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.

 LunarSol wrote:
This is such overcomplicated nonsense. I'm kind of entertained.

This makes me kind of miss the overwrought rules of Horus Heresy.

 Nevelon wrote:

GW wrote: we've seen a lot of questions about whether you can use a 3DP detachment as your only detachment in your army at 1000 points (a common size for doubles games). Our intent is to let you do so and we will be making an update to clarify that in the first update to the Muster Army rules after launch. Effectively, you can always choose to pick any one, lone detachment, regardless of the mission size, even if it costs more Detachment Points than that game might normally allow.

In regards to the smaller games and DP issue, from today’s event article

So what's the point of limiting 1k pt games to 2dp???

Because you can still run 2 1dp detachments or any single detachment. Seems simple enough, could’ve been clear from the beginning but it’s resolved it.

ccs wrote:

So what's the point of limiting 1k pt games to 2dp???

I guess it still means you can only pick two 1dp detachments at any one time, rather than 3. But yes, it does seem like they have kinda undone the entire point of this in a panic response to the Imperial Agents cockup.

 Lathe Biosas wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
You could convert or kitbash your own Draxus, perhaps? Inquisitors are fun projects.

After the negative feedback I got when asking about using the HH Land Raider as a Venerable Custodes Land Raider in 40k, I'm a little hesitant to convert a named character.

I kitbashed my own Ragnar, before I got the actual model (Long before the resculpt was ever done)
He used to be painted, but I stripped and re-primed him to paint again.
Mine's the one on the right LOL.

Am I missing it?

How do we determine the army's disposition?

Do you pick it? Or, does each detachment comes with a disposition?

The reason why I'm now a little gunshy about using other stuff is that I have a couple issues that I think will make everything plain.

About a year ago I moved to Florida, during the process, my Imperial Knight army and a smattering of allies were lost in the move.

For a bit, I wasn't sure if I was going to get back in, and after a few stalled attempts I decided on Custodes.

Currently, I don't know the current gaming groups, most of what I can look forward to are Warhammer Store Combat Patrol games or another shop where it's all about paid league games and training for tournaments.

I'm also temporarily bound by public transportation. Getting to a shop takes a long time and I can only carry so much stuff. I don't really want to worry about showing up to a shop to have someone point and say, "you can't use that." And Im SOL for the day.

That's why.

 whembly wrote:
Am I missing it?

How do we determine the army's disposition?

Do you pick it? Or, does each detachment comes with a disposition?

It's determined by the Detachment. All of the preview articles contain a list of detatchments, their disposition and DP cost. This will likely be in the MFM or a similar document soon.

 whembly wrote:
Am I missing it?

How do we determine the army's disposition?

Do you pick it? Or, does each detachment comes with a disposition?

GW said those will be in the next Munitorum Field Manual, together with the actual points.
Edit: To be clear, disposition depends on your chosen detachments, and the MFM will list which detachments will have which disposition.

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
The reason why I'm now a little gunshy about using other stuff is that I have a couple issues that I think will make everything plain.

About a year ago I moved to Florida, during the process, my Imperial Knight army and a smattering of allies were lost in the move.

For a bit, I wasn't sure if I was going to get back in, and after a few stalled attempts I decided on Custodes.

Currently, I don't know the current gaming groups, most of what I can look forward to are Warhammer Store Combat Patrol games or another shop where it's all about paid league games and training for tournaments.

I'm also temporarily bound by public transportation. Getting to a shop takes a long time and I can only carry so much stuff. I don't really want to worry about showing up to a shop to have someone point and say, "you can't use that." And Im SOL for the day.

That's why.

I had something similar happen to me.

Lost my entire collection (40k SW and 2nd ed rules + codex, Fantasy Dwarves + rules + army book, Man-o-war elves fleet, necromunda gang + rules)
This was back in 2000-2001. Me and my ex had all our stuff in storage as we had moved out of state as a trial-run to see if the move would be permanent. We ended up splitting up and had agreed we would take turns paying the storage fee. (we both had stuff in there, plus our kid's stuff)
At some point, she had decided not to pay so everything was lost before I could get any of it out.

At any rate, what I would do in your shoes: Plan on using the conversion as most would be fine with it, but have a replacement unit or something so if you get there and they say no, you can just swap it out and still get a game in.
As I said though, most people would be fine with it.

*edit to add*
I carried it all in one of these:
Top was for large models and all the books
1 tray for 40k
1 tray for fantasy
last tray for necromunda and MOW

It's a good carry solution if you're not worried about padding your minis to protect the paint. (although they should be fine if they have sealer on them)
Now my 40k army takes 2.
Anyway, the point is you can carry a lot in 1 so should be able to bring lots of options without taking up much room or being cumbersom on public transport.

 LunarSol wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Am I missing it?

How do we determine the army's disposition?

Do you pick it? Or, does each detachment comes with a disposition?

It's determined by the Detachment. All of the preview articles contain a list of detatchments, their disposition and DP cost. This will likely be in the MFM or a similar document soon.

 Tallandra wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Am I missing it?

How do we determine the army's disposition?

Do you pick it? Or, does each detachment comes with a disposition?

GW said those will be in the next Munitorum Field Manual, together with the actual points.
Edit: To be clear, disposition depends on your chosen detachments, and the MFM will list which detachments will have which disposition.

Thanks guys, I was reading all the previews and was struggling with this. I'm not missing it... just need to be patient.

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
I'm also temporarily bound by public transportation. Getting to a shop takes a long time and I can only carry so much stuff. I don't really want to worry about showing up to a shop to have someone point and say, "you can't use that." And Im SOL for the day.

If you can afford to play 40k, surely you can afford a car?

But if they can afford 40k and a car, can they still afford fuel?

 Dysartes wrote:
But if they can afford 40k and a car, can they still afford fuel?

Touché

 vipoid wrote:

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
I'm also temporarily bound by public transportation. Getting to a shop takes a long time and I can only carry so much stuff. I don't really want to worry about showing up to a shop to have someone point and say, "you can't use that." And Im SOL for the day.

If you can afford to play 40k, surely you can afford a car?

I have a car, but I can't drive until September 6th due to a March 6th seizure...

Could be a similar situation.

 RaptorusRex wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
I'm also temporarily bound by public transportation. Getting to a shop takes a long time and I can only carry so much stuff. I don't really want to worry about showing up to a shop to have someone point and say, "you can't use that." And Im SOL for the day.

If you can afford to play 40k, surely you can afford a car?

I have a car, but I can't drive until September 6th due to a March 6th seizure...

Could be a similar situation.

Oof. Sorry to hear that.

Kind of have mixed feelings about how the tax for 3+ copies of a given unit are being handled. On one hand, I get the desire to cut down on spam. But on the other, this does feel like it kind of discourages some armies from fielding themed lists. Especially if they don't have huge model ranges with lots of datasheets to choose from.

I've played oops-all-scourges a couple of times and enjoyed fluffing the army as being a solar cult attacking en force alongside their kabalite allies. If I want to run those 6 scourge squads now (3 heavy weapons, 3 carbines), then it costs me an extra 20 points. Probably not a big deal, but I notice that I can run a phobos-themed marine list without really having to worry about running into the same issue because they have so many different phobos kits/datasheets.

Similarly, scourges have been my go-to anti-tank, so this kind of feels like a ham-fisted way to get me to consider ravagers.

Idk. It's an old argument, but I feel like if people were spamming 3+ of the same unit for non-thematic reasons, it either means you made that unit undercosted or you designed the faction to be reliant on that unit. So a spam tax makes less sense to me than just fixing the unit's rules, base price, or not punishing players for playing an army with limited datasheets.

It's for units that get stronger the more you take of them. The first iteration here is crude, as you noticed, but the theory is sound. A single Defiler is a potent but manageable power player, able to be isolated and picked apart. Three Defilers together is overwhelming, able to rapidly destroy the units that would threaten them, and able to make risky plays since three Defilers are too much for many enemy counter-punches to crack.

If an enemy army can kill a single Defiler per turn with what they can reasonably afford to expose, then every Defiler you take past the first is much more valuable than the first in isolation, because they get to run unchecked.

Very few of them are truly prohibitive. I think if you're going for theme you can easily do so. It's probably not optimal but its far from a handicap. The big thing is they seem to have built a lot of these points to stop things like the ability to take 6 big Chaos Knights while acknowledging the Ruinator is a hilariously underwhelming loadout.

Yeah. I follow you, Ashiraya. I guess I'm just sort of surprised they felt the need to spam tax so many drukhari units Of our 20 datasheets that aren't epic heroes, 8 of them got a spam tax. (So 40% of the non-epic heroes part of the army.)

One of the things I've brought up in the "armies don't feel like armies anymore" threads is that while spam can be a sign that something is undercosted, it can also be a way to help convey the lore/theme of an army.

Over the last few editions, a lot of armies feel like they've been incentivized to take 1 or 2 (but no more) of certain units because the optimal strategies have revolved around comboing that unit with a certain stratagem or relic or what have you. And this has been a contributor to armies feeling more like "sample platters" rather than having coherent appearances and themes.

I don't want to sound like I'm belly-aching too hard because the spam tax will probably only cost me 20ish points when it comes up at all, but it does feel like GW is kind of telling me they want me to build a sample platter army rather than leaning into a few favorite units.

It also kind of feels weird because my ability to spam a unit is already capped at 3 for non-battleline stuff (which, for DE, doesn't have a spam tax anyway.) So it's not like they're taxing me 40 extra points for fielding 6 shardcarbine scoruge squads. They're charging me 10 extra points for fielding my 3rd out of 3 squads. Which feels... I'm struggling to find a better word than "petty." Like, those 10 points don't seem likely to be the exact tax needed to reign in a list that would otherwise be overpowered, you know? They're basically saying that using 3 mandrake squads and 3 shardcarbine scourge squads as your action monkeys would be so powerful it warrants an extra 20 point tax, but fielding 2 mandrakes, 2 scourges, and 2 reavers instead is fine. Feels odd.

A lot of it is them doing this just for its own sake.

Like there was a strong triple land raider Custodes build, so they nerfed triple land raider for everyone, even though it's terrible for most other factions already.

They also reduced points on the redeemer land raider on principle due to it autohitting and ignoring cover now overlapping the same benefit, but it absolutely didn't need it, it was already the best land raider and now it's even more the best.

I think like a lot of GW ideas its probably reasonable in theory, but the execution is so low effort/random you are left wondering why they bothered.

I mean 10 points isn't breaking the bank. But as you say - the idea that 3 units of Reavers or Mandrakes is some terrible spam, but 2 units of each is fine, just seems like a contrived effort to get you to run up to a couple of each.

It seems rather silly to have created detachments that buff 2-3 datasheets, and then punish people for taking 3 of said datasheet.

 Wyldhunt wrote:
Kind of have mixed feelings about how the tax for 3+ copies of a given unit are being handled. On one hand, I get the desire to cut down on spam. But on the other, this does feel like it kind of discourages some armies from fielding themed lists. Especially if they don't have huge model ranges with lots of datasheets to choose from.

I've played oops-all-scourges a couple of times and enjoyed fluffing the army as being a solar cult attacking en force alongside their kabalite allies. If I want to run those 6 scourge squads now (3 heavy weapons, 3 carbines), then it costs me an extra 20 points. Probably not a big deal, but I notice that I can run a phobos-themed marine list without really having to worry about running into the same issue because they have so many different phobos kits/datasheets.

Similarly, scourges have been my go-to anti-tank, so this kind of feels like a ham-fisted way to get me to consider ravagers.

Idk. It's an old argument, but I feel like if people were spamming 3+ of the same unit for non-thematic reasons, it either means you made that unit undercosted or you designed the faction to be reliant on that unit. So a spam tax makes less sense to me than just fixing the unit's rules, base price, or not punishing players for playing an army with limited datasheets.

Eh.
I've always found "oops, I spammed all one thing" 'theme' lists to be incredibly boring and reductive. Use a little imagination, or pay a small tax in points. If you like the theme that's probably not an issue.

Cynically, 40k isn't really a theme game like most people use the term.

It's a competitive mechanics game, not a fluff game. It's not hard to deduce. Look at how much attention GW puts into competitive updates vs narrative material, especially with no Crusade updates.

They already service the themes by giving you detachments somewhat playing into them. They don't want to go further than that.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Cynically, 40k isn't really a theme game like most people use the term.

It's a competitive mechanics game, not a fluff game. It's not hard to deduce. Look at how much attention GW puts into competitive updates vs narrative material, especially with no Crusade updates.

They already service the themes by giving you detachments somewhat playing into them. They don't want to go further than that.

Well it is now
But some people still cling to the idea of writing fun thematic lists. And it's easy to see why, 40k still has a very rich story behind it .

Yeah. Point is, a lot of players see a unit of Kastelan Robots, and care very little for its aesthetics and lore next to the fact that the new enhancement made a Kastelan unit candidate for an incredible power player in gameplay (just a single unit though, repeats are expensive).

GW is totally fine with catering to this and frankly the community brought it on itself at least to a significant degree. Tier lists and balance dataslate reaction videos are what get the clicks and engagement. GW is only too happy to oblige and feed the churn machine.

I definitely miss the evocative descriptions and artwork that we got for every unit in like 5th edition.

I really remember reading through and going "that's sick, I want that".

These days though there's none of that.
Units are pretty just presented as "there's a bunch of dudes, they have a sword" with maybe a brief splash text that says "these are cool guys with cool swords"

But yes I do agree the online content mills get a lot more out of talking strategy and that's pushed the community as well

Is it really boring and reductive to take 3 of a 75 point unit?

I mean those 15 point a model guys have a 3 shot splinter rifle. Yeah you better run. I guess the boosting AP could add up - but most DE shooting worth anything has a bazillion AP anyway. (Haywire Blasters into TEQ if you fancy having a go beyond fishing for 6s I guess. Splinter Cannon Scourge into MEQ perhaps? Just bring a Ravager.)

Tyel wrote:
Is it really boring and reductive to take 3 of a 75 point unit?

I mean those 15 point a model guys have a 3 shot splinter rifle. Yeah you better run. I guess the boosting AP could add up - but most DE shooting worth anything has a bazillion AP anyway. (Haywire Blasters into TEQ if you fancy having a go beyond fishing for 6s I guess. Splinter Cannon Scourge into MEQ perhaps? Just bring a Ravager.)

Is it much more boring and reductive than just taking 2 of that unit? Not really.
But then it's not too much more expensive either

 kirotheavenger wrote:

Eh.
I've always found "oops, I spammed all one thing" 'theme' lists to be incredibly boring and reductive. Use a little imagination, or pay a small tax in points. If you like the theme that's probably not an issue.

YMMV regarding how much you value taking multiples of certain units as a way of conveying theme. Back in ye olden days, it was fairly common to see mechanics that allowed you to represent a faction's theme by making it easier to take more of certain units. So if you wanted to lean into your army being White Scars, for instance, you might take a captain on bike who would then turn bikers into troops, functionally allowing you to take up to 6 units of them instead of the usual 3.

Agreed that the tax is small (though could add up for some armies; like I said, 40% of the drukhari codex has a spam tax now). It's one of those things that probably isn't actually a problem, but is annoying.

My wych cult's fluff involves them having close ties to mandrakes. When I play a cult-heavy list, I usually like to field three squads of mandrakes, partly for rules but partly to represent that fluff. Now I'm basically charged a 10 point tax for doing so. I guess the argument is that having redundant action monkeys is significantly more powerful than just having two units of action monkeys? It doesn't feel like GW is solving a problem in this case; it feels like they're telling me that I should be buying a sample platter of units instead of leaning into the ones I like.

EDIT: Like I said earlier, it seems like if their goal is to actually address a balance issue related to unit spam, it might make more sense to either up the base price of the apparently underpowered unit or to design the unit's faction better so that they aren't so dependent on that particular datasheet. If they're trying to address skew lists, then rules that actually target skew lists and don't disproportionately punish factions with a small number of datasheets would probably be a better way to go. It just doesn't feel like people running 3x5 mandrakes was actually a problem that needed to be solved.

But hey. Maybe I"ll try the new rules out and discover that an extra 10 points for my mandrakes is exactly what was needed to fix the game.