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.

 Grimgold wrote:
D weapons are a response to the absurd levels of toughness that units can posses...

This is the root of all problems. Things like D-weapons and grav-weapons exist because GW made something too tough, then they go and make something even tougher to handle them, and they release bigger guns to handle them, all because they're unwilling to say 'we made a mistake' and go back and re-edit their releases. Dark Eldar are functionally irrelevant today because of all the anti-skimmer tech they released back in 6th to fight Wave Serpents.

which is why I say one save, and multiple wounds, it won't completely stop the the creep, but at least will keep it additive rather than multiplicative.

 Grimgold wrote:
which is why I say one save, and multiple wounds, it won't completely stop the the creep, but at least will keep it additive rather than multiplicative.

Except multiple wounds dont do much when its an instant death weapon which which your average toughness is 4, thats not hard to do.

I think ID from high str attacks is one of the things working as designed in the current edition. With that said, you could replace ID with weapons that inflict multiple wounds, which gives us another dial in which to tune balance. While we are at it, get rid of AP, the laziest design decision of 3rd, and go towards an AoS rend system. However unlike second keep str and rend separate and unrelated.

 Grimgold wrote:
I think ID from high str attacks is one of the things working as designed in the current edition. With that said, you could replace ID with weapons that inflict multiple wounds, which gives us another dial in which to tune balance. While we are at it, get rid of AP, the laziest design decision of 3rd, and go towards an AoS rend system. However unlike second keep str and rend separate and unrelated.

Thats like removing 3 things and adding 1 and then trying to balance it all out.

Im in favor of a rend system but it would need work.

Honestly they just need to remove the Apoc level units from normal games, IE Super Heavies, GMC, and D weapons.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
This is the root of all problems. Things like D-weapons and grav-weapons exist because GW made something too tough, then they go and make something even tougher to handle them, and they release bigger guns to handle them, all because they're unwilling to say 'we made a mistake' and go back and re-edit their releases. Dark Eldar are functionally irrelevant today because of all the anti-skimmer tech they released back in 6th to fight Wave Serpents.

Kind of disagree here. D-weapons exist because "normal" weapons are inadequate for representing things like the main gun of a titan. And for that they're fine. They wreck stuff in one shot, but that kind of firepower should wreck stuff in one shot. The issue isn't so much that D-weapons exist, it's that they started being used for more than just LoW-class units as a way to market the shiny new thing as "SO MUCH MOAR AWESOME THAN ANYTHING ELSE".

 Peregrine wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
This is the root of all problems. Things like D-weapons and grav-weapons exist because GW made something too tough, then they go and make something even tougher to handle them, and they release bigger guns to handle them, all because they're unwilling to say 'we made a mistake' and go back and re-edit their releases. Dark Eldar are functionally irrelevant today because of all the anti-skimmer tech they released back in 6th to fight Wave Serpents.

Kind of disagree here. D-weapons exist because "normal" weapons are inadequate for representing things like the main gun of a titan. And for that they're fine. They wreck stuff in one shot, but that kind of firepower should wreck stuff in one shot. The issue isn't so much that D-weapons exist, it's that they started being used for more than just LoW-class units as a way to market the shiny new thing as "SO MUCH MOAR AWESOME THAN ANYTHING ELSE".

This, the fact that a knight can use a D weapon like a titan is a little crazy in low point games.

So I feel like there are a couple ways to make Formations restrictive, yet still good.

1) Make some form of Core be required before any Formation can be taken, Like a CAD or Allied Detachment. Once this Core has been purchased, you may add up to a certain number (say 1-2 only) of Formations from the same Faction. You could even make 1-2 Formations be PART of a CAD and no longer "standalone", with certain exceptions like Harlequins who cannot field a CAD
FBDs (formation based detachment, like Decurion) should be the only way to get 3+ Formations of the same Faction without having to but another CAD/AD core.

2) Make sure all formations have a decent "tax" unit(s). Most Formations already have this, but some need work. The Riptide Wing wouldn't be so bad if it was required to buy 2 drones per Riptide, for example

I am sure there are others, but the above are my 2 favorites by far.

-

In general I don't see formations as a bad thing. There are 2 major problems with them though:

Formations that are too easy to build. Things like the Aspect Host formation give you a bonus for taking a bunch of units you were going to take anyway so there's never any point in not taking them in the formation. Riptide Wing allows you to take more of a powerful unit than you could normally take and gives you bonuses on top of that. That needs to stop.

Free stuff. Seriously, stop giving people free stuff. Playing 1500 vs 2000 points isn't fun.

I would prefer formations to require a little more effort to access (note that many formations are already like this, they just aren't seen as much as the abuseable ones). So instead of just needing 3 units of Aspect Warriors, for example, you'd need 6 or 7, maybe with additional restrictions. I also like the idea of limiting certain formations to only appearing within the larger meta-detachments, Riptide Wing is definitely a lot less scary if you can only use it in an army that's forced to spend 500 points on Fire Warriors.

There's also what I call the "GW problem" with formations. GW have an almost magical inability to maintain balance in their game for any length of time. Any new concept they introduce seems to eventually fall apart as it breaks the game in some way even if it seemed reasonable enough initially.

While some formations are ridiculously good, GW have such bad game balance that a lot of armies who have access to formations simply don't have many decent ones, if any. Not all formations are equal. As the IG player above pointed out, they have formations that require spending over 1000 points to access. BA are in roughly the same position, probably because of a knee-jerk reaction from GW after the power of previous formations.

If all formations followed similar guidelines it would improve things a lot. Things like having them all cost a minimum number of points would be good, especially with the Decurion style formations. Why can some armies spend around 600 points to create this sort of force, therefore leaving themselves with lots of spare points to abuse their other formations, while other armies need to spend double that just to meet the minimum requirements.

Slipspace wrote:
Free stuff. Seriously, stop giving people free stuff. Playing 1500 vs 2000 points isn't fun.

How many Formations actually give you free stuff (not including Special Rules)? Every one I know of either requires specific builds which doesn't allow a discount, or have added points on top of it.

The Free Transports for a Demi-Company do not come from the Formation, but from the Detachment they are a Choice in.

 Charistoph wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
Free stuff. Seriously, stop giving people free stuff. Playing 1500 vs 2000 points isn't fun.

How many Formations actually give you free stuff (not including Special Rules)? Every one I know of either requires specific builds which doesn't allow a discount, or have added points on top of it.

The Free Transports for a Demi-Company do not come from the Formation, but from the Detachment they are a Choice in.

There's the Gladius' free transports(which are restricted to the Tactical Squads, Devastator Squads, Command Squads, and Assault Squads in the two Battle Demi-Companies but nothing else), there's free Drop Pods in one of the Space Wolf Great Companies from Curse of the Wulfen, free vehicle upgrades in a couple other of the Companies I believe, and the free upgrades for a War Convocation(which is effectively a prebuilt CAD from the Skitarii, a CAD for the Cult Mechanicus, and the Knight Detachment which allows no Relics).

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
Free stuff. Seriously, stop giving people free stuff. Playing 1500 vs 2000 points isn't fun.

How many Formations actually give you free stuff (not including Special Rules)? Every one I know of either requires specific builds which doesn't allow a discount, or have added points on top of it.

The Free Transports for a Demi-Company do not come from the Formation, but from the Detachment they are a Choice in.

There's the Gladius' free transports(which are restricted to the Tactical Squads, Devastator Squads, Command Squads, and Assault Squads in the two Battle Demi-Companies but nothing else), there's free Drop Pods in one of the Space Wolf Great Companies from Curse of the Wulfen, free vehicle upgrades in a couple other of the Companies I believe, and the free upgrades for a War Convocation(which is effectively a prebuilt CAD from the Skitarii, a CAD for the Cult Mechanicus, and the Knight Detachment which allows no Relics).

If we were to go a little lower there's also free terminator armors and jump packs for chaos lords, free vets of long war, respawning cultists, free power weapons and combi-weapons for some BA vets, (too bad that one is like...half your army and forced into reserves,) as well as free fast engines also from BA. Also you missed the free pods for the dreads in battleco.

And that's just counting the ones that give you stuff that is easily quantifiable because you could have paid points for it. Then there are the other hundred formations that give you an effect that is obviously worth something, but you can't get outside the formation regardless of how much you want to pay for it. I think it's silly how people try to make a distinction between those two. Free stuff is free stuff, regardless of whether you could have bought it before or not.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
Free stuff. Seriously, stop giving people free stuff. Playing 1500 vs 2000 points isn't fun.

How many Formations actually give you free stuff (not including Special Rules)? Every one I know of either requires specific builds which doesn't allow a discount, or have added points on top of it.

The Free Transports for a Demi-Company do not come from the Formation, but from the Detachment they are a Choice in.

There's the Gladius' free transports(which are restricted to the Tactical Squads, Devastator Squads, Command Squads, and Assault Squads in the two Battle Demi-Companies but nothing else), there's free Drop Pods in one of the Space Wolf Great Companies from Curse of the Wulfen, free vehicle upgrades in a couple other of the Companies I believe, and the free upgrades for a War Convocation(which is effectively a prebuilt CAD from the Skitarii, a CAD for the Cult Mechanicus, and the Knight Detachment which allows no Relics).

But the Formations themselves do not give the Free Transports, it is the Detachments that give them this, correct?

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
This is the root of all problems. Things like D-weapons and grav-weapons exist because GW made something too tough, then they go and make something even tougher to handle them, and they release bigger guns to handle them, all because they're unwilling to say 'we made a mistake' and go back and re-edit their releases. Dark Eldar are functionally irrelevant today because of all the anti-skimmer tech they released back in 6th to fight Wave Serpents.

Kind of disagree here. D-weapons exist because "normal" weapons are inadequate for representing things like the main gun of a titan. And for that they're fine. They wreck stuff in one shot, but that kind of firepower should wreck stuff in one shot. The issue isn't so much that D-weapons exist, it's that they started being used for more than just LoW-class units as a way to market the shiny new thing as "SO MUCH MOAR AWESOME THAN ANYTHING ELSE".

This, the fact that a knight can use a D weapon like a titan is a little crazy in low point games.

Eh, I'm ok with the Knight having a Str D melee weapon.
Eldar getting D-1 Flamers on a fairly tough Elite Choice at like 50ppm though... like what was GW thinking besides "I'm Phil Kelly and I love Eldar" and "You know, we have this plastic kit we want to sell..."

 Charistoph wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
Free stuff. Seriously, stop giving people free stuff. Playing 1500 vs 2000 points isn't fun.

How many Formations actually give you free stuff (not including Special Rules)? Every one I know of either requires specific builds which doesn't allow a discount, or have added points on top of it.

The Free Transports for a Demi-Company do not come from the Formation, but from the Detachment they are a Choice in.

That's correct, but my point still stands. Free stuff on the level of a couple of the Detachments needs to stop and it seems GW have already realised this with nothing on the scale of the Gladius or the AdMech freebies being released recently.

Yes, there aren't too many that give much free stuff but, as with a lot of GW balance problems, 1 or 2 exceptions are enough to completely mess up the balance of the game.

 Charistoph wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
Free stuff. Seriously, stop giving people free stuff. Playing 1500 vs 2000 points isn't fun.

How many Formations actually give you free stuff (not including Special Rules)? Every one I know of either requires specific builds which doesn't allow a discount, or have added points on top of it.

The Free Transports for a Demi-Company do not come from the Formation, but from the Detachment they are a Choice in.

There's the Gladius' free transports(which are restricted to the Tactical Squads, Devastator Squads, Command Squads, and Assault Squads in the two Battle Demi-Companies but nothing else), there's free Drop Pods in one of the Space Wolf Great Companies from Curse of the Wulfen, free vehicle upgrades in a couple other of the Companies I believe, and the free upgrades for a War Convocation(which is effectively a prebuilt CAD from the Skitarii, a CAD for the Cult Mechanicus, and the Knight Detachment which allows no Relics).

But the Formations themselves do not give the Free Transports, it is the Detachments that give them this, correct?

The War Convocations is an actual formation.

Also why does it matter that the "decurion meta detachment" not specifically called a formation? They are just a detachment comprised of formations and give you free bonuses/units on top of the free rules you got from those formations already. I get that the thread topic is about formations but a detachment of formations is basically a formation

Slipspace wrote:Yes, there aren't too many that give much free stuff but, as with a lot of GW balance problems, 1 or 2 exceptions are enough to completely mess up the balance of the game.

CrownAxe wrote:Also why does it matter that the "decurion meta detachment" not specifically called a formation? They are just a detachment comprised of formations and give you free bonuses/units on top of the free rules you got from those formations already. I get that the thread topic is about formations but a detachment of formations is basically a formation

Because you are placing the blame on the wrong thing.

I do agree that free transports is wrong. Any free Wargear upgrade from a Detachment should be wrong. Heck, even free individual Rules like the Relentless that the is given by the Reclamation Legion is wrong.

There were some who were castigating the Choice for the rules of the Detachment. I just wanted to make sure that it was properly identified as to where the actual problem lies, and it wasn't with the Formations in most of these cases.

Eh, i think its a semantic thing at that point, detachment is just a formation of formations.

I don't play 7th, but can I ask: how many formations come with negative penalties in addition to bonuses?

From a game design standpoint that would be the obvious solution, much in the way old armies back in 3rd/4th came about in things like the Eye of Terror codex, etc.

For example, the Ulthwe Strikeforce

Bonuses:
+1 BS for guardians
+1 WS for storm guardians
+Unlimited Dark Reaper units
+Warp gate use
+Seer Council etc.

Negatives:
-Only light vehicles
-No other Aspects
-Could never recover from retreating etc.

I'm obviously missing a few from both, but the idea was sound. You can make something play completely differently without making it X% more powerful - in order to draw use. I suspect this doesn't deliver the sales goals of normal formations (considering some new formations seem to require comical amounts of model kits purchased).

 Elbows wrote:
I don't play 7th, but can I ask: how many formations come with negative penalties in addition to bonuses?

From a game design standpoint that would be the obvious solution, much in the way old armies back in 3rd/4th came about in things like the Eye of Terror codex, etc.

For example, the Ulthwe Strikeforce

Bonuses:
+1 BS for guardians
+1 WS for storm guardians
+Unlimited Dark Reaper units
+Warp gate use
+Seer Council etc.

Negatives:
-Only light vehicles
-No other Aspects
-Could never recover from retreating etc.

I'm obviously missing a few from both, but the idea was sound. You can make something play completely differently without making it X% more powerful - in order to draw use. I suspect this doesn't deliver the sales goals of normal formations (considering some new formations seem to require comical amounts of model kits purchased).

THe only really disadvantage is you cant take some cad units like it might limit you to, only these fast attacks ect ect. but since oyu can run as many formations as you want, its not really an issue.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
I don't play 7th, but can I ask: how many formations come with negative penalties in addition to bonuses?

From a game design standpoint that would be the obvious solution, much in the way old armies back in 3rd/4th came about in things like the Eye of Terror codex, etc.

For example, the Ulthwe Strikeforce

Bonuses:
+1 BS for guardians
+1 WS for storm guardians
+Unlimited Dark Reaper units
+Warp gate use
+Seer Council etc.

Negatives:
-Only light vehicles
-No other Aspects
-Could never recover from retreating etc.

I'm obviously missing a few from both, but the idea was sound. You can make something play completely differently without making it X% more powerful - in order to draw use. I suspect this doesn't deliver the sales goals of normal formations (considering some new formations seem to require comical amounts of model kits purchased).

THe only really disadvantage is you cant take some cad units like it might limit you to, only these fast attacks ect ect. but since oyu can run as many formations as you want, its not really an issue.

A lot of them make your stuff lose ObSec, and many for the larger ones limit what you can run because you can only fit so much into the list after that. But yeah, very few drawbacks.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Eh, i think its a semantic thing at that point, detachment is just a formation of formations.

Except the Gladius isn''t a Formation any more than a CAD. It has Command Benefits that are lost if you go Unbound, including the free Transports.

 Charistoph wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Eh, i think its a semantic thing at that point, detachment is just a formation of formations.

Except the Gladius isn''t a Formation any more than a CAD. It has Command Benefits that are lost if you go Unbound, including the free Transports.

The general point still stands though, semantics aside: 100s of points of free stuff granted by taking a certain Formation/Detachment/Decurion-style Detachment is a terrible idea.

If I show up to a game and put down my 1500 point army and my opponent does the same but it turns out he's got closer to 2000 points due to the rules for his Formation (or Decurion-style Detachment) the fact he could have lost those bonuses by doing something different is largely irrelevant. The rules that allow them to do that are part of the current style of army building GW are advocating using Formations, which is what the topic is asking about.

Slipspace wrote:
The general point still stands though, semantics aside: 100s of points of free stuff granted by taking a certain Formation/Detachment/Decurion-style Detachment is a terrible idea.

If I show up to a game and put down my 1500 point army and my opponent does the same but it turns out he's got closer to 2000 points due to the rules for his Formation (or Decurion-style Detachment) the fact he could have lost those bonuses by doing something different is largely irrelevant. The rules that allow them to do that are part of the current style of army building GW are advocating using Formations, which is what the topic is asking about.

The point does NOT stand because the accusation is that Formations alone have this issue when it is NOT the Formations which do it. This is not semantics, it is identifying where the issue truly lies and identifying where the issue truly is, i.e. where you place the blame.

Taking 2 Demi-Companies alone does not give you free Transports. Taking 2 Demi-Companies with an Auxiliary Formations with one of the Choices having a different Chapter Tactics does not give you free Transports.

It is only when taking those specific non-Formation Detachments as they are fully defined (2 Demi-Companies with an Auxiliary Choice Formation all with the same Chapter Tactic) do the free Transports come in to play.

So saying that Formations with free Transports are a problem is disingenuous when it is something else that is providing the free Transports than the actual Formations. Yes, the Formations make up what constitutes the detachment which provides free Transports and yes, the units in those Formations receive the benefits, but the Formations themselves do not provide them. This is not semantics, this is recognizing the rules for where they are and where they actually lie.

 Charistoph wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
The general point still stands though, semantics aside: 100s of points of free stuff granted by taking a certain Formation/Detachment/Decurion-style Detachment is a terrible idea.

If I show up to a game and put down my 1500 point army and my opponent does the same but it turns out he's got closer to 2000 points due to the rules for his Formation (or Decurion-style Detachment) the fact he could have lost those bonuses by doing something different is largely irrelevant. The rules that allow them to do that are part of the current style of army building GW are advocating using Formations, which is what the topic is asking about.

The point does NOT stand because the accusation is that Formations alone have this issue when it is NOT the Formations which do it. This is not semantics, it is identifying where the issue truly lies and identifying where the issue truly is, i.e. where you place the blame.

Taking 2 Demi-Companies alone does not give you free Transports. Taking 2 Demi-Companies with an Auxiliary Formations with one of the Choices having a different Chapter Tactics does not give you free Transports.

It is only when taking those specific non-Formation Detachments as they are fully defined (2 Demi-Companies with an Auxiliary Choice Formation all with the same Chapter Tactic) do the free Transports come in to play.

So saying that Formations with free Transports are a problem is disingenuous when it is something else that is providing the free Transports than the actual Formations. Yes, the Formations make up what constitutes the detachment which provides free Transports and yes, the units in those Formations receive the benefits, but the Formations themselves do not provide them. This is not semantics, this is recognizing the rules for where they are and where they actually lie.

But honestly, is there really any difference between the detachment and a formation in which the detachment says you need to meet x requirements to get Y bonuses.

The only difference is a detachment saves printing cost. Right now, lets take lions blade

Lions Blade Detachment give you full BS overwatch, free transports, and objSec on all units and you must take the following
2x battle demi company
1x auxiliary

thats exactly the same as saying
1x chaplin
1x company master
2x assault marines
2x devestators
6x tactical marines

and

1x scout squad
or
one LR and a tech marine and any choice of perd, vind, or ww
or
<inset all the other valid formations>

Its literally the exact same thing just in less wording, for all intent and purposes a detachment is a formation by another name.

Even still, its a moot point because at the end of the day, there should not be any formation or combonation of taking x units grants you Y for free in the game. Y can be rules, upgrades, units, powers, anything. There should not be a free lunch.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
But honestly, is there really any difference between the detachment and a formation in which the detachment says you need to meet x requirements to get Y bonuses.

Yes, obviously there is a difference, I just gave it. You are blaming the Formation for what the Detachment is doing.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
The only difference is a detachment saves printing cost. Right now, lets take lions blade
...
Its literally the exact same thing just in less wording, for all intent and purposes a detachment is a formation by another name.

Incorrect. Taken independently, the Formations do not grant those bonuses. Even while taken in the Detachment, these Formations do not grant these bonuses. If the army is Unbound, the Formation does not get these bonuses. Are you noting the pattern here?

Formations have a freedom that Command Benefit Detachments do not. And these Formations are not the ones providing the Free Transports, the Command Benefit Detachments are.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Even still, its a moot point because at the end of the day, there should not be any formation or combonation of taking x units grants you Y for free in the game. Y can be rules, upgrades, units, powers, anything. There should not be a free lunch.

It is not a cow's opinion. There is a noted and significant differentiation between normal Detachments with Command Benefits and Detachments that are Formations, and you are blinding yourself if you think the problem is only with the Formations.

Detachments (besides 6e Primary/Allied Detachments) and Formations have been giving out free upgrades ever since they were made. Sure, they weren't Transports and units before Codex Marines, but if you don't think having to not pay to upgrade a unit to have Relentless and Move Through Cover isn't in the same boat, you are being short-sighted.

If we changed the Demi-Company, it wouldn't change the Free Transports rules. We have to change the rules for the larger Detachment, which is not a Formation. I'm not saying these things should not be changed, in fact, I have stated otherwise, earlier, but what I am saying is recognize where the actual problems lie.