<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title><![CDATA[Latest posts for the thread "Formation should require detachments."]]></title>
		<link>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/16.page</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Latest messages posted in the thread "Formation should require detachments."]]></description>
		<generator>JForum - http://www.jforum.net</generator>
			<item>
				<title>Formation should require detachments.</title>
				<description><![CDATA[ Attaching a formation into another army is getting a bit abusive now that the new Codice is just filled with them. For example, there is a 3 Dire Avenger formation in the new Eldar Codex. It makes almost no sense to play Grey knights and put  3 Dire Avengers inside Wave Serpents and be fine with that in a tournament. <br /> <br /> What I want to suggest is that formation MUST include a Detachment, be it Combined Arms Detachment, Allied Detachment or specific Detachment stated in Codex, such as Real Space Raiders and Nemesis Strike Force. Here are a few implications:<br /> <br /> - Formations become not viable in small games.<br /> <br /> - Adamantium Lance requires 4 Knights in total, 3 for the Formation and 1 for Detachment.<br /> <br /> - Assassin formation gain the ability to be deployed without a detachment. The same goes for Heroes' Path in harlquin Codex because that kinda makes sense.<br /> <br /> Anyone has any opinion on this?<br /> ]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/645391/7770751.page</guid>
				<link>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/645391/7770751.page</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Mon, 20 Apr 2015 19:15:28]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ bibotot]]></author>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>Formation should require detachments.</title>
				<description><![CDATA[ In the States, the big tournaments have a 2-detachment limit, where a formation counts as one of the two. Personally, I disagree with formations in general (I would rather a core ruleset that allows you to emphasize a particular army role) but for most purposes, the 2-detachment limit does its job.]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/645391/7770769.page</guid>
				<link>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/645391/7770769.page</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Mon, 20 Apr 2015 19:20:38]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ MagicJuggler]]></author>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>Formation should require detachments.</title>
				<description><![CDATA[ <span class="glossaryitem" onmouseover='gp(71);'>Imho</span> it's fine, as long as you don't abuse/exploit it. But then I don't play competitively so take that with a pinch of salt ^^.]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/645391/7770784.page</guid>
				<link>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/645391/7770784.page</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Mon, 20 Apr 2015 19:26:59]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ Roknar]]></author>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>Formation should require detachments.</title>
				<description><![CDATA[ Nope... I really think detachments should have atleast 2 worthless units that dont really do anything and just take up points to balance out the awesome perks they get. ]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/645391/7770971.page</guid>
				<link>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/645391/7770971.page</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:34:01]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ Filch]]></author>
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>