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.

Mchagen wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Which is why that rumor is probably bogus. I really doubt GW will release a rule that negates a rule they just introduced for an army.

If you mean the max one of any type of detachment, that's not part of the rumored changes being discussed. That's a limitation already in place at some tournaments, by tournament organizers not GW.

Ah whoops, misunderstood then. I don't follow tournaments that much

I expect TO's will relax that for Patrol Detachments. Sure you can 'soup' with them, but you also lose a bunch of CPs. Dark Eldar should still be able to take advantage of them though, simply because their entire book is more or less a take on 'soup'.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I expect TO's will relax that for Patrol Detachments. Sure you can 'soup' with them, but you also lose a bunch of CPs. Dark Eldar should still be able to take advantage of them though, simply because their entire book is more or less a take on 'soup'.

Nah I doubt they will relax it, simply because I don’t think it’ll see much use (if any) in tournament play.
3 Patrols will get you 7CP, but, 1 Battalion and 2 mini detachments gets you 8CP. If you want to take Reavers you’ll prob take an outrider to have more than 2 units. If you want Talos, a spearhead is accessible. This can easily be rounded out by a kabalite battalion for example. You can still include a patrol if you want, and you’ll end up with the same 7CP.

I think the current belief is by going for all 3 you are causing more harm than you are getting in benefits, and the better way to go is to stop at 2.

If DE used three patrol detachments, wouldn't that be 11 CP? 3 to start, one for each patrol, and then they have their +4 bonus?

 cuda1179 wrote:
If DE used three patrol detachments, wouldn't that be 11 CP? 3 to start, one for each patrol, and then they have their +4 bonus?

Patrols give 0 base.

Kdash wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I expect TO's will relax that for Patrol Detachments. Sure you can 'soup' with them, but you also lose a bunch of CPs. Dark Eldar should still be able to take advantage of them though, simply because their entire book is more or less a take on 'soup'.

Nah I doubt they will relax it, simply because I don’t think it’ll see much use (if any) in tournament play.
3 Patrols will get you 7CP, but, 1 Battalion and 2 mini detachments gets you 8CP. If you want to take Reavers you’ll prob take an outrider to have more than 2 units. If you want Talos, a spearhead is accessible. This can easily be rounded out by a kabalite battalion for example. You can still include a patrol if you want, and you’ll end up with the same 7CP.

I think the current belief is by going for all 3 you are causing more harm than you are getting in benefits, and the better way to go is to stop at 2.

That honestly seems to be a bad way to run that rule. "It won't see use, so we'll ban it" seems...counter-intuitive. Maybe it would see use, but not be as effective. Should be allowed either way. The real rule we should relax is ignoring detachments that do not provide CP when applying the Highlander and max detachments rules. I think we'd see a bit more use of fortifications if they only ever cost points.

Kdash wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I expect TO's will relax that for Patrol Detachments. Sure you can 'soup' with them, but you also lose a bunch of CPs. Dark Eldar should still be able to take advantage of them though, simply because their entire book is more or less a take on 'soup'.

Nah I doubt they will relax it, simply because I don’t think it’ll see much use (if any) in tournament play.
3 Patrols will get you 7CP, but, 1 Battalion and 2 mini detachments gets you 8CP. If you want to take Reavers you’ll prob take an outrider to have more than 2 units. If you want Talos, a spearhead is accessible. This can easily be rounded out by a kabalite battalion for example. You can still include a patrol if you want, and you’ll end up with the same 7CP.

I think the current belief is by going for all 3 you are causing more harm than you are getting in benefits, and the better way to go is to stop at 2.

I hear this argument a lot, but this requires taking one more HQ than if you use 3 patrol detachments. 3 HQs is already a big tax for DE's mediocre HQ choices. I don't love the idea of upping it to 4, just for 1 command point. Then again, I don't really play competitively, so I don't have the same viewpoint.

Lemondish wrote:

Kdash wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I expect TO's will relax that for Patrol Detachments. Sure you can 'soup' with them, but you also lose a bunch of CPs. Dark Eldar should still be able to take advantage of them though, simply because their entire book is more or less a take on 'soup'.

Nah I doubt they will relax it, simply because I don’t think it’ll see much use (if any) in tournament play.
3 Patrols will get you 7CP, but, 1 Battalion and 2 mini detachments gets you 8CP. If you want to take Reavers you’ll prob take an outrider to have more than 2 units. If you want Talos, a spearhead is accessible. This can easily be rounded out by a kabalite battalion for example. You can still include a patrol if you want, and you’ll end up with the same 7CP.

I think the current belief is by going for all 3 you are causing more harm than you are getting in benefits, and the better way to go is to stop at 2.

That honestly seems to be a bad way to run that rule. "It won't see use, so we'll ban it" seems...counter-intuitive. Maybe it would see use, but not be as effective. Should be allowed either way. The real rule we should relax is ignoring detachments that do not provide CP when applying the Highlander and max detachments rules. I think we'd see a bit more use of fortifications if they only ever cost points.

Not all tournaments are doing this – only a few currently, so it’s not really going to have that much of an impact overall.

That said, not being able to run 3 patrol detachments also isn’t going to have that much of an impact either imo. Sure, it’s a neat interaction and opportunity, but, in reality – and top table games at events, I doubt you’ll see this being used.

As for the HQ tax – it’s essentially up to ~80 points, but of course completely depends on your list. 80 points for, not only +1CP, but also the option to further shape my army seems like a no brainer to me. Patrols are handy if needed, but, with only 2 slots for non-troops it’s very restrictive and you’ll often be looking at getting that 3rd fast attack or heavy support option – but doing so will often risk loosing detachment bonuses. Sure, you could run a 3 cabal patrol list, but, at that point, for 1 extra HQ you could prob just run 2 battalions instead and get +2CP.

Also, if you want to restrict detachments that give CP, you can’t then ignore it when 3 of 1 detachment provide extra CP, it is, somewhat backwards in itself.

Plez GW, just drop a rough estimated time frame. If you told us it'd take a week, a month, even expecting it to take 6 months, I don't think we'd care if you gave us an estimated time frame. GeeDubs, come on m8s. Get ya game togetha

Kdash wrote:

Lemondish wrote:

Kdash wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I expect TO's will relax that for Patrol Detachments. Sure you can 'soup' with them, but you also lose a bunch of CPs. Dark Eldar should still be able to take advantage of them though, simply because their entire book is more or less a take on 'soup'.

Nah I doubt they will relax it, simply because I don’t think it’ll see much use (if any) in tournament play.
3 Patrols will get you 7CP, but, 1 Battalion and 2 mini detachments gets you 8CP. If you want to take Reavers you’ll prob take an outrider to have more than 2 units. If you want Talos, a spearhead is accessible. This can easily be rounded out by a kabalite battalion for example. You can still include a patrol if you want, and you’ll end up with the same 7CP.

I think the current belief is by going for all 3 you are causing more harm than you are getting in benefits, and the better way to go is to stop at 2.

That honestly seems to be a bad way to run that rule. "It won't see use, so we'll ban it" seems...counter-intuitive. Maybe it would see use, but not be as effective. Should be allowed either way. The real rule we should relax is ignoring detachments that do not provide CP when applying the Highlander and max detachments rules. I think we'd see a bit more use of fortifications if they only ever cost points.

Not all tournaments are doing this – only a few currently, so it’s not really going to have that much of an impact overall.

That said, not being able to run 3 patrol detachments also isn’t going to have that much of an impact either imo. Sure, it’s a neat interaction and opportunity, but, in reality – and top table games at events, I doubt you’ll see this being used.

As for the HQ tax – it’s essentially up to ~80 points, but of course completely depends on your list. 80 points for, not only +1CP, but also the option to further shape my army seems like a no brainer to me. Patrols are handy if needed, but, with only 2 slots for non-troops it’s very restrictive and you’ll often be looking at getting that 3rd fast attack or heavy support option – but doing so will often risk loosing detachment bonuses. Sure, you could run a 3 cabal patrol list, but, at that point, for 1 extra HQ you could prob just run 2 battalions instead and get +2CP.

Also, if you want to restrict detachments that give CP, you can’t then ignore it when 3 of 1 detachment provide extra CP, it is, somewhat backwards in itself.

You're thinking too laterally, dark eldar are now 3 armies that lose bonuses if they cross units in detachments. If you have a batallion you're locking yourself out of 2/3 of the book for that batallion.

Kdash wrote:

Lemondish wrote:

Kdash wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I expect TO's will relax that for Patrol Detachments. Sure you can 'soup' with them, but you also lose a bunch of CPs. Dark Eldar should still be able to take advantage of them though, simply because their entire book is more or less a take on 'soup'.

Nah I doubt they will relax it, simply because I don’t think it’ll see much use (if any) in tournament play.
3 Patrols will get you 7CP, but, 1 Battalion and 2 mini detachments gets you 8CP. If you want to take Reavers you’ll prob take an outrider to have more than 2 units. If you want Talos, a spearhead is accessible. This can easily be rounded out by a kabalite battalion for example. You can still include a patrol if you want, and you’ll end up with the same 7CP.

I think the current belief is by going for all 3 you are causing more harm than you are getting in benefits, and the better way to go is to stop at 2.

That honestly seems to be a bad way to run that rule. "It won't see use, so we'll ban it" seems...counter-intuitive. Maybe it would see use, but not be as effective. Should be allowed either way. The real rule we should relax is ignoring detachments that do not provide CP when applying the Highlander and max detachments rules. I think we'd see a bit more use of fortifications if they only ever cost points.

Not all tournaments are doing this – only a few currently, so it’s not really going to have that much of an impact overall.

That said, not being able to run 3 patrol detachments also isn’t going to have that much of an impact either imo. Sure, it’s a neat interaction and opportunity, but, in reality – and top table games at events, I doubt you’ll see this being used.

As for the HQ tax – it’s essentially up to ~80 points, but of course completely depends on your list. 80 points for, not only +1CP, but also the option to further shape my army seems like a no brainer to me. Patrols are handy if needed, but, with only 2 slots for non-troops it’s very restrictive and you’ll often be looking at getting that 3rd fast attack or heavy support option – but doing so will often risk loosing detachment bonuses. Sure, you could run a 3 cabal patrol list, but, at that point, for 1 extra HQ you could prob just run 2 battalions instead and get +2CP.

Also, if you want to restrict detachments that give CP, you can’t then ignore it when 3 of 1 detachment provide extra CP, it is, somewhat backwards in itself.

I haven't actually seen a tournament that doesn't apply a 3 detachment limit, but I'll accept that you've seen one or two and that they exist. However, as GW is the one who established that suggested limit in the first place, I'd say it's probably more common than not. Keep in mind that without it, an effective army could run 3 patrol detachments and another more focused detachment to fit in the units you want rather than being forced to pay HQ and troop taxes in order to maintain the obsessions. The funny part about this is that we'll never know how effective that flexibility could be because it's outright disallowed, and as you pointed out, it's not because it's strong - it is seemingly disallowed because somebody decided it isn't strong enough, which is super weird.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Mostly is a funny word. It does not mean exclusively, just more of this and less of that.

Mostly can mean 95% and you know it.

2 points here.

1st flayed ones blow and you know it, and nobody is taking more then 60 of them in matched play ever

2nd if your wanting to re enact something from the fluff to this degree then your already better off playing a none matched play game.

Your reaching real hard for that branch mate.

How is a CC HQ with a 2+ invuln a weak unit?

 Tiberius501 wrote:
Plez GW, just drop a rough estimated time frame. If you told us it'd take a week, a month, even expecting it to take 6 months, I don't think we'd care if you gave us an estimated time frame. GeeDubs, come on m8s. Get ya game togetha

They're busting my iho sticks here!

 Red Corsair wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Mostly is a funny word. It does not mean exclusively, just more of this and less of that.

Mostly can mean 95% and you know it.

2 points here.

1st flayed ones blow and you know it, and nobody is taking more then 60 of them in matched play ever

2nd if your wanting to re enact something from the fluff to this degree then your already better off playing a none matched play game.

Your reaching real hard for that branch mate.

Flayed Ones aren't terrible for the price, so no you might not take 60 ordinarily unless you're facing mostly swarming opponents. However, I should have the option to do so in a tournament setting if I felt like it.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Flayed Ones aren't terrible for the price, so no you might not take 60 ordinarily unless you're facing mostly swarming opponents. However, I should have the option to do so in a tournament setting if I felt like it.

They are terrible, one of if not the worst unit in the necron codex. A tomb spyder is better point for point against MEQ, and freaking scarabs are better point for point against GEQ. I don't have a dog in the rest of the fight, but please stop using flayed ones as an example of anything other than a unit that desperately needs a point reduction.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
People only really use Wardens and Crusaders, though. I've literally never seen anyone field a Paladin or Errant. There's very little reason to do so when Titanic Feet is just better than their bad weapons most of the time.

Best Knight player at ATC used 3 Paladins and 1 Crusader. Went 6-0 and was ranked 15th overall.

Lemondish wrote:
I haven't actually seen a tournament that doesn't apply a 3 detachment limit, but I'll accept that you've seen one or two and that they exist. However, as GW is the one who established that suggested limit in the first place, I'd say it's probably more common than not. Keep in mind that without it, an effective army could run 3 patrol detachments and another more focused detachment to fit in the units you want rather than being forced to pay HQ and troop taxes in order to maintain the obsessions. The funny part about this is that we'll never know how effective that flexibility could be because it's outright disallowed, and as you pointed out, it's not because it's strong - it is seemingly disallowed because somebody decided it isn't strong enough, which is super weird.

I don't think they're talking about the "three detachment" limit. They're talking about a limit some tournaments impose of no more than one of each detachment, which would suck for drukhari even more than the "three detachment" limit.

Just heard from a VERY reliable source. That there will be a max limit of 3 duplicates of any unit in a list. Baring troops!


Thank you very much.

Ragweek wrote:
Just heard from a VERY reliable source. That there will be a max limit of 3 duplicates of any unit in a list. Baring troops!


Thank you very much.

So... no dedicated transports then? I guess screw rhino's and raiders.

 djones520 wrote:

Ragweek wrote:
Just heard from a VERY reliable source. That there will be a max limit of 3 duplicates of any unit in a list. Baring troops!


Thank you very much.

So... no dedicated transports then? I guess screw rhino's and raiders.

Well, Rhinos yes. Did anyone ever want to bring 4 Land Raiders? In a 2,000 point game they'd take up the vast majority of your points.

Ragweek wrote:
Just heard from a VERY reliable source. That there will be a max limit of 3 duplicates of any unit in a list. Baring troops!


Thank you very much.

Very reliable rumor from 15 post account, news at 11

 Cephalobeard wrote:

Ragweek wrote:
Just heard from a VERY reliable source. That there will be a max limit of 3 duplicates of any unit in a list. Baring troops!


Thank you very much.

Very reliable rumor from 15 post account, news at 11

To be honest I'm more afraid as day past that this will end up being true.

Don't you have a little voice in the back of your head telling you "The possibility of this being true is there!"?

 Galas wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:

Ragweek wrote:
Just heard from a VERY reliable source. That there will be a max limit of 3 duplicates of any unit in a list. Baring troops!


Thank you very much.

Very reliable rumor from 15 post account, news at 11

To be honest I'm more afraid as day past that this will end up being true.

Don't you have a little voice in the back of your head telling you "The possibility of this being true is there!"?

Eh. I have my own little birds. I haven't heard anything like this, at all.

 Grimgold wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Flayed Ones aren't terrible for the price, so no you might not take 60 ordinarily unless you're facing mostly swarming opponents. However, I should have the option to do so in a tournament setting if I felt like it.

They are terrible, one of if not the worst unit in the necron codex. A tomb spyder is better point for point against MEQ, and freaking scarabs are better point for point against GEQ. I don't have a dog in the rest of the fight, but please stop using flayed ones as an example of anything other than a unit that desperately needs a point reduction.

Wanna give the math on Scarabs and Spyders there? Please by all means do.

As for how FAQs affect Tournaments, why don’t TO’s holding tournaments around FAQ season simply set a deadline for when the last rules errata and possibly FAQ answers to be applied to their tournament? Or, just organize tournaments not around FAQ season...

macluvin wrote:
As for how FAQs affect Tournaments, why don’t TO’s holding tournaments around FAQ season simply set a deadline for when the last rules errata and possibly FAQ answers to be applied to their tournament? Or, just organize tournaments not around FAQ season...

Barnyard Brawl, a GT on the weekend of the 28th, has done that.

Lemondish wrote:

Kdash wrote:

Lemondish wrote:

Kdash wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I expect TO's will relax that for Patrol Detachments. Sure you can 'soup' with them, but you also lose a bunch of CPs. Dark Eldar should still be able to take advantage of them though, simply because their entire book is more or less a take on 'soup'.

Nah I doubt they will relax it, simply because I don’t think it’ll see much use (if any) in tournament play.
3 Patrols will get you 7CP, but, 1 Battalion and 2 mini detachments gets you 8CP. If you want to take Reavers you’ll prob take an outrider to have more than 2 units. If you want Talos, a spearhead is accessible. This can easily be rounded out by a kabalite battalion for example. You can still include a patrol if you want, and you’ll end up with the same 7CP.

I think the current belief is by going for all 3 you are causing more harm than you are getting in benefits, and the better way to go is to stop at 2.

That honestly seems to be a bad way to run that rule. "It won't see use, so we'll ban it" seems...counter-intuitive. Maybe it would see use, but not be as effective. Should be allowed either way. The real rule we should relax is ignoring detachments that do not provide CP when applying the Highlander and max detachments rules. I think we'd see a bit more use of fortifications if they only ever cost points.

Not all tournaments are doing this – only a few currently, so it’s not really going to have that much of an impact overall.

That said, not being able to run 3 patrol detachments also isn’t going to have that much of an impact either imo. Sure, it’s a neat interaction and opportunity, but, in reality – and top table games at events, I doubt you’ll see this being used.

As for the HQ tax – it’s essentially up to ~80 points, but of course completely depends on your list. 80 points for, not only +1CP, but also the option to further shape my army seems like a no brainer to me. Patrols are handy if needed, but, with only 2 slots for non-troops it’s very restrictive and you’ll often be looking at getting that 3rd fast attack or heavy support option – but doing so will often risk loosing detachment bonuses. Sure, you could run a 3 cabal patrol list, but, at that point, for 1 extra HQ you could prob just run 2 battalions instead and get +2CP.

Also, if you want to restrict detachments that give CP, you can’t then ignore it when 3 of 1 detachment provide extra CP, it is, somewhat backwards in itself.

I haven't actually seen a tournament that doesn't apply a 3 detachment limit, but I'll accept that you've seen one or two and that they exist. However, as GW is the one who established that suggested limit in the first place, I'd say it's probably more common than not. Keep in mind that without it, an effective army could run 3 patrol detachments and another more focused detachment to fit in the units you want rather than being forced to pay HQ and troop taxes in order to maintain the obsessions. The funny part about this is that we'll never know how effective that flexibility could be because it's outright disallowed, and as you pointed out, it's not because it's strong - it is seemingly disallowed because somebody decided it isn't strong enough, which is super weird.

2 things, 1 why are you getting CP for patrol detachments? Is that a dark eldar thing? I haven't looked too much at their book but patrol detachments for other armies don't get give any CP. Seems like an odd army benefit.

Second, I would like to say that I have only seen the 3 detachment limit bypassed in matched play events for 2 reasons 1. Because going all out with whatever you can fit was the point of the tournament. 2. WAAC people taking advantage of TOs that didn't know any better to run their theorycraft turbo cheese.

ERJAK wrote:
2 things, 1 why are you getting CP for patrol detachments? Is that a dark eldar thing? I haven't looked too much at their book but patrol detachments for other armies don't get give any CP. Seems like an odd army benefit.

ERJAK wrote:
2 things, 1 why are you getting CP for patrol detachments? Is that a dark eldar thing? I haven't looked too much at their book but patrol detachments for other armies don't get give any CP. Seems like an odd army benefit.

Second, I would like to say that I have only seen the 3 detachment limit bypassed in matched play events for 2 reasons 1. Because going all out with whatever you can fit was the point of the tournament. 2. WAAC people taking advantage of TOs that didn't know any better to run their theorycraft turbo cheese.

Yes, it's a drukhari thing. They get bonus command points for running either 3+ or 6+ patrol detachments because kabals, wych cults, and haemonculus covens each have their own choices for subfactions, which means you can't combine kabal and wych cult, or wych cult and haemonculus covens, etc., in the same detachment and still get the benefit of their subfaction special rules.

And, I'm still pretty sure nobody is talking about tournaments bypassing the limit of three detachments. That was just the person you quoted misunderstanding the topic at-hand. The discussion is about some tournaments placing a limit of 1 on each type of detachment, making it illegal for instance to run two spearheads or two supreme commands, which is relevant because of the aforementioned bonus for drukhari taking three patrols.