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.

Asmodios wrote:
Sweet another thread where soup absolutely dominates but the only part of the soup anyone wants to focus on is the IG. When you only look at one part you will never address the actual issue with soup and that is there is 0 downside. Also that the proposition of raising the cost of 1 part will not solve the issue.

>lets say soup is made of three ingredients
>raise the cost of x without touching the real isssue
>x is now taken is a smaller % or replaced with option Y
>option Y is now nerfed and is taken in a smaller % or replaced with option Z

repeat this over and over and over and guess what. Soup will still be dominant because there is no downside. Meanwhile, you are nerfing mono army after mono army that's already not top tier on its own. The final outcome of this is you will get a bunch of mono codexes that have absolutely 0 chance of winning on their own and a single balanced soup build that has to be cookie cutter

The issue IS Imperial Guard. Quit being like an Eldar player last edition and acknowledge there's an issue with your basic troop choice. Please.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Soup is not the reason that *certain units* are too cheap or, too costly. Soup is not the reason that *certain units* are over-performing and always seen on the top tables. What soup does, is make any discrepancies far, far more obvious. It highlights the units that are performing too well without the context of a faction. Infantry, for example, are not only good in an IG list, they are strong in an IK and SM list. We can literally see this from the OP, they are the go-to, well, 'infantry' unit for Imperium (fitting perhaps?) armies. In the same token Raven Castellans are the 'go-to' Super-heavy for Imperium armies. Slamguinius is the go-to SM character for these armies. There is obviously an element of context and knowledge to make these correlations but I think this is an indication of how *certain units* need a fix, one way or another.

I can make an argument specifically for the way Grand Strategist interacts with the Dominus version of rotate ion shields, but overall I agree. Even then, its just mostly an issue of Grand Strategist being randomly strictly better than similar traits.

Asmodios wrote:
Sweet another thread where soup absolutely dominates but the only part of the soup anyone wants to focus on is the IG. When you only look at one part you will never address the actual issue with soup and that is there is 0 downside. Also that the proposition of raising the cost of 1 part will not solve the issue.

>lets say soup is made of three ingredients
>raise the cost of x without touching the real isssue
>x is now taken is a smaller % or replaced with option Y
>option Y is now nerfed and is taken in a smaller % or replaced with option Z

repeat this over and over and over and guess what. Soup will still be dominant because there is no downside. Meanwhile, you are nerfing mono army after mono army that's already not top tier on its own. The final outcome of this is you will get a bunch of mono codexes that have absolutely 0 chance of winning on their own and a single balanced soup build that has to be cookie cutter

Nah - everyone agrees soup needs some kind of limitation.

Also - everyone agrees that DE and CWE are OP too. Tons of nerfs required.

Also - IG are OP as feth also. Tons of nerfs required.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
Sweet another thread where soup absolutely dominates but the only part of the soup anyone wants to focus on is the IG. When you only look at one part you will never address the actual issue with soup and that is there is 0 downside. Also that the proposition of raising the cost of 1 part will not solve the issue.

>lets say soup is made of three ingredients
>raise the cost of x without touching the real isssue
>x is now taken is a smaller % or replaced with option Y
>option Y is now nerfed and is taken in a smaller % or replaced with option Z

repeat this over and over and over and guess what. Soup will still be dominant because there is no downside. Meanwhile, you are nerfing mono army after mono army that's already not top tier on its own. The final outcome of this is you will get a bunch of mono codexes that have absolutely 0 chance of winning on their own and a single balanced soup build that has to be cookie cutter

The issue IS Imperial Guard. Quit being like an Eldar player last edition and acknowledge there's an issue with your basic troop choice. Please.

If the issue was imperial guard..... it would be mono guard because they are too points efficient and you would see nothing else. The issue is SOUP which means IG with everything else mixed in


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
Sweet another thread where soup absolutely dominates but the only part of the soup anyone wants to focus on is the IG. When you only look at one part you will never address the actual issue with soup and that is there is 0 downside. Also that the proposition of raising the cost of 1 part will not solve the issue.

>lets say soup is made of three ingredients
>raise the cost of x without touching the real isssue
>x is now taken is a smaller % or replaced with option Y
>option Y is now nerfed and is taken in a smaller % or replaced with option Z

repeat this over and over and over and guess what. Soup will still be dominant because there is no downside. Meanwhile, you are nerfing mono army after mono army that's already not top tier on its own. The final outcome of this is you will get a bunch of mono codexes that have absolutely 0 chance of winning on their own and a single balanced soup build that has to be cookie cutter

Nah - everyone agrees soup needs some kind of limitation.

Also - everyone agrees that DE and CWE are OP too. Tons of nerfs required.

Also - IG are OP as feth also. Tons of nerfs required.

If IG are OP as feth why arent these top players just bringing IG and winning everything? its almost as if *gasp* IG need other codexes to dump CP into to be top tier

 LunarSol wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Soup is not the reason that *certain units* are too cheap or, too costly. Soup is not the reason that *certain units* are over-performing and always seen on the top tables. What soup does, is make any discrepancies far, far more obvious. It highlights the units that are performing too well without the context of a faction. Infantry, for example, are not only good in an IG list, they are strong in an IK and SM list. We can literally see this from the OP, they are the go-to, well, 'infantry' unit for Imperium (fitting perhaps?) armies. In the same token Raven Castellans are the 'go-to' Super-heavy for Imperium armies. Slamguinius is the go-to SM character for these armies. There is obviously an element of context and knowledge to make these correlations but I think this is an indication of how *certain units* need a fix, one way or another.

I can make an argument specifically for the way Grand Strategist interacts with the Dominus version of rotate ion shields, but overall I agree. Even then, its just mostly an issue of Grand Strategist being randomly strictly better than similar traits.

Yeah there is some diversity on power level for those traits. The harlequin one and DE one are both as good as regen on a 5+ like marines and IG. The Relic regen for IG is just a silly little bonus combo that brings it above those other ones. The eldar one is just a free unit perk for an autarch (if hes your warlord) so you also get a warlord trait - so that one is really good too. The bad ones are the tau one which regens on stratagems and the admech one which I think is a 6+ only on your own CP. Then some armies don't have one.

Ice_can wrote:
Sorry if this sounds pedantic but do you mean mono codex or mono subfaction?
Just some people obviously have different views on what mono means with the CP changes they keep suggesting.

Not at all man! Ideally both but mono-codex will suffice and is probably more what I'm personally interested in.

Asmodios wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
Sweet another thread where soup absolutely dominates but the only part of the soup anyone wants to focus on is the IG. When you only look at one part you will never address the actual issue with soup and that is there is 0 downside. Also that the proposition of raising the cost of 1 part will not solve the issue.

>lets say soup is made of three ingredients
>raise the cost of x without touching the real isssue
>x is now taken is a smaller % or replaced with option Y
>option Y is now nerfed and is taken in a smaller % or replaced with option Z

repeat this over and over and over and guess what. Soup will still be dominant because there is no downside. Meanwhile, you are nerfing mono army after mono army that's already not top tier on its own. The final outcome of this is you will get a bunch of mono codexes that have absolutely 0 chance of winning on their own and a single balanced soup build that has to be cookie cutter

The issue IS Imperial Guard. Quit being like an Eldar player last edition and acknowledge there's an issue with your basic troop choice. Please.

If the issue was imperial guard..... it would be mono guard because they are too points efficient and you would see nothing else. The issue is SOUP which means IG with everything else mixed in


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
Sweet another thread where soup absolutely dominates but the only part of the soup anyone wants to focus on is the IG. When you only look at one part you will never address the actual issue with soup and that is there is 0 downside. Also that the proposition of raising the cost of 1 part will not solve the issue.

>lets say soup is made of three ingredients
>raise the cost of x without touching the real isssue
>x is now taken is a smaller % or replaced with option Y
>option Y is now nerfed and is taken in a smaller % or replaced with option Z

repeat this over and over and over and guess what. Soup will still be dominant because there is no downside. Meanwhile, you are nerfing mono army after mono army that's already not top tier on its own. The final outcome of this is you will get a bunch of mono codexes that have absolutely 0 chance of winning on their own and a single balanced soup build that has to be cookie cutter

Nah - everyone agrees soup needs some kind of limitation.

Also - everyone agrees that DE and CWE are OP too. Tons of nerfs required.

Also - IG are OP as feth also. Tons of nerfs required.

If IG are OP as feth why arent these top players just bringing IG and winning everything? its almost as if *gasp* IG need other codexes to dump CP into to be top tier

Soup is a problem - yep. Ban soup and IG will just outflank a shadowsword every game and still be on top. IG are part of the problem. Probably the most significant problem in regards to imperial soup.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Soup is a problem - yep. Ban soup and IG will just outflank a shadowsword every game and still be on top. IG are part of the problem. Probably the most significant problem in regards to imperial soup.

Soup is a problem.

Certain IG units are problems.

Certain other units from other factions are also problems.

Certain relics and stratagems are problems.

TLDR - there can be more than one problem over multiple factions.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
Sweet another thread where soup absolutely dominates but the only part of the soup anyone wants to focus on is the IG. When you only look at one part you will never address the actual issue with soup and that is there is 0 downside. Also that the proposition of raising the cost of 1 part will not solve the issue.

>lets say soup is made of three ingredients
>raise the cost of x without touching the real isssue
>x is now taken is a smaller % or replaced with option Y
>option Y is now nerfed and is taken in a smaller % or replaced with option Z

repeat this over and over and over and guess what. Soup will still be dominant because there is no downside. Meanwhile, you are nerfing mono army after mono army that's already not top tier on its own. The final outcome of this is you will get a bunch of mono codexes that have absolutely 0 chance of winning on their own and a single balanced soup build that has to be cookie cutter

The issue IS Imperial Guard. Quit being like an Eldar player last edition and acknowledge there's an issue with your basic troop choice. Please.

If the issue was imperial guard..... it would be mono guard because they are too points efficient and you would see nothing else. The issue is SOUP which means IG with everything else mixed in


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
Sweet another thread where soup absolutely dominates but the only part of the soup anyone wants to focus on is the IG. When you only look at one part you will never address the actual issue with soup and that is there is 0 downside. Also that the proposition of raising the cost of 1 part will not solve the issue.

>lets say soup is made of three ingredients
>raise the cost of x without touching the real isssue
>x is now taken is a smaller % or replaced with option Y
>option Y is now nerfed and is taken in a smaller % or replaced with option Z

repeat this over and over and over and guess what. Soup will still be dominant because there is no downside. Meanwhile, you are nerfing mono army after mono army that's already not top tier on its own. The final outcome of this is you will get a bunch of mono codexes that have absolutely 0 chance of winning on their own and a single balanced soup build that has to be cookie cutter

Nah - everyone agrees soup needs some kind of limitation.

Also - everyone agrees that DE and CWE are OP too. Tons of nerfs required.

Also - IG are OP as feth also. Tons of nerfs required.

If IG are OP as feth why arent these top players just bringing IG and winning everything? its almost as if *gasp* IG need other codexes to dump CP into to be top tier

Soup is a problem - yep. Ban soup and IG will just outflank a shadowsword every game and still be on top. IG are part of the problem. Probably the most significant problem in regards to imperial soup.

If IG becomes OP after a fix for soup then I 100% agree they would need to be nerfed. But i highly doubt they would as any -hit army counters IG super hard. But once again why nerf just IG now when its not mono IG that's the issue. I mean we have seen much more success out of mono eldar, DE this edition after the conscript nerf, then we have out of mono IG.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

The issue IS Imperial Guard. Quit being like an Eldar player last edition and acknowledge there's an issue with your basic troop choice. Please.

The issue is both.

Soup is an issue and ATM guard is its most problematic ingredient.

Asmodios wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
Sweet another thread where soup absolutely dominates but the only part of the soup anyone wants to focus on is the IG. When you only look at one part you will never address the actual issue with soup and that is there is 0 downside. Also that the proposition of raising the cost of 1 part will not solve the issue.

>lets say soup is made of three ingredients
>raise the cost of x without touching the real isssue
>x is now taken is a smaller % or replaced with option Y
>option Y is now nerfed and is taken in a smaller % or replaced with option Z

repeat this over and over and over and guess what. Soup will still be dominant because there is no downside. Meanwhile, you are nerfing mono army after mono army that's already not top tier on its own. The final outcome of this is you will get a bunch of mono codexes that have absolutely 0 chance of winning on their own and a single balanced soup build that has to be cookie cutter

The issue IS Imperial Guard. Quit being like an Eldar player last edition and acknowledge there's an issue with your basic troop choice. Please.

If the issue was imperial guard..... it would be mono guard because they are too points efficient and you would see nothing else. The issue is SOUP which means IG with everything else mixed in


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
Sweet another thread where soup absolutely dominates but the only part of the soup anyone wants to focus on is the IG. When you only look at one part you will never address the actual issue with soup and that is there is 0 downside. Also that the proposition of raising the cost of 1 part will not solve the issue.

>lets say soup is made of three ingredients
>raise the cost of x without touching the real isssue
>x is now taken is a smaller % or replaced with option Y
>option Y is now nerfed and is taken in a smaller % or replaced with option Z

repeat this over and over and over and guess what. Soup will still be dominant because there is no downside. Meanwhile, you are nerfing mono army after mono army that's already not top tier on its own. The final outcome of this is you will get a bunch of mono codexes that have absolutely 0 chance of winning on their own and a single balanced soup build that has to be cookie cutter

Nah - everyone agrees soup needs some kind of limitation.

Also - everyone agrees that DE and CWE are OP too. Tons of nerfs required.

Also - IG are OP as feth also. Tons of nerfs required.

If IG are OP as feth why arent these top players just bringing IG and winning everything? its almost as if *gasp* IG need other codexes to dump CP into to be top tier

Soup is a problem - yep. Ban soup and IG will just outflank a shadowsword every game and still be on top. IG are part of the problem. Probably the most significant problem in regards to imperial soup.

If IG becomes OP after a fix for soup then I 100% agree they would need to be nerfed. But i highly doubt they would as any -hit army counters IG super hard. But once again why nerf just IG now when its not mono IG that's the issue. I mean we have seen much more success out of mono eldar, DE this edition after the conscript nerf, then we have out of mono IG.

Well - I am a huge anti -1 to hit person. I hate -1 to hit. Yeah - it hurts gaurd armies but it hurts everyone. It is too much stacking minus to hits. Brings back bad memories of 7th eddition. Realistically though - IG have the best autohitting units too. Hellhounds.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
Sweet another thread where soup absolutely dominates but the only part of the soup anyone wants to focus on is the IG. When you only look at one part you will never address the actual issue with soup and that is there is 0 downside. Also that the proposition of raising the cost of 1 part will not solve the issue.

>lets say soup is made of three ingredients
>raise the cost of x without touching the real isssue
>x is now taken is a smaller % or replaced with option Y
>option Y is now nerfed and is taken in a smaller % or replaced with option Z

repeat this over and over and over and guess what. Soup will still be dominant because there is no downside. Meanwhile, you are nerfing mono army after mono army that's already not top tier on its own. The final outcome of this is you will get a bunch of mono codexes that have absolutely 0 chance of winning on their own and a single balanced soup build that has to be cookie cutter

The issue IS Imperial Guard. Quit being like an Eldar player last edition and acknowledge there's an issue with your basic troop choice. Please.

If the issue was imperial guard..... it would be mono guard because they are too points efficient and you would see nothing else. The issue is SOUP which means IG with everything else mixed in


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
Sweet another thread where soup absolutely dominates but the only part of the soup anyone wants to focus on is the IG. When you only look at one part you will never address the actual issue with soup and that is there is 0 downside. Also that the proposition of raising the cost of 1 part will not solve the issue.

>lets say soup is made of three ingredients
>raise the cost of x without touching the real isssue
>x is now taken is a smaller % or replaced with option Y
>option Y is now nerfed and is taken in a smaller % or replaced with option Z

repeat this over and over and over and guess what. Soup will still be dominant because there is no downside. Meanwhile, you are nerfing mono army after mono army that's already not top tier on its own. The final outcome of this is you will get a bunch of mono codexes that have absolutely 0 chance of winning on their own and a single balanced soup build that has to be cookie cutter

Nah - everyone agrees soup needs some kind of limitation.

Also - everyone agrees that DE and CWE are OP too. Tons of nerfs required.

Also - IG are OP as feth also. Tons of nerfs required.

If IG are OP as feth why arent these top players just bringing IG and winning everything? its almost as if *gasp* IG need other codexes to dump CP into to be top tier

Soup is a problem - yep. Ban soup and IG will just outflank a shadowsword every game and still be on top. IG are part of the problem. Probably the most significant problem in regards to imperial soup.

If IG becomes OP after a fix for soup then I 100% agree they would need to be nerfed. But i highly doubt they would as any -hit army counters IG super hard. But once again why nerf just IG now when its not mono IG that's the issue. I mean we have seen much more success out of mono eldar, DE this edition after the conscript nerf, then we have out of mono IG.

Well - I am a huge anti -1 to hit person. I hate -1 to hit. Yeah - it hurts gaurd armies but it hurts everyone. It is too much stacking minus to hits. Brings back bad memories of 7th eddition. Realistically though - IG have the best autohitting units too. Hellhounds.

I mean thats 3 of a single unit you can take. Easy to play around if your army is focused on -hit. Also, guards biggest weakness is going anywhere with the new dakka rule for orks leaked. If hitting on 6s no matter what is going to be a core rule then we will continue to see the stacking of -hit modifiers. My main point is though that soup needs to be toned down and then you will be able to see what actually is too strong in any specific codex. I have a suspicion if infantry squads were as busted as this forum likes to make them out to be then we would see more then the minimum amount in 90% of the Imperium soup builds you see.

Trying to bring this back on topic...

Was there a single mono-faction army in the top 11 at all?

3 DE + Allies was the extent of all xenos factions.
1 CSM/DG list
7 IoM lists - all the ones I recall were IG + beatsticks (BA, IK, Custodes, etc)

Did I miss one?

Yeah minus to hit isn't going anywhere. The space wolves just got a super busted 3 point stratagem to give 6" -1 to hit aura for a rune priest....affects everything. Including the Stormwolf which went down 50 points. Pretty sure we are going to see a ton of these - I think it's possible they might take over as the most powerful army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
Trying to bring this back on topic...

Was there a single mono-faction army in the top 11 at all?

3 DE + Allies was the extent of all xenos factions.
1 CSM/DG list
7 IoM lists - all the ones I recall were IG + beatsticks (BA, IK, Custodes, etc)

Did I miss one?

No - havn't seen top 25 though. Would be interested to see where the best mono armies placed.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Yeah minus to hit isn't going anywhere. The space wolves just got a super busted 3 point stratagem to give 6" -1 to hit aura for a rune priest....affects everything. Including the Stormwolf which went down 50 points. Pretty sure we are going to see a ton of these - I think it's possible they might take over as the most powerful army.

People will just be sticking a priest next to a knight. Once again this is the issue with soup. you will get something like this that is fine in a SW army but will be absolutely broken when you mix it in with the rest of the Imperium

Asmodios wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Yeah minus to hit isn't going anywhere. The space wolves just got a super busted 3 point stratagem to give 6" -1 to hit aura for a rune priest....affects everything. Including the Stormwolf which went down 50 points. Pretty sure we are going to see a ton of these - I think it's possible they might take over as the most powerful army.

People will just be sticking a priest next to a knight. Once again this is the issue with soup. you will get something like this that is fine in a SW army but will be absolutely broken when you mix it in with the rest of the Imperium

I think it only affects space wolf units. Not sure though. I meant it affects all unit types.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Yeah minus to hit isn't going anywhere. The space wolves just got a super busted 3 point stratagem to give 6" -1 to hit aura for a rune priest....affects everything. Including the Stormwolf which went down 50 points. Pretty sure we are going to see a ton of these - I think it's possible they might take over as the most powerful army.

People will just be sticking a priest next to a knight. Once again this is the issue with soup. you will get something like this that is fine in a SW army but will be absolutely broken when you mix it in with the rest of the Imperium

I think it only affects space wolf units. Not sure though. I meant it affects all unit types.

Not unless they change the wording of it... as of right now it affects every unit (unless every podcast ive listened to is dead wrong but from the current wording I believe they are right)

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Mono-codex would likely be easier to find.

And yet there's not even one of those for Guard in any of these lists...

Also good to know Kal is pulling the same mental gymnastics Eldar players did the last two editions.

By pointing out that there's trends in what people are taking...?

I pointed out that there's a trend in the list for a bare minimum amount of Infantry Squads and HQs for a Guard CP Battery. Someone disagreed with me--I proved them wrong. There were two lists that bucked that trend in the lists from the OP. One or two squads over in two separate lists is not really worth mentioning as a real discussion point.
I've been posting for awhile about possibly removing Mortars from Infantry Squads as a possible solution to curb their effectiveness as cheap objective holders that can ignore LOS and still contribute. I've also been accused in this thread of using that as a distraction from Infantry Squads...because I guess trying to come up with possible solutions is a distraction.

Yeah, I don't want to see Infantry Squads get a nerf. I don't think they need one. I think that people need to acknowledge the issue is soup before continuing to nerf the Guard.

Top 25 is just shifting the goalpost. I would have first looked for top 10 - only including the 11th because it was in the dump provided.

Not a single non-soup top-10 is impressive (in a negative sense).

Cheep dood detatchments + beatstick cherrypicked minor other-book detatchments went 11/11. That certainly says something.

Asmodios wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Yeah minus to hit isn't going anywhere. The space wolves just got a super busted 3 point stratagem to give 6" -1 to hit aura for a rune priest....affects everything. Including the Stormwolf which went down 50 points. Pretty sure we are going to see a ton of these - I think it's possible they might take over as the most powerful army.

People will just be sticking a priest next to a knight. Once again this is the issue with soup. you will get something like this that is fine in a SW army but will be absolutely broken when you mix it in with the rest of the Imperium

I think it only affects space wolf units. Not sure though. I meant it affects all unit types.

Not unless they change the wording of it... as of right now it affects every unit (unless every podcast ive listened to is dead wrong but from the current wording I believe they are right)

"Use this stratagem in your Psychic phase.Choose a RUNE PRIEST from your army that successfully manifested a psychic power in this phase. Your opponent must subtract 1 from all hit rolls for ranged attacks that target friendly SPACE WOLVES units within 6" of this model until the beginning of your next Psychic phase."

That's what the stratagem says.

Primortus wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Yeah minus to hit isn't going anywhere. The space wolves just got a super busted 3 point stratagem to give 6" -1 to hit aura for a rune priest....affects everything. Including the Stormwolf which went down 50 points. Pretty sure we are going to see a ton of these - I think it's possible they might take over as the most powerful army.

People will just be sticking a priest next to a knight. Once again this is the issue with soup. you will get something like this that is fine in a SW army but will be absolutely broken when you mix it in with the rest of the Imperium

I think it only affects space wolf units. Not sure though. I meant it affects all unit types.

Not unless they change the wording of it... as of right now it affects every unit (unless every podcast ive listened to is dead wrong but from the current wording I believe they are right)

"Use this stratagem in your Psychic phase.Choose a RUNE PRIEST from your army that successfully manifested a psychic power in this phase. Your opponent must subtract 1 from all hit rolls for ranged attacks that target friendly SPACE WOLVES units within 6" of this model until the beginning of your next Psychic phase."

That's what the stratagem says.

I was talking about the one that allows a unit from your army to fire at any deep striking unit. You can now stick one next to a knight and laugh if anyone tries to DS anything next to you... Yeah i see where you thought i was talking about that specific one

 Kanluwen wrote:
I pointed out that there's a trend in the list for a bare minimum amount of Infantry Squads and HQs for a Guard CP Battery. Someone disagreed with me--I proved them wrong.

You proved them wrong by...

 Kanluwen wrote:
There were two lists that bucked that trend in the lists from the OP.

....admitting that there are 2 lists that go completely against your statement? Interesting.

2/7 = 29%. Almost a third of the lists didn't follow your trend.

 Kanluwen wrote:
One or two squads over in two separate lists is not really worth mentioning as a real discussion point.

29% of the lists are not worth discussing because they go against your ideas? Why? Don't you think it's awfully telling that Infantry are taken as part of a Brigade at all?

Also I have to ask - are all these lists taking only 10 men per squad? That's the minimum number right? If they're taking 30 this isn't the minimum number of models to make a detachment.

 Kanluwen wrote:
I've been posting for awhile about possibly removing Mortars from Infantry Squads as a possible solution to curb their effectiveness as cheap objective holders that can ignore LOS and still contribute. I've also been accused in this thread of using that as a distraction from Infantry Squads...because I guess trying to come up with possible solutions is a distraction.

Yeah, I don't want to see Infantry Squads get a nerf. I don't think they need one. I think that people need to acknowledge the issue is soup before continuing to nerf the Guard.

They are one of a few units that need a nerf. They aren't the only one, but they are certainly one.

 Valkyrie wrote:
Just from skimming over the last couple of pages, here's my input on how some particular issues could be approached.

1: Particular units such as Custodes Jetbikes and Slamguinius get a points hike, or a 0-1/detachment limit similar to Coldstar Commanders.

2: You only get your +3CP bonus if you are not running soup.

3: CP Regen abilities are either killed off entirely, or are limited to one CP per try, or you can only regen CP used on that particular army's Strategems.


I don't want to cut out soup completly, as this completly screws over fluffly armies. I like the allies concept; I can take a couple of squads of Deathwatch with my Guard, or some Custodians with my Marines, but there's a few repeat offenders that could be dealt with in their own way, rather than a blanket "No soup" rule.

Yep, agreed. This is a good way to fix things instead of the usual suggestions of nuking the soup from orbit.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:


Soup is not the reason that *certain units* are too cheap or, too costly. Soup is not the reason that *certain units* are over-performing and always seen on the top tables. What soup does, is make any discrepancies far, far more obvious. It highlights the units that are performing too well without the context of a faction. Infantry, for example, are not only good in an IG list, they are strong in an IK and SM list. We can literally see this from the OP, they are the go-to, well, 'infantry' unit for Imperium (fitting perhaps?) armies. In the same token Raven Castellans are the 'go-to' Super-heavy for Imperium armies. Slamguinius is the go-to SM character for these armies. There is obviously an element of context and knowledge to make these correlations but I think this is an indication of how *certain units* need a fix, one way or another.

Point of fact soup does drastically effect the value and effectiveness of unit. While those units might still be "best of faction" style choices, their dominance in game is largely influenced by the ability to soup. Castellans are great, remove them from soup and I don't think they make the cut because knights mono-faction don't win because they cannot screen out units designed to kill those knights, and don't have near infinite CP to buff them. They are still good in a knight army, but the fix to them is reliant on them being souped, with soup they need to have their points adjusted, in mono-codex other units might come down in cost to compete. Same with IG infantry, they are good in an IG list, but far less so than in soup because they tend to lack assault threats to back them up.

That is not to say that they don't need fixing, but the ammount, and type of fixing is entirely directed by soup. Essentially any balance discussion is a matter of context, and soup provides the most competitive context. Using an old example Invisibility the 7th ed psychic power was not inherently broken, if it could only be taken and cast on say Inquisition units, no one would have balked at it, it's application to more powerful units caused the issue. As such I think that if one is going to "nerf soup" it would be wise to wait to correct other units based on a post soup meta.

Breng77 wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:


Soup is not the reason that *certain units* are too cheap or, too costly. Soup is not the reason that *certain units* are over-performing and always seen on the top tables. What soup does, is make any discrepancies far, far more obvious. It highlights the units that are performing too well without the context of a faction. Infantry, for example, are not only good in an IG list, they are strong in an IK and SM list. We can literally see this from the OP, they are the go-to, well, 'infantry' unit for Imperium (fitting perhaps?) armies. In the same token Raven Castellans are the 'go-to' Super-heavy for Imperium armies. Slamguinius is the go-to SM character for these armies. There is obviously an element of context and knowledge to make these correlations but I think this is an indication of how *certain units* need a fix, one way or another.

Point of fact soup does drastically effect the value and effectiveness of unit. While those units might still be "best of faction" style choices, their dominance in game is largely influenced by the ability to soup. Castellans are great, remove them from soup and I don't think they make the cut because knights mono-faction don't win because they cannot screen out units designed to kill those knights, and don't have near infinite CP to buff them. They are still good in a knight army, but the fix to them is reliant on them being souped, with soup they need to have their points adjusted, in mono-codex other units might come down in cost to compete. Same with IG infantry, they are good in an IG list, but far less so than in soup because they tend to lack assault threats to back them up.

That is not to say that they don't need fixing, but the ammount, and type of fixing is entirely directed by soup. Essentially any balance discussion is a matter of context, and soup provides the most competitive context. Using an old example Invisibility the 7th ed psychic power was not inherently broken, if it could only be taken and cast on say Inquisition units, no one would have balked at it, it's application to more powerful units caused the issue. As such I think that if one is going to "nerf soup" it would be wise to wait to correct other units based on a post soup meta.

Very well put

Bharring wrote:
Top 25 is just shifting the goalpost. I would have first looked for top 10 - only including the 11th because it was in the dump provided.

Not a single non-soup top-10 is impressive (in a negative sense).

Cheep dood detatchments + beatstick cherrypicked minor other-book detatchments went 11/11. That certainly says something.

Well it is possible that every army in the top 25 only lost 1 game - it is even possible they were undefeated and just got outscored or something. It's not moving the goal posts. I want to be able to see all the data is all. AND OFC. It is impossible to get this data without knowing where to look or just waiting a really long time. We really know nothing - all we know is these were the "TOP" lists.

Breng77 wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:


Soup is not the reason that *certain units* are too cheap or, too costly. Soup is not the reason that *certain units* are over-performing and always seen on the top tables. What soup does, is make any discrepancies far, far more obvious. It highlights the units that are performing too well without the context of a faction. Infantry, for example, are not only good in an IG list, they are strong in an IK and SM list. We can literally see this from the OP, they are the go-to, well, 'infantry' unit for Imperium (fitting perhaps?) armies. In the same token Raven Castellans are the 'go-to' Super-heavy for Imperium armies. Slamguinius is the go-to SM character for these armies. There is obviously an element of context and knowledge to make these correlations but I think this is an indication of how *certain units* need a fix, one way or another.

Point of fact soup does drastically effect the value and effectiveness of unit. While those units might still be "best of faction" style choices, their dominance in game is largely influenced by the ability to soup. Castellans are great, remove them from soup and I don't think they make the cut because knights mono-faction don't win because they cannot screen out units designed to kill those knights, and don't have near infinite CP to buff them. They are still good in a knight army, but the fix to them is reliant on them being souped, with soup they need to have their points adjusted, in mono-codex other units might come down in cost to compete. Same with IG infantry, they are good in an IG list, but far less so than in soup because they tend to lack assault threats to back them up.

That is not to say that they don't need fixing, but the ammount, and type of fixing is entirely directed by soup. Essentially any balance discussion is a matter of context, and soup provides the most competitive context. Using an old example Invisibility the 7th ed psychic power was not inherently broken, if it could only be taken and cast on say Inquisition units, no one would have balked at it, it's application to more powerful units caused the issue. As such I think that if one is going to "nerf soup" it would be wise to wait to correct other units based on a post soup meta.

Agreed. The use of soup is severely distorting any discussion of balance of individual units in a vacuum.

Either GW needs to limit soup or the community has to accept that mono-lists are dead and all discussion is based around soup lists.

Breng77 wrote:
Point of fact soup does drastically effect the value and effectiveness of unit. While those units might still be "best of faction" style choices, their dominance in game is largely influenced by the ability to soup. Castellans are great, remove them from soup and I don't think they make the cut because knights mono-faction don't win because they cannot screen out units designed to kill those knights, and don't have near infinite CP to buff them. They are still good in a knight army, but the fix to them is reliant on them being souped, with soup they need to have their points adjusted, in mono-codex other units might come down in cost to compete. Same with IG infantry, they are good in an IG list, but far less so than in soup because they tend to lack assault threats to back them up.

The thing is, to even get into a soup list the unit in question has to be the best of the best. You're forgetting the key thing about soup - that players cherry pick the best units to suit their needs from all available. This is soup 101. We're talking cream of tomato here.

I don't disagree that units can go from 'amazing' to 'amazing+' in a soup list. But there's no doubt they're amazing to start, it's how they get into a soup list to begin with. Infantry, for example, are great in both IG lists and soup lists. They may perform better in a soup list because they have great synergies with other units, abilities, stratagems, psychic powers and such but they are still incredibly potent in a mono-list. Want proof? IG had the second best mono list at the last GT. IG has strong mono list showings at most major events. Also Bullgryn are a pretty ridiculous assault threat. Catachan Infantry aren't bad either, for their cost.

Breng77 wrote:
That is not to say that they don't need fixing, but the ammount, and type of fixing is entirely directed by soup. Essentially any balance discussion is a matter of context, and soup provides the most competitive context. Using an old example Invisibility the 7th ed psychic power was not inherently broken, if it could only be taken and cast on say Inquisition units, no one would have balked at it, it's application to more powerful units caused the issue. As such I think that if one is going to "nerf soup" it would be wise to wait to correct other units based on a post soup meta.

I don't think that soup is going to go away or change so the units that are taken in soup lists will have to adapt to suit. If soup is changed in a meaningful way then you may be right. In the case of Infantry, I think they still need an adjustment to be fair, regardless of any changes with soup.

 Ordana wrote:
Agreed. The use of soup is severely distorting any discussion of balance of individual units in a vacuum.

Either GW needs to limit soup or the community has to accept that mono-lists are dead and all discussion is based around soup lists.

As above, I don't think it's 'seriously distorting' any discussion of balance of individual units in a vacuum. Units that are taken as part of a soup list are already extremely competitive. If anything soup makes obvious those worst offenders.

Also if competitive 40k is reduced to soup lists all those imposed mono-faction players, such as me, might as well stop playing.

Breng77 wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:


Soup is not the reason that *certain units* are too cheap or, too costly. Soup is not the reason that *certain units* are over-performing and always seen on the top tables. What soup does, is make any discrepancies far, far more obvious. It highlights the units that are performing too well without the context of a faction. Infantry, for example, are not only good in an IG list, they are strong in an IK and SM list. We can literally see this from the OP, they are the go-to, well, 'infantry' unit for Imperium (fitting perhaps?) armies. In the same token Raven Castellans are the 'go-to' Super-heavy for Imperium armies. Slamguinius is the go-to SM character for these armies. There is obviously an element of context and knowledge to make these correlations but I think this is an indication of how *certain units* need a fix, one way or another.

Point of fact soup does drastically effect the value and effectiveness of unit. While those units might still be "best of faction" style choices, their dominance in game is largely influenced by the ability to soup. Castellans are great, remove them from soup and I don't think they make the cut because knights mono-faction don't win because they cannot screen out units designed to kill those knights, and don't have near infinite CP to buff them. They are still good in a knight army, but the fix to them is reliant on them being souped, with soup they need to have their points adjusted, in mono-codex other units might come down in cost to compete. Same with IG infantry, they are good in an IG list, but far less so than in soup because they tend to lack assault threats to back them up.

That is not to say that they don't need fixing, but the ammount, and type of fixing is entirely directed by soup. Essentially any balance discussion is a matter of context, and soup provides the most competitive context. Using an old example Invisibility the 7th ed psychic power was not inherently broken, if it could only be taken and cast on say Inquisition units, no one would have balked at it, it's application to more powerful units caused the issue. As such I think that if one is going to "nerf soup" it would be wise to wait to correct other units based on a post soup meta.

Nah - not really. Every unit has the ability to soup or every unit doesn't have the ability to soup. A castellan without CP battery doesn't need to worry about a BA captain dropping 5 command points to 1 shot him if he doesn't have a CP battery ether so it is all relative.

Castellans are going to be OP in ANY rule set because they have too much at their disposal for too little. Cawls wrath obliterates things - as does the volcano lance - and it's got a helvrine on it's shoulders - plus 4 melta guns - plus invo denying missle and a 4++ to shooting as a warlord with 28 wounds t8. It's OP because it doesn't cost enough. Banning soup WILL NOT fix that. Fixing the units point costs and removing insane combos will fix soup though.

"All the data" is an impossible demand. THere will always be data we won't have. We can have more or we can have less, but we can never have it all.

Now, asking for the top 25 is not, in and of itself, unreasonable. But when we have the top 11, and that data was limited to the top 11 independent of what those top 11 were, that's good data. To say we know nothing is silly.

Further, the likelyhood of half the top 25 lists being monofaction when 0/11 are - or whatever variant you're looking for - is incredibly low. When looking for what is more powerful, top 11 are going to be substantially representative of the top 25. While it's just under half of the top 25, it skews to the stronger lists.

I'd rather the top 25, too, but the top 11 tells us volumes. Maybe not the volumes you're looking for, but nowhere near nothing.