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 from what I see is that you still want to have those 150 + points model FEEL powerfull. They are (usually) unique godly fighter or sorceror that can overturn a planet to their cause if they put their mind to it.
For a player, it feels great when those pricey model have a lot of impact on the game. And of course the extreme killyness of the game make it so that if you just increase the point cost, you'll have fewer model on the table to actually protect and help your big model, and it'll just die without accomplishing much.

That's why the 0-1 limit make sense, it lets player play with a powerfull model and always get bangs for their bucks, but without going overboard and bringing 6+ too efficient units.

Warmachine has the same kind of deal going on with warcaster, that really help define how an army is going to play and lets you synergise with every part of your army.

All in all, not saying I necessarly agree with the 0 -1 limit, but I can understand why their doing it.

Ix_Tab wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

 DaBraken wrote:
Like some people already have mentioned is it a bad idea to simply restrict hq to 0-1.
(Genestealer Cults for example only have 3 HQs in whole... others have a wide range to choose from)

The problem i see is, some armys suffer more than other, simply because the concerned HQs have sometimes less and sometimes more than 9 wounds. The character targeting rules are actually questionable, at best.
Hive Tyrants for example are inefficient cannon fodder without wings... you would try to not even take one, regardless of any restrictions.

And yeah, Flyrant spam can be annoying, but at least you can always target them when they reach the battlefield. I dont understand the hate people bring against that list.
It is antimeta and strong against alpha. So what? Some players got caught on the wrong foot, but hey, that happens with 'new' stuff noone expects. The meta will shift again.
You could get the impression that everyone had got his teeth kicked in by this list. Always. Ever.
A bit hyperbolic, isnt it?

This is accurate.

For all the complaining about alpha strike, this is one list that denies alpha.. and people lose their minds.

Looks like people screaming for nerfs really actually do want a brutal alpha. i guess.

But doesn't this list also bring a fairly brutal alpha?

It's not really an alpha list. Compared to something like Nurgle daemons or Poxwalkers it's got more killing power., but compared to Blood Angels it's got less killing power and much more survivability. The key really is how tough Hive Tyrants are in addition to having lots of power in all four stages of the game.

VoidSempai wrote:
The problem from what I see is that you still want to have those 150 + points model FEEL powerfull. They are (usually) unique godly fighter or sorceror that can overturn a planet to their cause if they put their mind to it.
For a player, it feels great when those pricey model have a lot of impact on the game. And of course the extreme killyness of the game make it so that if you just increase the point cost, you'll have fewer model on the table to actually protect and help your big model, and it'll just die without accomplishing much.

That's why the 0-1 limit make sense, it lets player play with a powerfull model and always get bangs for their bucks, but without going overboard and bringing 6+ too efficient units.

So have an expensive model, and have it worth it's points. Back to the tau commander, a major complaint is that it's still too good for its cost (compared to similar models in the book). All the 0-1 restriction does is encourage every army to be made of 3 detatchments to maximise commanders. This doesn't encourage variety. If commanders were more expensive (or less of a gun boat) there would be more of a choice between fielding more commanders or fielding crisis suits instead.

As for the "can only take one of each hq data sheet until you run out of options" how does this interact with special characters? Do tau armies only need to take a commander, fireblade & ethereal before they can cycle, unless they're tau Sept where they need to also take longstrike, darkstrider, etc? Do I need to take an autarch, autarch on bike, and autarch with wings before potentially taking another of the same? If I want to run a force of Tyranid warriors do I have to take neurothropes / tyrants to fill batallions instead of primes? Or if I want a batallion focused on small things with neurothropes as commanders, I have to run broodlords or primes instead of just a pair of neurothropes because....and this encourages variety? From what I can see, you're making any given list take a larger variety of datacards at the cost of lists in general being more homogenous.

VoidSempai wrote:
The problem from what I see is that you still want to have those 150 + points model FEEL powerfull. They are (usually) unique godly fighter or sorceror that can overturn a planet to their cause if they put their mind to it.
For a player, it feels great when those pricey model have a lot of impact on the game. And of course the extreme killyness of the game make it so that if you just increase the point cost, you'll have fewer model on the table to actually protect and help your big model, and it'll just die without accomplishing much.

That's why the 0-1 limit make sense, it lets player play with a powerfull model and always get bangs for their bucks, but without going overboard and bringing 6+ too efficient units.

That is the problem though. A 150 point model should be as efficient as any other 150-point model. Now granted different units may have different levels of speed, durability and killing power but if a particular 150-point unit is consistently more efficient than most other 150 point units, that is a problem. It should be addressed with points/rules changes. Making it 0-1 per detachment is treating a symptom rather than the underlying problem.

What Karhedron said.

Also, the Warmahorde HQ are for the most part(at least when I was playing) unique named characters, and the game revolves around a very specific HQ-centric gameplay that is different from Warhammer.

Basically, if GW would make all HQ more powerful the game would become even more of a Herohammer than before.

 Eldarsif wrote:

Basically, if GW would make all HQ more powerful the game would become even more of a Herohammer than before.

Herohammer is the last thing I want...

Speaking of which, why should any HQs be the best at anything? They presumably have buffs to hand out, so if anything, they should be the least point efficient at killing things. It really bothers me how many people think it's OK for Tau commanders to be broken because they are commanders.

HQs need to actually bring the army together, not run suicide drops to kill a tank. That's what Elites are for.

0-1 Warbosses for orks doesn't bother me overly much except when Ghazzy enters the picture. He's got Warbosses under his thumb as nobs. Essentially another rung on the hierarchy. Some of his Warboss underlings are highly renowned unique heroes in their own right with a their own empire and list of accomplishments.

For Hive tyrants as a Tyranid player I would have no problem with limiting the wings biomorph to 1 per detachment and +10 more points, +10 pts for Monstrous rending claws. This gives regular walking tyrants/Swarmlord no issues and limits flyrants to 3 in most games/tournaments and also makes most of them +20 pts(+10 at least).

There are Iconic/Powerful spammable units in every army that should be limited in some way just be creative.

OR

Just use 25% max each HQ/Elite/Heavy/Fast/Flyer/Super heavy. This makes only Troop/Transports/Fortifications really spamable and I don't think many people are complaining about any of these (Maby Razorbacks but not as much).

With the current detachments this becomes an interesting and fun list building exercise.


Edit +10 pts for Monsterous rending claws would mean we would need to reduce the cost of the Broodlord by at least 10pts(preferably 20-40) I'd also like to see a 20-40 pts decrease in Tyranid primes and Tervigons as at the current profile they are extremely lackluster adding to the "need" to take Flyrants. Our only basic HQ that I think is properly costed is the Nerunthrope.

Timeshadow wrote:
For Hive tyrants as a Tyranid player I would have no problem with limiting the wings biomorph to 1 per detachment and +10 more points, +10 pts for Monstrous rending claws. This gives regular walking tyrants/Swarmlord no issues and limits flyrants to 3 in most games/tournaments and also makes most of them +20 pts(+10 at least).

There are Iconic/Powerful spammable units in every army that should be limited in some way just be creative.

OR

Just use 25% max each HQ/Elite/Heavy/Fast/Flyer/Super heavy. This makes only Troop/Transports/Fortifications really spamable and I don't think many people are complaining about any of these (Maby Razorbacks but not as much).

With the current detachments this becomes an interesting and fun list building exercise.


Edit +10 pts for Monsterous rending claws would mean we would need to reduce the cost of the Broodlord by at least 10pts(preferably 20-40) I'd also like to see a 20-40 pts decrease in Tyranid primes and Tervigons as at the current profile they are extremely lackluster adding to the "need" to take Flyrants. Our only basic HQ that I think is properly costed is the Nerunthrope.

Unfortunately, primes and blords are quite close to being fairly costed once you sum up everything they bring on the table. You can drop them by 10 points, but that's it.

10 Points for MRC is too low, it should be at least 18, and for walkrants to be a choice the wings should be at least +15. Yes, this would mean a +33 on MRC flyrants, but that is what they are worth.

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
Greater Daemons should be restricted to one.

Ruleswize I could see it happening to Daemon Princes, too, fluffwize there have been occasions were several daemon princes fought together.

Lore wise it makes sense, but rules wise they don't need it. Greater daemons are not that hot compared to infantry.

Yeah, Greater Daemons are NOT in a good place right now.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Yeah, Greater Daemons are NOT in a good place right now.

Really? You want to use that phrase when talking about daemons? I'm sure the Slaaneshi daemons are having a wonderful time where ever they are.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Yeah, Greater Daemons are NOT in a good place right now.

Really? You want to use that phrase when talking about daemons? I'm sure the Slaaneshi daemons are having a wonderful time where ever they are.

Eh... I'd imagine Keepers of Secrets are never satisfied. They want-no, they NEED-more, more, MORE!

Great Unclean Ones, though, they're a jolly bunch. They're pretty happy, except Ku'Gath. He's busy trying to make it up to Grandpa Nurgle, and takes himself a little too seriously.

I like the IDEA of Greater Daemons being 1 per detachment.
And honestly most lists I've seen don't have more that this anyway. 2 GUOs, for example are quite expensive. and I've never seen a list with 3.
1 per detachment + the typical 3 total detahcments, therefore doesn't really hurt GDs.
There are also 4 separate datasheets for GDs, so you could easily have a GUO, a LOC and a BloodThirster in the same detachment if you wanted.

It might hurt Daemon Princes, however. In 7th, the Tetrad existed after all, so multiple Princes is clear supported by fluff.
But many of the reasons Flying Tyrants should be restricted exist for DPs too, just not to the same extreme.

-