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.

Seems to be the norm to see very goofy army comps that sacrifice everything to build around CP now. Most armies are min units of the cheapest things possible to get as many CP as possible. It looks like there's little regard given to what the actual units are. But are CP really more valuable than what units are in the army?

I find that outside of a few rare niche cases my lists end up being right at a battalion, with maybe one of the +1 CP. yet I see so many people suggesting "remove x, y, and z to include this 300 point non synergistic detachment of min everything to get more cp."

Most armies can only do one or two "neat tricks" and most of these are based on having CP.

Some armies are built around CP; some are not. Just all depends on what you want the army to do.

5 to 7 at 2000pts is the standard build.

I don't think having 7 is a MASSIVE advantage. But it all depends on the army and the build. There are circumstances where a 3CP strat can change a game, and having a few rerolls can make a big difference on clutch rolls. Often it's the difference between a key unit getting an extra turn or not, whether it's your own rerolling a save or an enemy in which you've rerolled damage.

It's incredibly difficult to value a CP, but I think generally the more you have the less valuable the next one is. If only because there's only so many good strats and you only use the same one once per phase.

I'd say for codex armies it's worth taking at least a Battalion most of the time. Especially if the troop choices in your army are decent or very cheap. Buy not worth forcing two Battalions or a Brigade.

Astra Militarum can theoretically get 30 CP within 2000pts... I'm not convinced this is a good list though!

It depends on the faction and the quality of the troops available, and the quality of the stratagems available.

Take CW eldar, the troop choices aren't really spectacular for actually doing the job of taking objectives, but they are lower cost and CWE have excellent stratagems, so 1-2 battalions ends up being worth building around.

Marines on the other hand have tacticals and intercessors, which aren't great, and 3 units of scouts is the most you'll usually want so you usually go for what you need in units instead of building for CP

That is a good question! I think it all comes down to your approach to the game, in that some people will build an army based purely on aesthetics or background, some will build for maximum rules effectiveness/points efficiency and some will find a particular trick or tactic that they like to focus on. The first group really wont be too bothered by cps and strategems, the second will factor them into their list, and the third may ignore them completely or base their entire strategy on one particular tactic.

While i tend to fall into the first grouping, there is absolutely nothing wrong with any of these approaches as long as you have fun, but most internet forums tend to focus on competitive play so any rule that can grant you a bonus when you need it will be utilised ( the old " i`d rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it" maxim) and in 8th, rerolls are king. we also have a system that seems to promote larger units (at last, after years of playing orks and nids my innumerable hordes are now actually to be feared) so naturally we are seeing a trend of, get as many cps as you can. However, all the rerolls and strategems in the world won`t save you if you dont utilise what you have correctly. We are still pretty early on in the evolution of 8th edition (half the armies have`nt even got a codex yet) so i would`nt worry unduly about this.

Personally i think its simply another option...yes, you could just have all the cheapest stuff you can to get more cps, but if you end up without the necessary tools for the job at hand then whats the point?

I pondered the same thing not long after 8th was released. Prior to the Death Guard codex being released I only ever used CP to get re-rolls never the other two effects. With the codex it is still mainly rerolls but only a couple of the DG specific stratagems. Sometimes I wonder whether CP are really worth building a list around with detachments because of that.

 BlackLobster wrote:
I pondered the same thing not long after 8th was released. Prior to the Death Guard codex being released I only ever used CP to get re-rolls never the other two effects. With the codex it is still mainly rerolls but only a couple of the DG specific stratagems. Sometimes I wonder whether CP are really worth building a list around with detachments because of that.

This pretty much sums up CP.

Your codex flavor IS your strategems.

You still need battleforged detachments to get your army wide special rule, which is usually much more important than strats.

Given that, it's unlikely you end up going in to a game with less than 5cp anyway!

From a more story based perspective, I've found CP to be vital to making army appropriate things happen. The first time my friend used an orbital strike out of nowhere things shifted for our group. I know this isn't in the same category of going after CP in list building to make a stronger army, but they're necessary if you want to evoke the story or flavour of your army. And then add in scenario specific stratagems and the can be even more important to narrative play.

Stux wrote:
You still need battleforged detachments to get your army wide special rule, which is usually much more important than strats.

Given that, it's unlikely you end up going in to a game with less than 5cp anyway!

6 is the absolute minimum I have ever gone into a game with.

My Chaos armies have the advantage of cheap troops that i actually like. My Ork army is the same. I would bring a minimum 6 troops at all times.

However my marine army was a WS biker list. So at best, I make 2 outriders and a flyer detachment for 6 cp. So

For Chaos, CP have always been useful. I run a Pox walker list for Death guard which is basically All Strategem themed, and there are lots of useful ones for CSM. For Orkz, re-rolls. And on the SM side I'm at a loss with no real troops units, but also no real useful strategems,

I have done 3. It happens in smaller games (700-ish points).

How important they are and how you're gna use them depends on your army(list).

Some armies, stratagems is a huge deal. They can heavily influence how you build an army and what units you take. I find my Eldar stratagems to be much more important than my Chaos Space Marine ones (I run Renegades so I don't have any fancy ones available).

Your available stratagems will also dictate how many units of a certain type you take and what size those units are. While the morale values of armies push toward minimum squad size (to get more detachment CPs etc.), stratagems often impact only a single unit so if you're planning around some, it may determine how many models you take. For instance, the Eldar Webway Portal allows up to two infantry units...well that could be five Scouts or 20 Guardians w/ two grav platforms...both are a single unit. I'd get far more bang for my buck by using a large Guardian squad, etc.

Another Eldar stratagem - Forewarned, is the strongest means of defending against deep strike, and encourages you to have a Farseer near a unit with excellent shooting (Dark Reapers, etc.) so this stratagem can impact how you plan and play your army. There is an Eldar stratagem which lets you bring back your Avatar if it perishes in close combat, so if you're taking an Avatar you might have an eye on keeping CP for that stratagem, etc.

Blood Angels and Tyranids have a number of stratagems which increase speed and will push an army toward first turn charges, etc.

By contrast my Chaos Space Marines have little to nothing which pushes my army builds. Playing as Renegades I get a few like Daemon Shell, and Tide of Traitors which I might use - maybe? Nothing which heavily impacts how I play the game or build my armies.

Depends on how good your stratagems are. If you have access to amazing stratagems then ur gonna want CP because they can make a huge difference.

Stratagems also scale with unit size/value of what the unit does for the stratagem.

It would be better to have 5 CP than 9 CP if you are spending CP efficienctly, ie your buffing expensive units that are well equiped and stated for what the strategem is going to do- opposed to using the same strategem twice on two separate but much less effective units.

Its a sliding scale you wanna maximise how many you can get for obvious reasons without taking it to the point getting cmd points sacrifices the effectiveness of your army.

The meta atm i find is you'll see chuck away batallions of say 3x10 brimstone horrors etc to net you 3cp for minimal pts investment BUT you still need those models to have a purpose and a role in your plan.

ignoring codex strats althogether the simple re-roll can and often does change the tide in a battle, so they are very important but obviously not as important as the list you build

The only things I'll typically use CP for is rerolls and Fury of Khorne strategem. So 6-7 is usually good for me. So I usually have a batallion and a spearhead or vanguard, sometimes I'll have all 3.

Death Guard and CSM seem like 7-9 is a sweet spot, but that allows you to build just using two battalions. Seems like many armies its nice to have CP's, but not necessary (DG seem to use them heavily T1/T2, then taper off)

1) Play Guard with 15CP at 2K points
2) Spam stratagems
3) ????
4) Profit

Pretty important when the other guy has stratagems and you don't.

Danny slag wrote:
Seems to be the norm to see very goofy army comps that sacrifice everything to build around CP now. Most armies are min units of the cheapest things possible to get as many CP as possible. It looks like there's little regard given to what the actual units are. But are CP really more valuable than what units are in the army?

I find that outside of a few rare niche cases my lists end up being right at a battalion, with maybe one of the +1 CP. yet I see so many people suggesting "remove x, y, and z to include this 300 point non synergistic detachment of min everything to get more cp."

CP's with a codex (stratagem options) and a way to gain CP or at least not spend CP, on use, can be back breaking. Simply because you can just keep using stratagems like candy. Combine that with most codices having one or two amazing stratagem, a handful of solid ones. Then a few situational but used right, can be outright devastating. CP's simply go up in value the better options you have.

BA can do double battalion very easily at 2K. Somtimes double battalion and spearhead for 10 CP.

When you see a BA player use forlorn fury on a DC unit for 2 CP to get 24+d6 inches up the board, and then declare like 5 of your units and some characters as charge targets, and then use 3 more CP to fight a second time and cripple your army? Yeah...CP can be VERY important.

Pancakey wrote:

 BlackLobster wrote:
I pondered the same thing not long after 8th was released. Prior to the Death Guard codex being released I only ever used CP to get re-rolls never the other two effects. With the codex it is still mainly rerolls but only a couple of the DG specific stratagems. Sometimes I wonder whether CP are really worth building a list around with detachments because of that.

This pretty much sums up CP.

Your codex flavor IS your strategems.

If you play Admech, you cannot play on anyones standard unless you use CP gimmicks. Out of all the Codex Admech is most CP crippled as they were early and the rules had not been quite setup yet and their whole codex is built around units and how they interact with command points. While most other codexs have their units made and then their stratgems drafted around thier army. Luckily us Admech players are not in as bad of a state as say Grey Knights but wow, reading all the other codexs makes me so sad to know my favorite army kinda got the "Eh, who cares" approach.

I can understand why people do it. As an Eldar player I could easily make use of 12 CP. But personally I don't like CP to dictate my lists so I settle for 7.

Some units /need/ CP to be even useable. In the case of Admech it's very obvious, and units like the Forgefiend and Defiler also basically need the Daemon Forge stratagem to work at full capacity as well. To me, CP act as three things. Gimmicks, crutches and rerolling.

Too important IMHO. They are too good, so it pushes you to game maximizing CP, and because they did nothing like they said to make CP the reward for fluff armies, you get things like Imperial Soup using multiple battalions of cheap troops to get a ton of points.

I like stratagems but GW pushing most of the cool things to them is a mistake IMHO.

It would be interesting if character officers gave +X CPs if in a "pure" army to reflect his/her battlefield presence.

I think part of the problem is them giving things the soup keywords. Like, you can't limit it to only one keyword, because you have Imperium. Can't do two, because you have Imperium/Adeptus Astartes so you would not have Imperial Soup, but Space Marine soup instead. But three gets too restrictive.