Army building and fixed CP

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.

**ERJAK**

Martel732 wrote:
Nazrak wrote:
Blackie wrote:
Exactly this, assault oriented armies should get a massive buff, not nerfings. Deep striking abilities should be addressed and limited, but units like ork boyz, which are already mediocre, need some love. As an ork player I don't see this stratagem very useful for our army which is already extremely CPs hungry. I don't think I'd never use it with the current knowledge of the game.

Well in terms of what we know so far, there's this, plus the changes to cover. There could be other stuff too, but it's not a bad start. Honestly, I think some people just aren't ever happy unless their units/armies look like getting turned into a invincible, auto-kill-everything button.

I want functional melee without the gakshow of tripointing.

So you want melee to kill a bunch of stuff but don't want to actually do anything more complex or involved than push your models into your opponent's models? Have you heard of 7th edition?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

ArcaneHorror wrote:
I hope they show the prices for the other detachments soon. If the other detachment styles cost more than the battalion, we'll be in the same situation we were in during 8th.

...how? If a Vanguard costs 4 no one will ever use a vanguard ever again. Remember, only battalions, brigades and patrols get the warlord bonus. If the other styles of detachments cost MORE than a battalion you will literally never see them except in armies that have expensive, terrible troops and yet somehow need more slots than a battalion allows for.

**catbarf**

ERJAK wrote:
So you want melee to kill a bunch of stuff but don't want to actually do anything more complex or involved than push your models into your opponent's models? Have you heard of 7th edition?

Personally, I'd prefer if melee weren't made 'complex and involved' solely through nonsensical, game-y mechanics like tri-pointing. I'm not familiar with 7th, but somehow we enjoyed 3rd-5th without this gimmick.

**Ice_can**

ERJAK wrote:
Ice_can wrote:
TheAvengingKnee wrote:
The new detachment they showed is nice, having 6 elite slots makes me very happy as I have a lot of good options for elites.

I am just very happy that they are killing the CP batteries that ruined some factions stratagem costs.

Except they really have not changed anything Guard can still bring a bunch of free comand points heck even a brigade of them so far are free if your taking a battalion of your other faction as their warlord trait and relic give you 6 CP over the game for a net +3CP unless the additional codex costs more CP than that.

So you spend your warlord trait, any warlord abilities your own warlord has, a relic, and dramatically limit the flexibility of your list for not at all 3 CP? First of all, there's no guarantee that you'll actually get 6CP refunded, especially with CP battery armies actually having LESS total CP than they did before. If your opponent blows all their CP turn one and two and doesn't use a stratagem again until 6, you'll be lucky to your investment back in a 6 turn game. Also, if you use pregame CP like relics or infiltrates, you reduce your chance of refunding CP because you can't use either the relic of the WT on those abilities.

That's ignoring the fact that CP received on turn 5 and turn 6 are FAR less valuable than CP received on turn one. Let's say you do magically actually get the 6CP return the relic+WT can theoretically get you, you're actually netting maybe a 1.5CP worth of first turn CP. It's a pretty obnoxious trade-off in exchange for a very mediocre bonus.

The loyal 32 is well and truly dead as a result of this. The only reason you'd take allies like that is if you want the UNITS that come along with them. At best the CP generation is just paying yourself back for taking allies.

Assuming you can still only gain 1 CP per

In the live stream they confirmed it's still only 1 CP per round generation.

My example is the least efficent way to justify taking the 32.

If you're main army is in one of the detachments that doesn't refund for having your warlord in, your down maybe 1 or 2 CP if you by in a warlord trait and relic (which you probably will want to do anyway as I belive the CP per turn might rely on your warlord being alive) and can generate 6CP over the game.

Loyal 32 is far from dead, it's not quite the +5, plus regen broken of 8th but given an additional codex seems to come very cheap as apparently adding a Knight costs 1-2CP the idea of soup being dead was way oversold.

It's very much still got mileage yet.

**Martel732**

catbarf wrote:
ERJAK wrote:
So you want melee to kill a bunch of stuff but don't want to actually do anything more complex or involved than push your models into your opponent's models? Have you heard of 7th edition?

Personally, I'd prefer if melee weren't made 'complex and involved' solely through nonsensical, game-y mechanics like tri-pointing. I'm not familiar with 7th, but somehow we enjoyed 3rd-5th without this gimmick.

This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Tripointing is cancer and the opposite of glorious charges for the emprah.

**Blackie**

ERJAK wrote:

So you want melee to kill a bunch of stuff but don't want to actually do anything more complex or involved than push your models into your opponent's models? Have you heard of 7th edition?

Melee in 7th wasn't extremely powerful though. It's always the combo deep strike+assault that is broken. The most competitive lists in 7th were all shooting oriented. But shooting has become insane, orks in order to be competitive have been turned into tau which is a joke. People look to data and say orks are fine or even good but all the performing lists are gunlines plus screeners and/or tarpits. I refuse to play orks that way.

**Daedalus81**

catbarf wrote:
Daedalus81 wrote:
No more falling back from Boyz, indeed.

1. Fall back from Boyz.
2. Hope your opponent wastes CP inflicting MW on your sacrificial screen.
3. Blast Boyz off the table.

I'm really hoping there are mechanical changes to Fall Back that will make it harder to escape combat, or it's not going to fix the really critical problem with melee.

You're assuming someone would use this on a trash unit. People are also making assumptions on what 'Engagement Range' is, which is very clearly a new definition that we don't have. Finally, Mob Up.

With this I doubt there will be any other structural changes to fall back.

**ArcaneHorror**

ERJAK wrote:
...how? If a Vanguard costs 4 no one will ever use a vanguard ever again. Remember, only battalions, brigades and patrols get the warlord bonus. If the other styles of detachments cost MORE than a battalion you will literally never see them except in armies that have expensive, terrible troops and yet somehow need more slots than a battalion allows for.

That's what I'm trying to say. If battalions cost the least amount of CP, we'll have to go right back to using battalions and filling out our armies with troops we may not want just to keep the CP, just as in 8th where one has to take troops to maximize CP. It will kill the opportunity to put the other detachments on an equal playing field. For example, if someone wants to run an army based primarily around tanks (or in my case, daemon engines and princes), I shouldn't be punished for doing that.

**Daedalus81**

Ice_can wrote:
the idea of soup being dead was way oversold.

It's very much still got mileage yet.

Who sold the idea of soup being dead? It was never going away. It just has an explicit cost now.

Also keep in mind the detachment costs CP as well as the allies cost.

**Sgt. Cortez**

Indeed. Whenever people say Melee in 8th is weak I'm thinking of 7th and am like, naaa, it's okay. You have a tactical aspect to it, you don't have to pull the kills of overwatch from the front, you can still maneuver around, units are generally faster, you don't have challenges, you have buffs from stratagems...

**catbarf**

Daedalus81 wrote:
You're assuming someone would use this on a trash unit.

I'm asserting that trash units are the main problem for melee, and against a competent player who understands screening, trash units are the most likely thing for a big unit of Boyz to wind up in melee with.

So either you're using the stratagem on trash units, or you're not using it at all, and either way your Boyz get shot off the table immediately thereafter. It doesn't matter what the definition of Engagement Range is- the stratagem could be 'instantly kill a unit that tries to fall back', and the problem would be the same. Yes, please Mob Up, it reduces the amount of overkill when I unload my gunline on the combined unit.

I'm holding out hope that there are other changes to fall back, because otherwise melee is going to still be stuck in the same rut. Just too easy to mitigate for minimal cost.

**Daedalus81**

ArcaneHorror wrote:
ERJAK wrote:
...how? If a Vanguard costs 4 no one will ever use a vanguard ever again. Remember, only battalions, brigades and patrols get the warlord bonus. If the other styles of detachments cost MORE than a battalion you will literally never see them except in armies that have expensive, terrible troops and yet somehow need more slots than a battalion allows for.

That's what I'm trying to say. If battalions cost the least amount of CP, we'll have to go right back to using battalions and filling out our armies with troops we may not want just to keep the CP, just as in 8th where one has to take troops to maximize CP. It will kill the opportunity to put the other detachments on an equal playing field. For example, if someone wants to run an army based primarily around tanks (or in my case, daemon engines and princes), I shouldn't be punished for doing that.

You pay more CP to not have to spend 150 to 300 points on units you don't / won't use. Jury is still out on whether or not that will be worthwhile.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

catbarf wrote:
Daedalus81 wrote:
You're assuming someone would use this on a trash unit.

I'm asserting that trash units are the main problem for melee, and against a competent player who understands screening, trash units are the most likely thing for a big unit of Boyz to wind up in melee with.

So either you're using the stratagem on trash units, or you're not using it at all, and either way your Boyz get shot off the table immediately thereafter. It doesn't matter what the definition of Engagement Range is- the stratagem could be 'instantly kill a unit that tries to fall back', and the problem would be the same. Yes, please Mob Up, it reduces the amount of overkill when I unload my gunline on the combined unit.

I'm holding out hope that there are other changes to fall back, because otherwise melee is going to still be stuck in the same rut. Just too easy to mitigate for minimal cost.

And all those trash units are going to cost more points. And Orks will benefit from cover more often. And this stratagem applies to all models in your army against the fleeing unit. Doesn't need to be a single unit of Boyz.

There's a lot more to the picture.

**Martel732**

The melee units will cost more too. Melee will continue to be easily dominated by cheap screens. Unless you tripoint and turn their entire off. What awesome choices.

**Galef**

Overall I have to say that I'm loving the changes so far.
Being able to take my whole army on a single detachment and getting MORE CP then I was using 3 detachments before is great

I feel like this simple change with stop all the silly faction combos to min/max CPs.
It also might bring back proper themed armies, like Deathwing/Ravenwing with proper Termies/Bikes.

If I can take an Outrider Detachment and still get plenty of CPs, my Windriders might see the table again as a proper core for my army.

-

**rbstr**

In general I think the new CP system is moving in the right direction.

A concern is that taking more than one Tau Commander is now going to cost not only the points for filling a detachment but some/a CP, unless they change the one-per-detachment rule (seems unlikely with the FSE rule in the PA book).
That's a pretty annoying nerf. Particularly in the face of the kinds of killy HQs that are out there these days.

**Arachnofiend**

We have an entirely new term where they would have said "within 1 inch" in 8th. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect some rules changes to make it so large units can actually fully engage a charged enemy, rather than just the front two rows.

**Ice_can**

rbstr wrote:
Taking more than one Tau Commander is now going to cost not only the points for filling a detachment but a CP, unless they change the one-per-detachment rule (seems unlikely with the FSE rule in the PA book).

That's a pretty annoying nerf. Particularly in the face of the kinds of killy HQs that are out there these days.

Roumer doing the rounds is that may no longer be such a Tau only limit imbalance as apparently GW didn't appreciate 3 smash captains.

I doubt it's tau levels of ouch but yeah Tau are going to need some serious errata at this rate

**Aash**

Ice_can wrote:
rbstr wrote:
Taking more than one Tau Commander is now going to cost not only the points for filling a detachment but a CP, unless they change the one-per-detachment rule (seems unlikely with the FSE rule in the PA book).

That's a pretty annoying nerf. Particularly in the face of the kinds of killy HQs that are out there these days.

Roumer doing the rounds is that may no longer be such a Tau only limit imbalance as apparently GW didn't appreciate 3 smash captains.

I doubt it's tau levels of ouch but yeah Tau are going to need some serious errata at this rate

I’ve always thought that top level leaders should be limited to one per detachment, Tau commanders, space marine captains, hive tyrants etc. The only problem is that some factions don’t have enough HQ options to make this viable. If that rumour does turn out to be true I really hope they expand the HQ options where needed.

**Ice_can**

Aash wrote:
Ice_can wrote:
rbstr wrote:
Taking more than one Tau Commander is now going to cost not only the points for filling a detachment but a CP, unless they change the one-per-detachment rule (seems unlikely with the FSE rule in the PA book).

That's a pretty annoying nerf. Particularly in the face of the kinds of killy HQs that are out there these days.

Roumer doing the rounds is that may no longer be such a Tau only limit imbalance as apparently GW didn't appreciate 3 smash captains.

I doubt it's tau levels of ouch but yeah Tau are going to need some serious errata at this rate

I’ve always thought that top level leaders should be limited to one per detachment, Tau commanders, space marine captains, hive tyrants etc. The only problem is that some factions don’t have enough HQ options to make this viable. If that rumour does turn out to be true I really hope they expand the HQ options where needed.

Yeah though in the mean time my Tau will be all in on being Farsight.

**alextroy**

Interesting thought about Patrol detachment cost.

GW said that Raiding Party will still work under the new rules. For those who have forgotten, Raiding Party gives 4 CP to an army with 3 Drukhari Patrol detachments and 8 CP do an army with 6 Drukhari Patrol detachments. Knowing this, what is the Command Cost of a Patrol detachment?

I theorize the more units a detachment can have, the more CP it will cost. Otherwise, it would be too expensive to add a second small detachment to your army in a small game.

So if a Patrol is 2 CP and Raiding Party gives you 4 CP for taking 3 Patrols, a 3 Patrol Drukhari army will have no net cost for extra detachments: Patrol with Warlord is free, 2 additional patrols cost 4, you gain 4 from Raiding Party. And a 6 Patrol army would cost the Drukhari army only 2 CP: Free first Patrol with Warlord, pay 10 for 5 more Patrols, gain 8 for Raiding party.

Did GW just back into making Drukhari play they way they wrote the book? All they have to do is remove the detachment limitation from Tournament play. Why wouldn't then when it cost CP to add detachments?

Thoughts?

**catbarf**

alextroy wrote:
Interesting thought about Patrol detachment cost.

GW said that Raiding Party will still work under the new rules. For those who have forgotten, Raiding Party gives 4 CP to an army with 3 Drukhari Patrol detachments and 8 CP do an army with 6 Drukhari Patrol detachments. Knowing this, what is the Command Cost of a Patrol detachment?

I theorize the more units a detachment can have, the more CP it will cost. Otherwise, it would be too expensive to add a second small detachment to your army in a small game.

So if a Patrol is 2 CP and Raiding Party gives you 4 CP for taking 3 Patrols, a 3 Patrol Drukhari army will have no net cost for extra detachments: Patrol with Warlord is free, 2 additional patrols cost 4, you gain 4 from Raiding Party. And a 6 Patrol army would cost the Drukhari army only 2 CP: Free first Patrol with Warlord, pay 10 for 5 more Patrols, gain 8 for Raiding party.

Did GW just back into making Drukhari play they way they wrote the book? All they have to do is remove the detachment limitation from Tournament play. Why wouldn't then when it cost CP to add detachments?

Thoughts?

That seems like a solid theory. I figured Patrols would cost 1CP and Brigades would cost 5CP, basically inverting the bonuses from when 8th launched, but then there wouldn't be much reason to take Battalions or Brigades as additional detachments since you could fit more stuff in Patrols. 2CP for a Patrol and maybe 4CP for a Brigade seems likely to me.

No idea what they'll do with Vanguard/Outrider/Spearhead, but I would assume probably 3CP. Same cost as a Battalion, fewer slots overall, but more slots in the type you want. Aside from Vanguard, but that really ought to allow up to 12 Elites to match the pattern established by the other two.

**Argive**

ERJAK wrote:
Argive wrote:
so a g-man ultra marine brigade now makes you 15 cp +1 cp each turn ? lol...

Isn't G-man a LoW? So he can't be your warlord and in your brigade AND he doesn't get the benefit of eliminating CP costs, so best case scenario with him as your warlord with Superheavy Aux and Brigade costing 1 each it's 13+1, which forces you to run a brigade, which really limits your options in a UM setup. SuperheavyAux could also cost 3+ CP as well.

Now CALGAR in a brigade might get you a good chunk of CP but Girlyman eats through his own bonus just being there.

My bad. Keep forgetting hes a LOW.
So he will pay for the supreme command or aux you put him in while calgar will effectively give you a free detachment.

Other HQ that Generate CP just for existing are going to skew this CP malarkay.

I'm not sure how I feel about his as not all faction have access to a characters that generates CP when you take them. I think we will see some armies starting on 15 CP and others on 6 because they cant just mono cheese their traits/doctrines.

Whats interesting is that they changed the detachment structure for the battalion. So its very early days to make an educated judgement. For all we know a brigade might be totaly different and not require elites at all for example.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

alextroy wrote:
Interesting thought about Patrol detachment cost.

GW said that Raiding Party will still work under the new rules. For those who have forgotten, Raiding Party gives 4 CP to an army with 3 Drukhari Patrol detachments and 8 CP do an army with 6 Drukhari Patrol detachments. Knowing this, what is the Command Cost of a Patrol detachment?

I theorize the more units a detachment can have, the more CP it will cost. Otherwise, it would be too expensive to add a second small detachment to your army in a small game.

So if a Patrol is 2 CP and Raiding Party gives you 4 CP for taking 3 Patrols, a 3 Patrol Drukhari army will have no net cost for extra detachments: Patrol with Warlord is free, 2 additional patrols cost 4, you gain 4 from Raiding Party. And a 6 Patrol army would cost the Drukhari army only 2 CP: Free first Patrol with Warlord, pay 10 for 5 more Patrols, gain 8 for Raiding party.

Did GW just back into making Drukhari play they way they wrote the book? All they have to do is remove the detachment limitation from Tournament play. Why wouldn't then when it cost CP to add detachments?

Thoughts?

Who knows right now. A lot of change is happening the battalion has been changed so who knows what the others will look like or what the final costs will be. Im really surprised they didint do a cost for 1500pts game it seems stupid and players will have to come up with a number on their own. Dumb.

Maybe by the time the DE book comes out all that nonsense will be fixed.

**catbarf**

Argive wrote:
Whats interesting is that they changed the detachment structure for the battalion.

Isn't it exactly the same as 8th? 2-3 HQ, 3-6 Troops, 0-6 Elites, 0-3 Fast Attack, 0-3 Heavy Support, 0-2 Flyers?

**Argive**

catbarf wrote:
Argive wrote:
Whats interesting is that they changed the detachment structure for the battalion.

Isn't it exactly the same as 8th? 2-3 HQ, 3-6 Troops, 0-6 Elites, 0-3 Fast Attack, 0-3 Heavy Support, 0-2 Flyers?

Damn my bad. Yeah you are right. I thought it was 0-3 elites originaly. I never used many elite slots in my lists...

**Amishprn86**

alextroy wrote:
Interesting thought about Patrol detachment cost.

GW said that Raiding Party will still work under the new rules. For those who have forgotten, Raiding Party gives 4 CP to an army with 3 Drukhari Patrol detachments and 8 CP do an army with 6 Drukhari Patrol detachments. Knowing this, what is the Command Cost of a Patrol detachment?

I theorize the more units a detachment can have, the more CP it will cost. Otherwise, it would be too expensive to add a second small detachment to your army in a small game.

So if a Patrol is 2 CP and Raiding Party gives you 4 CP for taking 3 Patrols, a 3 Patrol Drukhari army will have no net cost for extra detachments: Patrol with Warlord is free, 2 additional patrols cost 4, you gain 4 from Raiding Party. And a 6 Patrol army would cost the Drukhari army only 2 CP: Free first Patrol with Warlord, pay 10 for 5 more Patrols, gain 8 for Raiding party.

Did GW just back into making Drukhari play they way they wrote the book? All they have to do is remove the detachment limitation from Tournament play. Why wouldn't then when it cost CP to add detachments?

Thoughts?

10 of us was asking GW about Raiding Force, they didn't say a word about it, where did they say something about it?

**alextroy**

He specifically stated the the Drukhari and Knights special detachment rules would still be in effect.

**Amishprn86**

alextroy wrote:
He specifically stated the the Drukhari and Knights special detachment rules would still be in effect.

Yes like they are now, all rules are porting over, thats not what i was tlaking about, I'm saying he didn't say it was going to be useful, a 1 to 1 port doesn't mean it got changed.

**DominayTrix**

This seems like it's going to take a pretty massive overhaul for strategem costs. 12 CP goes a lot farther for Knights/Marines/Custodes than it does Tau/Guard/orks..

**Gadzilla666**

DominayTrix wrote:
This seems like it's going to take a pretty massive overhaul for strategem costs. 12 CP goes a lot farther for Knights/Marines/Custodes than it does Tau/Guard/orks..

Or csm....

**Not Online!!!**

Gadzilla666 wrote:
DominayTrix wrote:
This seems like it's going to take a pretty massive overhaul for strategem costs. 12 CP goes a lot farther for Knights/Marines/Custodes than it does Tau/Guard/orks..

Or csm....

Whats there to not Like about beeing for 2 turns your favourite Legion and afterwards generic splinter warband 10882749?
/S

**H.B.M.C.**

Every Chaos list I've built this edition has been Red Corsairs Battalion, or Red Corsairs Battalion + an Alpha Spearhead. The new system means more CP for me (unless Spearheads cost heaps of CP).

But here's a question I have: In this new system what is the purpose of a Brigade Detachment? About the only advantage to a Brigade that could see was that you got more from it than 2x Battalion. Now there's no inherent advantage over a Brigade that we can see so far, and it'll cost more CP to take.

So why take one?