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.

Ice_can wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
CP being reworked to be like Kill Team would make me absurdly happy. Something like:

1CP per turn base.

1CP per turn each turn your Warlord is alive.

1CP per turn for each non-auxiliary detachment you have that shares all faction keywords with your Warlord, 2CP if that detachment is a Brigade.

Current rules for CP generation/regeneration - so once per battle round.

You still get access to all stratagems for your allied detachments - they just don't generate CP.

I'd like that a lot more than a super-draconian "no soup for you" fix.

But you have created a no pregame strategums for you solution instead

I mean, I'd say an average army tends to be battleforged, have at least one detachment, and have a warlord, so you'd be starting from 3CP for your pre-game stratagems.

Want more pregame stratagems, bring more detachments? I don't know about you but I haven't seen too many armies that MUST spend more than 5CP pre turn 1 to exist and also are particularly good for the game.

the_scotsman wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
CP being reworked to be like Kill Team would make me absurdly happy. Something like:

1CP per turn base.

1CP per turn each turn your Warlord is alive.

1CP per turn for each non-auxiliary detachment you have that shares all faction keywords with your Warlord, 2CP if that detachment is a Brigade.

Current rules for CP generation/regeneration - so once per battle round.

You still get access to all stratagems for your allied detachments - they just don't generate CP.

I'd like that a lot more than a super-draconian "no soup for you" fix.

But you have created a no pregame strategums for you solution instead

I mean, I'd say an average army tends to be battleforged, have at least one detachment, and have a warlord, so you'd be starting from 3CP for your pre-game stratagems.

Want more pregame stratagems, bring more detachments? I don't know about you but I haven't seen too many armies that MUST spend more than 5CP pre turn 1 to exist and also are particularly good for the game.

So making a chapter master for marines and strategum for an assasin, oh ravenguard well no strike from the shadow for you.

Also what is the justification for more detachments equalling more CP'S, why does a more divided army become better at doing special manoeuvres?
The system as is has some glaring issues, but half of these "minor" fixes require rewriting entire codex's.

Sorry, this was a dumb question....removed.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'm not going to lie, is there any advantages to NOT taking a battleforged army? Like zero CP, all HQ? Is there a rule anywhere that states you are NOT allowed to play open/unaligned?

The manual states you "should" play organized rules, but is there anything saying I can't play with zero cp?

I mean, that would make an interesting offshoot style of play. ZERO cp, strength of list and units alone.

in pick up games yes, but I thin most tournaments would just say no. I have my orks allied to chaos marines, they share a lot so painting elements, leftover from 6th and 7th allies. friends have no issues and I do play it without any CP nd its still fun... but win rate is sub 50% unless we are jsu tboth playing zero CP.

The best IMHO solution for CP farming is this:

Detachments that don't share at least one keyword (excluding Imperium, Chaos, Aeldari, and Tyranid) with the detachment that includes your Warlord are considered Allied Detachments. Allied Detachments:

- Do not get army traits
- Do not get relics
- Do not unlock stratagems
- Generate half the normal CP (rounding down)

Clean and simple. It doesn't remove soup but removes the parts that constantly get abused, while not affecting fluffy players since they are likely not souping for min/maxing so wouldn't care if their allied detachments don't get certain things.

Wayniac wrote:
The best IMHO solution for CP farming is this:

Detachments that don't share at least one keyword (excluding Imperium, Chaos, Aeldari, and Tyranid) with the detachment that includes your Warlord are considered Allied Detachments. Allied Detachments:

- Do not get army traits
- Do not get relics
- Do not unlock stratagems
- Generate half the normal CP (rounding down)

Clean and simple. It doesn't remove soup but removes the parts that constantly get abused, while not affecting fluffy players since they are likely not souping for min/maxing so wouldn't care if their allied detachments don't get certain things.

So, no assassins. No knight armies with allies. Literally no one would do this except Orks, Tau, Necrons, and Eldar who still have Doom and point efficient units.

Now that fluffy army isn't terribly fluffy when it can't do what it usually does.

Why don't you just call it like it is - no soup allowed?

Honestly, why not do away with CP, and make strats the same as tactical objectives?

Draw up to 3 at the start of your turn, etc etc. That way it's completely random, you can't abuse them, and it makes a lopsided match actually playable and fun.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

[...], and Eldar who still have Doom and point efficient units.
[...]

Unless they include DE. Or Harlies. Or Ynnari. Each of those would lose out on all of the above.

Pure CWE wouldn't be impacted. But this is a fix for CP farming, and CWE do that worse than even Marines.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(I agree with you that we need to not kill Soup when reballancing, and the proposed suggestion might go too far.)

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Honestly, why not do away with CP, and make strats the same as tactical objectives?

Draw up to 3 at the start of your turn, etc etc. That way it's completely random, you can't abuse them, and it makes a lopsided match actually playable and fun.

God no.

I play magic for that experience

Ice_can wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
CP being reworked to be like Kill Team would make me absurdly happy. Something like:

1CP per turn base.

1CP per turn each turn your Warlord is alive.

1CP per turn for each non-auxiliary detachment you have that shares all faction keywords with your Warlord, 2CP if that detachment is a Brigade.

Current rules for CP generation/regeneration - so once per battle round.

You still get access to all stratagems for your allied detachments - they just don't generate CP.

I'd like that a lot more than a super-draconian "no soup for you" fix.

But you have created a no pregame strategums for you solution instead

I mean, I'd say an average army tends to be battleforged, have at least one detachment, and have a warlord, so you'd be starting from 3CP for your pre-game stratagems.

Want more pregame stratagems, bring more detachments? I don't know about you but I haven't seen too many armies that MUST spend more than 5CP pre turn 1 to exist and also are particularly good for the game.

So making a chapter master for marines and strategum for an assasin, oh ravenguard well no strike from the shadow for you.

Also what is the justification for more detachments equalling more CP'S, why does a more divided army become better at doing special manoeuvres?
The system as is has some glaring issues, but half of these "minor" fixes require rewriting entire codex's.

The goal of any proposed fix is to correct existing problems, preserve aspects of the game people seem to like, and add the minimum number of potential extra problems.

The issue I take with BCB's solution that he made above is that while it does correct a problem that a vocal many are complaining about (soup armies using allied detachments to "fuel" elite detachments with CP's) it creates major problems for a large number of the factions that exist in the game, and does nothing to address the general higher power of "horde' type armies over "elite" type armies at CP generation and use.

I feel that under BCB's solution, he would remove the current meta of soup with fueled elites added on that we see in the current competitive meta, and replace it with an even more restrictive meta of primarily just imperial guard+eldar soup/ynnari and whatever other factions are able to successfully spam light infantry to fill brigades and battalions while still retaining their teeth.

In effect, I think the problems it would leave in place would be just as bad as the problems it fixes. A guard army would only wipe you off the board marginally less efficiently by dumping its CP's/support into a Baneblade chassis as a shooty knight. Eldar are largely indifferent to having tons of CP from allied detachments, it's a trick they tend not to use, instead favoring just bringing either tons of craftworld flyers or Ynnari elites, or both, none of which really use tons of CP.

So I'd rather see something that would address what I see as a more core issue than the symptom we're seeing now: the relatively large gap between a CP-flush army and a CP-starved army, and the fact that it is very possible and optimal to spend all or almost all your CP pool in a single turn to frontload all the power in a list.

The problems of first turn being a be-all-end-all, the ITC "quasi-deathstar" meta, Cp-fueling soup detachments are all symptomatic problems of the underlying issue of the benefits of employing command points multiplicatively. You get double the impact out of the 3D6 charge stratagem and +D3A stratagem on your BA smash captain if he then proceeds to attack twice, and triple the impact if your target kills him and he gets to attack a third time. You get double the impact of the "attack characters with your seeker missile" knight stratagem if that knight then also rerolls all results of 1 for the turn.

So much of the game can shoot across the whole board or reliably appear and be in close combat that it now makes sense to dump all your command points turn 1 or turn 2 if you're a melee army and that's when you arrive.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
If you change the CP, it will be in something other than a FAQ. Maybe a CA, but it would be game altering, and FAQs generally aren't game altering...

Beta Rules have been - didn't they alter CPs for stuff like Battalions in a big faq?

Yea, last year big FAQ 1 they changed points and for big FAQ 2 they declared point changes will only be in chapter approved.
Now they even publish rules in White Dwarf, so they really have to much places to change the rules.

Marin wrote:
for big FAQ 2 they declared point changes will only be in chapter approved.

I don't recall such a declaration.

the_scotsman wrote:

Spoiler:

Ice_can wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
CP being reworked to be like Kill Team would make me absurdly happy. Something like:

1CP per turn base.

1CP per turn each turn your Warlord is alive.

1CP per turn for each non-auxiliary detachment you have that shares all faction keywords with your Warlord, 2CP if that detachment is a Brigade.

Current rules for CP generation/regeneration - so once per battle round.

You still get access to all stratagems for your allied detachments - they just don't generate CP.

I'd like that a lot more than a super-draconian "no soup for you" fix.

But you have created a no pregame strategums for you solution instead

I mean, I'd say an average army tends to be battleforged, have at least one detachment, and have a warlord, so you'd be starting from 3CP for your pre-game stratagems.

Want more pregame stratagems, bring more detachments? I don't know about you but I haven't seen too many armies that MUST spend more than 5CP pre turn 1 to exist and also are particularly good for the game.

So making a chapter master for marines and strategum for an assasin, oh ravenguard well no strike from the shadow for you.

Also what is the justification for more detachments equalling more CP'S, why does a more divided army become better at doing special manoeuvres?
The system as is has some glaring issues, but half of these "minor" fixes require rewriting entire codex's.

The goal of any proposed fix is to correct existing problems, preserve aspects of the game people seem to like, and add the minimum number of potential extra problems.

The issue I take with BCB's solution that he made above is that while it does correct a problem that a vocal many are complaining about (soup armies using allied detachments to "fuel" elite detachments with CP's) it creates major problems for a large number of the factions that exist in the game, and does nothing to address the general higher power of "horde' type armies over "elite" type armies at CP generation and use.

I feel that under BCB's solution, he would remove the current meta of soup with fueled elites added on that we see in the current competitive meta, and replace it with an even more restrictive meta of primarily just imperial guard+eldar soup/ynnari and whatever other factions are able to successfully spam light infantry to fill brigades and battalions while still retaining their teeth.

In effect, I think the problems it would leave in place would be just as bad as the problems it fixes. A guard army would only wipe you off the board marginally less efficiently by dumping its CP's/support into a Baneblade chassis as a shooty knight. Eldar are largely indifferent to having tons of CP from allied detachments, it's a trick they tend not to use, instead favoring just bringing either tons of craftworld flyers or Ynnari elites, or both, none of which really use tons of CP.

So I'd rather see something that would address what I see as a more core issue than the symptom we're seeing now: the relatively large gap between a CP-flush army and a CP-starved army, and the fact that it is very possible and optimal to spend all or almost all your CP pool in a single turn to frontload all the power in a list.

The problems of first turn being a be-all-end-all, the ITC "quasi-deathstar" meta, Cp-fueling soup detachments are all symptomatic problems of the underlying issue of the benefits of employing command points multiplicatively. You get double the impact out of the 3D6 charge stratagem and +D3A stratagem on your BA smash captain if he then proceeds to attack twice, and triple the impact if your target kills him and he gets to attack a third time. You get double the impact of the "attack characters with your seeker missile" knight stratagem if that knight then also rerolls all results of 1 for the turn.

So much of the game can shoot across the whole board or reliably appear and be in close combat that it now makes sense to dump all your command points turn 1 or turn 2 if you're a melee army and that's when you arrive.

I get what your saying and in fairness none of what your saying do I particularly disagree with, the problem is that the solution doesn't to me work as it still fundamentally rewards breaking your army up into as many detachments as possible, that to me inherently feels backwards.

Also why do people keep going along with GW insistence that more troops should equal more CP, I get marines have some terrible per point troup choices, but many armies are rewarded for taking cheap effective units on mass?

Their is also some other points to bring up about the front loading of CP I know Tau for example do have issues in that regardless of the CP distribution are always going to be forced into front loading as much of their CP spend as possible as they need lots of markerlights for optimum performance and they tend to get swept off the board pdq by competent opponents.

Ice_can wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

Spoiler:

Ice_can wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
CP being reworked to be like Kill Team would make me absurdly happy. Something like:

1CP per turn base.

1CP per turn each turn your Warlord is alive.

1CP per turn for each non-auxiliary detachment you have that shares all faction keywords with your Warlord, 2CP if that detachment is a Brigade.

Current rules for CP generation/regeneration - so once per battle round.

You still get access to all stratagems for your allied detachments - they just don't generate CP.

I'd like that a lot more than a super-draconian "no soup for you" fix.

But you have created a no pregame strategums for you solution instead

I mean, I'd say an average army tends to be battleforged, have at least one detachment, and have a warlord, so you'd be starting from 3CP for your pre-game stratagems.

Want more pregame stratagems, bring more detachments? I don't know about you but I haven't seen too many armies that MUST spend more than 5CP pre turn 1 to exist and also are particularly good for the game.

So making a chapter master for marines and strategum for an assasin, oh ravenguard well no strike from the shadow for you.

Also what is the justification for more detachments equalling more CP'S, why does a more divided army become better at doing special manoeuvres?
The system as is has some glaring issues, but half of these "minor" fixes require rewriting entire codex's.

The goal of any proposed fix is to correct existing problems, preserve aspects of the game people seem to like, and add the minimum number of potential extra problems.

The issue I take with BCB's solution that he made above is that while it does correct a problem that a vocal many are complaining about (soup armies using allied detachments to "fuel" elite detachments with CP's) it creates major problems for a large number of the factions that exist in the game, and does nothing to address the general higher power of "horde' type armies over "elite" type armies at CP generation and use.

I feel that under BCB's solution, he would remove the current meta of soup with fueled elites added on that we see in the current competitive meta, and replace it with an even more restrictive meta of primarily just imperial guard+eldar soup/ynnari and whatever other factions are able to successfully spam light infantry to fill brigades and battalions while still retaining their teeth.

In effect, I think the problems it would leave in place would be just as bad as the problems it fixes. A guard army would only wipe you off the board marginally less efficiently by dumping its CP's/support into a Baneblade chassis as a shooty knight. Eldar are largely indifferent to having tons of CP from allied detachments, it's a trick they tend not to use, instead favoring just bringing either tons of craftworld flyers or Ynnari elites, or both, none of which really use tons of CP.

So I'd rather see something that would address what I see as a more core issue than the symptom we're seeing now: the relatively large gap between a CP-flush army and a CP-starved army, and the fact that it is very possible and optimal to spend all or almost all your CP pool in a single turn to frontload all the power in a list.

The problems of first turn being a be-all-end-all, the ITC "quasi-deathstar" meta, Cp-fueling soup detachments are all symptomatic problems of the underlying issue of the benefits of employing command points multiplicatively. You get double the impact out of the 3D6 charge stratagem and +D3A stratagem on your BA smash captain if he then proceeds to attack twice, and triple the impact if your target kills him and he gets to attack a third time. You get double the impact of the "attack characters with your seeker missile" knight stratagem if that knight then also rerolls all results of 1 for the turn.

So much of the game can shoot across the whole board or reliably appear and be in close combat that it now makes sense to dump all your command points turn 1 or turn 2 if you're a melee army and that's when you arrive.

I get what your saying and in fairness none of what your saying do I particularly disagree with, the problem is that the solution doesn't to me work as it still fundamentally rewards breaking your army up into as many detachments as possible, that to me inherently feels backwards.

Also why do people keep going along with GW insistence that more troops should equal more CP, I get marines have some terrible per point troup choices, but many armies are rewarded for taking cheap effective units on mass?

Their is also some other points to bring up about the front loading of CP I know Tau for example do have issues in that regardless of the CP distribution are always going to be forced into front loading as much of their CP spend as possible as they need lots of markerlights for optimum performance and they tend to get swept off the board pdq by competent opponents.

I assume that the current 3-detachment limit at 2k will still be in place, making the maximum CP per turn you could functionally get would be about 5, and the most you could possibly get would be 8 if you could somehow squeeze 3 brigades (I don't think that is currently possible in 2k).

So, an army with a brigade as its only detachment would actually end up with less CP than an all-bike army that had 3 different fast attack slot detachments, the real point of a Brigade would be to unlock the freedom of having 6 slots of all the types. Note that Battalions would change to being worth only 1 cp per turn, the same as smaller detachments, with the main benefit being unlocking 3 of each slot and 6 troop slots - I agree with you that "troops should be worse than other models" is a stupid, outdated philosophy and we aren't currently living that world.

The main difference of a brigade that I think makes it worth more than other detachments is that the minimum buy-in is almost always an order of magnitude more than a battalion since few armies have the hat trick of cheap elites, cheap fast, AND cheap heavy.

Also, protecting markerlights for Tau has not been a problem at all in 8th, and if you follow their competitive builds you know that primarily markerlights come out of Firesight marksmen and a few, high impact but CP-light stratagems for concentrating or spreading markers. In most cases the only markerlight effect you actually want is the first anyway, so having BS3+ models with character protections laying down 1 is usually all you need to get the benefit out of it, and if you do need ignore cover, usually spending 1cp is worth it to remove that for your whole army.

Again though I think it needs to be asked: Why are tau armies getting wiped early on, forcing them to frontload their CP expenditure? Is it because they are weak as an army, or because other armies are dragging them in to an arms race whereby it is more effective to spend your CP turn 1 because turn 2 your CP-spenders or your force multipliers might all be dead?

A fairly simple fix to alter the CP maxing problem would be to bump a Battalion requirements to include at least 1 fast, 1 elite and 1 heavy support choice. If a damn brigade has to take 3 of each of those, a battalion should at least require 1. This would at least make the Loyal 32 add some mortars, a sentinel, etc. It doesn't completely eliminate the problem (some armies have super cheap options in these slots), but it does change the dynamic somewhat and make a detachment look more like a cohesive force.

the_scotsman wrote:
CP being reworked to be like Kill Team would make me absurdly happy. Something like:

1CP per turn base.

1CP per turn each turn your Warlord is alive.

1CP per turn for each non-auxiliary detachment you have that shares all faction keywords with your Warlord, 2CP if that detachment is a Brigade.

Current rules for CP generation/regeneration - so once per battle round.

You still get access to all stratagems for your allied detachments - they just don't generate CP.

I'd like that a lot more than a super-draconian "no soup for you" fix.

This is another fix that would destroy DE. We (A) Can't run a brigade. (b) can't realistically run more than 2 detachments of the same faction (Kabal/Cult/Coven) as we run out of HQs even using special characters. (c) are designed to be run with all 3 things in different detachments as a mono codex. I'm quite in favour of per turn CP, but all the CP fixes people suggest seem to just blow apart mono DE.

Khorne Daemons would be pretty dead as well unless they got innate Deep Strike back.

Realistically to fix the overall issues, somebody is going to have to suffer. There won't be any way around it.

Wayniac wrote:
Realistically to fix the overall issues, somebody is going to have to suffer. There won't be any way around it.

Try recosting autotakes first. Marines have a ridiculous number of units to choose from. Doesn't help a lick.

 bullyboy wrote:
A fairly simple fix to alter the CP maxing problem would be to bump a Battalion requirements to include at least 1 fast, 1 elite and 1 heavy support choice. If a damn brigade has to take 3 of each of those, a battalion should at least require 1. This would at least make the Loyal 32 add some mortars, a sentinel, etc. It doesn't completely eliminate the problem (some armies have super cheap options in these slots), but it does change the dynamic somewhat and make a detachment look more like a cohesive force.

I like this idea! Only problem: I play Custodes. So you are making my ability to play games under 1750 basically impossible with anything other than a single assassin as a ally. Forget a 340pt execution force.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
A fairly simple fix to alter the CP maxing problem would be to bump a Battalion requirements to include at least 1 fast, 1 elite and 1 heavy support choice. If a damn brigade has to take 3 of each of those, a battalion should at least require 1. This would at least make the Loyal 32 add some mortars, a sentinel, etc. It doesn't completely eliminate the problem (some armies have super cheap options in these slots), but it does change the dynamic somewhat and make a detachment look more like a cohesive force.

I like this idea! Only problem: I play Custodes. So you are making my ability to play games under 1750 basically impossible with anything other than a single assassin as a ally. Forget a 340pt execution force.

And for armies that don't have something in one or more of those slots? That would just force them to never take a battalion.

Drager wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
A fairly simple fix to alter the CP maxing problem would be to bump a Battalion requirements to include at least 1 fast, 1 elite and 1 heavy support choice. If a damn brigade has to take 3 of each of those, a battalion should at least require 1. This would at least make the Loyal 32 add some mortars, a sentinel, etc. It doesn't completely eliminate the problem (some armies have super cheap options in these slots), but it does change the dynamic somewhat and make a detachment look more like a cohesive force.

I like this idea! Only problem: I play Custodes. So you are making my ability to play games under 1750 basically impossible with anything other than a single assassin as a ally. Forget a 340pt execution force.

And for armies that don't have something in one or more of those slots? That would just force them to never take a battalion.

And now we are again at apoint where you could argue that armies that don't have any of these slots should not be armies.
Not saying per see it should be that way, but it would also free up some rules clatter.

It doesn't solve anything though, it just penalises armies without decent HS /FA/Elite choices.

Not Online!!! wrote:
And now we are again at apoint where you could argue that armies that don't have any of these slots should not be armies.
Not saying per see it should be that way, but it would also free up some rules clatter.

I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be able to take a Necron Battalion below 1000pts without taking some proper garbage units. Some armies naturally lean towards different specialisms (Elites, Heavy Supports, Fast Attacks, etc etc.) and the buy-in is that you only have to take HQs and you "have" to take Troops. Make me take an elite and a HS every game and suddenly I can't play below 1000pts without playing garbage like min-squad Deathmarks and Canoptek Spiders.

Drager wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
CP being reworked to be like Kill Team would make me absurdly happy. Something like:

1CP per turn base.

1CP per turn each turn your Warlord is alive.

1CP per turn for each non-auxiliary detachment you have that shares all faction keywords with your Warlord, 2CP if that detachment is a Brigade.

Current rules for CP generation/regeneration - so once per battle round.

You still get access to all stratagems for your allied detachments - they just don't generate CP.

I'd like that a lot more than a super-draconian "no soup for you" fix.

This is another fix that would destroy DE. We (A) Can't run a brigade. (b) can't realistically run more than 2 detachments of the same faction (Kabal/Cult/Coven) as we run out of HQs even using special characters. (c) are designed to be run with all 3 things in different detachments as a mono codex. I'm quite in favour of per turn CP, but all the CP fixes people suggest seem to just blow apart mono DE.

a) de is one of the major factions I play, and I was looking to be conscious to them specifically since I know they run differently. b) you'll notice that the CP generation of battalions and, for example, outrider detachments is now the same, so you will not run out of Hq slots as far fewer of them will be required minimum to run a cohesive army, c) as BCB pointed out, if De prove to be an exceptional case the triple patrol rule can easily be reworked to allow each patrol to generate a command point rather than the current (not super functional) version of the rule that exists right now.

The thing about this solution is that power gaming how much CP you get will include less reward if CPs are spread out over time. Ultimately, having just your warlord, battleforged,a nd the detachment your warlord is in grants you 3cp/turn. The common average I would assume would be around 4 - it makes sense to include 1 other small detachment aligned with your warlord or to expand your warlord's detachment out to a Brigade to get that fourth CP per turn, but then I'd think that the benefit of getting a souped detachment as your 3rd would work out to be better in almost all cases than stretching to get that fifth CP per turn.

An army designed to really maximise CP right now has 20 or more, plus regeneration. An army designed to disregard CP has about 4-5 (basically any army that eschews having a Battalion or bigger). That is a much bigger gulf than an army optimized for CP generation getting 5 per turn and an army not optimized at all getting 3, or I guess in some really extreme cases like your warlord being a lone knight in a super heavy aux, getting 2.

Personally, I think the best solution for CP generation is the following:

Return Battalions to 3CPs, Brigaded to 9CPs per the start of 8E.
Allow Detahcments that share 2+ Faction keywords (or 1 Keyword that is NOT Imperium, Chaos, Aeldari, etc) with the Army's Warlord to generate double CPs.

Now Battalions that share enough Keyword with you WL give 6CPs, thus encouraging Faction focus without being too detrimental to Soup.
Loyal 32 would still be needed for Knight lists for the bodies and would still grant 3CPs to them, while the Knight detachment (which would have the Army WL) would get double CPs. Although admittedly, this might require the Knights special detachment CPs reworked alongside.

For Soup, this might be a wash, or just slightly less CPs than now, but it would be a big bonus for lists that focus on a single Faction.

-

 bullyboy wrote:
A fairly simple fix to alter the CP maxing problem would be to bump a Battalion requirements to include at least 1 fast, 1 elite and 1 heavy support choice. If a damn brigade has to take 3 of each of those, a battalion should at least require 1. This would at least make the Loyal 32 add some mortars, a sentinel, etc. It doesn't completely eliminate the problem (some armies have super cheap options in these slots), but it does change the dynamic somewhat and make a detachment look more like a cohesive force.

Then Scions can’t be run in battalions. They don’t have those.

 Apple Peel wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
A fairly simple fix to alter the CP maxing problem would be to bump a Battalion requirements to include at least 1 fast, 1 elite and 1 heavy support choice. If a damn brigade has to take 3 of each of those, a battalion should at least require 1. This would at least make the Loyal 32 add some mortars, a sentinel, etc. It doesn't completely eliminate the problem (some armies have super cheap options in these slots), but it does change the dynamic somewhat and make a detachment look more like a cohesive force.

Then Scions can’t be run in battalions. They don’t have those.

As a former IG player, I would humbly submit that Scions were never meant to be a stand alone army. They are part and parcel to IG. Maybe a sole detachment, but never a sole army.

On CP I still think set amount of CP per game turn would be best. Say 3 CP per turn, batallion adds 1 per turn, brigade adds 2 per turn. these bonus CP can only be spent on units from that detachments. IE Castellen can only use the 3 but if you take loyal 32 plus heavy weapons squad go ahead and use that cp to reroll a hit or pass a morale or whatever you can do for 1 cp

I'm really tired of seeing minimal detachments. I think the game might be better with full detachments. I'd rather see someone with a full battalion rewarded more than someone with 2 minimum size battalions.