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.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

Reemule wrote:

 chimeara wrote:
What do you guys think of this?
http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2018/02/40k-big-tourney-says-no-imperial-chaos-soup-for-you.html

Yeah. I called this several posts ago. Its unfortunate that some people couldn't see this was coming and spent half the thread saying trying to deny this was going to be a reality.

Its also frustrating as its sure not the fix I wanted. While I can say that my idea of removing battleforged wasn't the best, the core idea that it wasn't a soup ban but a penalty/bonus for using soup/not using soup would have been a better fix.

Ahh well. Cya soup players. Should have been more reasonable.

Please, as if you had the slightest clue what you were talking about.

You realize that the rules they have in place for that tournament change absolutely nothing right? You realize that the rules in that tournament are precisely this, and this only, a 75 point tax on Space Marine players. Good job! That'll teach them!

Still trying to justify your position huh? From the article...

Today I learned that BSB has officially banned Chaos and Imperial Soup… eldar is next and the old nerf bat it hurts if you like your cheese

So, pretty much all he things you kept saying wouldn't happen, are starting. Well I'm sure your right on something else. Somewhere...

Reemule wrote:
So, pretty much all he things you kept saying wouldn't happen, are starting. Well I'm sure your right on something else. Somewhere...

Again, reading would serve you well here.

They banned those keywords for the purposes of creating battle-forged detachments only.

What this means, is that I can still take detachments from different codices and get access to those stratagems. It is precisely a 75 point tax on Space Marine players, that's it.

But hey, maybe reading comprehension isn't your thing.

 Crimson wrote:
So are Custodes-Guilliman-Guard soups routinely beating pure Guard lists?

Option A being more overpowered than Option B does not mean Option B is not overpowered. If both my friend and I have SoB armies, and I choose to ally in Guilliman to give my SoB army access to things it’s not designed to have (beatstickery and auras), I should have to give up something in exchange so my Soup army doesn’t just become objectively more powerful than my friend’s Pure one.

Or, to put it another way, there is more to this hobby than the top 3 tables at LVO.

Soup is awesome. Rules and game play aside, it allows you to create the stuff in the fluff. Especially for Imperial players it allows you to buy (and GW to sell) units without having to purchase an entire army. Eventually you'll have enough though for a detachment and then move on to the new shiny unit that comes out. I have like one Admech figure but if not for the CMON Zombicide KS next month would almost certain have bought the new Forgebane box. GW just makes such cool stuff...

kombatwombat wrote:
If both my friend and I have SoB armies, and I choose to ally in Guilliman to give my SoB army access to things it’s not designed to have (beatstickery and auras

That makes the assumption that SoB wasn't designed with that possibility in mind. Objectively, this is something you could not know unless you are part of the design team or specifically informed by them.

kombatwombat wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
So are Custodes-Guilliman-Guard soups routinely beating pure Guard lists?

Option A being more overpowered than Option B does not mean Option B is not overpowered. If both my friend and I have SoB armies, and I choose to ally in Guilliman to give my SoB army access to things it’s not designed to have (beatstickery and auras), I should have to give up something in exchange so my Soup army doesn’t just become objectively more powerful than my friend’s Pure one.

Or, to put it another way, there is more to this hobby than the top 3 tables at LVO.

The army is literally designed with the possibility of having those things. And you're giving up points by taking Guilliman. If that does not address the balance, then the problem is not the ability to take Guilliman, it is him being too cheap.

Furthermore, you obviously need to start addressing the balance issues from the most OP stuff. Most of the soup complaints are Guard related, and completely miss the point of the Guard being OP outside the souo as well. Nerf the IG and most of the soup problems vanish as well.

Reemule wrote:

 chimeara wrote:
What do you guys think of this?
http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2018/02/40k-big-tourney-says-no-imperial-chaos-soup-for-you.html

Yeah. I called this several posts ago. Its unfortunate that some people couldn't see this was coming and spent half the thread saying trying to deny this was going to be a reality.

Its also frustrating as its sure not the fix I wanted. While I can say that my idea of removing battleforged wasn't the best, the core idea that it wasn't a soup ban but a penalty/bonus for using soup/not using soup would have been a better fix.

Ahh well. Cya soup players. Should have been more reasonable.

Lol that's rich. You got called out for not knowing what in the nine hells you were talking about, then quote another poster (i.e you couldn't even try to find this yourself) about a 40 person tournament (that made this decision a month ago) as proof that tournament organizers are banning soup. And then you couldn't even be bothered to read the post to understand the only thing it bans is intra-detachment soup (which isn't the soup you've been whining and complaining about). This is the biggest joke of a gotcha moment I've ever seen. I strongly suggest reading the rules in question before you comment because so far its only made you look ill informed and someone who's prone to argue with emotion rather than with facts.

Hey, its okay to be bitter. I understand you guys just didn't want to believe that anyone would stop the precious soup.

Sorry it hurt you!

Reemule wrote:
Hey, its okay to be bitter. I understand you guys just didn't want to believe that anyone would stop the precious soup.

Sorry it hurt you!

It doesn't stop soup. You understand that right? I can 100% still play an army of Astra Militarum, Custodes, and Blood Angels in that set-up. Do you grasp that?

 Farseer_V2 wrote:
It doesn't stop soup. You understand that right? I can 100% still play an army of Astra Militarum, Custodes, and Blood Angels in that set-up. Do you grasp that?

He doesn't get it or is farming his post count, I think it's safe to put him on ignore at this point.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

 Farseer_V2 wrote:
It doesn't stop soup. You understand that right? I can 100% still play an army of Astra Militarum, Custodes, and Blood Angels in that set-up. Do you grasp that?

He doesn't get it or is farming his post count, I think it's safe to put him on ignore at this point.

Looks like he's done what he did yesterday where once he figured out he was wrong he's gone radio silent again.

I don't think you two get it. I never wanted it gone. I've said that repeatedly. Not sure why you strawman that I have.

I have said I want it limited and tossed a suggestion.

Then you two have roundly said why it would never be limited linking and discussing lots of ancedotal evidence.

And then wait a minute, here it is happening where its getting limited. With a penalty.

But hey, try to marginalize it away. Maybe even delete your posts so you can pretend this was what you supported the complete time. Put the guy who was right on ignore.

A fluffy list is a fluffy list. 'Soup' has a very specific connotation.

OP, you do not play Soup.

Reemule wrote:
I don't think you two get it. I never wanted it gone. I've said that repeatedly. Not sure why you strawman that I have.

I have said I want it limited and tossed a suggestion.

Then you two have roundly said why it would never be limited linking and discussing lots of ancedotal evidence.

And then wait a minute, here it is happening where its getting limited. With a penalty.

But hey, try to marginalize it away. Maybe even delete your posts so you can pretend this was what you supported the complete time. Put the guy who was right on ignore.

But you aren't right. The ONLY limit this places is that you can't run Astra Militarum and Blood Angels in the same detachment. You can still run them together in 2 separate detachments which still meets every definition of soup you've suggested - and there is no penalty, no CP, no strats, nothing. This only limits soup in name but never in function. You're crowing like its proof that its happening but its a minimal thing that basically hurts a few specific supreme command detachments and that's it. That's the part you seem to be missing is this is a tiny limitation that doesn't go anywhere near as far as you'd seem to like it to go. To be clear you literally typed "Ahh well. Cya soup players. Should have been more reasonable." as if this tournament is preventing soup from being played.

It would fix it if it was army wide, not detachment. Multiple detachments of different factions are part of the problem.

 Farseer_V2 wrote:

Reemule wrote:
I don't think you two get it. I never wanted it gone. I've said that repeatedly. Not sure why you strawman that I have.

I have said I want it limited and tossed a suggestion.

Then you two have roundly said why it would never be limited linking and discussing lots of ancedotal evidence.

And then wait a minute, here it is happening where its getting limited. With a penalty.

But hey, try to marginalize it away. Maybe even delete your posts so you can pretend this was what you supported the complete time. Put the guy who was right on ignore.

But you aren't right. The ONLY limit this places is that you can't run Astra Militarum and Blood Angels in the same detachment. You can still run them together in 2 separate detachments which still meets every definition of soup you've suggested - and there is no penalty, no CP, no strats, nothing. This only limits soup in name but never in function. You're crowing like its proof that its happening but its a minimal thing that basically hurts a few specific supreme command detachments and that's it. That's the part you seem to be missing is this is a tiny limitation that doesn't go anywhere near as far as you'd seem to like it to go. To be clear you literally typed "Ahh well. Cya soup players. Should have been more reasonable." as if this tournament is preventing soup from being played.

I don't think I've ever defined soup. Can you point out where I have?

So your post is null?

Reemule wrote:
I don't think you two get it. I never wanted it gone. I've said that repeatedly. Not sure why you strawman that I have.

I have said I want it limited and tossed a suggestion.

Then you two have roundly said why it would never be limited linking and discussing lots of ancedotal evidence.

And then wait a minute, here it is happening where its getting limited. With a penalty.

But hey, try to marginalize it away. Maybe even delete your posts so you can pretend this was what you supported the complete time. Put the guy who was right on ignore.

Yet, I didn't say it wouldn't be limited and specifically mentioned the Ynnari Soulburst, which we're all pretty sure is going to get changed. More than likely turned into a stratagem.

Also, one tournament does not represent any sort of official ruling, it just means the guys who run the tournament felt that an extra 75 points made Space Marines OP. Which is objectively idiotic, but hey, this is the cause you've chosen to champion.

So, congratulations, you successfully predicted a 75 point Space Marine tax in one tournament, buy yourself a cookie, from me.

But hey, let's pull a couple of your quotes:

"I stick by my original idea. If you’re not a single craftworld/dept/chapter/Clan, you don’t qualify as battleforged." - There's this winner, which is banning soup, I know comprehension isn't your thing.
"Ban soup and the OP has to buy more to play a force… as do all those depending on running soup." - Then there's this one, perhaps you didn't mean ban soup? Your point wasn't terribly consistent in your post, I think this was an example of a way to win customers over to buying more models? Brilliant.

No, you don't want to ban soup, you just want to cripple it so badly that it becomes the worst option available. It's such a subtle distinction, I can't imagine why some are opposed to it.

Wayniac wrote:
It would fix it if it was army wide, not detachment. Multiple detachments of different factions are part of the problem.

I think that your going to see this discussion continue. And even thought I'm beating Twinpole theory and Farseerduce over the head with their logical failures, this is a very small start. You have a tourney in a small part of the world making a very limited move that penalizes a few things.

Its a change and who knows where its going to end. But I think that the detachment issue is one that will see more light before this issue gets closed.

Reemule wrote:

 Farseer_V2 wrote:

Reemule wrote:
I don't think you two get it. I never wanted it gone. I've said that repeatedly. Not sure why you strawman that I have.

I have said I want it limited and tossed a suggestion.

Then you two have roundly said why it would never be limited linking and discussing lots of ancedotal evidence.

And then wait a minute, here it is happening where its getting limited. With a penalty.

But hey, try to marginalize it away. Maybe even delete your posts so you can pretend this was what you supported the complete time. Put the guy who was right on ignore.

But you aren't right. The ONLY limit this places is that you can't run Astra Militarum and Blood Angels in the same detachment. You can still run them together in 2 separate detachments which still meets every definition of soup you've suggested - and there is no penalty, no CP, no strats, nothing. This only limits soup in name but never in function. You're crowing like its proof that its happening but its a minimal thing that basically hurts a few specific supreme command detachments and that's it. That's the part you seem to be missing is this is a tiny limitation that doesn't go anywhere near as far as you'd seem to like it to go. To be clear you literally typed "Ahh well. Cya soup players. Should have been more reasonable." as if this tournament is preventing soup from being played.

I don't think I've ever defined soup. Can you point out where I have?

So your post is null?

Here you go

"I stick by my original idea. If you’re not a single craftworld/dept/chapter/Clan, you don’t qualify as battleforged" - Reemule. So yeah I think you've pretty clearly laid out what you think is soup.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Reemule wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
It would fix it if it was army wide, not detachment. Multiple detachments of different factions are part of the problem.

I think that your going to see this discussion continue. And even thought I'm beating Twinpole theory and Farseerduce over the head with their logical failures, this is a very small start. You have a tourney in a small part of the world making a very limited move that penalizes a few things.

Its a change and who knows where its going to end. But I think that the detachment issue is one that will see more light before this issue gets closed.

Logical failures - said the guy who claimed he never defined soup and then was shown where he defined soup.

That tournament's limitation is completely pointless. It effectively only affects niche stuff like Inquisition, Ministorom and Assassins. No one puts IG, Marines or Ad Mech in mixed detachments anyway.

 Farseer_V2 wrote:

Reemule wrote:

 Farseer_V2 wrote:

Reemule wrote:
I don't think you two get it. I never wanted it gone. I've said that repeatedly. Not sure why you strawman that I have.

I have said I want it limited and tossed a suggestion.

Then you two have roundly said why it would never be limited linking and discussing lots of ancedotal evidence.

And then wait a minute, here it is happening where its getting limited. With a penalty.

But hey, try to marginalize it away. Maybe even delete your posts so you can pretend this was what you supported the complete time. Put the guy who was right on ignore.

But you aren't right. The ONLY limit this places is that you can't run Astra Militarum and Blood Angels in the same detachment. You can still run them together in 2 separate detachments which still meets every definition of soup you've suggested - and there is no penalty, no CP, no strats, nothing. This only limits soup in name but never in function. You're crowing like its proof that its happening but its a minimal thing that basically hurts a few specific supreme command detachments and that's it. That's the part you seem to be missing is this is a tiny limitation that doesn't go anywhere near as far as you'd seem to like it to go. To be clear you literally typed "Ahh well. Cya soup players. Should have been more reasonable." as if this tournament is preventing soup from being played.

I don't think I've ever defined soup. Can you point out where I have?

So your post is null?

Here you go

"I stick by my original idea. If you’re not a single craftworld/dept/chapter/Clan, you don’t qualify as battleforged" - Reemule. So yeah I think you've pretty clearly laid out what you think is soup.

Your trying to extrapolate my definition of soup from a potential fix I laid out (A fix that won't work, as I've admitted)?

Lets try this, what is the definition of soup? After we all agree surely it can be fixed?

And I'm not being coy. My definition of soup is cherry picking options from multiple sources that might not be available to all players with no apparent downside.

Reemule wrote:
Lets try this, what is the definition of soup? After we all agree surely it can be fixed?

And I'm not being coy. My definition of soup is cherry picking options from multiple sources that might not be available to all players with no apparent downside.

So then you still have an issue with the tournament's system for fixing soup? To be clear your definition of soup is effectively any army that is pulling from multiple sources.

 Crimson wrote:
That tournament's limitation is completely pointless. It effectively only affects niche stuff like Inquisition, Ministorom and Assassins. No one puts IG, Marines or Ad Mech in mixed detachments anyway.

I do love this point of view. If you scroll back you will fine several people who have felt that it was really bad if any army building that affected assassins, Ministrorom, and inquisition was affected in any way.

Then someone puts out a tourney rule saying it will be affected in a few ways, and its being glossed over as pointless.

Reemule wrote:
Lets try this, what is the definition of soup? After we all agree surely it can be fixed?

And I'm not being coy. My definition of soup is cherry picking options from multiple sources that might not be available to all players with no apparent downside.

You're assuming it needs to be fixed outside of a few specific instances of problematic mechanics (see: Soulburst). This is a logical fallacy known as begging the question.

"Begging the question, sometimes known by its Latin name petitio principii (meaning assuming the initial point), is a logical fallacy in which the writer or speaker assumes the statement under examination to be true. In other words, begging the question involves using a premise to support itself."

 Farseer_V2 wrote:

Reemule wrote:
Lets try this, what is the definition of soup? After we all agree surely it can be fixed?

And I'm not being coy. My definition of soup is cherry picking options from multiple sources that might not be available to all players with no apparent downside.

So then you still have an issue with the tournament's system for fixing soup? To be clear your definition of soup is effectively any army that is pulling from multiple sources.

I put in a few more points. Cherry picking. That is where your not taking just any option, but only options that might be considered a great benefit for the points they cost.

The argument as I see it in this thread.

Op, I like soup its not bad.
Me: its bad, and most likely going to get fixed.
Twinpoledtheory: Its never going to be fixed, against financial interest.
Farseer v2 Yeah. Its not going to be fixed. Infact your fix won't work.
Me I think it will be fixed.
Some random tournament make a small fix.
Twinpole and Farseerv2: OGM that is not a fix!
Me ... Okay.

Reemule wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
That tournament's limitation is completely pointless. It effectively only affects niche stuff like Inquisition, Ministorom and Assassins. No one puts IG, Marines or Ad Mech in mixed detachments anyway.

I do love this point of view. If you scroll back you will fine several people who have felt that it was really bad if any army building that affected assassins, Ministrorom, and inquisition was affected in any way.

Then someone puts out a tourney rule saying it will be affected in a few ways, and its being glossed over as pointless.

It is bad and stupid as it unnecessarily punishes people who want to bring sub-par fluffy stuff while in no way affecting actually competitive stuff. But as a fix it is pointless, as it doesn't fix any of the real problems. Or did anyone really have an issue with an Inquisitor sharing a detachment with some Death Cult Assassins?

Reemule wrote:

 Farseer_V2 wrote:

Reemule wrote:
Lets try this, what is the definition of soup? After we all agree surely it can be fixed?

And I'm not being coy. My definition of soup is cherry picking options from multiple sources that might not be available to all players with no apparent downside.

So then you still have an issue with the tournament's system for fixing soup? To be clear your definition of soup is effectively any army that is pulling from multiple sources.

I put in a few more points. Cherry picking. That is where your not taking just any option, but only options that might be considered a great benefit for the points they cost.

The argument as I see it in this thread.

Op, I like soup its not bad.
Me: its bad, and most likely going to get fixed.
Twinpoledtheory: Its never going to be fixed, against financial interest.
Farseer v2 Yeah. Its not going to be fixed. Infact your fix won't work.
Me I think it will be fixed.
Some random tournament make a small fix.
Twinpole and Farseerv2: OGM that is not a fix!
Me ... Okay.

That's a fairly generous to yourself summation - here's my view.

OP - Soup isn't so bad, fluffy players use it too.
You - Soup is bad and I'd like to see it rendered unplayable (in the guise of making soup armies illegal for matched play)
Me - I don't think that fix will work (because it won't)
You - Crickets
Someone else - hey this relatively small tournament of no real consequence it limiting soup in name only
You - Aha! I got you! I told you soup would be banned, see here! Cya soup players, haha you were wrong and I was right!
Me - But that doesn't limit soup the way you think it should be limited
You - Wrong, its the start of a tidal wave of soup alterations
Me - But again it doesn't address the issue you have
You - *shuffles goal posts*

I don’t agree it’s bad or stupid. When someone gets into 40K competitively people complain about soup and slow play.

Fixes are like a pendulum. They either don’t swing far enough, or swing too far. As a first fix, do you want it to go to far or too short? This might be a little short, but it’s the main point is that it just started swinging.

Did it though? One 40 man tournament isn't really much of a start. None of the majors have even glanced at it (Adepticon, NOVA, BAO, SoCal Open, even Renegade ((who did drop points)).

 Farseer_V2 wrote:

Reemule wrote:

 Farseer_V2 wrote:

Reemule wrote:
Lets try this, what is the definition of soup? After we all agree surely it can be fixed?

And I'm not being coy. My definition of soup is cherry picking options from multiple sources that might not be available to all players with no apparent downside.

So then you still have an issue with the tournament's system for fixing soup? To be clear your definition of soup is effectively any army that is pulling from multiple sources.

I put in a few more points. Cherry picking. That is where your not taking just any option, but only options that might be considered a great benefit for the points they cost.

The argument as I see it in this thread.

Op, I like soup its not bad.
Me: its bad, and most likely going to get fixed.
Twinpoledtheory: Its never going to be fixed, against financial interest.
Farseer v2 Yeah. Its not going to be fixed. Infact your fix won't work.
Me I think it will be fixed.
Some random tournament make a small fix.
Twinpole and Farseerv2: OGM that is not a fix!
Me ... Okay.

That's a fairly generous to yourself summation - here's my view.

OP - Soup isn't so bad, fluffy players use it too.
You - Soup is bad and I'd like to see it rendered unplayable (in the guise of making soup armies illegal for matched play)
Me - I don't think that fix will work (because it won't)
You - Crickets
Someone else - hey this relatively small tournament of no real consequence it limiting soup in name only
You - Aha! I got you! I told you soup would be banned, see here! Cya soup players, haha you were wrong and I was right!
Me - But that doesn't limit soup the way you think it should be limited
You - Wrong, its the start of a tidal wave of soup alterations
Me - But again it doesn't address the issue you have
You - *shuffles goal posts*

I can see your the Hero of your own story also! So I'd guess the truth was inbetween. I'm self aware enough to see that... Are you?