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.
Bharring wrote: IG + big boys is the coolest/most fluffy ally in the game. It's the last one we should be trying to fully erradicate.
You have got to be kidding me. Multiple shield captains is somehow fluffy?
You're aware they fight together, no?
Custodes don't have factions. They exist as a singular entity. Members of groups have individual "ranks". Those "ranks" can form other groups.
In "The Master of Mankind" some of the eldest custodes, ranging from a tribune to other captains are referred to as the "High Lords of Terra".
They're not marines. Stop thinking about them like them.
They are a genetically modified super humans - grown to be a fighting machine - the also have big armor and should pads. They are friggen marines dude. The levels of "elite soliders" in this game are becoming excessively lame. I'm not even sure how anyone even cares for imperial factions at this point.
That is another discussion though. The discussion is about taking the most basic armies in the game to soup up the most elite ones. Do you really think a 10,000 year old super solider is at all enhanced by a bridge of pathetic humans behind him? No. They are irrelevant to him. They aren't going to give him tactical insight or anything or the kind. He is a master of war - they are the army reserves.
I... don't think you're aware of Custodes lore, genuinely.
Diocletian, again, a Custodian in "Master of Mankind" deliberately describes being impressed by a Knight Scion who stood before him and chose to fight for the emperor, was impressed by her Zeal.
Multiple Custodians regard Arkhan Land, a human techno archaeologist who literally created the Land Raider, with respect.
Custodians work alongside inquisitiors, who are humans. They sit among the High Lords of Terra, who are humans.
The Imperium of Man is for man. Created by The Emperor, and all creations exist for the betterment of Mankind.
Custodians fight for them, because it is the emperors vision. A human among them who is able to gleam a tactical level of insight to assist them is not only fully valid by warhammer lore, it's literally expected to find a human who might be of that level of standard that is assigned to an area BESIEGED BY THE ENEMY in which Custodians, maybe even in the Sol System, are then set out to also protect.
You're going against fluff to make it invalid. It's wrong.
They can respect normal humans all they like but it doesn't make them any less useless by comparison in actual fights. Respect doesn't stop bullets. Plus aren't Custodes meant to be super duper awesome elite of the elite of the elite of the elite soldiers who are all tactical genius's? So they don't really need some Guard general with essentially no experience by comparison to give tactical insight. But hey, my whole group gave up in Gathering Storm so I might be absolutely behind the latest retcons.
Respect doesn't, no. I'm simply indicating they fight together; as they do.
Because they do.
They are useless, so are 32 Models in the AM Battalion you're using to ally.
Just one of them is providing you with a benefit, and perhaps that guy is seeing something no one else did.
We're taking "Warlord" too literally. It's just a model. Forge your own narrative if you're worried about it.
Not disagreeing that they can fight together. They shouldn't get bonus tactical ability for fighting with guard though. That is just silly.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
40k is not for simulating a realistic battle. Or do soldiers pause to look around after wandering a few steps into the battlefield? Do vehicles guns admire the scenery if other weapons are being fired?
No, so realism isn't the best argument to use.
tremere47-fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate, leads to triple riptide spam
If an engagement has several platoons of average Army infantry, an Army captain, and a Marine squad with a Marine Captain in it somehow, who's directing the overall battle? The Army captain or the Marine captain (modern military)?
In First Heretic Custodes fought alone. In Master of Mankind there was no AM or any flunkies. And flunkies don’t count as AM not even a good try there.
Bow down to Guilliman for he is our new God Emperor!
Martel - "Custodes are terrible in 8th. Good luck with them. They take all the problems of marines and multiply them."
"Lol, classic martel. 'I know it was strong enough to podium in the biggest tournament in the world but I refuse to acknowledge space marines are good because I can't win with them and it can't possibly be ME'."
DakkaDakka is really the place where you need anti-tank guns to kill basic dudes, because anything less isn't durable enough.
They also built flunkies giving more CP into the game. Troops are what net you the most CP, the basic troopers in any army. Elite guys? Next to nothing.
You can totally build a brigade for Custodes at 2000 points.
Bow down to Guilliman for he is our new God Emperor!
Martel - "Custodes are terrible in 8th. Good luck with them. They take all the problems of marines and multiply them."
"Lol, classic martel. 'I know it was strong enough to podium in the biggest tournament in the world but I refuse to acknowledge space marines are good because I can't win with them and it can't possibly be ME'."
DakkaDakka is really the place where you need anti-tank guns to kill basic dudes, because anything less isn't durable enough.
This is 2 issues you have combined into one and people are not going to agree untill you break down the issue to the individual root causes
The issue with allies isn't CP, its the plugging a codex's weakness from another codex, meaning that soup usually outperforms a mono codex build.
The issue with Imperial Guard is the rediculous 5+regenerate CP warloard trait and 5+ steel CP relic. Both of those for sub 200 points thats more CP for less points than any other faction in 8th edition. Untill the CP abusing farm is fixed doing anything else to IG is pointless as it won't address the underlying issue.
Vaktathi wrote: Making Infantry Squads 5ppm isnt going to do much about soup, especially the CP battery issues, most of these armies arent running hundreds of guardsmen, for the CP battery lists, theyll be able to squeeze 30-60pts elsewhere without much issue in an 1850/2k game.
Likewise, banning one faction from being allies but not others doesnt hold any water either.
Simple fix...CP's only get to be used on the detachments or factions that generate them. Suddenly, the allied CP shennanigans ceases to be an issue, factions deal with the CP they were designed to have, and we dont need to get into manipulating points or bans.
Joan do you know how many CP an army was designed to have?
We dont specifically, but more broadly speaking, most factions (barring stuff like Harlequins) are designed as self contained forces fully playable without allies, their Stratagems are specific to their units and costed to such units, and when built as self contained forces usually operate within a range of CP availability that differs from other armies built as self contained forces as well, and access to allied CP's and CP batteries is wildly inconsistent.
Allies are part of the game
a very poorly implemented part of it.
and in theory the CP stuff is as designed.
Looking at the actual execution in codex books, it does not appear CP sharing was ever considered much.
but I think restricting CP to generating faction is cumbersome and basically kills allies
Just because you cant use 10CP generated by a Guard army on your Space Marines or Sisters?
Most armies arent reliant on stratagems, especially not on spamming them, except those that go out of their way to abuse certain mechanics and are built in a specific manner to do just that. Having a CP battery from another faction shouldnt be taken as a given, especially when so many lack such access.
with minimal exception especially if you also take away the 3 you get for battleforged. Sorry but a lot in this thread reads as I hate allies.
To some degree thats not unfair, but thats also because GWs implementation of "allies" is atrocious, even in matched play it is little more than "take whatever you want from wherever you want in whatever quantity you want if they share a fluff keyword then they get to share a bunch of game mechanics to boot". Between the allies rules and detachment allowances, you really can make almost any combination and mishmash of units perfectly legal to field, which leads to lots of problems.
Aside from armies built specifically to abuse CP generation, i dont see what great harm restricting CP's to at least just the factions that generate them does.
The damage it does is to armies not designed to abuse those rules. I play Ravenguard allied with sisters, and have 9 CP total in most games. With your change I would have 6 one of which could be spent on sisters... so there is my one re-roll yay....Then my Ravenguard have 5, 3 of which probably get used pregame. So I have 1-3 strats to use during the game yay...sounds fun to me. Further I now need to track 2 separate CP pools, 3 if I went to other detachments. What this rule says to me is, no reason to ally now because it is overly punishing, I’m better off playing pure Ravenguard, and having probably 13 CP I can use on anything in my army.
It is your choice to play a dual army. Plus - if you just take 2 battalions you could have 10 base. You have options.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
Not matter how you slice it it’s a black eye for the hobby and being heavily abused now.
Bow down to Guilliman for he is our new God Emperor!
Martel - "Custodes are terrible in 8th. Good luck with them. They take all the problems of marines and multiply them."
"Lol, classic martel. 'I know it was strong enough to podium in the biggest tournament in the world but I refuse to acknowledge space marines are good because I can't win with them and it can't possibly be ME'."
DakkaDakka is really the place where you need anti-tank guns to kill basic dudes, because anything less isn't durable enough.
Ice_can wrote: This is 2 issues you have combined into one and people are not going to agree untill you break down the issue to the individual root causes
The issue with allies isn't CP, its the plugging a codex's weakness from another codex, meaning that soup usually outperforms a mono codex build.
The issue with Imperial Guard is the rediculous 5+regenerate CP warloard trait and 5+ steel CP relic. Both of those for sub 200 points thats more CP for less points than any other faction in 8th edition. Untill the CP abusing farm is fixed doing anything else to IG is pointless as it won't address the underlying issue.
If you restrict the command points generated by a detachment to only the detachment that generates them - you fix this problem.
Plus - you are right - there is more than one issue. Which favors taking allies even more. Mainly though - you have an overpowered force (like custodes) that needs command points to really shine - but they can't produce them. AM solves 2 problems at once by providing turn 1 screening and backfield objective holding. There is no reason not to do it. That is why it needs to be fixed.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/09 20:05:42
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
Primark G wrote: In First Heretic Custodes fought alone. In Master of Mankind there was no AM or any flunkies. And flunkies don’t count as AM not even a good try there.
Master of Mankind literally had Thousands upon Thousands of Admech, ranging from servitors, skitarii, to tech adepts (literally all humans), fighting alongside Custodes, AM, a Blood Angel, Sisters, etc.
"Conscripts" are flunkies. They're CONSCRIPTED to fight. They're absolutely nothing.
The never fought side by side. I don’t believe there was any AM involved at all either. The Emperor, Custodes, SoS, and loyalist Mechanicus are all fighting Daemons in the Web way.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/09 20:09:32
Bow down to Guilliman for he is our new God Emperor!
Martel - "Custodes are terrible in 8th. Good luck with them. They take all the problems of marines and multiply them."
"Lol, classic martel. 'I know it was strong enough to podium in the biggest tournament in the world but I refuse to acknowledge space marines are good because I can't win with them and it can't possibly be ME'."
DakkaDakka is really the place where you need anti-tank guns to kill basic dudes, because anything less isn't durable enough.
Ice_can wrote: This is 2 issues you have combined into one and people are not going to agree untill you break down the issue to the individual root causes
The issue with allies isn't CP, its the plugging a codex's weakness from another codex, meaning that soup usually outperforms a mono codex build.
The issue with Imperial Guard is the rediculous 5+regenerate CP warloard trait and 5+ steel CP relic. Both of those for sub 200 points thats more CP for less points than any other faction in 8th edition. Untill the CP abusing farm is fixed doing anything else to IG is pointless as it won't address the underlying issue.
If you restrict the command points generated by a detachment to only the detachment that generates them - you fix this problem.
Your half right IMHO, you limit the ability to abuse the IGCP farm to only IG strategums, but I have seen plenty of pure IG armies gaining CP as the game goes on even when spending CP as fast as they can this seems totally bonkers and god help non IG players when GW intorduces more strategums.
Vaktathi wrote: Making Infantry Squads 5ppm isnt going to do much about soup, especially the CP battery issues, most of these armies arent running hundreds of guardsmen, for the CP battery lists, theyll be able to squeeze 30-60pts elsewhere without much issue in an 1850/2k game.
Likewise, banning one faction from being allies but not others doesnt hold any water either.
Simple fix...CP's only get to be used on the detachments or factions that generate them. Suddenly, the allied CP shennanigans ceases to be an issue, factions deal with the CP they were designed to have, and we dont need to get into manipulating points or bans.
Joan do you know how many CP an army was designed to have?
We dont specifically, but more broadly speaking, most factions (barring stuff like Harlequins) are designed as self contained forces fully playable without allies, their Stratagems are specific to their units and costed to such units, and when built as self contained forces usually operate within a range of CP availability that differs from other armies built as self contained forces as well, and access to allied CP's and CP batteries is wildly inconsistent.
Allies are part of the game
a very poorly implemented part of it.
and in theory the CP stuff is as designed.
Looking at the actual execution in codex books, it does not appear CP sharing was ever considered much.
but I think restricting CP to generating faction is cumbersome and basically kills allies
Just because you cant use 10CP generated by a Guard army on your Space Marines or Sisters?
Most armies arent reliant on stratagems, especially not on spamming them, except those that go out of their way to abuse certain mechanics and are built in a specific manner to do just that. Having a CP battery from another faction shouldnt be taken as a given, especially when so many lack such access.
with minimal exception especially if you also take away the 3 you get for battleforged. Sorry but a lot in this thread reads as I hate allies.
To some degree thats not unfair, but thats also because GWs implementation of "allies" is atrocious, even in matched play it is little more than "take whatever you want from wherever you want in whatever quantity you want if they share a fluff keyword then they get to share a bunch of game mechanics to boot". Between the allies rules and detachment allowances, you really can make almost any combination and mishmash of units perfectly legal to field, which leads to lots of problems.
Aside from armies built specifically to abuse CP generation, i dont see what great harm restricting CP's to at least just the factions that generate them does.
The damage it does is to armies not designed to abuse those rules. I play Ravenguard allied with sisters, and have 9 CP total in most games. With your change I would have 6 one of which could be spent on sisters... so there is my one re-roll yay....Then my Ravenguard have 5, 3 of which probably get used pregame. So I have 1-3 strats to use during the game yay...sounds fun to me. Further I now need to track 2 separate CP pools, 3 if I went to other detachments. What this rule says to me is, no reason to ally now because it is overly punishing, I’m better off playing pure Ravenguard, and having probably 13 CP I can use on anything in my army.
It is your choice to play a dual army. Plus - if you just take 2 battalions you could have 10 base. You have options.
Which are severely limited by this rule....you have options now too, with you rule the options all become worse then playing mono-armies because doing so severely limits those options.
Ice_can wrote: This is 2 issues you have combined into one and people are not going to agree untill you break down the issue to the individual root causes
The issue with allies isn't CP, its the plugging a codex's weakness from another codex, meaning that soup usually outperforms a mono codex build.
The issue with Imperial Guard is the rediculous 5+regenerate CP warloard trait and 5+ steel CP relic. Both of those for sub 200 points thats more CP for less points than any other faction in 8th edition. Untill the CP abusing farm is fixed doing anything else to IG is pointless as it won't address the underlying issue.
If you restrict the command points generated by a detachment to only the detachment that generates them - you fix this problem.
Your half right IMHO, you limit the ability to abuse the IGCP farm to only IG strategums, but I have seen plenty of pure IG armies gaining CP as the game goes on even when spending CP as fast as they can this seems totally bonkers and god help non IG players when GW intorduces more strategums.
With how easy it is to get 13+ command points I don't really see this as an issue. Out of fairness though - the IG command point generator needs to be nerfed to 6+...like the exact trait the DE just got. 5+ is just better for no reason compared to other generators.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
Primark G wrote: Not matter how you slice it it’s a black eye for the hobby and being heavily abused now.
It isn’t, but if it is seen as such, fix the farming portion, or require your warlord to come from your faction with the highest points. So you can take you 200 points for 5CP not 5+ farming.
Dude, ignore him. He’s defeated and just trolling you at this point to make himself feel superior or whatever.
Threads like this are why people have been leaving dakka to go post elsewhere. I’ve been posting here for years, and lurking even longer, and at no point has dakka ever been as god-awful as it is now. People like that have made this forum suck, and are the reason the entirety of the rest of the online 40k community makes fun of dakka. How /tg/ got to be a better place than this for 40k is beyond me, but it’s at that point.
Bi'ios wrote: Dude, ignore him. He’s defeated and just trolling you at this point to make himself feel superior or whatever.
Threads like this are why people have been leaving dakka to go post elsewhere. I’ve been posting here for years, and lurking even longer, and at no point has dakka ever been as god-awful as it is now. People like that have made this forum suck, and are the reason the entirety of the rest of the online 40k community makes fun of dakka. How /tg/ got to be a better place than this for 40k is beyond me, but it’s at that point.
He trolls the Custodes primary thread, as well. Has openly admitted to it. I recommend following this advice.
Vaktathi wrote: Making Infantry Squads 5ppm isnt going to do much about soup, especially the CP battery issues, most of these armies arent running hundreds of guardsmen, for the CP battery lists, theyll be able to squeeze 30-60pts elsewhere without much issue in an 1850/2k game.
Likewise, banning one faction from being allies but not others doesnt hold any water either.
Simple fix...CP's only get to be used on the detachments or factions that generate them. Suddenly, the allied CP shennanigans ceases to be an issue, factions deal with the CP they were designed to have, and we dont need to get into manipulating points or bans.
Joan do you know how many CP an army was designed to have?
We dont specifically, but more broadly speaking, most factions (barring stuff like Harlequins) are designed as self contained forces fully playable without allies, their Stratagems are specific to their units and costed to such units, and when built as self contained forces usually operate within a range of CP availability that differs from other armies built as self contained forces as well, and access to allied CP's and CP batteries is wildly inconsistent.
Allies are part of the game
a very poorly implemented part of it.
and in theory the CP stuff is as designed.
Looking at the actual execution in codex books, it does not appear CP sharing was ever considered much.
but I think restricting CP to generating faction is cumbersome and basically kills allies
Just because you cant use 10CP generated by a Guard army on your Space Marines or Sisters?
Most armies arent reliant on stratagems, especially not on spamming them, except those that go out of their way to abuse certain mechanics and are built in a specific manner to do just that. Having a CP battery from another faction shouldnt be taken as a given, especially when so many lack such access.
with minimal exception especially if you also take away the 3 you get for battleforged. Sorry but a lot in this thread reads as I hate allies.
To some degree thats not unfair, but thats also because GWs implementation of "allies" is atrocious, even in matched play it is little more than "take whatever you want from wherever you want in whatever quantity you want if they share a fluff keyword then they get to share a bunch of game mechanics to boot". Between the allies rules and detachment allowances, you really can make almost any combination and mishmash of units perfectly legal to field, which leads to lots of problems.
Aside from armies built specifically to abuse CP generation, i dont see what great harm restricting CP's to at least just the factions that generate them does.
The damage it does is to armies not designed to abuse those rules. I play Ravenguard allied with sisters, and have 9 CP total in most games. With your change I would have 6 one of which could be spent on sisters... so there is my one re-roll yay....Then my Ravenguard have 5, 3 of which probably get used pregame. So I have 1-3 strats to use during the game yay...sounds fun to me. Further I now need to track 2 separate CP pools, 3 if I went to other detachments. What this rule says to me is, no reason to ally now because it is overly punishing, I’m better off playing pure Ravenguard, and having probably 13 CP I can use on anything in my army.
It is your choice to play a dual army. Plus - if you just take 2 battalions you could have 10 base. You have options.
Which are severely limited by this rule....you have options now too, with you rule the options all become worse then playing mono-armies because doing so severely limits those options.
Nah dude - you could easily build an army with 10 cp. You just don't want to.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
I’ve never publically admitted to trolling anything online. Apparently it’s not okay with some people to have a different perception or opinion.
Bow down to Guilliman for he is our new God Emperor!
Martel - "Custodes are terrible in 8th. Good luck with them. They take all the problems of marines and multiply them."
"Lol, classic martel. 'I know it was strong enough to podium in the biggest tournament in the world but I refuse to acknowledge space marines are good because I can't win with them and it can't possibly be ME'."
DakkaDakka is really the place where you need anti-tank guns to kill basic dudes, because anything less isn't durable enough.
Bi'ios wrote: Dude, ignore him. He’s defeated and just trolling you at this point to make himself feel superior or whatever.
Threads like this are why people have been leaving dakka to go post elsewhere. I’ve been posting here for years, and lurking even longer, and at no point has dakka ever been as god-awful as it is now. People like that have made this forum suck, and are the reason the entirety of the rest of the online 40k community makes fun of dakka. How /tg/ got to be a better place than this for 40k is beyond me, but it’s at that point.
Well since you said it - it must be true. Also - this thread is actually producing good discussion - until you tried to derail it. Except maybe for the guy trying to argue that it is fluffy for custodes to get buku command points for taking AM brigades but at least hes discussing the topic.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
I wasn't 100% sure who in this thread he was talking about.
I was hoping it wasn't me.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Do you not see a strategic benefit to an elite corps to have a less elite but more numerous corps to handle other jobs?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/09 20:19:39
It’s unfair that Imperial soup players have a broken means to farm CP. What if they just didn’t take that WLT and relic but no they would never not do it.
Bow down to Guilliman for he is our new God Emperor!
Martel - "Custodes are terrible in 8th. Good luck with them. They take all the problems of marines and multiply them."
"Lol, classic martel. 'I know it was strong enough to podium in the biggest tournament in the world but I refuse to acknowledge space marines are good because I can't win with them and it can't possibly be ME'."
DakkaDakka is really the place where you need anti-tank guns to kill basic dudes, because anything less isn't durable enough.
Vaktathi wrote: Making Infantry Squads 5ppm isnt going to do much about soup, especially the CP battery issues, most of these armies arent running hundreds of guardsmen, for the CP battery lists, theyll be able to squeeze 30-60pts elsewhere without much issue in an 1850/2k game.
Likewise, banning one faction from being allies but not others doesnt hold any water either.
Simple fix...CP's only get to be used on the detachments or factions that generate them. Suddenly, the allied CP shennanigans ceases to be an issue, factions deal with the CP they were designed to have, and we dont need to get into manipulating points or bans.
Joan do you know how many CP an army was designed to have?
We dont specifically, but more broadly speaking, most factions (barring stuff like Harlequins) are designed as self contained forces fully playable without allies, their Stratagems are specific to their units and costed to such units, and when built as self contained forces usually operate within a range of CP availability that differs from other armies built as self contained forces as well, and access to allied CP's and CP batteries is wildly inconsistent.
Allies are part of the game
a very poorly implemented part of it.
and in theory the CP stuff is as designed.
Looking at the actual execution in codex books, it does not appear CP sharing was ever considered much.
but I think restricting CP to generating faction is cumbersome and basically kills allies
Just because you cant use 10CP generated by a Guard army on your Space Marines or Sisters?
Most armies arent reliant on stratagems, especially not on spamming them, except those that go out of their way to abuse certain mechanics and are built in a specific manner to do just that. Having a CP battery from another faction shouldnt be taken as a given, especially when so many lack such access.
with minimal exception especially if you also take away the 3 you get for battleforged. Sorry but a lot in this thread reads as I hate allies.
To some degree thats not unfair, but thats also because GWs implementation of "allies" is atrocious, even in matched play it is little more than "take whatever you want from wherever you want in whatever quantity you want if they share a fluff keyword then they get to share a bunch of game mechanics to boot". Between the allies rules and detachment allowances, you really can make almost any combination and mishmash of units perfectly legal to field, which leads to lots of problems.
Aside from armies built specifically to abuse CP generation, i dont see what great harm restricting CP's to at least just the factions that generate them does.
The damage it does is to armies not designed to abuse those rules. I play Ravenguard allied with sisters, and have 9 CP total in most games. With your change I would have 6 one of which could be spent on sisters... so there is my one re-roll yay....Then my Ravenguard have 5, 3 of which probably get used pregame. So I have 1-3 strats to use during the game yay...sounds fun to me. Further I now need to track 2 separate CP pools, 3 if I went to other detachments. What this rule says to me is, no reason to ally now because it is overly punishing, I’m better off playing pure Ravenguard, and having probably 13 CP I can use on anything in my army.
It is your choice to play a dual army. Plus - if you just take 2 battalions you could have 10 base. You have options.
Which are severely limited by this rule....you have options now too, with you rule the options all become worse then playing mono-armies because doing so severely limits those options.
Nah dude - you could easily build an army with 10 cp. You just don't want to.
Nah dude It severely limits options because to do that I am required to take specific options, that would make the army significantly worse...and I would still have much more limited abuse of my CP (only 5 for the marines to use). So no still far worse to the point that it is not worth doing over playing pure. To get 10 CP I’d still need 6 troops, and 4 HQ choices, have less CP, and less flexibility. So yeah I can build a worse army than I have now and still have worse access to my CP than I have now. So like I said...the I hate allies thread because your suggest change kills them except maybe taking guard the problem the OP was trying to solve you. So you have punished allies, but still not fixed the major complained about ally. Sorry your fix is terrible.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Primark G wrote: It’s unfair that Imperial soup players have a broken means to farm CP. What if they just didn’t take that WLT and relic but no they would never not do it.
EASy to fix-your warlord must be in your faction with the most points. Fixed no more guard CP farm.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/05/09 20:24:45
Bharring wrote: I wasn't 100% sure who in this thread he was talking about.
I was hoping it wasn't me.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Do you not see a strategic benefit to an elite corps to have a less elite but more numerous corps to handle other jobs?
Pretty sure he was talking about Primarch but who cares - he prefers another site to this one but still comes to this one to rave about how much this site sucks. Sounds butthurt.
Anyways. Back on track. No I don't see the benefit. Wouldn't it be even more beneficial to have additional armies from your same force - with direct lines of communication and understanding of your battle tactics at a very high level? Wouldn't they offer better information gathering? Better reliability? Ect?
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
Vaktathi wrote: Making Infantry Squads 5ppm isnt going to do much about soup, especially the CP battery issues, most of these armies arent running hundreds of guardsmen, for the CP battery lists, theyll be able to squeeze 30-60pts elsewhere without much issue in an 1850/2k game.
Likewise, banning one faction from being allies but not others doesnt hold any water either.
Simple fix...CP's only get to be used on the detachments or factions that generate them. Suddenly, the allied CP shennanigans ceases to be an issue, factions deal with the CP they were designed to have, and we dont need to get into manipulating points or bans.
Joan do you know how many CP an army was designed to have?
We dont specifically, but more broadly speaking, most factions (barring stuff like Harlequins) are designed as self contained forces fully playable without allies, their Stratagems are specific to their units and costed to such units, and when built as self contained forces usually operate within a range of CP availability that differs from other armies built as self contained forces as well, and access to allied CP's and CP batteries is wildly inconsistent.
Allies are part of the game
a very poorly implemented part of it.
and in theory the CP stuff is as designed.
Looking at the actual execution in codex books, it does not appear CP sharing was ever considered much.
but I think restricting CP to generating faction is cumbersome and basically kills allies
Just because you cant use 10CP generated by a Guard army on your Space Marines or Sisters?
Most armies arent reliant on stratagems, especially not on spamming them, except those that go out of their way to abuse certain mechanics and are built in a specific manner to do just that. Having a CP battery from another faction shouldnt be taken as a given, especially when so many lack such access.
with minimal exception especially if you also take away the 3 you get for battleforged. Sorry but a lot in this thread reads as I hate allies.
To some degree thats not unfair, but thats also because GWs implementation of "allies" is atrocious, even in matched play it is little more than "take whatever you want from wherever you want in whatever quantity you want if they share a fluff keyword then they get to share a bunch of game mechanics to boot". Between the allies rules and detachment allowances, you really can make almost any combination and mishmash of units perfectly legal to field, which leads to lots of problems.
Aside from armies built specifically to abuse CP generation, i dont see what great harm restricting CP's to at least just the factions that generate them does.
The damage it does is to armies not designed to abuse those rules. I play Ravenguard allied with sisters, and have 9 CP total in most games. With your change I would have 6 one of which could be spent on sisters... so there is my one re-roll yay....Then my Ravenguard have 5, 3 of which probably get used pregame. So I have 1-3 strats to use during the game yay...sounds fun to me. Further I now need to track 2 separate CP pools, 3 if I went to other detachments. What this rule says to me is, no reason to ally now because it is overly punishing, I’m better off playing pure Ravenguard, and having probably 13 CP I can use on anything in my army.
It is your choice to play a dual army. Plus - if you just take 2 battalions you could have 10 base. You have options.
Which are severely limited by this rule....you have options now too, with you rule the options all become worse then playing mono-armies because doing so severely limits those options.
Nah dude - you could easily build an army with 10 cp. You just don't want to.
Nah dude It severely limits options because to do that I am required to take specific options, that would make the army significantly worse...and I would still have much more limited abuse of my CP (only 5 for the marines to use). So no still far worse to the point that it is not worth doing over playing pure. To get 10 CP I’d still need 6 troops, and 4 HQ choices, have less CP, and less flexibility. So yeah I can build a worse army than I have now and still have worse access to my CP than I have now. So like I said...the I hate allies thread because your suggest change kills them except maybe taking guard the problem the OP was trying to solve you. So you have punished allies, but still not fixed the major complained about ally. Sorry your fix is terrible.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Primark G wrote: It’s unfair that Imperial soup players have a broken means to farm CP. What if they just didn’t take that WLT and relic but no they would never not do it.
EASy to fix-your warlord must be in your faction with the most points. Fixed no more guard CP farm.
What choices are you required to take?
2 batallions
4hq - lias/captain 2x leu
6 troops - 3 scouts -3 intercessors
patrol
Celestine
2x sisters
You got about 900-1000 points to spam whatever units you want. List building getting harder is actually a good thing.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
Vaktathi wrote: Making Infantry Squads 5ppm isnt going to do much about soup, especially the CP battery issues, most of these armies arent running hundreds of guardsmen, for the CP battery lists, theyll be able to squeeze 30-60pts elsewhere without much issue in an 1850/2k game.
Likewise, banning one faction from being allies but not others doesnt hold any water either.
Simple fix...CP's only get to be used on the detachments or factions that generate them. Suddenly, the allied CP shennanigans ceases to be an issue, factions deal with the CP they were designed to have, and we dont need to get into manipulating points or bans.
Joan do you know how many CP an army was designed to have?
We dont specifically, but more broadly speaking, most factions (barring stuff like Harlequins) are designed as self contained forces fully playable without allies, their Stratagems are specific to their units and costed to such units, and when built as self contained forces usually operate within a range of CP availability that differs from other armies built as self contained forces as well, and access to allied CP's and CP batteries is wildly inconsistent.
Allies are part of the game
a very poorly implemented part of it.
and in theory the CP stuff is as designed.
Looking at the actual execution in codex books, it does not appear CP sharing was ever considered much.
but I think restricting CP to generating faction is cumbersome and basically kills allies
Just because you cant use 10CP generated by a Guard army on your Space Marines or Sisters?
Most armies arent reliant on stratagems, especially not on spamming them, except those that go out of their way to abuse certain mechanics and are built in a specific manner to do just that. Having a CP battery from another faction shouldnt be taken as a given, especially when so many lack such access.
with minimal exception especially if you also take away the 3 you get for battleforged. Sorry but a lot in this thread reads as I hate allies.
To some degree thats not unfair, but thats also because GWs implementation of "allies" is atrocious, even in matched play it is little more than "take whatever you want from wherever you want in whatever quantity you want if they share a fluff keyword then they get to share a bunch of game mechanics to boot". Between the allies rules and detachment allowances, you really can make almost any combination and mishmash of units perfectly legal to field, which leads to lots of problems.
Aside from armies built specifically to abuse CP generation, i dont see what great harm restricting CP's to at least just the factions that generate them does.
The damage it does is to armies not designed to abuse those rules. I play Ravenguard allied with sisters, and have 9 CP total in most games. With your change I would have 6 one of which could be spent on sisters... so there is my one re-roll yay....Then my Ravenguard have 5, 3 of which probably get used pregame. So I have 1-3 strats to use during the game yay...sounds fun to me.
Any change can have a negative impact on things, but regarding specific army lists, unless theyre going to be totally invalidated or nerfed into unplayability, which the force you described wont be, it is difficult to be too worried over the loss of few CP in the grand scheme. Sure, for that CP hit isn't nothing, but its hardly the end of allies. Any change is likely going to negatively impact certain things. The last CSM/RH list I ran would encounter similar issues, but I can live with that change.
Also, it makes perfect sense that armies composed of disparate factions would be less effective at coordinating and operating in tactical harmony than one composed entirely of the same faction.
More to the point, until a few months ago, Stratagems didnt even exist in the game, if thats what is going to kill it for you, I wonder what the draw was before.
Further I now need to track 2 separate CP pools, 3 if I went to other detachments. What this rule says to me is, no reason to ally now because it is overly punishing, I’m better off playing pure Ravenguard, and having probably 13 CP I can use on anything in my army.
So, the only point to running an allied mixed force was to take advantage of CP mechanics? And CP's matter more than everything else allies offer?
Not fluffy themed armies, not running units and abilities that synergistically covered each others weaknesses, not finding a use for those handful of SM models you own in your otherwise 2000pt skitarii army, etc?
If so, I feel more strongly about that change than ever.
Limit it to just factions if you like instead of by detachment, thatll cut down on tracking requirements, but will still achieve the same goal.
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
If your force had corps appropriate to other roles, yes. But if your entire corps is identical, not so much. Custodes jsut don't have the 'warm bodies' necessary for many roles. They need warm bodies to do things.
It doesn't take an uber soldier to dig a latrene. An uber soldier isn't that much better at simply being present. And you can effectively have a dozen of warm bodies (real world, fluff, or game) for each super-uber-soldier, so even things where the uber-soldier is twice as good, the warm body has the advantage.
The communications thing is a real deal. It should be more a cost than a gain for strategery to mix multiple armies. But Custodes fighting with IG should have a lot more tactical flexability than simply more Custodes.
Someone once suggested you only get Stratagems - and maybe even CP - from detatchments of the same Keyword as your Warlord's detatchment - that might be an even more extreme option.
I like the general idea of mono having more CP or something to encourage it, but we need to ensure we don't simply remove "And IG allies" from the game. It's a hugely awsome thing to have in the game. Ideally, it would be a tradeoff.
