have a 3++ to survive all your power-fists or other nasty melee abilities. You can't shoot Wraiths because they're high toughness, again with a 3++, and will often have a 4+ RP roll after that. You can't ignore Wraiths because they're too dangerous. You can't avoid Wraiths because they're too fast.

For most armies, the "solution" to Wraiths is a unit that costs 2-3 times as much as a Wraith unit does, and for some armies EVEN THEN you will lose to the Wraiths, or you will lose to the rest of the Necron army because you had to devote 300 points to killing a unit that only cost your opponent 120 points.

They are a completely unbalanced unit, plain and simple.

While I agree they are unbalanced, a Wraith kills 0.583 MEQ in close combat, 1.083 Ork Boyz, and 1.22 GEQ.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It will take 6 of them half the game to get through a full squad of marines.

Yoyoyo wrote:

lustigjh wrote:
I think you're severely underestimating Wraiths. I had a 20 cultist blob with Dark Apostle get mulched in two turns (something like 17 died in round 1 so the Wraiths got to stay locked during my shooting phase). I even tried to get the charge but unfortunately beasts are much more likely to be getting charges than massed infantry.

Not getting the charge is going to hurt, that's another tactical problem. As for their damage potential, you want to stay away from throwing a 100pt unit into combat with them, only 3-5pt bodies. They need to kill 43x 5pt models to make their points back. Obviously getting something like Invisibility or Mental Fortitude into them would help a lot, so keep looking for solutions. They will be out there.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I literally stopped reading after you talked about catching Tomb Blades in melee.

Suit yourself.

Invisibility is literally a solution for everything. That's not anything new you just pulled out of your head.
Also, you suggested tarpitting a Jetbike. That's simply ludicrous.

Alcibiades wrote:

While I agree they are unbalanced, a Wraith kills 0.583 MEQ in close combat, 1.083 Ork Boyz, and 1.22 GEQ.

It will take 6 of them half the game to get through a full squad of marines.

I agree they are more heavily unbalanced on the defensive side than the offensive side, but I fail to see how that really matters. They're still dangerous enough that no player can ignore or avoid them. Even if you sacrifice a full tactical squad to slow them for a couple turns you're still likely going to have a lot of Wraiths left to deal with when they finish shredding them.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Did you want to include the unit? No? And that unit costs points? Then that is a cost you did not want to bear.

No matter how objectively / relatively good those units may be, it is still a tax. For example you simply cannot get a decurion of any decent composition at lower levels, if you want to take a Monolith youre taking an Obeliesk as well, etc.

Its the same issue as poorly analysing PAGK and deciding theyre undercosts, as a power weapon on a S4 model costs 15 points, so they should be at least 30 point.s. Its a poor analysis that doesnt take into account that "mandatory" always provides a discount over "optional".

Um, yes, by taking a Decurion you DO want to include these units. The Decurion is, wait for it, optional! You have the option to take a CAD and still get 4+ RP on certain units with certain HQ choices. By choosing to take Decurion over CAD, you are opting to take units you claim you don't want. Fortunately, you don't have to. They are not being forced on you. Just don't take these unwanted units and take a CAD instead. Because a Necron CAD is still really, really good! And guess what? Even with a lowly CAD, you will still do pretty well, because Necrons are, top to bottom, a solid army with or without the Decurion. If Necrons couldn't be run as a CAD, then you would actually be paying a tax.

There's a big difference between a Cryptek 4+, which only works on one unit and can be sniped out, and army-wide 4+.

I mean, to get 4 units of Warriors 4+ RP using CAD, thats 260 points IIRC. At that point I'd be inclined to go whole-hog and buy the Invul, too, so that'd be 360 worth of HQ.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Invisibility is literally a solution for everything. That's not anything new you just pulled out of your head.
Also, you suggested tarpitting a Jetbike. That's simply ludicrous.

Ok, invisibility. What solution would his lordship prefer?

Look, I don't need to tarpit or kill a single Tomb Blade to win. I just need to control them. I halve their damage output with Gauss just by keeping them outside 12". Shooting gives me zero control, close to zero effect, zero real threat and simply incurs opportunity cost when I could have targeted a softer unit like a Warrior or Immortal. Instead, I plan to take the hit from the Tomb Blade on a unit that can afford to, control my space, and stay focused on cutting down the horde. If he comes within 18", I pounce. I don't fall for the distraction Carnifex -- I manage it and stay on track with my game plan.

BTW, it looks like an Ironclad Dreadnought w/Icon of Glory stands a decent chance with a 4++ (Forewarning). I didn't run the stats but the Dread won a few times when I diced it out. So we will eventually find ways to deal with the Wraiths too.

sweetbacon wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Did you want to include the unit? No? And that unit costs points? Then that is a cost you did not want to bear.

No matter how objectively / relatively good those units may be, it is still a tax. For example you simply cannot get a decurion of any decent composition at lower levels, if you want to take a Monolith youre taking an Obeliesk as well, etc.

Its the same issue as poorly analysing PAGK and deciding theyre undercosts, as a power weapon on a S4 model costs 15 points, so they should be at least 30 point.s. Its a poor analysis that doesnt take into account that "mandatory" always provides a discount over "optional".

Um, yes, by taking a Decurion you DO want to include these units. The Decurion is, wait for it, optional! You have the option to take a CAD and still get 4+ RP on certain units with certain HQ choices. By choosing to take Decurion over CAD, you are opting to take units you claim you don't want. Fortunately, you don't have to. They are not being forced on you. Just don't take these unwanted units and take a CAD instead. Because a Necron CAD is still really, really good! And guess what? Even with a lowly CAD, you will still do pretty well, because Necrons are, top to bottom, a solid army with or without the Decurion. If Necrons couldn't be run as a CAD, then you would actually be paying a tax.

Even admitting Necron CAD is 'really, really good', it's still most likely significantly worse than a Decurion.

That being said, 'you have to take X to be competitive' is a thing most codexes have. Want to play Tyranids for example? You have the totally free choice to take flyrants or suck.

sweetbacon wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Did you want to include the unit? No? And that unit costs points? Then that is a cost you did not want to bear.

No matter how objectively / relatively good those units may be, it is still a tax. For example you simply cannot get a decurion of any decent composition at lower levels, if you want to take a Monolith youre taking an Obeliesk as well, etc.

Its the same issue as poorly analysing PAGK and deciding theyre undercosts, as a power weapon on a S4 model costs 15 points, so they should be at least 30 point.s. Its a poor analysis that doesnt take into account that "mandatory" always provides a discount over "optional".

Um, yes, by taking a Decurion you DO want to include these units. The Decurion is, wait for it, optional! You have the option to take a CAD and still get 4+ RP on certain units with certain HQ choices. By choosing to take Decurion over CAD, you are opting to take units you claim you don't want. Fortunately, you don't have to. They are not being forced on you. Just don't take these unwanted units and take a CAD instead. Because a Necron CAD is still really, really good! And guess what? Even with a lowly CAD, you will still do pretty well, because Necrons are, top to bottom, a solid army with or without the Decurion. If Necrons couldn't be run as a CAD, then you would actually be paying a tax.

Sigh.

You're taking a decurion because you want the benefits of arm wide 4+ RP. This forces units on you you would not have had to take otherwise in a CAD, and forces you to take specific formations in order to add any models outside of the RL. This is the tax you are paying. This is not debateable, this is a factual item.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

sweetbacon wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Did you want to include the unit? No? And that unit costs points? Then that is a cost you did not want to bear.

No matter how objectively / relatively good those units may be, it is still a tax. For example you simply cannot get a decurion of any decent composition at lower levels, if you want to take a Monolith youre taking an Obeliesk as well, etc.

Its the same issue as poorly analysing PAGK and deciding theyre undercosts, as a power weapon on a S4 model costs 15 points, so they should be at least 30 point.s. Its a poor analysis that doesnt take into account that "mandatory" always provides a discount over "optional".

Um, yes, by taking a Decurion you DO want to include these units. The Decurion is, wait for it, optional! You have the option to take a CAD and still get 4+ RP on certain units with certain HQ choices. By choosing to take Decurion over CAD, you are opting to take units you claim you don't want. Fortunately, you don't have to. They are not being forced on you. Just don't take these unwanted units and take a CAD instead. Because a Necron CAD is still really, really good! And guess what? Even with a lowly CAD, you will still do pretty well, because Necrons are, top to bottom, a solid army with or without the Decurion. If Necrons couldn't be run as a CAD, then you would actually be paying a tax.

Sigh.

You're taking a decurion because you want the benefits of arm wide 4+ RP. This forces units on you you would not have had to take otherwise in a CAD, and forces you to take specific formations in order to add any models outside of the RL. This is the tax you are paying. This is not debateable, this is a factual item.

Isn't that true for anything though? Any detachment that has mandatory units/slots (CAD included) has a tax.

Yes, I wasnt saying it wasnt. It is, however, a much greater tax than a CAD, so in a strict comparison between the two, with a CAD being the default, there IS a cost associated with the Decurion benefit; loss of obsec being one, the other being the very high minium mandatory spend of over 500 points, and the requriement to include troops you may not have a use for / your local meta simply treats as expensive warriors, models you may dislike, and a restriction on how you access additional units within the army by placing even more requirements.

Claiming there is no cost to a decurion is objectively false.

Necrons just require a different focus to beat and shifts the metagame in a major way. They're not a push-over and I'm not nearly naive or stupid enough to suggest that they are or I'm that good, but I do manage a 50/50 win against them with my IG.

Spamming (large) blasts is your friend. Assault is your friend. Tarpitting is your friend. Suicide units are your friend.

The only thing I don't have any easy answer to is the Enclave with Nightbringer. But that makes me happy in a weird way because I love his fluff.

But seriously, assaulting and blasts of any kind other than small (barring wyverns). Forcing saves sounds hard until you're forcing the majority of the unit to make a simultaneous save and dropping their RP. Dropping large blasts or suicide units to take out the spider cuts wraith survivability in half, if I don't tie them up with cheap fodder for the rest of the game first.

People are stuck now, and I have no doubt people will come up with theoretical scenarios and deny what I'm saying. But in a few months they'll find it out and tournaments will prove Necrons are strong, but just as beatable as other upper-mid or top tier armies when you shift your strategy appropriately.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Claiming there is no cost to a decurion is objectively false.

There's restrictions, but that's not remotely the same as a cost.

So being forced to take both 2 warrior units and an immortals unit, alongside a unit of bikes, is not a cost over and above the requirements of a CAD? Please, enlighten me as to how you are getting these free units?

nosferatu1001 wrote:
So being forced to take both 2 warrior units and an immortals unit, alongside a unit of bikes, is not a cost over and above the requirements of a CAD? Please, enlighten me as to how you are getting these free units?

Go ahead and point out the abnormal cost to them.

Like I said, that's a restriction. Completely different thing.

changemod wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
So being forced to take both 2 warrior units and an immortals unit, alongside a unit of bikes, is not a cost over and above the requirements of a CAD? Please, enlighten me as to how you are getting these free units?

Go ahead and point out the abnormal cost to them.

Like I said, that's a restriction. Completely different thing.

It is a cost you pay in order to gain the benefits of army wide 4+, over and above the cost you would normally pay to play a bound army using a CAD.

Its not even a restriction using the meaning of the word correctluy, it is a requirement of you fielding a decurion. WHich is a completely different thing again.

Please show how the additional 85pts plus 3 bikes plus one other formation (deathmarks being cheapest, from memory) is free, i.e it COSTS nothing, over your minimum 2 warriors and an HQ (ignoring that you could take a cheaper HQ than the mandatory RL one, jsut to keep things simpler) in a CAD

Objectively there is a COST to fielding a decurion that is over and above the accepted "norm" of a CAD. This is factual.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

changemod wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
So being forced to take both 2 warrior units and an immortals unit, alongside a unit of bikes, is not a cost over and above the requirements of a CAD? Please, enlighten me as to how you are getting these free units?

Go ahead and point out the abnormal cost to them.

Like I said, that's a restriction. Completely different thing.

It is a cost you pay in order to gain the benefits of army wide 4+, over and above the cost you would normally pay to play a bound army using a CAD.

Its not even a restriction using the meaning of the word correctluy, it is a requirement of you fielding a decurion. WHich is a completely different thing again.

Please show how the additional 85pts plus 3 bikes plus one other formation (deathmarks being cheapest, from memory) is free, i.e it COSTS nothing, over your minimum 2 warriors and an HQ (ignoring that you could take a cheaper HQ than the mandatory RL one, jsut to keep things simpler) in a CAD

Objectively there is a COST to fielding a decurion that is over and above the accepted "norm" of a CAD. This is factual.

If CAD cost was an 'accepted norm', you wouldn't hear the words 'troop tax' ao often.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Objectively there is a COST to fielding a decurion that is over and above the accepted "norm" of a CAD. This is factual.

You are constrained by the Decurion. You are required to make more specific lists in order to use it.

You are not however paying a single damn point for the benefits.

And it's important to note that the restrictions placed upon your list do not in any way prevent you from making a power build. Perhaps not as amazing a power build if you had your cake and could eat it too, but at the end of the day nothing that cripples the ability to field a very powerful army. You can't necessarily build the fluffy or cool list you want to play, but that's not a serious problem when alternate list building methods, including unbound if all else fails, exist.

And the end of the day, if you are complaining about the Decurion's restrictions from a power perspective, you're being farcical.

Sigh. No, I have not made that claim. What I have claimed, and proven (it was trivial of course), is that the requirements of the decurion give rise to a cost you must pay in order to access the benefits of the decurion.

In order to receive the army wide benefits, you are paying an additional cost you MUSt pay, regardless of whether you WANT to pay that cost. That is a cost, and is indeed a tax on fielding a decurion. FFS, look up "opportunity cost", its been alluded to enough times.

I am a) not complaining, but objectively stating a fact, one you are missing by being imprecise with wording, and b) not saying you cannot make a powerful list.

I am pointing out, and proving, that there is indeed a cost to running a decurion. This is objective fact, and cannot be sensibly decried.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

LordBlades wrote:

If CAD cost was an 'accepted norm', you wouldn't hear the words 'troop tax' ao often.

the phrase "Troop tax" has existed since the FOC aka CAD was invented. Try again, with facts this time.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
i am pointing out, and proving, that there is indeed a cost to running a decurion. This is objective fact, and cannot be sensibly decried.

And I'm pointing out that you're systematically failing to describe anything that even loosely resembles a genuine cost. You are simply restating the existence of restrictions and trying to portray them as a genuine loss or tax. And make no mistake, an actual tax is defined by the loss it incurs.

The only way to get a tax out of a reclamation legion is to treat it as one. It's a formation that requires you to build a strong core gunline, which can be easily achieved by buying up a few unit upgrades to build synergy. Grabbing a minimum Reclamation Legion with units you don't want and filling up on gimmicky formations will give you dead points. Filling it up to roughly 1000 points will give you a substantial massed gunline that'll refuse to die.

Again, wrong word:

REQUIREMENTS

Those requirements come at a cost. This is the cost you pay to access the benefits. There is only so many ways to restate a simple concept.

In your quote snipping you have ignored the term "opportunity cost", look it up, and come back and explain how this opportunity cost you pay isnt actually one.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Again, wrong word:

REQUIREMENTS

Those requirements come at a cost. This is the cost you pay to access the benefits. There is only so many ways to restate a simple concept.

I think what you're looking to say here is there's only so many ways so backpedal before you're left with what is at absolute best, a pointless semantic distinction.

In your quote snipping you have ignored

Nothing, as I dismissed your point as a whole.

the term "opportunity cost", look it up, and come back and explain how this opportunity cost you pay isnt actually one.

You still have every one of those opportunities, mate. You just can't claim a free resurrection orb for every model at the same time.

But hey, feel free to keep pretending being unable to have a cake after eating it means you've lost out on cake.