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.

 Platuan4th wrote:

stormboy wrote:
It certainly would not help sales of their new mini-knight...

You can field them in units of 1-3, so you could still field 9 Armigers and most likely 9 Helligers in a single army with this restriction.

What army? No HQ's for you with no allies.

Or are we looking at just Super Heavy detachments, I guess, with 3 knights and 9 armigers, and that's your lot forever?

hobojebus wrote:
If I went to a tournament and it was PL I would pile on every upgrade on the assumption my opponent will do the same.

There's zero reason not to take the best option under PL.

I know casual at any cost types really want to boast about how they use PL and it's fine but no ones buying it.

It is fine. Even abusing the upgrade system too the max, all it does is juggle the meta around.

40k isn't balanced, it's never been balanced, it's never going to be balanced. The only thing that changes is ever few months something comes out that shakes up what is and is not powerful. Playing powerlevel instead of points is one of those ways. Tell me, do you honestly feel that if you played index necrons against Codex: CWE, that it would matter even a little whether you used PL or Points?

AdmiralHalsey wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:

stormboy wrote:
It certainly would not help sales of their new mini-knight...

You can field them in units of 1-3, so you could still field 9 Armigers and most likely 9 Helligers in a single army with this restriction.

What army? No HQ's for you with no allies.

Or are we looking at just Super Heavy detachments, I guess, with 3 knights and 9 armigers, and that's your lot forever?

Can't do that. That is 6 LoW.

I got excited when someone said there was news and then immediately got disappointed when I saw it was that bollocks rumour mentioned before which is clearly not legit.

Man is the hype real

drbored wrote:
NEWS

Apparently from the FAQ playtester group. Take with a big grain of salt.

If this is true, then I'm pretty much done with 8th. SoB only have 3 good units in their codex.

Read further down the page, thank god it's fake. How would it even work? Can I only take 3 rhinos in a list? How do armies with only 1 or 2 hqs make multiple detachments?

Theres no need to punish anyone. You should just reward fluffy non-spammy lists.


The brigade was an attempt at doing so, but some armies simply cant make a brigade cheaply enough to have a competitive army.

Just change battle forged a bit.

Make it so that you get 2 CP for being battleforged, and you get 1 extra CP for every detachment that comes wholley from the same codex.

With a 3 detachment limit that almost everyone has already been using you wont see too much abuse, but give one book armies an extra 2 CP over soup, and take 1 CP away from 3 book lists.

 Eihnlazer wrote:
Theres no need to punish anyone. You should just reward fluffy non-spammy lists.


The brigade was an attempt at doing so, but some armies simply cant make a brigade cheaply enough to have a competitive army.

Just change battle forged a bit.

Make it so that you get 2 CP for being battleforged, and you get 1 extra CP for every detachment that comes wholley from the same codex.

With a 3 detachment limit that almost everyone has already been using you wont see too much abuse, but give one book armies an extra 2 CP over soup, and take 1 CP away from 3 book lists.

I just gotta ask, this board seems to take "no spam" and "down with soup" as gospel. Why? There's nothing I herebtly wrong with either. I can sympathize if you want mono to be equal to soup, but what I usually see if folks calling for mono to be Superior to soup which makes no sense. Same with spam. So his army is all Terminators vs. yours which isn't? Who cares? If you balance the actual units it won't matter.

With the Indomitus and Black Crusades, soup and allies are just as fluffy as mono anyway.

Audustum wrote:

 Eihnlazer wrote:
Theres no need to punish anyone. You should just reward fluffy non-spammy lists.


The brigade was an attempt at doing so, but some armies simply cant make a brigade cheaply enough to have a competitive army.

Just change battle forged a bit.

Make it so that you get 2 CP for being battleforged, and you get 1 extra CP for every detachment that comes wholley from the same codex.

With a 3 detachment limit that almost everyone has already been using you wont see too much abuse, but give one book armies an extra 2 CP over soup, and take 1 CP away from 3 book lists.

I just gotta ask, this board seems to take "no spam" and "down with soup" as gospel. Why? There's nothing I herebtly wrong with either. I can sympathize if you want mono to be equal to soup, but what I usually see if folks calling for mono to be Superior to soup which makes no sense. Same with spam. So his army is all Terminators vs. yours which isn't? Who cares? If you balance the actual units it won't matter.

With the Indomitus and Black Crusades, soup and allies are just as fluffy as mono anyway.

I only call for soup to be diminished because it breaks balance so clearly. If every army had equal footing and you didnt get such a clear advantage from it I'd have no problem with it.

 Galas wrote:
GW: *Puts out the Adeptus Custodes Codex that has <Imperium> based buffs*

Also GW: *Bans all of that two months after*

I don't think nu-GW is capable of that. (But oh boy if they are!)

Well old or new same. Reason they aren't likely to do is they care about money so they have been removing restrictions rather than adding. This would go against idea of selling as much stuff to as wide group as possible. Having custodes only playable as custodes army for example means no IG player has reason to add few units to their IG army=GW loses money=GW unlikely to do it


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Platuan4th wrote:

stormboy wrote:
It certainly would not help sales of their new mini-knight...

You can field them in units of 1-3, so you could still field 9 Armigers and most likely 9 Helligers in a single army with this restriction.

And how many players would be buying those for solo army? If you can't add say 3 to army of admech/IG/marines sales would pummel.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

AdmiralHalsey wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:

stormboy wrote:
It certainly would not help sales of their new mini-knight...

You can field them in units of 1-3, so you could still field 9 Armigers and most likely 9 Helligers in a single army with this restriction.

What army? No HQ's for you with no allies.

Or are we looking at just Super Heavy detachments, I guess, with 3 knights and 9 armigers, and that's your lot forever?

Can't do that. That is 6 LoW.

2 LOW detachments. But that would be rather expensive weird solo army not many are likely to buy. Certainly would sell less armigers and knights than if you can soup them up

 Eihnlazer wrote:
Theres no need to punish anyone. You should just reward fluffy non-spammy lists.

So did the Necron Bone Kingdom Of Drazak just suddenly cease existing as it isn't "fluffy"? What do you consider to actually be "fluffy"? One-of-everything armies that look AND perform terrible on the table because they don't have a cohesive look AND strategy to them?

Amazing how I suggest rewarding fluffy lists and people act like I'm suggesting their armies are shaved to the skin.


If you don't know what a fluffy army is then you probably aren't making one.

"Fluffy" is another one of those eye of the beholder things though. One of my first 6th edition games was against a "fluffy ork" army made up of two mobs of boyz, some lootas and were led / assisted by that named Bloodletter, fiends of slaanesh and nurgling swarms.Totes fluffy!

I want this silly rumor to be true just for the entertainment factor.

 Eihnlazer wrote:
Theres no need to punish anyone. You should just reward fluffy non-spammy lists.


The brigade was an attempt at doing so, but some armies simply cant make a brigade cheaply enough to have a competitive army.

Just change battle forged a bit.

Make it so that you get 2 CP for being battleforged, and you get 1 extra CP for every detachment that comes wholley from the same codex.

With a 3 detachment limit that almost everyone has already been using you wont see too much abuse, but give one book armies an extra 2 CP over soup, and take 1 CP away from 3 book lists.

GW would be better off dropping CP tied to FOCs entirely. It's too skewed by unit point cost and varies a lot between armies.

It would be better to tie it to something every army has in common, like a tiered faction system. Add +1 CP for your army's (not detachment's) first shared keyword (Imperium). Add +2 CP for your army's second shared keyword (Imperial Guard). Add +3 CP for your army's third shared keyword (Cadia).

You can soup, but can't get around it costing you CP.

Would still be a patch, though. 8th ed's entire framework is shoddy.

The one thing I find annoying in regards to the response to this bit of news – real or fake, is a lot of people’s general reaction to instantly complain about it without considering the bigger picture.

Yes, some armies would struggle, but it wouldn’t “invalidate” them. Knights can still play with 3 Knights and the new Armiger kits (and that’s if they lump all the different main Knight variants into 1 “unit” header). Sure, transports would need to be exempt from this, but that’s an easy fix. Likewise, allowing assassins etc into armies is also easy to fix

As for all the “but this army only has 3 “good” units in its current form” is just pointless whining. Sure, some index units might suck right now, but, 1, there will be updates within a codex and 2, we don’t know what else is changing in the FAQ.

For a long time people have complained about soup and spam being the “go-to” in top end tournament lists, but, the moment something is linked to potentially solving those masses of complaints, it gets complained about.

Is restricting the units so heavily the right way to go? I’m not sure, but I’m on the “no” side of the fence right now… But then, I look at all the list I’ve used/planned to use in events and I realise that this wouldn’t affect me in any shape or form, should it turn out to be true and gets put into effect. This is simply because my lists have always tended to be TAC style lists. Sure, it might not be as good as running 8 Dark Talons or 9 Flyrants most of the time, but it doesn’t mean I can’t do well.

People have seemed to forget that just because a dozen people vocally, continuously, say something is bad across the board, it doesn’t always mean it is “un-usable”. A lot of people have seemed to forget how to think and plan for themselves and to experiment.

As it stands the army that will get hit the hardest by something like this is… Harlequinns. This is simply because they have such a tiny selection of units (which may or may not change with their codex). Other armies are limited in certain aspects (E.g. Thousand Sons and Fast Attack) if you discount forgeworld options, but in reality, this does not stop you building an army or theming an army. All it -really- does, is prevent you from spamming certain models. You also need to take points into account. Armies with limited options for certain roles (i.e Grey Knights and their single Fast Attack choice) are generally expensive in terms of points, naturally restricting their spam options. 3 full, basic units of Interceptors for example, rocks in at 750 points – this could naturally become 6 squads if you wanted – all it does is prevent you from getting +1 CP. Armies designed around hordes and getting brigades + other detachments also won’t suffer too much from this, as they have enough options to still do that.

Sure, it’ll bring down the power of a lot of lists, but, it’ll also increase the amount of different units on the table.

I think a lot of these problems would go away if the FoC actually meant something. As long as you can take special extra FoC's to spam unit types then army composition will never mean anything. Just max out the formations required for the best units and/or most CP.

the problems wouldn't go away, they would be different. Either people minimalizing troops or if you went really strict you'd just buff the armies with the best troops.

 Earth127 wrote:
the problems wouldn't go away, they would be different. Either people minimalizing troops or if you went really strict you'd just buff the armies with the best troops.

Term troop tax wasn't invented for nothing.

These limitationss are just bandaid. They don't fix the real culprit but try to hide it.

My biggest problem is this limitation HARMS fluffy armies instead of encouraging them. Crimson Fists run a lot of Devastators (the fresh Marine recruits out of the Scout Company) and Sternguard (the experienced Marines from the days of the Rynn's World incident). They do not have that many Tactical Squads. This runs counter to that. Or Blood Angels running a good deal of Assault Squads. Wanna run a Saim Hann or whatever Eldar army? Nope, can't because Jetbikes are now very limited. And those are just the armies that I can think of off of the top of my head.

Meanwhile, Horde armies STILL have the advantage.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
My biggest problem is this limitation HARMS fluffy armies instead of encouraging them. Crimson Fists run a lot of Devastators (the fresh Marine recruits out of the Scout Company) and Sternguard (the experienced Marines from the days of the Rynn's World incident). They do not have that many Tactical Squads. This runs counter to that. Or Blood Angels running a good deal of Assault Squads. Wanna run a Saim Hann or whatever Eldar army? Nope, can't because Jetbikes are now very limited. And those are just the armies that I can think of off of the top of my head.

Meanwhile, Horde armies STILL have the advantage.

In that instance though, Crimson Fists can still take 30 Sternguard (min 534 points), 30 Devestators (admittedly only 12 heavy weapons… min 390 points before weapons). So, for all lascannons that alone would bring you to 1224 points before HQs, and between 6 and 12 units to start with (due to combat squads). You can then easily add in other units linked to the Crimson Fists to round out the army.

Blood Angels can get 30 Assault Marines, 18 Inceptors, 30 Vanguard Vets, 30? Sanguinary Guard, 60? Death Company, Emperor knows, how many Jump Pack Characters.

Saim-Hann. 27 Windriders, 27 Shining Spears, 9 Vypers THEN you have all the tanks, Wave Serpents and Flyers…..

It doesn’t affect “fluffy” lists as much as people think it will, especially when points cost is factored in. A Saim-Hann Eldar list with 27 Windriders, 27 Spears, 9 Vypers and an Autarch on a bike without upgrades on anyone comes in at 2151 points.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
My biggest problem is this limitation HARMS fluffy armies instead of encouraging them. Crimson Fists run a lot of Devastators (the fresh Marine recruits out of the Scout Company) and Sternguard (the experienced Marines from the days of the Rynn's World incident). They do not have that many Tactical Squads. This runs counter to that. Or Blood Angels running a good deal of Assault Squads. Wanna run a Saim Hann or whatever Eldar army? Nope, can't because Jetbikes are now very limited. And those are just the armies that I can think of off of the top of my head.

Meanwhile, Horde armies STILL have the advantage.

You could still run 30 devs, sterguard, or assault Marines in those examples, and each group of 3 would cost 6-700+ points. Surely you can think of other fluffy options for the army? If your idea of a fun fluffy army is just the same unit over and over, maybe you should be more imaginative?

If you see a 0-3 Limitation, you'll see 3x 40 Cultists and Poxwalker swarms take over the game.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
If you see a 0-3 Limitation, you'll see 3x 40 Cultists and Poxwalker swarms take over the game.

Entirely depends on how the event is run... Besides, you already see a LOT of that anyway.

Chess Clocks would eventually be the bane of this style of army though, as they'd never really get much done.

Kdash wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:
If you see a 0-3 Limitation, you'll see 3x 40 Cultists and Poxwalker swarms take over the game.

Entirely depends on how the event is run... Besides, you already see a LOT of that anyway.

Chess Clocks would eventually be the bane of this style of army though, as they'd never really get much done.

I don't think we see a lot of that currently. We would see much, much more afterwards, though.

 Cephalobeard wrote:

Kdash wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:
If you see a 0-3 Limitation, you'll see 3x 40 Cultists and Poxwalker swarms take over the game.

Entirely depends on how the event is run... Besides, you already see a LOT of that anyway.

Chess Clocks would eventually be the bane of this style of army though, as they'd never really get much done.

I don't think we see a lot of that currently. We would see much, much more afterwards, though.

Well, wasn't there a rumour that "The Dead Walk Again" would possibly be FAQed to cost reinforcement points and Tide of Traitors would be capped at 10 Cultists or so? (independent and before the Detachment-Limit Rumours).

I can't speak to either of those rumors, unfortunately. Hell, I don't believe the 0-3 one is real, either. Or rather I hope it isn't, I guess.

Kdash wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
My biggest problem is this limitation HARMS fluffy armies instead of encouraging them. Crimson Fists run a lot of Devastators (the fresh Marine recruits out of the Scout Company) and Sternguard (the experienced Marines from the days of the Rynn's World incident). They do not have that many Tactical Squads. This runs counter to that. Or Blood Angels running a good deal of Assault Squads. Wanna run a Saim Hann or whatever Eldar army? Nope, can't because Jetbikes are now very limited. And those are just the armies that I can think of off of the top of my head.

Meanwhile, Horde armies STILL have the advantage.

In that instance though, Crimson Fists can still take 30 Sternguard (min 534 points), 30 Devestators (admittedly only 12 heavy weapons… min 390 points before weapons). So, for all lascannons that alone would bring you to 1224 points before HQs, and between 6 and 12 units to start with (due to combat squads). You can then easily add in other units linked to the Crimson Fists to round out the army.

Blood Angels can get 30 Assault Marines, 18 Inceptors, 30 Vanguard Vets, 30? Sanguinary Guard, 60? Death Company, Emperor knows, how many Jump Pack Characters.

Saim-Hann. 27 Windriders, 27 Shining Spears, 9 Vypers THEN you have all the tanks, Wave Serpents and Flyers…..

It doesn’t affect “fluffy” lists as much as people think it will, especially when points cost is factored in. A Saim-Hann Eldar list with 27 Windriders, 27 Spears, 9 Vypers and an Autarch on a bike without upgrades on anyone comes in at 2151 points.

I agree, and in fact would argue that the 0-3 restriction FORCES more fluffy lists. Or at the very least makes a spammy list look more fluffy.
For example, Eldar lists had tons of Windriders in 7th. That did not make it Saim-Hann.
If you could only take 3 untis of Windriders, you would then have to take something else, possibly Vypers or Shining Spears. NOW you have a Saim-Hann list

Although, I can certainly see the counter argument that you can still spamm 30 Dark Reapers with this 0-3 limit. Although if the unit size for Reapers gets "fixed" to 3-5 Reapers per unit, the 0-3 unit limit per army suddenly caps Reaper at 15 per army ever.
Much more reasonable.

-

I don't think and hope that the 0-3 thing isn't real either.

Tough Matched play I think stops properly working at anything above 2500 points and in some ways even 2000 is pushing it. The current restrictions don't scale. So the "every strategem can only be used once per phase" is fine at 1000 but can get reallly restrictive at 2500. Same goes for psychic powers.

You could make the limits of 1 scale with points tough. Topic for another time.

Matched Play ought to be limited to 1500 points, specifically for reasons related to time maintenance.

jcd386 wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
My biggest problem is this limitation HARMS fluffy armies instead of encouraging them. Crimson Fists run a lot of Devastators (the fresh Marine recruits out of the Scout Company) and Sternguard (the experienced Marines from the days of the Rynn's World incident). They do not have that many Tactical Squads. This runs counter to that. Or Blood Angels running a good deal of Assault Squads. Wanna run a Saim Hann or whatever Eldar army? Nope, can't because Jetbikes are now very limited. And those are just the armies that I can think of off of the top of my head.

Meanwhile, Horde armies STILL have the advantage.

You could still run 30 devs, sterguard, or assault Marines in those examples, and each group of 3 would cost 6-700+ points. Surely you can think of other fluffy options for the army? If your idea of a fun fluffy army is just the same unit over and over, maybe you should be more imaginative?

So if I want to run a squad of Devastators and a squad of Sternguard, that leaves me only one choice for another non-Troopa unit. So say I want to run a Vindicator. That means I can't run a Dreadnought or Terminators. Heck, if I run the classic Command Squad (Veterans, Apothecary, Ancient), I can't run any other units besides Troops in my army. Oh wait, that means no HQs. So if I run a Battalion, I have ONE choice in my army besides Troops.

It is a gakky limitation that only encourages homogeneous armies with little to no variation.

For the record, I don't spam any units in my army. The largest number of non-Troops units that I run is I run two squads of Hellblasters. Otherwise I run a lot of different units. Aggressors, Sternguard, Honour Guard, Devastators.

But really, the fact this limitation would invalidate any Battalion or Brigade army is exactly why it is an utter bs rumor.

I don't think that's the point. I think it's "you can never run more than 3 dev squds" but even if you run three you can still run 3 whirlwinds or whatever.