Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The problem is not just soup. The problem is not just CP and it's regeneration or lack thereof. The problem is not just stratagems. There is also the problem of units performing too well for their points. Here's something I posted in the "how to balance Guard" thread that I think is very pertinent here;

Judging IG Infantry against other similarly costed units they outperform all but GSCultists significantly. Not by a small amount. Significantly. They are mathematically better than Fire Warriors even when they are increased to 5ppm.

Infantry are simply the most points efficient unit in the game by a huge margin when compared to other, similarly costed units. Let's stop pretending that mono Guard can't compete - it has been stated already but at the BAO a Guard player was the second highest ranked mono list, the first list was Tau. Also as far as any Imperium lists are concerned in the competitive meta, "pure" anything lists don't really exist, particularly when we consider that there is absolutely no downside to souping.

In contrast to the general belief here, armies that are primarily Guard (ie - those that spend more points on a Guard detachment than any other) have been doing extremely well (read - too well) competitively for some time, here's how they placed in the ITC over the last few months;

August - most top 3 results in all ITC events (best faction)
July - most top 3 results in all ITC events (best faction)
June - 4th most top 3 results in all ITC events
May - 2nd most top 3 results in all ITC events
April - most top 3 results in all ITC events (best faction)
March - 4th most top 3 results in all ITC events

They also feature in almost every Imperium soup list, even when they aren't the primary faction.

So I think it's pretty justified to nerf those units in the guard dex that are clearly outperforming their peers. The biggest culprit of this is, without question, Infantry squads. There are others in the IG dex that also need to be brought in line with everything else in the game.

I really wish people would stop defending something that is clearly too good. It's obvious through mathematics in a vacuum. It's obvious from real life experience. It's obvious from tournament results backing up all the theory. At this point it's blindingly obvious that certain units are not priced properly, yet whenever this is raised I see far more IG players defending their units rather than accepting the facts.

You can replace 'Infantry squads' for any unit that is performing too well for it's points cost - Castellans, Dawn Eagle Shield Captains, Slamguinius, Shining Spears, Dark Reapers etc etc etc

Can we stop pretending that a magical mix of CP, stratagems and soup somehow make these units perform better than they do otherwise? The units perform better than average regardless of whether they are taken in a mono or soup list. Soup lists simply give players the ability to sure up the traditional weaknesses of a faction by picking another to compliment it.

E - format, additional points.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Can we stop pretending that a magical mix of CP, stratagems and soup somehow make these units perform better than they do otherwise? The units perform better than average regardless of whether they are taken in a mono or soup list. Soup lists simply give players the ability to sure up the traditional weaknesses of a faction by picking another to compliment it.

I agree with this, though the Castellan specifically IS probably overperforming due to a magical mix of CP, strategems and soup. Arguably the Slam Captain as well I suppose. There is little else that stands out as much as these two though.

The game is more or less decided by turn 2 in basically every game I play. Even with a nerf to CP genreation these lists will still be able to start the game with 20 CP. LOL 20 CP? That is 2 turns of captain smash and 2 turns of rotate ion sheilds (which lets be honest) Shooting at the castellan is a waste anyways even with a 4++ save. I think a smart player will just let you shoot it and waste your firepower. Then fight at full strength for 1 CP (if CP started to become an issue) which it wont. 20 CP is more than enough to run this army - I ASSURE YOU.

Lets see - with my proposal.
15 starting CP
IG brigade = -0
Allied batallion = -1 (-1 due to allied)
Allied superheavy detachment = -4 (3 for super heavy - 1 for allied)

They would still have regen but they would start the game with 10 CP (before relics are distributed and paid for) This army would start the game with 7 CP with their exact build. Plus honestly - I would sure like to remove the ability to use CP regen on multiple detachments. Lets say - only your warlords faction can but used for abilities that "cause you to be refunded or gain CP or start with bonus CP".

 Xenomancers wrote:
The game is more or less decided by turn 2 in basically every game I play. Even with a nerf to CP genreation these lists will still be able to start the game with 20 CP. LOL 20 CP? That is 2 turns of captain smash and 2 turns of rotate ion sheilds (which lets be honest) Shooting at the castellan is a waste anyways even with a 4++ save. I think a smart player will just let you shoot it and waste your firepower. Then fight at full strength for 1 CP (if CP started to become an issue) which it wont. 20 CP is more than enough to run this army - I ASSURE YOU.

The list typically spends 3 CP on BA relics, 2 on Knight warlord and relic, and 2 on DVoS on the smash captains to start the game with 13.

If the only change that was made was too limit CP regen abilities to only work on <faction> stratagems, you'd only regen 1-2 CP from the BA captain combo (6-7CP if he dies/fights again) and none from the IK stratagems (7CP) so you'd be down to 0-3 ish CP on average by your second turn assuming you regen 1-2 from enemy strats.

That's not enough to do a full combo again, so you'd have to consider spending fewer CP at the start. You could leave DVoS and the BA relic off and start with 16, and have a bit more in that second turn, but the effectiveness of the list would definitely be reduced with each change.

If this was combined with fewer CP to start with (let's say we cap it to 12 or do the reverse CP thing) and a something stopping the Castellan from getting a 3++ (maybe make the 4++ warlord Questorus class only, or change it in some other way) all of the issues with this list would be solved.

A cap to 12-15 CP (and probably up battleforged to 4-5 or increase the 1CP detachments to 2) would also let most armies get close to the same CP levels as long as they took at least 1 battillion, which should be all they need to do IMO. Rewards after that first one should be minimal. I don't like it as much as reverse CP but it's a one to three sentence solution.

A lot of perfectly valid normal mono armies currently only get about 8 CP. 1 battillion and a spearhead should be a valid army build. If it gave you 10-11CP and the most anyone could get was 15 then things wouldn't be so bad, and you wouldn't feel forced with a lot of armies to take a second battillion.

jcd386 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
The game is more or less decided by turn 2 in basically every game I play. Even with a nerf to CP genreation these lists will still be able to start the game with 20 CP. LOL 20 CP? That is 2 turns of captain smash and 2 turns of rotate ion sheilds (which lets be honest) Shooting at the castellan is a waste anyways even with a 4++ save. I think a smart player will just let you shoot it and waste your firepower. Then fight at full strength for 1 CP (if CP started to become an issue) which it wont. 20 CP is more than enough to run this army - I ASSURE YOU.

The list typically spends 3 CP on BA relics, 2 on Knight warlord and relic, and 2 on DVoS on the smash captains to start the game with 13.

If the only change that was made was too limit CP regen abilities to only work on <faction> stratagems, you'd only regen 1-2 CP from the BA captain combo (6-7CP if he dies/fights again) and none from the IK stratagems (7CP) so you'd be down to 0-3 ish CP on average by your second turn assuming you regen 1-2 from enemy strats.

That's not enough to do a full combo again, so you'd have to consider spending fewer CP at the start. You could leave DVoS and the BA relic off and start with 16, and have a bit more in that second turn, but the effectiveness of the list would definitely be reduced with each change.

If this was combined with fewer CP to start with (let's say we cap it to 12 or do the reverse CP thing) and a something stopping the Castellan from getting a 3++ (maybe make the 4++ relic Questorus class only, or change it in some other way) all of the issues with this list would be solved.

A cap to 12-15 CP (and probably make the 1CP detachments cost 2) would also let most armies get close to the same CP levels as long as they took at least 1 battillion, which should be all they need to do IMO. Rewards after that first one should be minimal. I don't like it as much as reverse CP but it's a one to three sentence solution.

A lot of perfectly valid normal mono armies currently only get about 8 CP. 1 battillion and a spearhead should be a valid army build. If it gave you 10CP and the most anyone could get was 15 then things wouldn't be so bad, and you wouldn't feel forced with a lot of armies to take a second battillion.

12 would probably be even better.

No you've got it backwards - a lot of armies take a vanguard or a spearhead to get an additional CP because they are units they are taking anyways. Their slots for HS were already open in their battalion. This system rewards armies that take less detachments.

Also as someone who plays a lot of mono knights getting by on like 9 CP if I am lucky. The idea that they can't get by with 16 is just asinine. They can.

Primarily the only thing you really need to spam the 3++ against is another castellan. Nothing else has the firepower to chew through 28 wounds t8 4++ to begin with. Just having the ability to do it makes shooting at it a complete waste. Plus there is the poor mans build for the castellan. Use house tyranis and have the same durability of a 3++ just by standing there for free...What do you lose? reroll 1's to hit and wound but save 2 CP a turn which you can use to resurrect yourself if you die for 2 CP. Yeah...that is what I would do and it will still dominate. Castellan being 100 points too cheap is a much bigger issue than command points.

I suppose this is one place I disagree with your CP/Detatchment scheme:

Battalion/Brigade should cost CP, even if it's one.

This incentivises the player to take a Brigade or fully flesh out their Battalion instead of adding an aditional detatchment. Thus, the CP cost makes the player want to minimize detatchments. That inherently makes Allies a little less appealing, without making Allies DOA.

Which is extra nice, because no need to figure out "what counts as allies". It seems super simple with the keyword detatchement system, but gets quite a bit more complicated quickly.

Bharring wrote:
I suppose this is one place I disagree with your CP/Detatchment scheme:

Battalion/Brigade should cost CP, even if it's one.

This incentivises the player to take a Brigade or fully flesh out their Battalion instead of adding an aditional detatchment. Thus, the CP cost makes the player want to minimize detatchments. That inherently makes Allies a little less appealing, without making Allies DOA.

Which is extra nice, because no need to figure out "what counts as allies". It seems super simple with the keyword detatchement system, but gets quite a bit more complicated quickly.

Perhaps an additional brigade or batallion should cost 1 CP. I honestly hadn't even thought of that. The first one should be free though - it also starts getting too complicated there. It's not like taking 2 batallion does not have it's own taxes. That requires 4 HQ and 6 troop. That is a solid amount of tax. I get where you are coming from though - you don't want people to take 2 batallions with 6 heavy support. You would much rather see a batallion full of FA and elites too.

Try to think of a way to incentives that?

What problem are you even trying to solve with this? The entire game shouldn't be revamped because of imperial guard.

Double battalion has a hefty tax if you aren't imperial guard.
And so does a brigade.

The problem isn't that you take a lower batt/brigade to improve your own cp, the problem is that it can be accomplished for nothing. And that's primarily in 1 faction.

Tau have access to dirt cheap battalions. Do we need to nerf Tau?

"The first one should be free though"

Which is the cleaner rulesset?

A)
Start with 11 CP
Each Brigade or Battalion after the first is 1CP
Each Vanguard... is nCP
...

B)
Start with 12 CP
Each Brigade or Battalionis 1CP
Each Vanguard... is nCP

I'd rather 4 HQ and 6 Troop of Ultramarines have more CP (even if it's just 1) than 2 UM HQ 3 Troops + 2 BA HQ + 3 troops. Without adding more rules, if possible.

What exactly are you guys trying to achieve now as this is going into changes that are borderline 8.5 edition.

Once Guard CP generation has been addressed/removed CP isn't why people are souping.

It's strategums, units and psykic powers, you can't address those directly but you can just put in a CP counter. Does it realy matter which detachment people take for allies?

Why are you trying to force people into mono subfaction of mono codex's?

 Marmatag wrote:
What problem are you even trying to solve with this? The entire game shouldn't be revamped because of imperial guard.

Double battalion has a hefty tax if you aren't imperial guard.
And so does a brigade.

The problem isn't that you take a lower batt/brigade to improve your own cp, the problem is that it can be accomplished for nothing. And that's primarily in 1 faction.

Tau have access to dirt cheap battalions. Do we need to nerf Tau?

I'm trying to solve all the games problems with a simple fix. using a simple approach - fairness.

Tau wont be nerfed by this - armies taking allies will be punished - while tau can will start the game with 15 CP. Only 2 less than their typical build would start with now.
As pointed out above - the soup list with a Castellan and BA batallion and IG bridage is suffering a -5 CP penalty from the 15 base they start with. Tau will have +5 CP on that army. It is a big deal.

Nids for example - the power they can get out of a single batallion is freaking huge.
3 FHT
3 Hive Guard units
and 9 carnifex.

Pretty sure nids will be able to start with 15 CP most of the time without sacrificing unit quality. In fact I see this as a buff to nids because nid troops are pretty much garbage. My nid armies are starting with 9 ATM...Yeah...it sucks.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ice_can wrote:
What exactly are you guys trying to achieve now as this is going into changes that are borderline 8.5 edition.

Once Guard CP generation has been addressed/removed CP isn't why people are souping.

It's strategums, units and psykic powers, you can't address those directly but you can just put in a CP counter. Does it realy matter which detachment people take for allies?

Why are you trying to force people into mono subfaction of mono codex's?

Wrong. IG will still have the most command points. You have to look ahead. Nothing short of nerfing allies into complete uselessness - short of what I am proposing (a rework of how command points are obtained) will fix the games problems.

If we nerfed CP regen. Here is what happens. Space marines become worse. Admech become worse. All eldar factions become worse (this is not necessarily bad). Even tau becomes worse. Guess who wins? Imperial Gaurd. By far the cheapest CP battalions and brigades. Plus - they don't take a single bad unit to obtain them. "but CP regen on gaurd is OP" no...its not. It is only OP because they start with the most command points BY FAR and regen scales with starting CP. If we make starting CP standard...Guard does not have such a huge advantage in CP anymore(thought they still will have the best ability to regen) - plus - if we charge CP for allied units their base CP shrinks and other armies start to have CP advantage over them.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
What problem are you even trying to solve with this? The entire game shouldn't be revamped because of imperial guard.

Double battalion has a hefty tax if you aren't imperial guard.
And so does a brigade.

The problem isn't that you take a lower batt/brigade to improve your own cp, the problem is that it can be accomplished for nothing. And that's primarily in 1 faction.

Tau have access to dirt cheap battalions. Do we need to nerf Tau?

I'm trying to solve all the games problems with a simple fix. using a simple approach - fairness.

Tau wont be nerfed by this - armies taking allies will be punished - while tau can will start the game with 15 CP. Only 2 less than their typical build would start with now.
As pointed out above - the soup list with a Castellan and BA batallion and IG bridage is suffering a -5 CP penalty from the 15 base they start with. Tau will have +5 CP on that army. It is a big deal.

Nids for example - the power they can get out of a single batallion is freaking huge.
3 FHT
3 Hive Guard units
and 9 carnifex.

Pretty sure nids will be able to start with 15 CP most of the time without sacrificing unit quality. In fact I see this as a buff to nids because nid troops are pretty much garbage. My nid armies are starting with 9 ATM...Yeah...it sucks.

You actually have nerfed a number of Tau builds with this rule.

Your trying to over engineer a solution when it's obvious the issue isn't CP regen in general its Astra Millicheese CP recycling plant.

You've also still screwed Assasins and Sisters of silence hardcore.

P.S. who cares if mono Guard generate CP for less points, you make it so that armies loose battle forged CP to add guard.
Which also helps with Choas and Aeldari.

If the 3 CP isn't enough of a deterrent just add CP to that and reduce battalions and Brigades.

Ice_can wrote:
What exactly are you guys trying to achieve now as this is going into changes that are borderline 8.5 edition.

Once Guard CP generation has been addressed/removed CP isn't why people are souping.

It's strategums, units and psykic powers, you can't address those directly but you can just put in a CP counter. Does it realy matter which detachment people take for allies?

Why are you trying to force people into mono subfaction of mono codex's?

Isnt the current thing to dump CP into relics? the whole thing about IG is that you can make a ton of CP, get a butt load of relics and still have more left over for other strats AND generate more.

going by the last few even lists at least.

i guess a fix might be to only allow you to buy relics for your primary detachment or lock stratagems to specific detachments so that you cant max out relics if you want to use some specific other strat.

but some one some where will complain about any changes eh?

 Desubot wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
What exactly are you guys trying to achieve now as this is going into changes that are borderline 8.5 edition.

Once Guard CP generation has been addressed/removed CP isn't why people are souping.

It's strategums, units and psykic powers, you can't address those directly but you can just put in a CP counter. Does it realy matter which detachment people take for allies?

Why are you trying to force people into mono subfaction of mono codex's?

Isnt the current thing to dump CP into relics? the whole thing about IG is that you can make a ton of CP, get a butt load of relics and still have more left over for other strats AND generate more.

going by the last few even lists at least.

i guess a fix might be to only allow you to buy relics for your primary detachment or lock stratagems to specific detachments so that you cant max out relics if you want to use some specific other strat.

but some one some where will complain about any changes eh?

The solution to that problem is taking Grand Strategists and Kurov's to Non matched play options.

Ice_can wrote:

The solution to that problem is taking Grand Strategists and Kurov's to Non matched play options.

You lost me there.

you mean using those cp regens?

Well fix that by making it so those only affect faction specific CP. and anything refunded only work for the faction that ability is part of.

no Fix is going to be easy. its basicly going to have to be one hell of an updated rehaul to make sure there is no cross contamination of CP.
Mind you i have no idea what would happen. or if something else will become abused but i think it would help at least the current meh meta.

Ice_can wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
What problem are you even trying to solve with this? The entire game shouldn't be revamped because of imperial guard.

Double battalion has a hefty tax if you aren't imperial guard.
And so does a brigade.

The problem isn't that you take a lower batt/brigade to improve your own cp, the problem is that it can be accomplished for nothing. And that's primarily in 1 faction.

Tau have access to dirt cheap battalions. Do we need to nerf Tau?

I'm trying to solve all the games problems with a simple fix. using a simple approach - fairness.

Tau wont be nerfed by this - armies taking allies will be punished - while tau can will start the game with 15 CP. Only 2 less than their typical build would start with now.
As pointed out above - the soup list with a Castellan and BA batallion and IG bridage is suffering a -5 CP penalty from the 15 base they start with. Tau will have +5 CP on that army. It is a big deal.

Nids for example - the power they can get out of a single batallion is freaking huge.
3 FHT
3 Hive Guard units
and 9 carnifex.

Pretty sure nids will be able to start with 15 CP most of the time without sacrificing unit quality. In fact I see this as a buff to nids because nid troops are pretty much garbage. My nid armies are starting with 9 ATM...Yeah...it sucks.

You actually have nerfed a number of Tau builds with this rule.

Your trying to over engineer a solution when it's obvious the issue isn't CP regen in general its Astra Millicheese CP recycling plant.

You've also still screwed Assasins and Sisters of silence hardcore.

P.S. who cares if mono Guard generate CP for less points, you make it so that armies loose battle forged CP to add guard.
Which also helps with Choas and Aeldari.

If the 3 CP isn't enough of a deterrent just add CP to that and reduce battalions and Brigades.

"Your trying to over engineer a solution when it's obvious the issue isn't CP regen in general its Astra Millicheese CP recycling plant."

You must see beyond the specific problem you are thinking about and look overall at the problem.
Armies need CP to function - they do not have access to equal ability to get them. This is an inherent flaw in the system.
Custodes for example have a min battalion of like 650ish points while IG can make a battalion for 180 points. This would make sense if there were some sort of link between CP power and ability to create CP - BUT THERE ISN'T. So any solution to the problem has to start here.

The next problem is that allies can give CP to allied armies. This creates a situation where allies are essential to run certain armies. This is inherently flawed because you should be able to run any army you want right out of your own codex. Allies should be an option but not a requirement. So any solution that uses allies as a crutch is also a failure.

Alternatively suggestions have been made that suggest CP/stratagems should only be available to your warlords faction. This is a failure because it completely kills allies - you should be able to take allies if you want - it should just not be autoinclude or a requirement to run your army. Allies give you the benifit of taking the best possible unit for a role that your base army lacks - in turn it should also have a negative associated with it.

From these three lines of thought - we (my good 40k buddy IRL) came to this solution. It solves all these problems simultaneously. Without forcing you to build your army any particular way. With every build available in the previous system still being potentially viable. The only place this system is weak - is with the current power level/ access to stratagems area of things. This might require balancing - IDK.

If it turns out IK starting with 15 CP is too much...we will increase the cost of their stratagems. Same thing with an army like custodes. Or any stratagem that is over-performing. Problem is right now we have no real metric to establish stratagem balance because all armies have unequal access to command points. This will fix that.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Desubot wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
What exactly are you guys trying to achieve now as this is going into changes that are borderline 8.5 edition.

Once Guard CP generation has been addressed/removed CP isn't why people are souping.

It's strategums, units and psykic powers, you can't address those directly but you can just put in a CP counter. Does it realy matter which detachment people take for allies?

Why are you trying to force people into mono subfaction of mono codex's?

Isnt the current thing to dump CP into relics? the whole thing about IG is that you can make a ton of CP, get a butt load of relics and still have more left over for other strats AND generate more.

going by the last few even lists at least.

i guess a fix might be to only allow you to buy relics for your primary detachment or lock stratagems to specific detachments so that you cant max out relics if you want to use some specific other strat.

but some one some where will complain about any changes eh?

Well the problem is more complicated than that. Yeah - that is what is happening. There is more than one problem though.
IG have the absolutely cheapest battalion and brigade. They offer a huge chunk of CP to start with. Basically with 500 points of IG in your army - you have more starting CP than most complete 2000 point armies. Unless they are spamming batallions which...only 1 army other than IG does that well - and it's tau. Tau can't take allies though (they don't have access to them) so nobody complain about them fueling soup.

So really - lets just focus on that. 500ish points of IG gets you more starting CP than most other armies 2000 point final product. Seems pretty unfair right? Well...it is.

Also on top of this - they also have the best ability to create CP in game per spent CP - with a free combo of relic and warlord trait. This is even more unfair.

What a bunch of uninspired people are suggesting to fix this problem that we remove CP regeneration from the game. Just go back to IG easily producing more base CP than everyone else. However every other army (I think 8 others have CP regen) also loses their regen (and it wasn't as good as the IG regen was to begin with). Somehow that is going to balance the game?

Wait why only focus on that.

its literally one of the biggest problem right now is using allies as a battery to fuel other stratagems. going by what is top 8ting.

like riddle me this. what would a 500 point IG brigade do with all the CP they can eat but cant hand them out to anyone else. what is worth casting for that army?

if you lock it down, people will be using IG less and less for their battery potential but can still run them for other things.



(my suggestion was to lock all CP to their own respective factions. 200 CP from IG will never touch a Blood angles captains shiny relic. anything that regens will only effect their own dice pool. the free base CP would need to be fixed or only function on the 3 base strats)

No, adjusting imperial guard has to be the starting point, for any of these solutions.

Then, you need to adjust soup.

 Desubot wrote:
Wait why only focus on that.

its literally one of the biggest problem right now is using allies as a battery to fuel other stratagems. going by what is top 8ting.

like riddle me this. what would a 500 point IG brigade do with all the CP they can eat but cant hand them out to anyone else. what is worth casting for that army?

if you lock it down, people will be using IG less and less for their battery potential but can still run them for other things.



(my suggestion was to lock all CP to their own respective factions. 200 CP from IG will never touch a Blood angles captains shiny relic. anything that regens will only effect their own dice pool. the free base CP would need to be fixed or only function on the 3 base strats)

Because it makes it pretty pointless to ally in IG anymore, and makes armies that have three roughly even factions really hard to play, and it still doesn't solve the problem of some factions not being able to generate CP very well.

 Desubot wrote:


(my suggestion was to lock all CP to their own respective factions. 200 CP from IG will never touch a Blood angles captains shiny relic. anything that regens will only effect their own dice pool. the free base CP would need to be fixed or only function on the 3 base strats)

Yeah. I think that's the best solution.

Kinda curious how all the tournament players claim this is "too much bookkeeping" while playing all those weird spreadsheet ITC/Nova missions, etc..

3 base CP should just be assigned the faction of your warlord and you're done.

 Marmatag wrote:
No, adjusting imperial guard has to be the starting point, for any of these solutions.

Then, you need to adjust soup.

You need to adjust soup before touching any armies.
End of story.

Any disagreement on that note is you just wanting to nerf one army.

jcd386 wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Wait why only focus on that.

its literally one of the biggest problem right now is using allies as a battery to fuel other stratagems. going by what is top 8ting.

like riddle me this. what would a 500 point IG brigade do with all the CP they can eat but cant hand them out to anyone else. what is worth casting for that army?

if you lock it down, people will be using IG less and less for their battery potential but can still run them for other things.



(my suggestion was to lock all CP to their own respective factions. 200 CP from IG will never touch a Blood angles captains shiny relic. anything that regens will only effect their own dice pool. the free base CP would need to be fixed or only function on the 3 base strats)

Because it makes it pretty pointless to ally in IG anymore, and makes armies that have three roughly even factions really hard to play, and it still doesn't solve the problem of some factions not being able to generate CP very well.

No point are you kidding? 4 point screens that have orders and 5+ saves? Artillery? These things are generally useful. People were taking imperial guard before farming CP was a thing, because they're incredibly useful in shutting off assault. Even if you get 0 CP, small footprint armies like Custodes and Knights still want to patch their holes with Guard.

jcd386 wrote:

Because it makes it pretty pointless to ally in IG anymore, and makes armies that have three roughly even factions really hard to play, and it still doesn't solve the problem of some factions not being able to generate CP very well.

Well, alternatively just make all CP regen non-matched play only. For matched-play and tournament, everyone gets, dunno, 10 CP flat, no regen. Done. Doesn't get more balanced than that for the variant of 40K that plays more towards the "test your skill/e-sport" angle than the background angle.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
What problem are you even trying to solve with this? The entire game shouldn't be revamped because of imperial guard.

Double battalion has a hefty tax if you aren't imperial guard.
And so does a brigade.

The problem isn't that you take a lower batt/brigade to improve your own cp, the problem is that it can be accomplished for nothing. And that's primarily in 1 faction.

Tau have access to dirt cheap battalions. Do we need to nerf Tau?

I'm trying to solve all the games problems with a simple fix. using a simple approach - fairness.

Tau wont be nerfed by this - armies taking allies will be punished - while tau can will start the game with 15 CP. Only 2 less than their typical build would start with now.
As pointed out above - the soup list with a Castellan and BA batallion and IG bridage is suffering a -5 CP penalty from the 15 base they start with. Tau will have +5 CP on that army. It is a big deal.

Nids for example - the power they can get out of a single batallion is freaking huge.
3 FHT
3 Hive Guard units
and 9 carnifex.

Pretty sure nids will be able to start with 15 CP most of the time without sacrificing unit quality. In fact I see this as a buff to nids because nid troops are pretty much garbage. My nid armies are starting with 9 ATM...Yeah...it sucks.

You actually have nerfed a number of Tau builds with this rule.

Your trying to over engineer a solution when it's obvious the issue isn't CP regen in general its Astra Millicheese CP recycling plant.

You've also still screwed Assasins and Sisters of silence hardcore.

P.S. who cares if mono Guard generate CP for less points, you make it so that armies loose battle forged CP to add guard.
Which also helps with Choas and Aeldari.

If the 3 CP isn't enough of a deterrent just add CP to that and reduce battalions and Brigades.

"Your trying to over engineer a solution when it's obvious the issue isn't CP regen in general its Astra Millicheese CP recycling plant."

You must see beyond the specific problem you are thinking about and look overall at the problem.
Armies need CP to function - they do not have access to equal ability to get them. This is an inherent flaw in the system.
Custodes for example have a min battalion of like 650ish points while IG can make a battalion for 180 points. This would make sense if there were some sort of link between CP power and ability to create CP - BUT THERE ISN'T. So any solution to the problem has to start here.

The next problem is that allies can give CP to allied armies. This creates a situation where allies are essential to run certain armies. This is inherently flawed because you should be able to run any army you want right out of your own codex. Allies should be an option but not a requirement. So any solution that uses allies as a crutch is also a failure.

Alternatively suggestions have been made that suggest CP/stratagems should only be available to your warlords faction. This is a failure because it completely kills allies - you should be able to take allies if you want - it should just not be autoinclude or a requirement to run your army. Allies give you the benifit of taking the best possible unit for a role that your base army lacks - in turn it should also have a negative associated with it.

From these three lines of thought - we (my good 40k buddy IRL) came to this solution. It solves all these problems simultaneously. Without forcing you to build your army any particular way. With every build available in the previous system still being potentially viable. The only place this system is weak - is with the current power level/ access to stratagems area of things. This might require balancing - IDK.

If it turns out IK starting with 15 CP is too much...we will increase the cost of their stratagems. Same thing with an army like custodes. Or any stratagem that is over-performing. Problem is right now we have no real metric to establish stratagem balance because all armies have unequal access to command points. This will fix that.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Desubot wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
What exactly are you guys trying to achieve now as this is going into changes that are borderline 8.5 edition.

Once Guard CP generation has been addressed/removed CP isn't why people are souping.

It's strategums, units and psykic powers, you can't address those directly but you can just put in a CP counter. Does it realy matter which detachment people take for allies?

Why are you trying to force people into mono subfaction of mono codex's?

Isnt the current thing to dump CP into relics? the whole thing about IG is that you can make a ton of CP, get a butt load of relics and still have more left over for other strats AND generate more.

going by the last few even lists at least.

i guess a fix might be to only allow you to buy relics for your primary detachment or lock stratagems to specific detachments so that you cant max out relics if you want to use some specific other strat.

but some one some where will complain about any changes eh?

Well the problem is more complicated than that. Yeah - that is what is happening. There is more than one problem though.
IG have the absolutely cheapest battalion and brigade. They offer a huge chunk of CP to start with. Basically with 500 points of IG in your army - you have more starting CP than most complete 2000 point armies. Unless they are spamming batallions which...only 1 army other than IG does that well - and it's tau. Tau can't take allies though (they don't have access to them) so nobody complain about them fueling soup.

So really - lets just focus on that. 500ish points of IG gets you more starting CP than most other armies 2000 point final product. Seems pretty unfair right? Well...it is.

Also on top of this - they also have the best ability to create CP in game per spent CP - with a free combo of relic and warlord trait. This is even more unfair.

What a bunch of uninspired people are suggesting to fix this problem that we remove CP regeneration from the game. Just go back to IG easily producing more base CP than everyone else. However every other army (I think 8 others have CP regen) also loses their regen (and it wasn't as good as the IG regen was to begin with). Somehow that is going to balance the game?

Your going to have to provide a bit more of a detailed list of what each detachment costs and which armies get to side step some of those costs.
SoS can only ever be taken in vanguard detachments even in a pure list.
Knights are superheavy or superheavy auxiliary but if a superheavy is 0 CP guard would still be better placed.
How do Primarchs fit in to this structure to?

jcd386 wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Wait why only focus on that.

its literally one of the biggest problem right now is using allies as a battery to fuel other stratagems. going by what is top 8ting.

like riddle me this. what would a 500 point IG brigade do with all the CP they can eat but cant hand them out to anyone else. what is worth casting for that army?

if you lock it down, people will be using IG less and less for their battery potential but can still run them for other things.



(my suggestion was to lock all CP to their own respective factions. 200 CP from IG will never touch a Blood angles captains shiny relic. anything that regens will only effect their own dice pool. the free base CP would need to be fixed or only function on the 3 base strats)

Because it makes it pretty pointless to ally in IG anymore, and makes armies that have three roughly even factions really hard to play, and it still doesn't solve the problem of some factions not being able to generate CP very well.

How so. you still have an ass load of bodies, decently strong options for cheap shooting. from what i recall decent double shot tank options for specific regis, only thing i dont know is what you would use those CP for.

also who cares if you cant generate more CP on some armies. yall ever thing you should be able to play the game without using CP as such a crutch? or that not all armies should have to use them as a crutch.

 Marmatag wrote:
No, adjusting imperial guard has to be the starting point, for any of these solutions.

Then, you need to adjust soup.

I disagree. The only thing wrong with the CP regen abilities is them stacking.

If you remove that, the next biggest issue becomes some factions having access to way too many CP for the points you pay for them.

Once you fix that, the issue becomes it's always better to have more factions vs only one.

Once you fix that, you can balance the individual factions.

 Desubot wrote:
Wait why only focus on that.

its literally one of the biggest problem right now is using allies as a battery to fuel other stratagems. going by what is top 8ting.

like riddle me this. what would a 500 point IG brigade do with all the CP they can eat but cant hand them out to anyone else. what is worth casting for that army?

if you lock it down, people will be using IG less and less for their battery potential but can still run them for other things.



(my suggestion was to lock all CP to their own respective factions. 200 CP from IG will never touch a Blood angles captains shiny relic. anything that regens will only effect their own dice pool. the free base CP would need to be fixed or only function on the 3 base strats)

Humm - IG certainly do better at giving CP to other armies - but they aren't space marine levels of bad here. They have good enough stratagems for their having more CP is still a real issue because their units are also better. For example they can give +1 armor to a unit on demand (has a similar benifit to eldar -1 to hit). They can also get +1 to hit against a single target for their whole army...that is really good too (comparable to the tau +1w stratagem). They also have a host of other things to dump CP into....like outflanking russes or shadowswords. Like - a lot of these armies were popular when the gaurd codex came out but before other armies came out that gave them better options. The IG armies were winning then and they are still winning now. Not much has changed except soup has made IG even better than before.

Restricting CP to the detachment that created them kills allies.
Imagine - your detachment of BA is all dead but didn't spend their CP (that is just wasted CP). Now Imagine you really need more CP for you BA captain but you can't because you have 20 CP on your imperial gaurd pool...it just doesn't work. It will kill allies if you do something like that. Which I am actually fine with that - I am just trying to make a solution that makes everyone happy. I would love to go back to mono armies.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
No, adjusting imperial guard has to be the starting point, for any of these solutions.

Then, you need to adjust soup.

You need to adjust soup before touching any armies.
End of story.

Any disagreement on that note is you just wanting to nerf one army.

You're both wrong. There are multiple codexes with units that are over-performing, all of which need to be addressed as well as soup and CP. See my post at the top of this page.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

jcd386 wrote:

Because it makes it pretty pointless to ally in IG anymore, and makes armies that have three roughly even factions really hard to play, and it still doesn't solve the problem of some factions not being able to generate CP very well.

Well, alternatively just make all CP regen non-matched play only. For matched-play and tournament, everyone gets, dunno, 10 CP flat, no regen. Done. Doesn't get more balanced than that for the variant of 40K that plays more towards the "test your skill/e-sport" angle than the background angle.

So screw everyone with a fixed CP regen warlord trait then? Nice to see a well though out and all impacts considered arguments being made.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Wait why only focus on that.

its literally one of the biggest problem right now is using allies as a battery to fuel other stratagems. going by what is top 8ting.

like riddle me this. what would a 500 point IG brigade do with all the CP they can eat but cant hand them out to anyone else. what is worth casting for that army?

if you lock it down, people will be using IG less and less for their battery potential but can still run them for other things.



(my suggestion was to lock all CP to their own respective factions. 200 CP from IG will never touch a Blood angles captains shiny relic. anything that regens will only effect their own dice pool. the free base CP would need to be fixed or only function on the 3 base strats)

Humm - IG certainly do better at giving CP to other armies - but they aren't space marine levels of bad here. They have good enough stratagems for their having more CP is still a real issue because their units are also better. For example they can give +1 armor to a unit on demand (has a similar benifit to eldar -1 to hit). They can also get +1 to hit against a single target for their whole army...that is really good too (comparable to the tau +1w stratagem). They also have a host of other things to dump CP into....like outflanking russes or shadowswords. Like - a lot of these armies were popular when the gaurd codex came out but before other armies came out that gave them better options. The IG armies were winning then and they are still winning now. Not much has changed except soup has made IG even better than before.

Restricting CP to the detachment that created them kills allies.
Imagine - your detachment of BA is all dead but didn't spend their CP (that is just wasted CP). Now Imagine you really need more CP for you BA captain but you can't because you have 20 CP on your imperial gaurd pool...it just doesn't work. It will kill allies if you do something like that. Which I am actually fine with that - I am just trying to make a solution that makes everyone happy. I would love to go back to mono armies.

Winning before.... i dont recall i know IG was strong but i could of sworn some one brough up that pure IG was pretty low on the list.

as for killing allies.... seriously you guys IG Still have a lot of good things to do that fill out a lot of problems for other armies.