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.
Once again proving the issue was in grand strategist being an OP trait, and bad for the game.
I mean before the Castellan the reroll was nothing worth talking about. The CP regen has been heavily nerfed. The reroll just needs to apply to the actual model carrying it and it's all good.
Once again proving the issue was in grand strategist being an OP trait, and bad for the game.
I mean before the Castellan the reroll was nothing worth talking about. The CP regen has been heavily nerfed. The reroll just needs to apply to the actual model carrying it and it's all good.
Yeah and everyone else got CP regen nerfed to be exactly as useless when it's mandatory on every named charictor and doesn't include a free 1CP re-roll either.
Once again proving the issue was in grand strategist being an OP trait, and bad for the game.
I mean before the Castellan the reroll was nothing worth talking about. The CP regen has been heavily nerfed. The reroll just needs to apply to the actual model carrying it and it's all good.
Yeah and everyone else got CP regen nerfed to be exactly as useless when it's mandatory on every named charictor and doesn't include a free 1CP re-roll either.
I disagree. The CP regen mechanic works better with a large pool of CP to draw from. AM had the most and suffered the most.
Once again proving the issue was in grand strategist being an OP trait, and bad for the game.
I mean before the Castellan the reroll was nothing worth talking about. The CP regen has been heavily nerfed. The reroll just needs to apply to the actual model carrying it and it's all good.
Yeah and everyone else got CP regen nerfed to be exactly as useless when it's mandatory on every named charictor and doesn't include a free 1CP re-roll either.
I disagree. The CP regen mechanic works better with a large pool of CP to draw from. AM had the most and suffered the most.
Astra Militarum had the most busted and abused version I'll agree, but they didn't loose the most.
Ultramarines who MUST take it on all named charictors amd don't even get the free reroll, got most effected.
Marines pay more for their CP and unlike Astra Millicheese dont have the option to swap to one of the other options.
Played 2 games with the Valiant. Using it as a suicide tool - it does exceptionally well.
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
The game gets better if they fix CP/Stratagems to foster the game play they desire. Right now, the CP and Stratagem game rewards getting as much CP as you can, with as much access to as many effective Stratagems as you can. This leads to small detachments to either provide CP (loyal 32), or a small detachment to give you access to Stratagem you want (formerly the Castellan)
I’d like the game to move in a direction of detachments that are more than the minimum required models, but with models retaining access to all the portions of the game that make them unique.
Reemule wrote: The game gets better if they fix CP/Stratagems to foster the game play they desire. Right now, the CP and Stratagem game rewards getting as much CP as you can, with as much access to as many effective Stratagems as you can. This leads to small detachments to either provide CP (loyal 32), or a small detachment to give you access to Stratagem you want (formerly the Castellan)
I’d like the game to move in a direction of detachments that are more than the minimum required models, but with models retaining access to all the portions of the game that make them unique.
That's why I always suggest that the cp a formation brings can only be used for that armies strata ie loyal 32 only can be used on guard strats.
Reemule wrote: The game gets better if they fix CP/Stratagems to foster the game play they desire. Right now, the CP and Stratagem game rewards getting as much CP as you can, with as much access to as many effective Stratagems as you can. This leads to small detachments to either provide CP (loyal 32), or a small detachment to give you access to Stratagem you want (formerly the Castellan)
I’d like the game to move in a direction of detachments that are more than the minimum required models, but with models retaining access to all the portions of the game that make them unique.
That's why I always suggest that the cp a formation brings can only be used for that armies strata ie loyal 32 only can be used on guard strats.
The issue I have with that is it specifically neuters Assassins. They would get a Single CP. So they couldn't even play some of the better Stratagems they have. And it would cause arguments. Where do recovered CP go? What if you get CP from your opponent using CP where would those go? And even Battleforged?
Backspacehacker wrote: How about they un-nerf the castellen, and make it so you can only use CP on the army that's brings it to the table
IE if you bring a guard battalion, the cp from that can ONLY be used on guard.
I got a pretty hardcore suggestion.
Remove the command re-roll stratagem entirely.
No thanks. I deal with perils enough to not want to have that go away, because of the Castellan.
Yeah, but those risks are what makes things so much more dramatic. If you don't have to deal with perils much anymore, why even have that mechanic?
I'd rather more bombastic gak going wrong, and you having to adjust to it, than the trend we have now where we try and control as many outcomes as possible. Ya'll hate randomness, I get that.
But the test of skill isn't reducing randomness by pinpoint list building before even tossing a single die - its overcoming the random element in the heat of the moment.
Get rid of the command re-roll and let the dice decide your fate more often - you'll start thinking about how to handle things when the worst outcome hits. To each their own, but that sounds much more fun to me.
What if you had to decide before the match which detachment gets what CP? So, in effect, like the shooting of a multi-gun vehicle.
So you have 9 CP on your list, This BN gets 6 CP, this Vanguard gets 2, and this Outrider gets 1. Any recovered CP through tricks or strats can be given at the point of reward to the owner's discretion.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/05/20 20:37:32
Backspacehacker wrote: How about they un-nerf the castellen, and make it so you can only use CP on the army that's brings it to the table
IE if you bring a guard battalion, the cp from that can ONLY be used on guard.
I got a pretty hardcore suggestion.
Remove the command re-roll stratagem entirely.
No thanks. I deal with perils enough to not want to have that go away, because of the Castellan.
Except having that reroll always available is also responsible for a number of balance issues, those events that are supposed to be rare but serious downsides or large bonuses have their probability altered dramatically by the auto reroll.
GW never seems to take these into consideration for the most part.
Backspacehacker wrote: How about they un-nerf the castellen, and make it so you can only use CP on the army that's brings it to the table
IE if you bring a guard battalion, the cp from that can ONLY be used on guard.
I got a pretty hardcore suggestion.
Remove the command re-roll stratagem entirely.
No thanks. I deal with perils enough to not want to have that go away, because of the Castellan.
Yeah, but those risks are what makes things so much more dramatic. If you don't have to deal with perils much anymore, why even have that mechanic?
I'd rather more bombastic gak going wrong, and you having to adjust to it, than the trend we have now where we try and control as many outcomes as possible. Ya'll hate randomness, I get that.
But the test of skill isn't reducing randomness by pinpoint list building before even tossing a single die - its overcoming the random element in the heat of the moment.
Get rid of the command re-roll and let the dice decide your fate more often - you'll start thinking about how to handle things when the worst outcome hits. To each their own, but that sounds much more fun to me.
There is plenty of drama. Ever rerolled a dice and it came up as the exact same result? A reroll isn't a guarantee of success nor are they limitless.
You don't "overcome" your lead psyker exploding himself to bits - you just manage with what you have left.
Except having that reroll always available is also responsible for a number of balance issues, those events that are supposed to be rare but serious downsides or large bonuses have their probability altered dramatically by the auto reroll.
GW never seems to take these into consideration for the most part.
A single reroll per phase is not typically upsetting any balance issues like you suggest. If that were the case then Salamanders of Deathskulls would be the most broken of armies.
It's what gets rerolled that matters.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/05/20 21:06:15
Backspacehacker wrote: How about they un-nerf the castellen, and make it so you can only use CP on the army that's brings it to the table
IE if you bring a guard battalion, the cp from that can ONLY be used on guard.
I got a pretty hardcore suggestion.
Remove the command re-roll stratagem entirely.
No thanks. I deal with perils enough to not want to have that go away, because of the Castellan.
Yeah, but those risks are what makes things so much more dramatic. If you don't have to deal with perils much anymore, why even have that mechanic?
I'd rather more bombastic gak going wrong, and you having to adjust to it, than the trend we have now where we try and control as many outcomes as possible. Ya'll hate randomness, I get that.
But the test of skill isn't reducing randomness by pinpoint list building before even tossing a single die - its overcoming the random element in the heat of the moment.
Get rid of the command re-roll and let the dice decide your fate more often - you'll start thinking about how to handle things when the worst outcome hits. To each their own, but that sounds much more fun to me.
There is plenty of drama. Ever rerolled a dice and it came up as the exact same result? A reroll isn't a guarantee of success nor are they limitless.
You don't "overcome" your lead psyker exploding himself to bits - you just manage with what you have left.
Except having that reroll always available is also responsible for a number of balance issues, those events that are supposed to be rare but serious downsides or large bonuses have their probability altered dramatically by the auto reroll.
GW never seems to take these into consideration for the most part.
A single reroll per phase is not typically upsetting any balance issues like you suggest. If that were the case then Salamanders of Deathskulls would be the most broken of armies.
It's what gets rerolled that matters.
Salamanders and deathsculls can reroll the perills that kills a warlord or that 3++ against a flat damage weapon.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/05/20 21:12:12
Can someone explain why Astra Militarum deserves more CP than any other faction? CP are a huge aspect of this game and giving one faction tons of this resource and others very limited doesn't seem all that fair, does it? Because there is no reason for AM to be entitled to more CP than anyone else. Yet, they get more than anyone else. It's bad design that favors one faction.
Galas wrote: I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you
Bharring wrote: He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
Marmatag wrote: Can someone explain why Astra Militarum deserves more CP than any other faction? CP are a huge aspect of this game and giving one faction tons of this resource and others very limited doesn't seem all that fair, does it? Because there is no reason for AM to be entitled to more CP than anyone else. Yet, they get more than anyone else. It's bad design that favors one faction.
To be fair, a competitive tau list can have anywhere between 14-18 cp easily as well. AM do it better, but there are other armies that can reach big heights.
Marmatag wrote: Can someone explain why Astra Militarum deserves more CP than any other faction? CP are a huge aspect of this game and giving one faction tons of this resource and others very limited doesn't seem all that fair, does it? Because there is no reason for AM to be entitled to more CP than anyone else. Yet, they get more than anyone else. It's bad design that favors one faction.
If Stratagems were all the same, I could kinda see IG getting the most CPs because they're based around many, cheap units.
e.g. if you're using a +1 to hit stratagem, you'd have to use it on 2 40pt IG squads to buff the same number of points as an 80pt Marine squad.
However, this completely breaks down when it comes to IG vehicles (which aren't significantly cheaper or less powerful than those of other factions), ans especially IG super-heavies.
To be perfectly honest, the whole stratagem system just seems like a complete mess at this point. Allies mean that available CPs is all over the place, stratagems don't seem to be costed with regard to the cost of the unit they're buffing (Imperial Knight stratagems aren't significantly more expensive than normal ones, in spite of buffing several hundred points at a time, nor is there any additional cost if you want to apply a normal buff to a super-heavy etc.).
I think it would be nice if 40k did not contain strategems, faction traits, warlord traits or cp at all. I mean would the castellan ever had been an issue if it was killable with it's standard 5+iv, and no cheesy way to ignore it's damage stacks?
I play a Renegade Knight household (yeah, I'm not a competitive player by any means).
While I welcomed the change capping Knight invulnerable saves to 4++, I'd really like to see a system that changes Ion shields to operate more like they did in 7th. Allow a base 4++, but only in something like a 90-45 degree arc on the model. Rotate ion shields allows a single Knight per turn to change that facing.
Why? I figure it allows both players greater depth of play. If you're looking to kill the Knight, you can do so more easily by out positioning it. The Knight player has to think far more carefully about where that Knight will be standing also, when to pop that single Rotate, and not just be reliant on a reliable invuln to cover errors in their play. Given how few models Knight players typically have to move, I'm not thinking one extra step like this would have any real impact on game speed either.
On the Castellan...
I've said this before, but I'm not completely convinced it was ever a truly problematic unit in and of itself. You never see Renegade Castellans, because without the Stratagems and Relics used to make the Imperial flavour so dominant, it's just not all that great. Even the strats etc are reasonably balanced within the context of the Knight Codex. Knight's are CP limited by themselves and the strats were often costly. You quickly get into issues though when you can feed a unit like that CP from souped sources that I'm not convinced it was ever intended to have.
