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.

Wow, look at all that unit variety. Man, so glad the rule of 3 is a thing. It TOTALLY didn't fail utterly to do any of the things it was meant to do. I mean, it's not like it was a totally pointless addition that constrains list building, unfairly punishes weaker factions, does nothing to increase unit varierty, and is arguably detrimental to game balance.

Boy, I sure do hope they add more pointless rules patches that fail utterly to address the underlying problems in the game.

Asmodios wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

Tower wrote:
Best Coast App subscribers have access to all of the lists. There were four mono-faction armies in top 25. Tau at 14 and 24th, Ultramarines at 15th, and Nurgle at 16th. Of course Tau has no choice but to be soupless.

Wow amazing there weren't any mono guard considering they are obviously so busted they don't even need soup /sarcasm

Has anything changed since the BAO where they were the second best mono list? No? Guess that's still relevant then.

Yeah second best mono to tau.... so tau need to be super duper nerfed

Sorry but with whom can Tau soup? Aslong as Soup exsists Tau need buffs not nerfs. As do Crons though Crons need some rechromed with the amount of buffing needed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ERJAK wrote:
Wow, look at all that unit variety. Man, so glad the rule of 3 is a thing. It TOTALLY didn't fail utterly to do any of the things it was meant to do. I mean, it's not like it was a totally pointless addition that constrains list building, unfairly punishes weaker factions, does nothing to increase unit varierty, and is arguably detrimental to game balance.

Boy, I sure do hope they add more pointless rules patches that fail utterly to address the underlying problems in the game.

That's the thing you think it didn't work GW think it did. Atleast none of those armies have 5 of the same HQ choice in it, so it has improved unit variety in each list, just made all the lists cookie cutter copies of each other.

Fairly sure Asmodios was being sarcastic. Showing that mono-IG isn't OP by comparing to Tau, which is known to not be OP.

Bharring wrote:
Fairly sure Asmodios was being sarcastic. Showing that mono-IG isn't OP by comparing to Tau, which is known to not be OP.

ok my re chrome plating Necrons joke obviously wasn't up to standard then. I'll try harder next time

Bharring wrote:That does raise a good point about intrabook soup:
-If you take a Sally battalian, a RG Heavy Support, etc etc, is that soup?
-Is a Kabal + Coven 'soup'?

It'd be odd for the above to not be considered soup, but a DE/CWE list with a single Harlie squad on foot soup. It wasn't long ago they were in the same book.

For DE thats not soup, thats like saying having Primaris and Norma Marines in the same army or Wraiths and Shiny spears as consider soup, DE book was made to play them in their own detachment or you lose everything that makes them playable.

Xenomancers wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

A.T. wrote:

Tower wrote:
Best Coast App subscribers have access to all of the lists. There were four mono-faction armies in top 25. Tau at 14 and 24th, Ultramarines at 15th, and Nurgle at 16th. Of course Tau has no choice but to be soupless.

I'd also consider the DE/harlies list pretty close, mono but for part of their faction now being sold separately.
It'd be interesting to know if psychic protection was the driving force in the top-placing DE soups.

Well we all know Harlie bikes are amazing units. Native -1 and 4++ with on demand -2 and 3++. Good CC. plus Mortal spam on vehicals that doubles are good anti chaff. They have a 22" move and charge naturally (plus fly keyword) So can stay locked with a castellan in CC (castellan can move over fly keyword units). They are a great choice.

They are Anti-Tank vs of Shinny Spears

Spears are pretty good anti tank too. I think the principle difference is harlie bikes have a 4++ in CC and are a little bit more manuverable (without spending CP). Spears do more overall damage BUT the mortals from 12 harlie bikes...holy freaking crap. That is a lot of mortals.

I am helping my friend build a harlie army. I told him to start building around 12 bikes....Look what just won the tournament lol.

Shiny Spears are amazing Anti-infantry, the AT weapons are actually Red Herring.

ERJAK wrote:
Wow, look at all that unit variety.

very disappointing.

Well, there is some upside. In the top 11 alone, we have:

-DE
-CWE
-Ynnari
-Harlequins
-CSM
-TSons
-SM-BA
-Custodes
-IG
-Knights

So 10 factions in the top 11!

The downside is that IG are in 7 of the top 11.

Heck, Blood Angels are one of the powerhouse factions - in over half the top lists!

Bharring wrote:
Fairly sure Asmodios was being sarcastic. Showing that mono-IG isn't OP by comparing to Tau, which is known to not be OP.

I'm fairly sure he's just throwing out words at this point.

It is entirely possible that some units in the Tau dex need adjustment. Of course they shouldn't be a priority because, as others have stated, they can't soup.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

Bharring wrote:That does raise a good point about intrabook soup:
-If you take a Sally battalian, a RG Heavy Support, etc etc, is that soup?
-Is a Kabal + Coven 'soup'?

It'd be odd for the above to not be considered soup, but a DE/CWE list with a single Harlie squad on foot soup. It wasn't long ago they were in the same book.

For DE thats not soup, thats like saying having Primaris and Norma Marines in the same army or Wraiths and Shiny spears as consider soup, DE book was made to play them in their own detachment or you lose everything that makes them playable.

Xenomancers wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

A.T. wrote:

Tower wrote:
Best Coast App subscribers have access to all of the lists. There were four mono-faction armies in top 25. Tau at 14 and 24th, Ultramarines at 15th, and Nurgle at 16th. Of course Tau has no choice but to be soupless.

I'd also consider the DE/harlies list pretty close, mono but for part of their faction now being sold separately.
It'd be interesting to know if psychic protection was the driving force in the top-placing DE soups.

Well we all know Harlie bikes are amazing units. Native -1 and 4++ with on demand -2 and 3++. Good CC. plus Mortal spam on vehicals that doubles are good anti chaff. They have a 22" move and charge naturally (plus fly keyword) So can stay locked with a castellan in CC (castellan can move over fly keyword units). They are a great choice.

They are Anti-Tank vs of Shinny Spears

Spears are pretty good anti tank too. I think the principle difference is harlie bikes have a 4++ in CC and are a little bit more manuverable (without spending CP). Spears do more overall damage BUT the mortals from 12 harlie bikes...holy freaking crap. That is a lot of mortals.

I am helping my friend build a harlie army. I told him to start building around 12 bikes....Look what just won the tournament lol.

Shiny Spears are amazing Anti-infantry, the AT weapons are actually Red Herring.

I don't think you are disagreeing with me - spears have killed my tanks too many times to not be considered good anti tank. CWE are going to doom an IK and charge it with SS turn 1 - it's pretty much an auto dead knight.

Shooting does 4 wounds with TLSC (with autarch RR 1's) Then with their spears 6. With a 4++ save. In CC though it's Waxed because no save. Dealing 14 wounds. That averages a kill without guide. AP -4 is not to be underestimated.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

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.

WIthout a CP battery BA captains are 'balanced' because you can do it once and thats almost all your cp for the game.
Pure Guard barely benefit from the CP battery since they dont have the Stratagems to abuse it with.
Mortarion without Warp Time isn't nearly as interesting
ect.

Yes the units being used in soup are good, if not the best thing in their codex. But that doesnt make them 'to good' by default. Its the combinations that push many of these things over the top.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Fairly sure Asmodios was being sarcastic. Showing that mono-IG isn't OP by comparing to Tau, which is known to not be OP.

I'm fairly sure he's just throwing out words at this point.

It is entirely possible that some units in the Tau dex need adjustment. Of course they shouldn't be a priority because, as others have stated, they can't soup.

Fair to say IG is better than mono Tau.

Infantry are better than fire warriors.
Russ Commanders are better than hammer heads or commanders. Long strike is awesome but that is only 1 unit.
Tau don't actually have good range. IG's primary shooting is 48+.
Tau have no CC ability. IG have amazing CC ability with catachans and bullgyrns.


It's pretty safe to say people just aren't playing mono IG because why would you when you can get a castellan and throw it into the mix and wreck peoples lives?

Tau have some very obnoxious mechanics with Shield Drones. Tau armies with Riptides, Commanders, Stormsurges and Broadsides and 30-50 shielddrones are actually very competitive, and as others have noted, they can't soup, thats why they are the only mono-faction that places high in tournaments.

It does not mean that is better than mono-guard or mono-DE (They aren't) but... why would you play mono-guard or mono-DE when you can soup?

Bharring wrote:
Well, there is some upside. In the top 11 alone, we have:

-DE
-CWE
-Ynnari
-Harlequins
-CSM
-TSons
-SM-BA
-Custodes
-IG
-Knights

So 10 factions in the top 11!

The downside is that IG are in 7 of the top 11.

Heck, Blood Angels are one of the powerhouse factions - in over half the top lists!

This is definitely a cool stat to see. Though I wonder if getting rid of soup would actually hurt this number?

barboggo wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Well, there is some upside. In the top 11 alone, we have:

-DE
-CWE
-Ynnari
-Harlequins
-CSM
-TSons
-SM-BA
-Custodes
-IG
-Knights

So 10 factions in the top 11!

The downside is that IG are in 7 of the top 11.

Heck, Blood Angels are one of the powerhouse factions - in over half the top lists!

This is definitely a cool stat to see. Though I wonder if getting rid of soup would actually hurt this number?

The stat is BS. blood angels is some scouts (because they have to take something) and 2 captains. Custodes is 3 bike captains. Tsons is Ahriman and magnus with a Daemon prince. DE Quins CWE Ynnari are OP and you expect to see them there. Knights and IG are OP on their own and expect to see them there. Nothing about that is cool to me. Spam OP stuff and win tournaments. About what you expect. It would be cool to see an interesting "non meta" list make it in there.

Yep, definitely wouldn't expect anything less than "spamming OP stuff" from competitive players.

I legitimately feel there are 3 reasons why the meta is currently how it is.

1:The addition of new types of detachments away from the initial 3 and the scaling of which detachments you can take. **This leads to too much spam and loopholes.

2: CP generation being dependent on Detachments. This is another drive towards cheaper and minimum size units. Filling out large detachments gives more CPs and thus uses of powerful abilities.

3:Allowing allied units to take advantage of faction special rules even though they are not the primary faction. Allies should not bring Relics/warlord traits/stratagems/abilities to an army. Only units being used to fill in a weakness.


So my quick ideas to fix these issues:

-Each army starts with one of the main 3 detachments based on point size. Less then or equal to 1k = Patrol, up to 2k = battalion and 3k+ = brigade. This has to consist of your warlord's army. Then each army can take 1 and only 1 of the other types of detachments allies, This can be from the same book as well. Rule of 3 still applies. none of these detachments give CP (Followup on that later next)

-Don't give CPs based on detachments, this is too hard to balance. Instead give CPs based on a Army rating, so that as the point values increase the amount of CPs increase accordingly. EX: Space Marines would have a rating of 3, for every 500pts you play, they get 3 CP. Thus at 1750 they get 9 CPs. It doesn't matter what they take in their list, they get 9CP. Guards would have a higher rating, like 5, and thus have 15 CPs at 1750. This would make balancing armies easier, because you could adjust how many CPs they get at different point size, units that generate CPs would still be useful, CP regen would still work (Fix grand strategist to be inline with everyone else)

-Finally, don't let allies bring their faction special rules, they should be reserved for the main army only. If you bring allies, expect them to fill holes and not benefit from your stratagems/abilities.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Fairly sure Asmodios was being sarcastic. Showing that mono-IG isn't OP by comparing to Tau, which is known to not be OP.

I'm fairly sure he's just throwing out words at this point.

It is entirely possible that some units in the Tau dex need adjustment. Of course they shouldn't be a priority because, as others have stated, they can't soup.

So its almost like we should *gasp* address soup and then specific codexes that rise in power..... what a crazy thought


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Fairly sure Asmodios was being sarcastic. Showing that mono-IG isn't OP by comparing to Tau, which is known to not be OP.

I'm fairly sure he's just throwing out words at this point.

It is entirely possible that some units in the Tau dex need adjustment. Of course they shouldn't be a priority because, as others have stated, they can't soup.

Fair to say IG is better than mono Tau.

Infantry are better than fire warriors.
Russ Commanders are better than hammer heads or commanders. Long strike is awesome but that is only 1 unit.
Tau don't actually have good range. IG's primary shooting is 48+.
Tau have no CC ability. IG have amazing CC ability with catachans and bullgyrns.


It's pretty safe to say people just aren't playing mono IG because why would you when you can get a castellan and throw it into the mix and wreck peoples lives?

Yet we see mono tau do better then mono guard in tournaments..... interesting

So no-one wants to admit the issue is the price in points that Guard CP costs?
With maximum regeneration relics and warlord traits.
Guard CP 18 points per CP in Battalion
Tau CP, 27 points per CP in Battalion
Ultramarines CP, 40 points per CP in Battalion (Non Ultra 56 points)
Chaos Marines CP, 52 points per CP in Battalion(No CP Regen?)
Knight CP, 177 points per CP.

Base line(not regen)
Guard CP, 36 points per CP
Tau CP, 38 points per CP
Chaos CP, 52
Marines 56
Knights 177

FYI the only one of those cheapest CP lists that wouldn't swap at least one of those choices out for more expensive model is the Guard battalion.

Ice_can wrote:
So no-one wants to admit the issue is the price in points that Guard CP costs?
With maximum regeneration relics and warlord traits.
Guard CP 18 points per CP in Battalion
Tau CP, 27 points per CP in Battalion
Ultramarines CP, 40 points per CP in Battalion (Non Ultra 56 points)
Chaos Marines CP, 52 points per CP in Battalion(No CP Regen?)
Knight CP, 177 points per CP.

CP regeneration is an issue in general
CP regeneration in soup is disgustingly good
nobody is arguing against that. Read my post earlier in the thread CP regeneration should be removed from the game period

Asmodios wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Fairly sure Asmodios was being sarcastic. Showing that mono-IG isn't OP by comparing to Tau, which is known to not be OP.

I'm fairly sure he's just throwing out words at this point.

It is entirely possible that some units in the Tau dex need adjustment. Of course they shouldn't be a priority because, as others have stated, they can't soup.

So its almost like we should *gasp* address soup and then specific codexes that rise in power..... what a crazy thought


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Fairly sure Asmodios was being sarcastic. Showing that mono-IG isn't OP by comparing to Tau, which is known to not be OP.

I'm fairly sure he's just throwing out words at this point.

It is entirely possible that some units in the Tau dex need adjustment. Of course they shouldn't be a priority because, as others have stated, they can't soup.

Fair to say IG is better than mono Tau.

Infantry are better than fire warriors.
Russ Commanders are better than hammer heads or commanders. Long strike is awesome but that is only 1 unit.
Tau don't actually have good range. IG's primary shooting is 48+.
Tau have no CC ability. IG have amazing CC ability with catachans and bullgyrns.


It's pretty safe to say people just aren't playing mono IG because why would you when you can get a castellan and throw it into the mix and wreck peoples lives?

Yet we see mono tau do better then mono guard in tournaments..... interesting

Dude - tau can't take allies. That is the reason.

Also you should see the 15 ranked Ultra marines list.
6 units of scouts and 3 dev squads with heavy bolters and a big sternguard unit with quilliman and tigarius. AKA - one of the worst lists I've ever seen. If you don't think mono IG can outperform that list...just wow.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Check out this https://www.frontlinegaming.org/category/podcast/

 Xenomancers wrote:

Asmodios wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Fairly sure Asmodios was being sarcastic. Showing that mono-IG isn't OP by comparing to Tau, which is known to not be OP.

I'm fairly sure he's just throwing out words at this point.

It is entirely possible that some units in the Tau dex need adjustment. Of course they shouldn't be a priority because, as others have stated, they can't soup.

So its almost like we should *gasp* address soup and then specific codexes that rise in power..... what a crazy thought


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Fairly sure Asmodios was being sarcastic. Showing that mono-IG isn't OP by comparing to Tau, which is known to not be OP.

I'm fairly sure he's just throwing out words at this point.

It is entirely possible that some units in the Tau dex need adjustment. Of course they shouldn't be a priority because, as others have stated, they can't soup.

Fair to say IG is better than mono Tau.

Infantry are better than fire warriors.
Russ Commanders are better than hammer heads or commanders. Long strike is awesome but that is only 1 unit.
Tau don't actually have good range. IG's primary shooting is 48+.
Tau have no CC ability. IG have amazing CC ability with catachans and bullgyrns.


It's pretty safe to say people just aren't playing mono IG because why would you when you can get a castellan and throw it into the mix and wreck peoples lives?

Yet we see mono tau do better then mono guard in tournaments..... interesting

Dude - tau can't take allies. That is the reason.

Also you should see the 15 ranked Ultra marines list.
6 units of scouts and 3 dev squads with heavy bolters and a big sternguard unit with quilliman and tigarius. AKA - one of the worst lists I've ever seen. If you don't think mono IG can't outperform that list...just wow.

Dude guard that don't take allies finish behind tau.... It's almost like guard are considered OP because of there ability to soup.... what if we did something crazy like added some sort of negative to souping instead of nerfing mono players into the dirt dude

Asmodios are you referencing the BAO placings? Lol

You are only talking about people playing their army wrongly...I'm surprised there aren't a few mono IG list in the top 20. Look at that ultra marines army that placed 15th lol.

GW should address soup BEFORE they address IG.

Once soup is addressed and IG is still a problem, then tackle IG.

 Smirrors wrote:
GW should address soup BEFORE they address IG.

Once soup is addressed and IG is still a problem, then tackle IG.

Basically this. It's very difficult to judge how strong IG is because they're never used solo or in a vacuum. The ally system is a greater issue atm.

At BAO, the final winner had 6177 Swiss points. The mono Tau player and the Guard player had the exact same W/L record and were just a place away from each other, with a difference of TWO Swiss points. These scores were as close as can be, and The Guard player actually went more games being undefeated than the Tau player meaning he was on the top tables for longer. Also, the number of Tau players largely outnumbered the number of mono Guard players, yet Guard still hit equally as high. Using this as some sort of statistic that says "mono Guard are objectively weaker than mono Tau" is just absurdity. This is why people say you are biased.

 Xenomancers wrote:


Also you should see the 15 ranked Ultra marines list.
6 units of scouts and 3 dev squads with heavy bolters and a big sternguard unit with quilliman and tigarius. AKA - one of the worst lists I've ever seen. If you don't think mono IG can outperform that list...just wow.

One of the worst lists you've seen?

This list was made and piloted by Reecius who play tested this list to singularly beat Castellan type lists.

 Smirrors wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:


Also you should see the 15 ranked Ultra marines list.
6 units of scouts and 3 dev squads with heavy bolters and a big sternguard unit with quilliman and tigarius. AKA - one of the worst lists I've ever seen. If you don't think mono IG can outperform that list...just wow.

One of the worst lists you've seen?

This list was made and piloted by Reecius who play tested this list to singularly beat Castellan type lists.

This list can not beat anything. It is actually weak AF against the Castellan list. It's even weaker against eldar. Tons of scouts vs Staken guardsmen LOL. I just can't even emphasize how auto lose this is for ultra marines.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

We have proven that mathematically 4 ppm Infantry units are the most efficient infantry in the game.

We have seen countless evidence that top players believe Infantry units to be incredibly efficient.

We have seen an insurmountable amount of evidence to suggest that even amateur players believe this to be the case.

Everything, and I mean everything points to Infantry units being undercosted.

But you refuse to accept it, blaming the results of the unit instead on soup or, of all things, mortar squads.

Did it ever occur to you that perhaps Infantry units, mortars and certain stratagems and relics that IG have access to are all to blame? That the combination of these things makes them too efficient for their cost?

You and everyone that has math hammered efficiency have been doing so in a vacuum. And you may be right in all your conclusions. I believe that GW should take incremental steps to review the meta rather than make rash decisions based on this as the reason these efficiencies have become an issue is due to soup.

Do you think that the results will change if those battalions go up by 30pts? Or 60pts in a brigade?



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

This list can not beat anything. It is actually weak AF against the Castellan list. It's even weaker against eldar. Tons of scouts vs Staken guardsmen LOL. I just can't even emphasize how auto lose this is for ultra marines.

I think Reecius would disagree with you. He lost his game by 5 points to Juice and by his own admission played the worst game of his life by forgetting rules and doing stupid moves.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Karol wrote:
Are you sure about GW knowing how their rules work in game? Because when you hear them talk about playing or read articles on their official page it feels as if they had zero idea about the game.

Yeah. I second this. They really don't know the consequence of the rules they write. In a lot of cases. The don't consider the stacking of strats and spells and fighting twice and stuff.

They know exactly what they are doing. Sales reflect this.