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.
The problem with a lot of the game's current balance problems do seem to root from allies and soup lists. I think that there should be a requirement that in matched play, all models in a detachment need to be from the same codex, and all models in an army from the same codex must follow the same army trait.
The problem with this, however, is that Games Workshop have made a lot of design decisions (especially lately) that this idea would cause serious issues, with many armies or units being garbage, or nearly unusable.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Galas wrote: I actually agree with Martel that if you want to nerf soup you just need to make the game more balanced.
If Codexes are balanced, then Souping is not a power-based decision but a tactical-based decision.
A slight issue with this way of thinking. Some factions could be balanced around lacking certain elements, which would allow them to instead be strong in other areas to be much more fair. Take T'au, who really lack in dedicated close combat units, or Imperial Guard, who don't have access to good elite infantry. In theory, this would make the faction stand out more from the others, and allow their strengths to really be played to on the tabletop.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/02/06 22:50:20
I agree Darsath with that way of thinking but at the end of the day, if all Codex are balanced, does it matter that I have a "xenos soup" (Imagine just for sake of argument that it is possible) of 50% shooting tau and 50% meele ork? If they are both balanced, I have solved the weakness of Tau in meele, yeah, but at the cost of having half the firepower I would have had otherwise.
The same goes for Imperial Guard.
If Codex's are balanced, Soup is just another tactical option. Codex without access to soup would have less tactical options but that shouldn't mean that they are at a power disadvantage.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/02/06 22:53:50
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
Farseer_V2 wrote: Of course a guard player doesn't seen an issue with filling out your primary detachment before moving on.
Notice how I don't say that you need to field a Brigade as your primary detachment or anything of that nature...
Filling out a Patrol Detachment isn't unreasonable. 1-2 HQs, 1-3 Troops, 0-2 Elites, Fast Attacks, Heavy Supports, and Flyers.
One can argue that you shouldn't be forced to have the Flyer and I'll agree with that wholeheartedly. Some armies(AdMech) don't even have Flyers to bring so that criteria would be impossible to meet.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/02/06 22:57:41
Farseer_V2 wrote: Of course a guard player doesn't seen an issue with filling out your primary detachment before moving on.
Notice how I don't say that you need to field a Brigade as your primary detachment or anything of that nature...
Filling out a Patrol Detachment isn't unreasonable. 1-2 HQs, 1-3 Troops, 0-2 Elites, Fast Attacks, Heavy Supports, and Flyers.
One can argue that you shouldn't be forced to have the Flyer and I'll agree with that wholeheartedly.
This is bad comedy. Try opening a different codex, see how easy it is to fill out a detachment when you don't have a spate of undercosted stuff to pick from.
Galas wrote: I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you
Bharring wrote: He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
Farseer_V2 wrote: Of course a guard player doesn't seen an issue with filling out your primary detachment before moving on.
Notice how I don't say that you need to field a Brigade as your primary detachment or anything of that nature...
Filling out a Patrol Detachment isn't unreasonable. 1-2 HQs, 1-3 Troops, 0-2 Elites, Fast Attacks, Heavy Supports, and Flyers.
One can argue that you shouldn't be forced to have the Flyer and I'll agree with that wholeheartedly.
This is bad comedy. Try opening a different codex, see how easy it is to fill out a detachment when you don't have a spate of undercosted stuff to pick from.
Do you want one with or without a Flyer?
And for the record, the only two codices I have to work with outside of my Guard are AdMech and Vanilla Marines. I can get my hands on Death Guard pretty easy, probably.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/02/06 23:03:07
I don't like rules that force you to use units that you don't want. Thats marketing and we know how that ends.
What if I don't want to play with Heavy Support? Or Elites? But have still a small allied force?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/02/06 23:03:39
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
Galas wrote: I don't like rules that force you to use units that you don't want. Thats marketing and we know how that ends.
What if I don't want to play with Heavy Support? Or Elites?
Then don't play Matched Play, where such a rule would be enforced?
Galas wrote: I don't like rules that force you to use units that you don't want. Thats marketing and we know how that ends.
What if I don't want to play with Heavy Support? Or Elites?
Then don't play Matched Play, where such a rule would be enforced?
Thats disingenuous. We all know in 90% of the cases "Don't play matched play" is the same as "Just don't play". And as someone that did prefer AoS without points you should know it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/02/06 23:05:01
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
Galas wrote: I don't like rules that force you to use units that you don't want. Thats marketing and we know how that ends.
What if I don't want to play with Heavy Support? Or Elites?
Then don't play Matched Play, where such a rule would be enforced?
Thats disingenuous. We all know in 90% of the cases "Don't play matched play" is the same as "Just don't play". And as someone that did prefer AoS without points you should know it.
You'd be surprised how many people are playing Open Play for 40k with Power instead of Points.
Galas wrote: I don't like rules that force you to use units that you don't want. Thats marketing and we know how that ends.
What if I don't want to play with Heavy Support? Or Elites?
Then don't play Matched Play, where such a rule would be enforced?
Thats disingenuous. We all know in 90% of the cases "Don't play matched play" is the same as "Just don't play". And as someone that did prefer AoS without points you should know it.
You'd be surprised how many people are playing Open Play for 40k with Power instead of Points.
Lol, yeah, I mean as the formal authority on all 40k in the entire world, i trust you completely on this.
Galas wrote: I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you
Bharring wrote: He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
Galas wrote: I don't like rules that force you to use units that you don't want. Thats marketing and we know how that ends.
What if I don't want to play with Heavy Support? Or Elites?
Then don't play Matched Play, where such a rule would be enforced?
Thats disingenuous. We all know in 90% of the cases "Don't play matched play" is the same as "Just don't play". And as someone that did prefer AoS without points you should know it.
You'd be surprised how many people are playing Open Play for 40k with Power instead of Points.
Why though? Why would people opt for a intentionally less balanced system?
Farseer_V2 wrote: Of course a guard player doesn't seen an issue with filling out your primary detachment before moving on.
Notice how I don't say that you need to field a Brigade as your primary detachment or anything of that nature...
Filling out a Patrol Detachment isn't unreasonable. 1-2 HQs, 1-3 Troops, 0-2 Elites, Fast Attacks, Heavy Supports, and Flyers.
One can argue that you shouldn't be forced to have the Flyer and I'll agree with that wholeheartedly.
This is bad comedy. Try opening a different codex, see how easy it is to fill out a detachment when you don't have a spate of undercosted stuff to pick from.
Do you want one with or without a Flyer?
And for the record, the only two codices I have to work with outside of my Guard are AdMech and Vanilla Marines. I can get my hands on Death Guard pretty easy, probably.
lol.
This is a silly topic, so don't take any of this seriously, but here's a basic "filled-out" battalion detachment of Tau (since battalions are GW's vanilla detachment). Trying to take units that are at least... mildly reasonable. I gave up near the end though and just added in some really cheap units I'd never take otherwise. 1516 points.
Galas wrote: I don't like rules that force you to use units that you don't want. Thats marketing and we know how that ends.
What if I don't want to play with Heavy Support? Or Elites?
Then don't play Matched Play, where such a rule would be enforced?
Thats disingenuous. We all know in 90% of the cases "Don't play matched play" is the same as "Just don't play". And as someone that did prefer AoS without points you should know it.
You'd be surprised how many people are playing Open Play for 40k with Power instead of Points.
Why though? Why would people opt for a intentionally less balanced system?
To an effect, it's because it's "less balanced but still balanced". There's a lot of people, at least locally for me, who dislike the points system saying that it's "clunky and hard to work with" for writing up lists instead opting for Power.
Now for some people, that might very well be the case(who likes consulting reference tables to see if X weapon on the unit costs you a point when you're writing a list on the fly) and for others it's been a sneaky way of gaming the system(one of our WAAC players disliked points because he felt he was 'punished' for using Wraithknights and other LoWs with tiny pinpricks of points compared to Power).
This is a silly topic, so don't take any of this seriously, but here's a basic "filled-out" battalion detachment of Tau (since battalions are GW's vanilla detachment). Trying to take units that are at least... mildly reasonable. I gave up near the end though and just added in some really cheap units I'd never take otherwise. 1516 points.
The 'basic' Detachment would more likely be a Patrol in their minds, since the 'basic' Detachment in previous editions was 1 HQ and 2 Troops Minimum and a Patrol is 1 HQ and 1 Troop.
Interestingly enough, the 'Patrol' Detachment also matches up with the old Allied Detachment requires of 1 HQ and 1 Troop.
Also worth mentioning that you could have swapped the Ethereal out for Darkstrider instead and actually get some usage from him with regards to the Strike Teams. He's the same points as an Ethereal.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/02/06 23:31:14
I think "one codex" would make me a lot happier personally, but I'm not sure how to salvage those exceptions in a satisfactory way.
I've said it before, but if one restricted "Allies" to a Patrol Detachment or an Allied bit it would go a long way towards fixing things.
There's a particular elegance to having an "Allied" detachment that's much more limited, like Patrol (but preferably with no troop requirement so as to fix Inq/Assassins). Didn't they do that in 6th? I like it though.
Hell, one could even require that you have your selected primary Detachment filled out 100% before allowing secondary faction Detachments.
I like this less. You might be able to do something useful down this train of thought, but even the cheapest GK (which is one of the armies this would need to work with for Inq/Assassins) patrol detachment is 1117 pts WITHOUT a flyer. And that's scraping the bottom of the barrel pretty hard:
2x Bro Champ
3x Strike Squad
2x Servitors with servo arm (I still can't believe this is the cheapest elite they have)
2x Interceptor Squad
2x Purgation Squad
(no upgrades)
It'd be basically impossible to include inquisition at 1500 points with a serious list, and tough even with this one.
I think "one codex" would make me a lot happier personally, but I'm not sure how to salvage those exceptions in a satisfactory way.
I've said it before, but if one restricted "Allies" to a Patrol Detachment or an Allied bit it would go a long way towards fixing things.
There's a particular elegance to having an "Allied" detachment that's much more limited, like Patrol (but preferably with no troop requirement so as to fix Inq/Assassins). Didn't they do that in 6th? I like it though.
Hell, one could even require that you have your selected primary Detachment filled out 100% before allowing secondary faction Detachments.
I like this less. You might be able to do something useful down this train of thought, but even the cheapest GK (which is one of the armies this would need to work with for Inq/Assassins) patrol detachment is 1117 pts WITHOUT a flyer. And that's scraping the bottom of the barrel pretty hard:
2x Bro Champ 3x Strike Squad 2x Servitors with servo arm (I still can't believe this is the cheapest elite they have) 2x Interceptor Squad 2x Purgation Squad (no upgrades)
It'd be basically impossible to include inquisition at 1500 points with a serious list, and tough even with this one.
The fun part about this is that it makes it so that the "Auxiliary Support Detachments" could be made actually a viable solution here--allow for them to be taken without fulfilling the criteria of your Primary Detachment.
But since ASDs subtract a Command Point for every ASD you take in your army, you can control a bit of the Stratagem/Command Point farming as well.
It could also be a way for things like Assassins and Inquisitors to make an appearance with an "Auxiliary Support" bonus where they don't remove Command Points but can't use them either?
There's a lot of room rather than just "NERF THE GUARD!".
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/02/06 23:37:48
This is a silly topic, so don't take any of this seriously, but here's a basic "filled-out" battalion detachment of Tau (since battalions are GW's vanilla detachment). Trying to take units that are at least... mildly reasonable. I gave up near the end though and just added in some really cheap units I'd never take otherwise. 1516 points.
The 'basic' Detachment would more likely be a Patrol in their minds
You think the basic detachment an 8th edition army should run as their primary force is a patrol detachment? Uh, ok.
Also worth mentioning that you could have swapped the Ethereal out for Darkstrider instead and actually get some usage from him with regards to the Strike Teams. He's the same points as an Ethereal.
Yeah you're taking this example too seriously if you think I'd ever run an Ethereal. Or a Darkstrider, honestly. I'd run stuff that costs way more points than these 1500 if I were filling out that many slots with what I'd actually bring.
Darsath wrote: The problem with a lot of the game's current balance problems do seem to root from allies and soup lists. I think that there should be a requirement that in matched play, all models in a detachment need to be from the same codex, and all models in an army from the same codex must follow the same army trait.
The problem with this, however, is that Games Workshop have made a lot of design decisions (especially lately) that this idea would cause serious issues, with many armies or units being garbage, or nearly unusable.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Galas wrote: I actually agree with Martel that if you want to nerf soup you just need to make the game more balanced.
If Codexes are balanced, then Souping is not a power-based decision but a tactical-based decision.
A slight issue with this way of thinking. Some factions could be balanced around lacking certain elements, which would allow them to instead be strong in other areas to be much more fair. Take T'au, who really lack in dedicated close combat units, or Imperial Guard, who don't have access to good elite infantry. In theory, this would make the faction stand out more from the others, and allow their strengths to really be played to on the tabletop.
Still not an issue if units are fairly costed. Tau units don't get better if you include melee elements.
I think "one codex" would make me a lot happier personally, but I'm not sure how to salvage those exceptions in a satisfactory way.
I've said it before, but if one restricted "Allies" to a Patrol Detachment or an Allied bit it would go a long way towards fixing things.
There's a particular elegance to having an "Allied" detachment that's much more limited, like Patrol (but preferably with no troop requirement so as to fix Inq/Assassins). Didn't they do that in 6th? I like it though.
Hell, one could even require that you have your selected primary Detachment filled out 100% before allowing secondary faction Detachments.
I like this less. You might be able to do something useful down this train of thought, but even the cheapest GK (which is one of the armies this would need to work with for Inq/Assassins) patrol detachment is 1117 pts WITHOUT a flyer. And that's scraping the bottom of the barrel pretty hard:
2x Bro Champ
3x Strike Squad
2x Servitors with servo arm (I still can't believe this is the cheapest elite they have)
2x Interceptor Squad
2x Purgation Squad
(no upgrades)
It'd be basically impossible to include inquisition at 1500 points with a serious list, and tough even with this one.
The fun part about this is that it makes it so that the "Auxiliary Support Detachments" could be made actually a viable solution here--allow for them to be taken without fulfilling the criteria of your Primary Detachment.
But since ASDs subtract a Command Point for every ASD you take in your army, you can control a bit of the Stratagem/Command Point farming as well.
It could also be a way for things like Assassins and Inquisitors to make an appearance with an "Auxiliary Support" bonus where they don't remove Command Points but can't use them either?
There's a lot of room rather than just "NERF THE GUARD!".
Right, because this doesn't limit elite CP light armies to having even less CP while guard still gets a lot and is basically not effected in any real way...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/02/06 23:42:30
This is a silly topic, so don't take any of this seriously, but here's a basic "filled-out" battalion detachment of Tau (since battalions are GW's vanilla detachment). Trying to take units that are at least... mildly reasonable. I gave up near the end though and just added in some really cheap units I'd never take otherwise. 1516 points.
The 'basic' Detachment would more likely be a Patrol in their minds
You think the basic detachment an 8th edition army should run as their primary force is a patrol detachment? Uh, ok.
See what I bolded in your post. I'm just proposing possible solutions that aren't just "NERF THE GUARD!" or that will indirectly harm other armies.
Also worth mentioning that you could have swapped the Ethereal out for Darkstrider instead and actually get some usage from him with regards to the Strike Teams. He's the same points as an Ethereal.
Yeah you're taking this example too seriously if you think I'd ever run an Ethereal. Or a Darkstrider, honestly. I'd run stuff that costs way more points than these 1500 if I were filling out that many slots with what I'd actually bring.
And if you wanted to do anything other than set up disingenuous arguments, you probably wouldn't have set up a Battalion as the 'example'.
That would be like me claiming that "I can fill out a Guard Brigade with no problem, why can't the Custodes?".
The fun part about this is that it makes it so that the "Auxiliary Support Detachments" could be made actually a viable solution here--allow for them to be taken without fulfilling the criteria of your Primary Detachment.
But since ASDs subtract a Command Point for every ASD you take in your army, you can control a bit of the Stratagem/Command Point farming as well.
It could also be a way for things like Assassins and Inquisitors to make an appearance with an "Auxiliary Support" bonus where they don't remove Command Points but can't use them either?
There's a lot of room rather than just "NERF THE GUARD!".
Yeah, okay, I think now you're hitting pay dirt. I'd need to stare at a list of factions and think about it a while, but I like this a lot.
Honestly, I think you should hand out a CP either just for having a patrol, or for a full patrol, but I've thought that regardless of this.
Right, because this doesn't limit elite CP light armies to having even less CP while guard still gets a lot and is basically not effected in any real way...
And what's your feedback been on this?
Oh right. "Guard are OP, please nerf."
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/02/06 23:44:01
This is a silly topic, so don't take any of this seriously, but here's a basic "filled-out" battalion detachment of Tau (since battalions are GW's vanilla detachment). Trying to take units that are at least... mildly reasonable. I gave up near the end though and just added in some really cheap units I'd never take otherwise. 1516 points.
The 'basic' Detachment would more likely be a Patrol in their minds
You think the basic detachment an 8th edition army should run as their primary force is a patrol detachment? Uh, ok.
See what I bolded in your post. I'm just proposing possible solutions that aren't just "NERF THE GUARD!" or that will indirectly harm other armies.
Also worth mentioning that you could have swapped the Ethereal out for Darkstrider instead and actually get some usage from him with regards to the Strike Teams. He's the same points as an Ethereal.
Yeah you're taking this example too seriously if you think I'd ever run an Ethereal. Or a Darkstrider, honestly. I'd run stuff that costs way more points than these 1500 if I were filling out that many slots with what I'd actually bring.
And if you wanted to do anything other than set up disingenuous arguments, you probably wouldn't have set up a Battalion as the 'example'.
That would be like me claiming that "I can fill out a Guard Brigade with no problem, why can't the Custodes?".
"Guard can get fun toys when they fill out their mandatory detachment. But Custodes can't. GW needs to nerf Guard soup.
Sorry but this solution just makes everything worse, Who knew game design could be so hard.
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
Your suggestion of maxing out a detachment wasn't a good one. Just let the idea die.
Many codexes simply can't do this and be even remotely viable. You are spoiled by 8th edition imperial guard, where everything is pretty cheap and good.
Galas wrote: I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you
Bharring wrote: He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
And if you wanted to do anything other than set up disingenuous arguments, you probably wouldn't have set up a Battalion as the 'example'.
That would be like me claiming that "I can fill out a Guard Brigade with no problem, why can't the Custodes?".
Suggesting people run filled out detachments, even patrol detachments, as a solution is no less ridiculous than that.
I'm not the one who has been whining about soup breaking the game.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Marmatag wrote: Your suggestion of maxing out a detachment wasn't a good one. Just let the idea die.
Many codexes simply can't do this and be even remotely viable. You are spoiled by 8th edition imperial guard, where everything is pretty cheap and good.
I'm still waiting for you to find a single post where I say that Marines need to run soup to be good.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/02/06 23:48:02
Limiting armies to 1 codex in the current state of the game does nothing to stop the topic of 'Guard keeps getting nerfed'.
Every Imperial army is running Something + Guard because guard is simply the most cost effective codex even at low point investments.
If you limit armies to 1 codex this simply changes to everyone running guard, because they are the most cost effective codex.
Single codex armies start working at the same time as soup armies stop always taking IG.
Namely when there is better balance and Guard are not always the defacto answer for everything except melee combat.
