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.
Galef wrote: Given the choice between CPs being generated by detachments OR points/power level, I'd prefer points/power level.
However, I think a combination of the two would be best. Otherwise if we move to something like "5CPs per 500pts/20PL" then suddenly Battalions and Brigades that have a high unit investment are worthless and everyone will gravitate towards Spearheads/Outriders/Vanguards
Therefore a better solution would be to have Battlalions and Brigades be the ONLY detachments that grant CPs, but only like 2 for Battalion, 5 or so for a Brigade.
That way there is incentive to take them, but the gap isn't so large since MOST CPs are generated for Battle-Forged base on army size
-
A 2K games give you 12 CP.
- 1 CP for each detachment after the first.
-1 CP for each Faction taken after the first.
You take a Craftworld/Ynarri/Drukari soup? 8 CP.
Technically wouldn't that be 6CP? If you take all 3 factions you lose 2 CP, each faction then requires its own detachment so there is another -2, so if you take 3 factions you automatically lose 4 CP.
This is btw, a very good idea and a decent idea at ending soup. Knight armies can now take a knight army and still have 12 CP as opposed to relying on the IG battery pack. If they like souping or they really want those loyal 32, they can take them, its just -2 to their CP I like it. A subtle kick in the balls to soup armies.
Depends on how you want to count it I guess. My vision is the first Detachment and Faction is free. So if you take a Ultramarine Battalion, 12 CP. Add in Super heavy Aux for Gman, down to 11 CP (-1 for second detachment), and if you then added in a Excution force of Assassins down to 9 CP.
Start with 12 CP First detachment and faction ultramarine battalion for Free.
-1 for 2nd detachment (Gman)
-1 for 3rd detachment (assassins)
-1 for 2nd Faction (assassins)
= 9 CP.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bharring wrote: I'm less worried about losing to pure-Knight lists that can get a 3++ every turn than single-Castellian Soup lists that can get a 3++ every turn. The pure-Knight list will struggle to adapt. If I can force an early declaration of RIS, I can put most of my firepower into a different Knight, and try to win by outpositioning. You can't do that against a horde of IG frontrunning the Knight.
MonoKnight lists aren't that scary, competitively, for more reasons than just not having enough CP.
All true. if you do Guard and Raven Castellan, for 10 CP.. Down to 8 if you give it Cawl's and Ion Bulwork.
8 doesn't go far with that Castellan.
Yeah - this is good stuff.
I guess I'm going to be told that no once cares about DE again, as tends to happen when I point out this stuff messes them up as a mono faction. If I was playing Flayed Skull/Red Grief/Prophets of Flesh in 3 detachements would that leave me with 10 CP or 8 under your system? Also being less than other mono factions and having to pay a HQ tax just to access more than 1/3 of the units in the codex would suck. It's hard now even getting extra CPs for taking more detachments as I either have to take an Outrider/Spearhead/Vanguard or buy an extra HQ and 3 Troops on top of the 5-6 troops I actually want (and they have to be different and inferior for the build). Punishing that further would just make me give up on trying to make a mono list work and only play soup.
Xenomancers wrote: tech marines are so bad they might as well not exist.
They're dirt cheap HQs now.
They don't do anything.
They can carry the Eye of Hypnoth in an Imperial Fist Seige Breaker detachment. And repair the Dreads you're probably taking there. And they do have a very interesting gun available.
I think you are off on thinking that a 1-4 CP penalty will cause all soup to disapear, people just will need to make a choice about which they value more the CP, or the flexibilty of soup.
Too bad this flexibility of soup is apparently only tied with Imperium and mostly Imperial Knights with Imperial Guard. People seem to forget easily that Aeldari have a super faction called Ynnari that more or less have all Aeldari except covens in a single army. Giving a -1 to CP/Detachment is a blanket nerf just to nerf a single combo.
Plus this -1 CP for faction/detachments is made purely to spite Drukhari players who have a faction built on multiple detachment shenanigans.
I am actually getting on board with the idea of removing stratagems and make them hero/unit level command abilities(we can call it Command Stratagem) a la Age of Sigmar and have CP be generated per turn like AoS and Kill Team. That would be the only proper method that would appease most people. It would also force you to take certain heroes/units to get that command stratagem instead of the current buffet we have.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/16 16:07:37
I think you are off on thinking that a 1-4 CP penalty will cause all soup to disapear, people just will need to make a choice about which they value more the CP, or the flexibilty of soup.
Too bad this flexibility of soup is apparently only tied with Imperium and mostly Imperial Knights with Imperial Guard. People seem to forget easily that Aeldari have a super faction called Ynnari that more or less have all Aeldari except covens in a single army. Giving a -1 to CP/Detachment is a blanket nerf just to nerf a single combo.
Plus this -1 CP for faction/detachments is made purely to spite Drukhari players who have a faction built on multiple detachment shenanigans.
I am actually getting on board with the idea of removing stratagems and make them hero/unit level command abilities(we can call it Command Stratagem) a la Age of Sigmar and have CP be generated per turn like AoS and Kill Team. That would be the only proper method that would appease most people. It would also force you to take certain heroes/units to get that command stratagem instead of the current buffet we have.
Except nothing stops Ynnari armies in a single detachment, you just don't get to power game the system with Ynnari spears/ reapers, then Alitoc-2 to hit rangers and flyers and Drukari FnP and vect.
You can have 12 CP if you just stick to an actual Ynnari army not some grand Aldari Soup.
Galef wrote: Given the choice between CPs being generated by detachments OR points/power level, I'd prefer points/power level.
However, I think a combination of the two would be best. Otherwise if we move to something like "5CPs per 500pts/20PL" then suddenly Battalions and Brigades that have a high unit investment are worthless and everyone will gravitate towards Spearheads/Outriders/Vanguards
Therefore a better solution would be to have Battlalions and Brigades be the ONLY detachments that grant CPs, but only like 2 for Battalion, 5 or so for a Brigade.
That way there is incentive to take them, but the gap isn't so large since MOST CPs are generated for Battle-Forged base on army size
-
A 2K games give you 12 CP.
- 1 CP for each detachment after the first.
-1 CP for each Faction taken after the first.
You take a Craftworld/Ynarri/Drukari soup? 8 CP.
Technically wouldn't that be 6CP? If you take all 3 factions you lose 2 CP, each faction then requires its own detachment so there is another -2, so if you take 3 factions you automatically lose 4 CP.
This is btw, a very good idea and a decent idea at ending soup. Knight armies can now take a knight army and still have 12 CP as opposed to relying on the IG battery pack. If they like souping or they really want those loyal 32, they can take them, its just -2 to their CP I like it. A subtle kick in the balls to soup armies.
Depends on how you want to count it I guess. My vision is the first Detachment and Faction is free. So if you take a Ultramarine Battalion, 12 CP. Add in Super heavy Aux for Gman, down to 11 CP (-1 for second detachment), and if you then added in a Excution force of Assassins down to 9 CP.
Start with 12 CP First detachment and faction ultramarine battalion for Free.
-1 for 2nd detachment (Gman)
-1 for 3rd detachment (assassins)
-1 for 2nd Faction (assassins)
= 9 CP.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bharring wrote: I'm less worried about losing to pure-Knight lists that can get a 3++ every turn than single-Castellian Soup lists that can get a 3++ every turn. The pure-Knight list will struggle to adapt. If I can force an early declaration of RIS, I can put most of my firepower into a different Knight, and try to win by outpositioning. You can't do that against a horde of IG frontrunning the Knight.
MonoKnight lists aren't that scary, competitively, for more reasons than just not having enough CP.
All true. if you do Guard and Raven Castellan, for 10 CP.. Down to 8 if you give it Cawl's and Ion Bulwork.
8 doesn't go far with that Castellan.
Yeah - this is good stuff.
I guess I'm going to be told that no once cares about DE again, as tends to happen when I point out this stuff messes them up as a mono faction. If I was playing Flayed Skull/Red Grief/Prophets of Flesh in 3 detachements would that leave me with 10 CP or 8 under your system? Also being less than other mono factions and having to pay a HQ tax just to access more than 1/3 of the units in the codex would suck. It's hard now even getting extra CPs for taking more detachments as I either have to take an Outrider/Spearhead/Vanguard or buy an extra HQ and 3 Troops on top of the 5-6 troops I actually want (and they have to be different and inferior for the build). Punishing that further would just make me give up on trying to make a mono list work and only play soup.
Really having 10CP over what double battalion and spear head for 14 total under the current system is too much of a nerf?
You can maybe argue starting at 12 is a bit low but 2 CP to be able to pick the best subfaction traits doesn't seem like a cost that's high enough to render them unplayable, just enough of a downside to balance out the benifit of having the best subfaction traits for each set of units.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/16 16:30:37
I think you are off on thinking that a 1-4 CP penalty will cause all soup to disapear, people just will need to make a choice about which they value more the CP, or the flexibilty of soup.
Too bad this flexibility of soup is apparently only tied with Imperium and mostly Imperial Knights with Imperial Guard. People seem to forget easily that Aeldari have a super faction called Ynnari that more or less have all Aeldari except covens in a single army. Giving a -1 to CP/Detachment is a blanket nerf just to nerf a single combo.
Plus this -1 CP for faction/detachments is made purely to spite Drukhari players who have a faction built on multiple detachment shenanigans.
I am actually getting on board with the idea of removing stratagems and make them hero/unit level command abilities(we can call it Command Stratagem) a la Age of Sigmar and have CP be generated per turn like AoS and Kill Team. That would be the only proper method that would appease most people. It would also force you to take certain heroes/units to get that command stratagem instead of the current buffet we have.
Except nothing stops Ynnari armies in a single detachment, you just don't get to power game the system with Ynnari spears/ reapers, then Alitoc-2 to hit rangers and flyers and Drukari FnP and vect.
You can have 12 CP if you just stick to an actual Ynnari army not some grand Aldari Soup.
Yes it does. The rules for Ynarri stop it, unless you don't want to have Craftworlders and Drukharii and Harlequins in one army... which is the whole point from a fluff perspective. If theya re just a special character then, sure.
Ice_can wrote: Except nothing stops Ynnari armies in a single detachment,....
Except, of course, the Matched Play amendment for Battle Brothers that disallows detachemtns from sharing specific Keywords, including YNNARI, along with AELDARI, CHAOS, IMPERIUM, etc
You still have to organize them in CWE, DE or Harlie detachments separately. For now at least. The May White Dwarf is likely to change how Ynnari work fairly dramatically.
Most likely making Soulbursts into Stratagems, which would mean the -1CP suggestion on additional detachments would disproportionally punish mixed Ynnari lists
I guess I'm going to be told that no once cares about DE again, as tends to happen when I point out this stuff messes them up as a mono faction. If I was playing Flayed Skull/Red Grief/Prophets of Flesh in 3 detachements would that leave me with 10 CP or 8 under your system? Also being less than other mono factions and having to pay a HQ tax just to access more than 1/3 of the units in the codex would suck. It's hard now even getting extra CPs for taking more detachments as I either have to take an Outrider/Spearhead/Vanguard or buy an extra HQ and 3 Troops on top of the 5-6 troops I actually want (and they have to be different and inferior for the build). Punishing that further would just make me give up on trying to make a mono list work and only play soup.
Chances are their needs to be a Faction list. Drukari isn't a good one, as its sort of the equivalent of Adeptus Astartes. but thats beyond my pay grade. And where does it stop? I run Knights as House Tanaris.. Does adding in House Krast stop me now? Still pure knights?
Overall I think its best to define factions on the Chapter level of Spacemarines. But that would leave you with choosing a cult, and Knight players choosing a house, and Nide players choosing a hive type, and Craftworld Eldar choosing a specific Craftworld.
Xenomancers wrote: tech marines are so bad they might as well not exist.
That also didn't used to be the case. Warlocks used to be cheaper than tech marines but they got nerfed because of Ynnari. Warlocks are currently extremely overcosted.
Techmarines are best bought attached to a Thunderfire Cannon.
Agreed - they aren't HQ int hat case though.
True, but at leas their useful. Servitors suck too much anymore for Techmarines to be good.
Thinking about it, I'd rather see mono <faction> armies get a bonus than mark it as a penalty. Like if your army shares the same <faction> keyword get +3 CP. Phrasing it that ways makes it sound like a reward for having a single faction instead of a punishment for taking multiple factions.
Isn't a servitor at this point a 2-point T3 4+ body with a single imperial guard powerfist attack?
I'm fairly sure I ran the numbers on them at some point and relized if they could be taken in any significant numbers (you are limited to a total of 12 since they're fixed unit size 4) they would be crazy OP.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
I guess I'm going to be told that no once cares about DE again, as tends to happen when I point out this stuff messes them up as a mono faction. If I was playing Flayed Skull/Red Grief/Prophets of Flesh in 3 detachements would that leave me with 10 CP or 8 under your system? Also being less than other mono factions and having to pay a HQ tax just to access more than 1/3 of the units in the codex would suck. It's hard now even getting extra CPs for taking more detachments as I either have to take an Outrider/Spearhead/Vanguard or buy an extra HQ and 3 Troops on top of the 5-6 troops I actually want (and they have to be different and inferior for the build). Punishing that further would just make me give up on trying to make a mono list work and only play soup.
Chances are their needs to be a Faction list. Drukari isn't a good one, as its sort of the equivalent of Adeptus Astartes. but thats beyond my pay grade. And where does it stop? I run Knights as House Tanaris.. Does adding in House Krast stop me now? Still pure knights?
Overall I think its best to define factions on the Chapter level of Spacemarines. But that would leave you with choosing a cult, and Knight players choosing a house, and Nide players choosing a hive type, and Craftworld Eldar choosing a specific Craftworld.
Choosing a Cult, Coven or Kabal, which was my point. Whichever one you choose locks out 2/3 of the codex.
Ice_can wrote: Except nothing stops Ynnari armies in a single detachment,....
Except, of course, the Matched Play amendment for Battle Brothers that disallows detachemtns from sharing specific Keywords, including YNNARI, along with AELDARI, CHAOS, IMPERIUM, etc
You still have to organize them in CWE, DE or Harlie detachments separately. For now at least. The May White Dwarf is likely to change how Ynnari work fairly dramatically.
Most likely making Soulbursts into Stratagems, which would mean the -1CP suggestion on additional detachments would disproportionally punish mixed Ynnari lists
-
Funnily enough I've never once seen a multiple Ynnari detachment list, it always Ynnari plus Craftworld units but using craftworld rules,or Ynnari Plus Drukari unit but using Drukari Rules, not Ynnari Craftworld plus Ynnari Drukari.
At this point Ynnari either need a codex or squatted, this halfway house of shopping from 3 codex's for units designed faction shouldn't have left the designer's sketch book. It's a balance problem they still haven't addressed.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/16 16:42:25
Galef wrote: Given the choice between CPs being generated by detachments OR points/power level, I'd prefer points/power level.
However, I think a combination of the two would be best. Otherwise if we move to something like "5CPs per 500pts/20PL" then suddenly Battalions and Brigades that have a high unit investment are worthless and everyone will gravitate towards Spearheads/Outriders/Vanguards
Therefore a better solution would be to have Battlalions and Brigades be the ONLY detachments that grant CPs, but only like 2 for Battalion, 5 or so for a Brigade.
That way there is incentive to take them, but the gap isn't so large since MOST CPs are generated for Battle-Forged base on army size
-
A 2K games give you 12 CP.
- 1 CP for each detachment after the first.
-1 CP for each Faction taken after the first.
You take a Craftworld/Ynarri/Drukari soup? 8 CP.
Technically wouldn't that be 6CP? If you take all 3 factions you lose 2 CP, each faction then requires its own detachment so there is another -2, so if you take 3 factions you automatically lose 4 CP.
This is btw, a very good idea and a decent idea at ending soup. Knight armies can now take a knight army and still have 12 CP as opposed to relying on the IG battery pack. If they like souping or they really want those loyal 32, they can take them, its just -2 to their CP I like it. A subtle kick in the balls to soup armies.
Depends on how you want to count it I guess. My vision is the first Detachment and Faction is free. So if you take a Ultramarine Battalion, 12 CP. Add in Super heavy Aux for Gman, down to 11 CP (-1 for second detachment), and if you then added in a Excution force of Assassins down to 9 CP.
Start with 12 CP First detachment and faction ultramarine battalion for Free.
-1 for 2nd detachment (Gman)
-1 for 3rd detachment (assassins)
-1 for 2nd Faction (assassins)
= 9 CP.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bharring wrote: I'm less worried about losing to pure-Knight lists that can get a 3++ every turn than single-Castellian Soup lists that can get a 3++ every turn. The pure-Knight list will struggle to adapt. If I can force an early declaration of RIS, I can put most of my firepower into a different Knight, and try to win by outpositioning. You can't do that against a horde of IG frontrunning the Knight.
MonoKnight lists aren't that scary, competitively, for more reasons than just not having enough CP.
All true. if you do Guard and Raven Castellan, for 10 CP.. Down to 8 if you give it Cawl's and Ion Bulwork.
8 doesn't go far with that Castellan.
Yeah - this is good stuff.
I guess I'm going to be told that no once cares about DE again, as tends to happen when I point out this stuff messes them up as a mono faction. If I was playing Flayed Skull/Red Grief/Prophets of Flesh in 3 detachements would that leave me with 10 CP or 8 under your system? Also being less than other mono factions and having to pay a HQ tax just to access more than 1/3 of the units in the codex would suck. It's hard now even getting extra CPs for taking more detachments as I either have to take an Outrider/Spearhead/Vanguard or buy an extra HQ and 3 Troops on top of the 5-6 troops I actually want (and they have to be different and inferior for the build). Punishing that further would just make me give up on trying to make a mono list work and only play soup.
Drukhari are honestly strong enough that they could probably weather this nerf. Yeah, it hurts them, but they're very clearly a top tier army so it's not the end of the world for them.
Might also encourage GW to flesh out the unit variety for Kabals, Cults and Covens as well, which would be a definite win.
I guess I'm going to be told that no once cares about DE again, as tends to happen when I point out this stuff messes them up as a mono faction. If I was playing Flayed Skull/Red Grief/Prophets of Flesh in 3 detachements would that leave me with 10 CP or 8 under your system? Also being less than other mono factions and having to pay a HQ tax just to access more than 1/3 of the units in the codex would suck. It's hard now even getting extra CPs for taking more detachments as I either have to take an Outrider/Spearhead/Vanguard or buy an extra HQ and 3 Troops on top of the 5-6 troops I actually want (and they have to be different and inferior for the build). Punishing that further would just make me give up on trying to make a mono list work and only play soup.
Chances are their needs to be a Faction list. Drukari isn't a good one, as its sort of the equivalent of Adeptus Astartes. but thats beyond my pay grade. And where does it stop? I run Knights as House Tanaris.. Does adding in House Krast stop me now? Still pure knights?
Overall I think its best to define factions on the Chapter level of Spacemarines. But that would leave you with choosing a cult, and Knight players choosing a house, and Nide players choosing a hive type, and Craftworld Eldar choosing a specific Craftworld.
Choosing a Cult, Coven or Kabal, which was my point. Whichever one you choose locks out 2/3 of the codex.
First, that seems a little dramatic. Second, it would apply to all. Should a force of Ultramarines, Grey knights, and Spacewolves count as soup, or not?
Galef wrote: Given the choice between CPs being generated by detachments OR points/power level, I'd prefer points/power level.
However, I think a combination of the two would be best. Otherwise if we move to something like "5CPs per 500pts/20PL" then suddenly Battalions and Brigades that have a high unit investment are worthless and everyone will gravitate towards Spearheads/Outriders/Vanguards
Therefore a better solution would be to have Battlalions and Brigades be the ONLY detachments that grant CPs, but only like 2 for Battalion, 5 or so for a Brigade.
That way there is incentive to take them, but the gap isn't so large since MOST CPs are generated for Battle-Forged base on army size
-
A 2K games give you 12 CP.
- 1 CP for each detachment after the first.
-1 CP for each Faction taken after the first.
You take a Craftworld/Ynarri/Drukari soup? 8 CP.
Technically wouldn't that be 6CP? If you take all 3 factions you lose 2 CP, each faction then requires its own detachment so there is another -2, so if you take 3 factions you automatically lose 4 CP.
This is btw, a very good idea and a decent idea at ending soup. Knight armies can now take a knight army and still have 12 CP as opposed to relying on the IG battery pack. If they like souping or they really want those loyal 32, they can take them, its just -2 to their CP I like it. A subtle kick in the balls to soup armies.
Depends on how you want to count it I guess. My vision is the first Detachment and Faction is free. So if you take a Ultramarine Battalion, 12 CP. Add in Super heavy Aux for Gman, down to 11 CP (-1 for second detachment), and if you then added in a Excution force of Assassins down to 9 CP.
Start with 12 CP First detachment and faction ultramarine battalion for Free.
-1 for 2nd detachment (Gman)
-1 for 3rd detachment (assassins)
-1 for 2nd Faction (assassins)
= 9 CP.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bharring wrote: I'm less worried about losing to pure-Knight lists that can get a 3++ every turn than single-Castellian Soup lists that can get a 3++ every turn. The pure-Knight list will struggle to adapt. If I can force an early declaration of RIS, I can put most of my firepower into a different Knight, and try to win by outpositioning. You can't do that against a horde of IG frontrunning the Knight.
MonoKnight lists aren't that scary, competitively, for more reasons than just not having enough CP.
All true. if you do Guard and Raven Castellan, for 10 CP.. Down to 8 if you give it Cawl's and Ion Bulwork.
8 doesn't go far with that Castellan.
Yeah - this is good stuff.
I guess I'm going to be told that no once cares about DE again, as tends to happen when I point out this stuff messes them up as a mono faction. If I was playing Flayed Skull/Red Grief/Prophets of Flesh in 3 detachements would that leave me with 10 CP or 8 under your system? Also being less than other mono factions and having to pay a HQ tax just to access more than 1/3 of the units in the codex would suck. It's hard now even getting extra CPs for taking more detachments as I either have to take an Outrider/Spearhead/Vanguard or buy an extra HQ and 3 Troops on top of the 5-6 troops I actually want (and they have to be different and inferior for the build). Punishing that further would just make me give up on trying to make a mono list work and only play soup.
Really having 10CP over what double battalion and spear head for 14 total under the current system is too much of a nerf?
You can maybe argue starting at 12 is a bit low but 2 CP to be able to pick the best subfaction traits doesn't seem like a cost that's high enough to render them unplayable, just enough of a downside to balance out the benifit of having the best subfaction traits for each set of units.
It's not about picking the best subfaction traits for each unit, it's about being able to pick those units at all if I choose Flayed Skull as my Obsession I can't take 2/3 of the units in the codex. If I choose Red Grief a different 2/3 are locked out and I can't take a brigade as I have no heavy support at all. Drukharii have to take multiple traits, not because they are better, but because you are not allowed to take most of your units with any one trait.
Ice_can wrote: Except nothing stops Ynnari armies in a single detachment,....
Except, of course, the Matched Play amendment for Battle Brothers that disallows detachemtns from sharing specific Keywords, including YNNARI, along with AELDARI, CHAOS, IMPERIUM, etc
You still have to organize them in CWE, DE or Harlie detachments separately. For now at least. The May White Dwarf is likely to change how Ynnari work fairly dramatically.
Most likely making Soulbursts into Stratagems, which would mean the -1CP suggestion on additional detachments would disproportionally punish mixed Ynnari lists
-
Funnily enough I've never once seen a multiple Ynnari detachment list, it always Ynnari plus Craftworld units but using craftworld rules,or Ynnari Plus Drukari unit but using Drukari Rules, not Ynnari Craftworld plus Ynnari Drukari.
This is probably because their current rules force you to take multiple special characters if you want to do that, and it's just not worth it. The Yncarne's super expensive and has the same limited pool of psychic powers as Yvraine, and the Visarch is pretty overcosted for what he brings to the table. Unless you're playing a fluffy list it's easiest to just pick one of the Yncarne or Yvraine and then build the rest of your army around that choice.
I guess I'm going to be told that no once cares about DE again, as tends to happen when I point out this stuff messes them up as a mono faction. If I was playing Flayed Skull/Red Grief/Prophets of Flesh in 3 detachements would that leave me with 10 CP or 8 under your system? Also being less than other mono factions and having to pay a HQ tax just to access more than 1/3 of the units in the codex would suck. It's hard now even getting extra CPs for taking more detachments as I either have to take an Outrider/Spearhead/Vanguard or buy an extra HQ and 3 Troops on top of the 5-6 troops I actually want (and they have to be different and inferior for the build). Punishing that further would just make me give up on trying to make a mono list work and only play soup.
Chances are their needs to be a Faction list. Drukari isn't a good one, as its sort of the equivalent of Adeptus Astartes. but thats beyond my pay grade. And where does it stop? I run Knights as House Tanaris.. Does adding in House Krast stop me now? Still pure knights?
Overall I think its best to define factions on the Chapter level of Spacemarines. But that would leave you with choosing a cult, and Knight players choosing a house, and Nide players choosing a hive type, and Craftworld Eldar choosing a specific Craftworld.
Choosing a Cult, Coven or Kabal, which was my point. Whichever one you choose locks out 2/3 of the codex.
The Triple Patrol option in the DE codex would need to be amended for detatchments-cost anyways.
Ideally, I'd think their rule would be that the Triple Patrol costs the same as a single Battalion. That'd be fair, and really push the fluff vibe the rule is aiming for.
Now, factions-cost being added into the mix does complicated that further.
I guess I'm going to be told that no once cares about DE again, as tends to happen when I point out this stuff messes them up as a mono faction. If I was playing Flayed Skull/Red Grief/Prophets of Flesh in 3 detachements would that leave me with 10 CP or 8 under your system? Also being less than other mono factions and having to pay a HQ tax just to access more than 1/3 of the units in the codex would suck. It's hard now even getting extra CPs for taking more detachments as I either have to take an Outrider/Spearhead/Vanguard or buy an extra HQ and 3 Troops on top of the 5-6 troops I actually want (and they have to be different and inferior for the build). Punishing that further would just make me give up on trying to make a mono list work and only play soup.
Chances are their needs to be a Faction list. Drukari isn't a good one, as its sort of the equivalent of Adeptus Astartes. but thats beyond my pay grade. And where does it stop? I run Knights as House Tanaris.. Does adding in House Krast stop me now? Still pure knights?
Overall I think its best to define factions on the Chapter level of Spacemarines. But that would leave you with choosing a cult, and Knight players choosing a house, and Nide players choosing a hive type, and Craftworld Eldar choosing a specific Craftworld.
Choosing a Cult, Coven or Kabal, which was my point. Whichever one you choose locks out 2/3 of the codex.
First, that seems a little dramatic. Second, it would apply to all. Should a force of Ultramarines, Grey knights, and Spacewolves count as soup, or not?
DE already, as-is, have rules aimed at making them more intra-book soupy than other books. It'd be more like would First, Third, and Tenth Company members in one army be considered Soup? Of course not.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/16 16:43:40
I guess I'm going to be told that no once cares about DE again, as tends to happen when I point out this stuff messes them up as a mono faction. If I was playing Flayed Skull/Red Grief/Prophets of Flesh in 3 detachements would that leave me with 10 CP or 8 under your system? Also being less than other mono factions and having to pay a HQ tax just to access more than 1/3 of the units in the codex would suck. It's hard now even getting extra CPs for taking more detachments as I either have to take an Outrider/Spearhead/Vanguard or buy an extra HQ and 3 Troops on top of the 5-6 troops I actually want (and they have to be different and inferior for the build). Punishing that further would just make me give up on trying to make a mono list work and only play soup.
Chances are their needs to be a Faction list. Drukari isn't a good one, as its sort of the equivalent of Adeptus Astartes. but thats beyond my pay grade. And where does it stop? I run Knights as House Tanaris.. Does adding in House Krast stop me now? Still pure knights?
Overall I think its best to define factions on the Chapter level of Spacemarines. But that would leave you with choosing a cult, and Knight players choosing a house, and Nide players choosing a hive type, and Craftworld Eldar choosing a specific Craftworld.
Choosing a Cult, Coven or Kabal, which was my point. Whichever one you choose locks out 2/3 of the codex.
First, that seems a little dramatic. Second, it would apply to all. Should a force of Ultramarines, Grey knights, and Spacewolves count as soup, or not?
Those are from 3 different books. Choosing to play Ultramarines doesn't mean you lose access to Assault Marines and Land Speeders, but if you played Raven Guard you could have those, but no Devastators or Intercessors and any unit that can be taken in different flavours, well tehy get no trait at all. That's how the DE book is structured. So I don't really think it's dramatic it's jsut a description of how the rules work.
Ice_can wrote: Except nothing stops Ynnari armies in a single detachment,....
Except, of course, the Matched Play amendment for Battle Brothers that disallows detachemtns from sharing specific Keywords, including YNNARI, along with AELDARI, CHAOS, IMPERIUM, etc
You still have to organize them in CWE, DE or Harlie detachments separately. For now at least. The May White Dwarf is likely to change how Ynnari work fairly dramatically.
Most likely making Soulbursts into Stratagems, which would mean the -1CP suggestion on additional detachments would disproportionally punish mixed Ynnari lists
-
Funnily enough I've never once seen a multiple Ynnari detachment list, it always Ynnari plus Craftworld units but using craftworld rules,or Ynnari Plus Drukari unit but using Drukari Rules, not Ynnari Craftworld plus Ynnari Drukari.
At this point Ynnari either need a codex or squatted, this halfway house of shopping from 3 codex's for units designed faction shouldn't have left the designer's sketch book. It's a balance problem they still haven't addressed.
They don't shop around "3 Codexes designed for mono" any more than a Company Commander does. Only the 3 Ynnari Characters are allowed to be present in any one Codex's detatchment.
I do support further nerfs, of course. But Ynnari Soup isn't any worse than Imperial or Chaos Soup, rules-wise.
Isn't a servitor at this point a 2-point T3 4+ body with a single imperial guard powerfist attack?
I'm fairly sure I ran the numbers on them at some point and relized if they could be taken in any significant numbers (you are limited to a total of 12 since they're fixed unit size 4) they would be crazy OP.
With the servo arm at 0, yea it would be a huge problem.
12 of them with PC and a TM is 266. 24 plasma shots isn't too bad at that price save for trying to keep them alive.
Ice_can wrote: Except nothing stops Ynnari armies in a single detachment,....
Except, of course, the Matched Play amendment for Battle Brothers that disallows detachemtns from sharing specific Keywords, including YNNARI, along with AELDARI, CHAOS, IMPERIUM, etc
You still have to organize them in CWE, DE or Harlie detachments separately. For now at least. The May White Dwarf is likely to change how Ynnari work fairly dramatically.
Most likely making Soulbursts into Stratagems, which would mean the -1CP suggestion on additional detachments would disproportionally punish mixed Ynnari lists
-
Funnily enough I've never once seen a multiple Ynnari detachment list, it always Ynnari plus Craftworld units but using craftworld rules,or Ynnari Plus Drukari unit but using Drukari Rules, not Ynnari Craftworld plus Ynnari Drukari.
At this point Ynnari either need a codex or squatted, this halfway house of shopping from 3 codex's for units designed faction shouldn't have left the designer's sketch book. It's a balance problem they still haven't addressed.
They don't shop around "3 Codexes designed for mono" any more than a Company Commander does. Only the 3 Ynnari Characters are allowed to be present in any one Codex's detatchment.
I do support further nerfs, of course. But Ynnari Soup isn't any worse than Imperial or Chaos Soup, rules-wise.
If Ynnari are supposed to be a full faction sporting X,Y,Z units create a codex detailing what they should and shouldn't have, and points cost them according to the rules they have in the Ynnari codex.
Saying here's a faction you can choose units from these 3 codex's and they gain X rules means that points changes arn't an option to balance said army, bad design choice.
A company commander doesn't suddenly gain a 5+ FNP in exchange for nolonger being cadian in imperial soup. He's still following the guard codex rules so the points are for the same rules.
Reemule wrote: I really envision them putting out a faction list.
Counts as a factions:
Ultramarines
Spacewolves
Ulthwe
House Tanris
House Raven
Goffs
Evil Suns..
and so on.
Perhaps Drukari shows up as a single faction in that list.
That could work, but then I'd lean the other way, because taking Flayed Skull for your Venoms and Black Heart for your Ravagers (Those are both Kabals, so could all be tkaen in one trait) is exactly the sort of mixing you'd be prohibiting Ultramarines and Raven Guard doing. I don't want it to be unfair in either direction!
Reemule wrote: I really envision them putting out a faction list.
Counts as a factions:
Ultramarines
Spacewolves
Ulthwe
House Tanris
House Raven
Goffs
Evil Suns..
and so on.
Perhaps Drukari shows up as a single faction in that list.
These kinds of arguments are part of why I don't like rules driven by Factions, whenever it's avoidable.
Ice_can wrote: Except nothing stops Ynnari armies in a single detachment,....
Except, of course, the Matched Play amendment for Battle Brothers that disallows detachemtns from sharing specific Keywords, including YNNARI, along with AELDARI, CHAOS, IMPERIUM, etc
You still have to organize them in CWE, DE or Harlie detachments separately. For now at least. The May White Dwarf is likely to change how Ynnari work fairly dramatically.
Most likely making Soulbursts into Stratagems, which would mean the -1CP suggestion on additional detachments would disproportionally punish mixed Ynnari lists
-
Funnily enough I've never once seen a multiple Ynnari detachment list, it always Ynnari plus Craftworld units but using craftworld rules,or Ynnari Plus Drukari unit but using Drukari Rules, not Ynnari Craftworld plus Ynnari Drukari.
At this point Ynnari either need a codex or squatted, this halfway house of shopping from 3 codex's for units designed faction shouldn't have left the designer's sketch book. It's a balance problem they still haven't addressed.
They don't shop around "3 Codexes designed for mono" any more than a Company Commander does. Only the 3 Ynnari Characters are allowed to be present in any one Codex's detatchment.
I do support further nerfs, of course. But Ynnari Soup isn't any worse than Imperial or Chaos Soup, rules-wise.
If Ynnari are supposed to be a full faction sporting X,Y,Z units create a codex detailing what they should and shouldn't have, and points cost them according to the rules they have in the Ynnari codex.
Saying here's a faction you can choose units from these 3 codex's and they gain X rules means that points changes arn't an option to balance said army, bad design choice.
A company commander doesn't suddenly gain a 5+ FNP in exchange for nolonger being cadian in imperial soup. He's still following the guard codex rules so the points are for the same rules.
If Assasins are supposed to be a full faction supporting.... everything... wait, what?
Ynnari are techincally the warlord and faction, but practiaclly they're drop-in into other armies. They do replace certain Traits, and there are balance problems in the execution, but Ynnari are not their own faction.
Ynnari rules are too strong, and the faction changing rules aren't clean enough. Those are problems. But, at the end of the day, you have a DE, CWE, Harlie, or Corsair detatchment that takes a Ynnari special character. You do *not* mix any 2 of those factions into a single detatchment (anymore).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/16 16:58:29
These kinds of arguments are part of why I don't like rules driven by Factions, whenever it's avoidable.
Honestly though though it is a discussion worth having. Right now its some poor communications from the rules dev in this. The idea is that Ultramarines are a faction. This is backed up with some 25+ years of example. The Drukari book clearly leaves people with other ideas. If the game is to be a tight ruleset, something like that should be easy to iron out.
And I'm not even getting involved in the Ynarri thing. We know they are getting something in the next WD. Why get worked up till that happens?
Reemule wrote: If the game is to be a tight ruleset, something like that should be easy to iron out.
It would seem that your expectations, and those of the game developers, may be at odds.
Reemule wrote: And I'm not even getting involved in the Ynarri thing. We know they are getting something in the next WD. Why get worked up till that happens?
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
Galef wrote: Given the choice between CPs being generated by detachments OR points/power level, I'd prefer points/power level.
However, I think a combination of the two would be best. Otherwise if we move to something like "5CPs per 500pts/20PL" then suddenly Battalions and Brigades that have a high unit investment are worthless and everyone will gravitate towards Spearheads/Outriders/Vanguards
Therefore a better solution would be to have Battlalions and Brigades be the ONLY detachments that grant CPs, but only like 2 for Battalion, 5 or so for a Brigade.
That way there is incentive to take them, but the gap isn't so large since MOST CPs are generated for Battle-Forged base on army size
-
A 2K games give you 12 CP.
- 1 CP for each detachment after the first.
-1 CP for each Faction taken after the first.
You take a Craftworld/Ynarri/Drukari soup? 8 CP.
Technically wouldn't that be 6CP? If you take all 3 factions you lose 2 CP, each faction then requires its own detachment so there is another -2, so if you take 3 factions you automatically lose 4 CP.
This is btw, a very good idea and a decent idea at ending soup. Knight armies can now take a knight army and still have 12 CP as opposed to relying on the IG battery pack. If they like souping or they really want those loyal 32, they can take them, its just -2 to their CP I like it. A subtle kick in the balls to soup armies.
Depends on how you want to count it I guess. My vision is the first Detachment and Faction is free. So if you take a Ultramarine Battalion, 12 CP. Add in Super heavy Aux for Gman, down to 11 CP (-1 for second detachment), and if you then added in a Excution force of Assassins down to 9 CP.
Start with 12 CP First detachment and faction ultramarine battalion for Free.
-1 for 2nd detachment (Gman)
-1 for 3rd detachment (assassins)
-1 for 2nd Faction (assassins)
= 9 CP.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bharring wrote: I'm less worried about losing to pure-Knight lists that can get a 3++ every turn than single-Castellian Soup lists that can get a 3++ every turn. The pure-Knight list will struggle to adapt. If I can force an early declaration of RIS, I can put most of my firepower into a different Knight, and try to win by outpositioning. You can't do that against a horde of IG frontrunning the Knight.
MonoKnight lists aren't that scary, competitively, for more reasons than just not having enough CP.
All true. if you do Guard and Raven Castellan, for 10 CP.. Down to 8 if you give it Cawl's and Ion Bulwork.
8 doesn't go far with that Castellan.
Yeah - this is good stuff.
I guess I'm going to be told that no once cares about DE again, as tends to happen when I point out this stuff messes them up as a mono faction. If I was playing Flayed Skull/Red Grief/Prophets of Flesh in 3 detachements would that leave me with 10 CP or 8 under your system? Also being less than other mono factions and having to pay a HQ tax just to access more than 1/3 of the units in the codex would suck. It's hard now even getting extra CPs for taking more detachments as I either have to take an Outrider/Spearhead/Vanguard or buy an extra HQ and 3 Troops on top of the 5-6 troops I actually want (and they have to be different and inferior for the build). Punishing that further would just make me give up on trying to make a mono list work and only play soup.
Under my system it would be 13 CP or 12 CP depdning on wether you went 3 battalions or 2 battalions and spearhead.
Start with 15
First detachment free if battalion/brigade (batallions and brigades are free but additional detachments are not)
Second detachment -1
3rd detachment -1 (if its a spearhead or something it will be an additional -1)
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
These kinds of arguments are part of why I don't like rules driven by Factions, whenever it's avoidable.
Honestly though though it is a discussion worth having. Right now its some poor communications from the rules dev in this. The idea is that Ultramarines are a faction. This is backed up with some 25+ years of example. The Drukari book clearly leaves people with other ideas. If the game is to be a tight ruleset, something like that should be easy to iron out.
And I'm not even getting involved in the Ynarri thing. We know they are getting something in the next WD. Why get worked up till that happens?
That assumes that it's just pure communication and that they actually have an agreed definition of what a faction is.
However without that your correct that we're never going to be able to agree without a common understanding of what a faction is and isn't.
These kinds of arguments are part of why I don't like rules driven by Factions, whenever it's avoidable.
Personally I'd just like sub-faction traits to be removed from the game entirely when it comes to Matched play. Balancing an army that is Saim-hann or Alaitoc are two wildly different things as both amplify the codex differently. This problem is especially apparent when it comes to the Ynnari.
I mean, I take Prophets of Flesh and I get a 4+ invuln flat on my coven infantry? That is crazy good in comparison to many other coven traits, and for that there is little to no reason to play other sub-factions in matched play.
However, I'd argue that sub-faction traits are evidence that GW intends you to inter-ally with yourself. Ie. you run a certain hive with certain Nid models, and another hive with another set of models.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/16 17:36:58
Grey Knights and Scions aren't a problem, even though Scions bring something that cover a weakness GK have, while the GKs give you some elite power and activity in the Psychic phase.
Vehicle heavy Iron Hands marines and cheap infantry Ad Mech aren't a major problem, even though they can cover each other's weaknesses. Or Black Templars with Sisters. Or any of the overwhelming majority of potential combinations you have available.
Almost nobody takes issue with Biel Tan Eldar souping in some Harlies. Almost nobody has a problem with Custodes crossing the battlefield alongside some Deathwatch. If you want to run two Necron Dynasties side by side, very few people are going to complain.
What folks really have issue with are the hyper-competitive lists that make up less than 2% of the potential combinations the ally system allows. And to address those, you think it's best to stuff the whole thing down the drain? Seems a tad overzealous. I'm glad we understand now that the main source of the issue is CP fuel, but targeting everybody instead of focusing on the repeat offenders sounds rather foolish.
The soup lists we see in competitive tournaments are the outliers when compared to the vast majority of list combinations you can make with allies. In fact, ALL the lists we see at tournaments are essentially outliers by the very nature of the tournament scene. For every unit taken in a tournament list because of its competitive viability, 10 others are left by the wayside. It's much, much easier to drop those outliers down than to try and redesign an entire system that is fair for everybody right from the start. The only thing a new system will do is generate a new set of best choices and we'll be back here after a slight adjustment to the meta. If the goal is to temporarily shake up the meta, then you'll succeed. If it's to tweak it so there's less auto-takes, then you've only managed to kick the can down the road.
Any change doesn't need to address everybody - it needs to stamp down on the blades of grass growing taller than the rest of the field.
Somewhat related: I think the ITC best in faction change will have a larger impact on the way the meta shakes out for the next little while than people give it credit. If you want to take that trophy, you can't just go win at all costs soup - you need to play 4 events at the least in a season of mono-armies to actually compete for that title. Sure, the soup armies will likely take the tournament, but for the vast majority of competitors that weren't likely to compete for the top leaderboard in ITC, they now have a very compelling reason to go mono-faction.
Lemondish wrote: I'm glad we understand now that the main source of the issue is CP fuel, but targeting everybody instead of focusing on the repeat offenders sounds rather foolish.
I don't think this works the way you want. If you don't address an underlying cause of an issue, your just going to spend all your efforts just addressing the next alliteration of the same issue. And I don't think its a "targetting" anyone, or any faction.
For me, i want all options to be available to play, with all options to be viable in some context. Now it might be that the context for some is a obscure formation build, and that is really the only place that something works, so be it.
I like it. A subtle kick in the balls to soup armies.
