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.

IMHO, the ITC missions contribute to part of the problem, they don't fix it.

Purifying Tempest wrote:

 Ordana wrote:
The perfect example of an internet forum.
A topic saying "40k has no combo's" and another saying "40k is just about assembling your combo" on the same page.

It is because the whole 'discussion' relies on something that is completely subjective. What I consider synergy may not be what other people consider synergy. It is more of an opinion piece, and there are lots of opposing opinions out there :(

Now, enough reasonability... back to being asinine and obtuse. Or as my wife has now termed it: an acute donkey-cave.

Edit: I LOVE the auto-correct to donkey-cave, dakka, that is pretty funny. Thank you!

Because what a lot of dakka considers "synergy" is spamming 27 of one unit and winning. Units that are in an army that wins doesn't necessarily equal synergy. It's a really strange way to use the word.
What I and anyone who isn't being a tard mean by synergy is when units have various interactions with one another.

Danny slag wrote:

Purifying Tempest wrote:

 Ordana wrote:
The perfect example of an internet forum.
A topic saying "40k has no combo's" and another saying "40k is just about assembling your combo" on the same page.

It is because the whole 'discussion' relies on something that is completely subjective. What I consider synergy may not be what other people consider synergy. It is more of an opinion piece, and there are lots of opposing opinions out there :(

Now, enough reasonability... back to being asinine and obtuse. Or as my wife has now termed it: an acute donkey-cave.

Edit: I LOVE the auto-correct to donkey-cave, dakka, that is pretty funny. Thank you!

Because what a lot of dakka considers "synergy" is spamming 27 of one unit and winning. Units that are in an army that wins doesn't necessarily equal synergy. It's a really strange way to use the word.
What I and anyone who isn't being a tard mean by synergy is when units have various interactions with one another.

Competitive 40k in a nutshell - spam the crap out of the most cost effective units and proclaim it as a synergistic masterpiece.

There is a lot of synergy in 8th... but it's almost entirely all being used in the same boring way. Find something that gives re-rolls to hit/wound, and surround it with big scary shooting. It's bland and it's boring.

Death guard has some decent synergy with spells and stratagems, but they can be really hard to line up properly and avoided, so competitive lists become "spam that one pretty good and easy to use model"

Chaos daemons are probably the biggest exception to this discussion. Both with synergy and with min troops armies. For some reason, troops are point for point, insanely good for daemons (at least bloodletters, pinkies and nurglings). However as mentioned by another poster, ITC missions kinda slap some of the daemon strategies (units over 20) in the mouth.

what has made me most sad about army comps is that every list seems to just be an alternative on leaf blower from 5th ed. The "take a little of everything and be good at it" of space marines feels completely gone.

 gwarsh41 wrote:
There is a lot of synergy in 8th... but it's almost entirely all being used in the same boring way. Find something that gives re-rolls to hit/wound, and surround it with big scary shooting. It's bland and it's boring.

Death guard has some decent synergy with spells and stratagems, but they can be really hard to line up properly and avoided, so competitive lists become "spam that one pretty good and easy to use model"

Chaos daemons are probably the biggest exception to this discussion. Both with synergy and with min troops armies. For some reason, troops are point for point, insanely good for daemons (at least bloodletters, pinkies and nurglings). However as mentioned by another poster, ITC missions kinda slap some of the daemon strategies (units over 20) in the mouth.

what has made me most sad about army comps is that every list seems to just be an alternative on leaf blower from 5th ed. The "take a little of everything and be good at it" of space marines feels completely gone.

I'm sad you didn't mention Daemonettes, as I've decided to play mono-slaanesh, but eh. Another topic for another thread I guess.

 gwarsh41 wrote:


what has made me most sad about army comps is that every list seems to just be an alternative on leaf blower from 5th ed. The "take a little of everything and be good at it" of space marines feels completely gone.

Until 40k drops I-go-you-go for a system built around alternating unit activation, this is always going to be the case. The current system is always going to encourage massive front-loading of firepower, as the best way to win games is removing your opponents' options, and the best way to do that is to blow them off the table before your opponent gets to even use them.

40k misses tactics. It's allready close to ccg.

I think there is definitely synergies, by definition in 40k as it stands.