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.

So I came up with this in another thread and decided to post it here to avoid derailing someone else's post.

original post:


To summarise, you;

1: base the amount of CP generated on the amount of units in a detachment, rather than simply by fulfilling the minimums of the detachment.
2: Increase the maximum amount of CP generated by each detachment
3: Add Formations, which are combinations of detachments, and must all be the same army, as if they were one detachment.
3: Only allow the use of CP from one detachment or formation- and it must contain your warlord.

So my suggestion was to redesign the whole "Detachment" thing to make detachments smaller and more specialist. Then, introduce "Formation" which combine Detachments to produce things similar to current detachments.

so you would have a HQ detachment of 1-2 HQ's, and "TROOPS" of 1-3 Troops. Then you would have the ELITES Detachment of 1-3 elites, FAST ATTACK of 1-3 fast attack, HEAVY SUPPORT of 1-3 heavy supports, and FLIER of 1-2 fliers. Each would grant 1 CP. There would be a rule to prevent extra detachments being taken if the previous wasn't full - so you can't take 2 elite detachments of 1 unit.
There would have to be a "HQ" one of 1-2 HQ as well.

Then you have the "Batallion" formation, which would comprise of 1 HQ and 2 TROOPS detachments, 0-2 ELITE detachments, 0-1 FAST ATTACK detachments, 0-1 HEAVY SUPPORT Detachments and 0-1 FLIER Detachments.

The battalion would grant double CP for each detachment. so if you filled it, you would get 16CP. If you had the minimum of 2 troops & 1 HQ, you get 6CP.

A Brigade would be 3 HQ, 6 TROOPS, 1-3 ELITE, 1-2 FAST ATTACK, 1-2 HEAVY SUPPORT and 0-1 FLIER.
If it doubled CP, as above, it would give 24CP minimum and 34CP Max. Which may be a bit much.

Outriders, spearheads and vanguards would have 1 HQ, 1 Troops and 1-3 of their specialty. They wouldn't double CP.

Then, you can only use a single formation or detachment to generate CP, and you must have your warlord in it.

The repercussions are that you can take more soup if you want, by taking nothing but "ELITE" detachments for different armies and mixing them all together. But, you would end up with only 1 CP for the detachment with your warlord in it.

Or, you could take a load of minimal battalions, like soup is now, but end up with only 6CP for the one battalion used as your warlords.

Or, you could take a pure army with a single, full brigade, and gain 34CP, but none of the flexibility of allies. or 2 maxed battalions, from different armies, for 16CP.

Additional Formations can be added to include superheavies, or tank columns (no non-vehicle units allowed, unless they have a dedicated transport), like the old formations but less strict and with less special rules added in. They would be designed to let people bring fun armies but keep them viable - speed freeks where if everything's got 10+" movement or is in a trukk, they double the CP generated like a battalion. I'm sure there's plenty of armies which can't build a themed list because it performs poorly, and this could save them.

Thoughts?

On one hand I run a soup army, CSM with iron warriors, night lords and alpha legion. I don't see why eliminating soup is a priority.

On the other hand I would like to do a necron army and of course necrons are one of a couple armies that can't soup at all.

I'm not sure I think soup needs to be eliminated, a lot of the 40k stories have alliances in them. But it can give a soup capable army a big advantage over a soupless army.

Soup will never be eliminated. Its how GW wants 40k to be played.

The number of CP given neeeeds to be toned down. 34 CP for a batallion? Even if that wholly requires the whole formation to be filled...only 1 or 2 armies can do that reliably. (Guard, Nids).

I don't...mind soup. However, I dislike that you can run armies of like...3 super heavies and some support characters and call it "an army"

 Techpriestsupport wrote:
On one hand I run a soup army, CSM with iron warriors, night lords and alpha legion. I don't see why eliminating soup is a priority.

Aren't those "factions" from the same codex? If that's the case your army is not a soup. Lists with evil sunz+bad moons or kabal+coven (or wych cult) are not examples of soups.

24-34 CPs sounds crazy. I'd cap around 15 the max you can get for a 2000 points army. I wouldn't mind an average of 8-9 per army.

Ok, yeah I think that the CP was a bit excessive.

So, if we remove the doubling CP for Battalions & Brigades, we are left with the simple approach of CP = number of units in largest formation/detachment.

This will incentivise larger forces in single detachments, and did-incentivise massed mini brigades to generate CP.


In fact, you could scrap the whole detachments & formations thing I suggested in the first place and go for a flat:

"each player has 1CP for each unit in their warlords detachment".

bam.

Units built around a solid, cohesive army? Check.
Soup still useable but not for CP Spam? Check.
Battallion still more CP than a brigade? Check.

in fact your force can easily just grow from one into the other.

if you want more heavy supports or fast attack, split your army but accept you're getting less CP than if you added something you don't already have.

MSU armies are laughing all the way to the CP bank.

Sterling191 wrote:
MSU armies are laughing all the way to the CP bank.

And that's good, as most CP use is on a single unit, so a MSU army would generate more CP and yet be less effective at using it!

Also they would have to have MSU for all the slots to capitalise on this, where most armies have MSU for troops and then more expensive units for elites through to heavies. so in larger games it balances out, and in smaller games they would take MSU troops to get CP and then be destroyed by a balanced army that also happens to get CP.

I think that this would bring a balance between CP generated and how effective the CP is when used. you will still end up with a cheap guard battalion generating CP, but not to the extent they do now, I feel, and with reduced effectiveness as the game size increases and they hit the upper limits of troops slots. the "loyal 32" would be a thing of the past. People would have to consider the merits of units beyond their ability to generate CP to shout at knight to make him more effective!

TBH, the best way to tone down CP farms is tie the number of command points an army gets directly to the points in the battle.

3 CP per 500 points, to a max of 12 at 2000. No muss. No fuss.

Reduces the incentive for MSU spam to get command points. Just spend points on the models you want.

Then again, I also think that a batallion should be required to unlock outriders, vanguards and spearheads to reduce spam.

An easier fix would be 3-fold:
A) return Battalions and Brigades to 3/9cps respectively. I.e. return hem to "factor settings"
B) Battle Forge grants 5CPs, not 3
C) Detachments that share AT LEAST 2 or more keyword with your WL double their CPs generated.

For example:
An army including a BA WL with a BA Battalion (+3 x2), BA Outrider (+1 x2) and Guard battalion (+3) would have 16CPs

This change rewards lists that stick with the same faction without over-nerfing Allies
The idea being that cheap Allies can't be a means to fish for CPs as effectively as just sticking with the same faction

-

 iGuy91 wrote:
TBH, the best way to tone down CP farms is tie the number of command points an army gets directly to the points in the battle.

3 CP per 500 points, to a max of 12 at 2000. No muss. No fuss.

Reduces the incentive for MSU spam to get command points. Just spend points on the models you want.

Then again, I also think that a batallion should be required to unlock outriders, vanguards and spearheads to reduce spam.

I do think this would work but only if we go back to the brilliant old days where you had to stick to the force organisation chart, and that was that - no extra detachments, no spam. you want 4 HS choices, tough, you got 3. go use other units.

However, if there is no reward for sticking to detachments then there is no incentive not to just bring the scariest models you have without any troop tax or anything. you could face 2k points of pure mek guns, with the same CP as a balanced army with a leadership structure.

though by keeping the -1CP for adding in a single unit of any type you could temper this.

I still like the 1CP per unit in the warlords detachment.

 some bloke wrote:

the "loyal 32" would be a thing of the past.

You're right, you'll have the loyal 71 giving you 12 CPs for ~400 points instead. All the benefits of a Brigade without needing to fill out a Brigade? No way that could go wrong.

 Galef wrote:
An easier fix would be 3-fold:
A) return Battalions and Brigades to 3/9cps respectively. I.e. return hem to "factor settings"
B) Battle Forge grants 5CPs, not 3
C) Detachments that share AT LEAST 2 or more keyword with your WL double their CPs generated.

For example:
An army a BA WL with a BA Battalion (+6), BA Outrider (+2) and Guard battalion (+3) would have 16CPs

This change rewards lists that stick with the same faction without over-nerfing Allies
The idea being that Allies don't get to use as many command benefits from the ARMY'S commander.

-

I'm trying to avoid the whole "KEYWORD" thing as a lot of people have pointed out already that there are armies which suffer from units being disallowed because of this. I think just one detachment generating CP, based on how big the detachment is, would be beneficial to the balance of the game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sterling191 wrote:

 some bloke wrote:

the "loyal 32" would be a thing of the past.

You're right, you'll have the loyal 71 giving you 12 CPs for ~400 points instead.

Yes, but that's all they would get - you wouldn't get to take 5 in a 2k list for 60CP, you would only get the one detachment of it.

what's the most CP you can get by binging loyal 32 lists at the moment in 2k?

 some bloke wrote:

what's the most CP you can get by binging loyal 32 lists at the moment in 2k?

15 if you're dumb about it and lock yourself into a pure Guard force. But folks who are using the guard CP battery don't play it dumb, and will happily run the equivalent of two for the benefit of a brigade's worth of CP, plus ridiculous board control and indirect fire capacity in a single detachment, leaving two for their primary army.

And this isn't taking into consideration what for instance Kabals could do.

I'm afraid I'm not a fan of this, some bloke.

It feels like it would punish thematic armies and allied armies on principle rather than addressing specific issues. If I want a roughly 50/50 split between my dark eldar and harlequins or a 50/50 split between my sisters and guardsmen, then I'm not likely to have nearly as large of a detachment for my warlord as I would if I went with an 80/20 split instead. Additionally, thematic lists like deathwing and ravenwing that focus on having lots of FA and Elites respectively are being punished for having the audacity to not be taken from semi-arbitrarily declared "troops" units.

Want to field your chariot and seeker heavy Slaaneshi daemons alongside their slaaneshi biker buddies? That's cool, but you'll only have a couple CP. Meanwhile, the guardsman gunline with a castellan backing them up will have a maxed out batallion's worth.

Your system would be an interesting way of forcing players to take a well-rounded list in the style of the old force org chart, but I'm not sure that's really a desirable thing in the modern incarnation of the game. The rule of 3 already prevents people from spamming a given unit any more than they would have in a force org chart, and forcing people to take units from lots of different slots just rewards books that happen to be lucky enough to have competitive options in all slots while also punishing thematic armies that happen to have many units in a handful of the same slots.

So I guess I'm just not sure what the advantage of this would be outside of punishing people for not playing oldschool 40k.

CP's should've been how warp charges worked in prior editions - you determine how many commands you can give (i.e. how many command points you have) at the beginning of each battleround, non-recycling.

Detachment based CP generation is loose and prone to abuse.

They need to make all troops worth their points on their own right and not band-aid fix them with detachments that give you more CP's for taking them.

Troops' uselessness is offset by CP generation. Poor game design.

 skchsan wrote:
CP's should've been how warp charges worked in prior editions - you determine how many commands you can give (i.e. how many command points you have) at the beginning of each battleround, non-recycling.

Detachment based CP generation is loose and prone to abuse.

They need to make all troops worth their points on their own right and not band-aid fix them with detachments that give you more CP's for taking them.

Troops' uselessness is offset by CP generation. Poor game design.

Yeah, I'd like to see something like this too, but for army size, rather than HQ based (because some factions can take tons of "commanders")
But CPs given by detachments would be good too, just not so many.

If I were to completely rewrite the system, it would look like this:
Battle Forged armies generate 1CP at the start of each Battle round, +1CP per 500pts of the army size.
So a 2000pt army would get 5CPs each turn. These CPs are lost if not used by the end of the Battle round

After that, detachments could add a "pool" of CP just like it does now that your army can use/hold from turn to turn.
A Battalion might give 2CPs while Brigades would give 5CPs. These CPs are not lost until used

-

 Galef wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
CP's should've been how warp charges worked in prior editions - you determine how many commands you can give (i.e. how many command points you have) at the beginning of each battleround, non-recycling.

Detachment based CP generation is loose and prone to abuse.

They need to make all troops worth their points on their own right and not band-aid fix them with detachments that give you more CP's for taking them.

Troops' uselessness is offset by CP generation. Poor game design.

Yeah, I'd like to see something like this too, but for army size, rather than HQ based (because some factions can take tons of "commanders")
But CPs given by detachments would be good too, just not so many.

If I were to completely rewrite the system, it would look like this:
Battle Forged armies generate 1CP at the start of each Battle round, +1CP per 500pts of the army size.
So a 2000pt army would get 5CPs each turn. These CPs are lost if not used by the end of the Battle round

After that, detachments could add a "pool" of CP just like it does now that your army can use/hold from turn to turn.
A Battalion might give 2CPs while Brigades would give 5CPs. These CPs are not lost until used

-

I'm not opposed to something sort of along these lines, but how many CP would you give people pre-game for deepstriking and relic purchasing and so forth?

Wyldhunt wrote:

 Galef wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
CP's should've been how warp charges worked in prior editions - you determine how many commands you can give (i.e. how many command points you have) at the beginning of each battleround, non-recycling.

Detachment based CP generation is loose and prone to abuse.

They need to make all troops worth their points on their own right and not band-aid fix them with detachments that give you more CP's for taking them.

Troops' uselessness is offset by CP generation. Poor game design.

Yeah, I'd like to see something like this too, but for army size, rather than HQ based (because some factions can take tons of "commanders")
But CPs given by detachments would be good too, just not so many.

If I were to completely rewrite the system, it would look like this:
Battle Forged armies generate 1CP at the start of each Battle round, +1CP per 500pts of the army size.
So a 2000pt army would get 5CPs each turn. These CPs are lost if not used by the end of the Battle round

After that, detachments could add a "pool" of CP just like it does now that your army can use/hold from turn to turn.
A Battalion might give 2CPs while Brigades would give 5CPs. These CPs are not lost until used

-

I'm not opposed to something sort of along these lines, but how many CP would you give people pre-game for deepstriking and relic purchasing and so forth?

The relics one is actually simple: Relics shouldn't be free and need to cost points again.

Wyldhunt wrote:

 Galef wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
CP's should've been how warp charges worked in prior editions - you determine how many commands you can give (i.e. how many command points you have) at the beginning of each battleround, non-recycling.

Detachment based CP generation is loose and prone to abuse.

They need to make all troops worth their points on their own right and not band-aid fix them with detachments that give you more CP's for taking them.

Troops' uselessness is offset by CP generation. Poor game design.

Yeah, I'd like to see something like this too, but for army size, rather than HQ based (because some factions can take tons of "commanders")
But CPs given by detachments would be good too, just not so many.

If I were to completely rewrite the system, it would look like this:
Battle Forged armies generate 1CP at the start of each Battle round, +1CP per 500pts of the army size.
So a 2000pt army would get 5CPs each turn. These CPs are lost if not used by the end of the Battle round

After that, detachments could add a "pool" of CP just like it does now that your army can use/hold from turn to turn.
A Battalion might give 2CPs while Brigades would give 5CPs. These CPs are not lost until used

-

I'm not opposed to something sort of along these lines, but how many CP would you give people pre-game for deepstriking and relic purchasing and so forth?

They should do away with pregame stratagems as this too is largely prone to abuse.