doubleback
novice
I rock harder than most, yet less hard than some.
Posts: 1,262
|
Post by doubleback on Apr 18, 2019 10:13:02 GMT -6
I would agree that not every unit need be "competitive", that's unrealistic, but I think as a whole, every codex should be with at least a couple build options. If you are going to sell competitive play through tournaments as something to do with your army, then it is your responsibility to your customers to make sure the product they are paying for functions at that level. If going forward you want to make a narrative only faction that people know from the outset won't be competitive that's fine, but if I've dropped hundreds into a faction already I expect to at least have a real chance on an even playing field.
|
|
cj
neophyte
Posts: 734
|
Post by cj on Apr 18, 2019 11:19:11 GMT -6
What are the currently non-competitive books? I'm not well versed in the meta.
|
|
|
Post by Nick P on Apr 18, 2019 12:21:00 GMT -6
I would agree that not every unit need be "competitive", that's unrealistic, but I think as a whole, every codex should be with at least a couple build options. If you are going to sell competitive play through tournaments as something to do with your army, then it is your responsibility to your customers to make sure the product they are paying for functions at that level. If going forward you want to make a narrative only faction that people know from the outset won't be competitive that's fine, but if I've dropped hundreds into a faction already I expect to at least have a real chance on an even playing field. See but then that's the issue right? Your $100s might be on units that actually are competitive, but someone else's $100s might be spent on fluffy units they think look cool -both won't be competitively viable in all likelihood. Even the "worst" codeces have a build or two that can compete - necrons suck for the most part, but triple DDAs and a tesseract ark do serious work. Grey knights suck for the most part, but spamming grand master dreadkights and interceptors and ven dreads with lascannons can do well. I'd even argue that if you remove soup and just go codex v codex pure faction, the game actually is much better balanced - GW hosts pure codex tournaments at warhammer world, and the finals for one of them was (if I remember correctly) Grey Knights vs Tau, which is something I don't know the community would have ever guessed. But then it goes back to the point about whether GW should get rid of Soup lists or at least tweak them so that pure faction armies have their day in the sun.
|
|
doubleback
novice
I rock harder than most, yet less hard than some.
Posts: 1,262
|
Post by doubleback on Apr 18, 2019 15:12:10 GMT -6
I love how wildly this thread has shifted, it might be the sole thing keeping me sane at work.
Nick, I get your point, and I have never begrudged a single unit not being competitive, that happens update to update and it is just part of the cycle of the game. You buy an army because you love it and you fill it with things that you like, that is how most of us play. The issue is 100% soup armies, and as far as I can tell there is only one fix.
Tau, Orks, and Necrons either get to be a soup army together, or you give one to each of the existing armies, excluding Imperium (because they are already too big and stupid)
Chaos soup gets the necrons (both are assholes, Chaos has a huge catalog and Necrons have a fairly small one)
Tyrannids/GSC get the Tau...because if anyone can talk to the Tyrannids its the fucking Tau, and everyone hates playing both of them.
Eldar get Orcs. They are opposite edges of the same Old One sword, and I feel like the Eldar take the Orks with a sense of humor
It's not a perfect system, primarily because Necrons don't get along with anyone, but its either this or only let soup armies fight other soup armies, because that shit is broken
|
|
doubleback
novice
I rock harder than most, yet less hard than some.
Posts: 1,262
|
Post by doubleback on Apr 18, 2019 15:17:29 GMT -6
What are the currently non-competitive books? I'm not well versed in the meta. Mono Codex, as a whole, is largely unable to match a soup army. It's not a 100% rule, but you don't see a lot of non-soup armies winning anything. If they do (you occasionally see something like DG crack into a top 5) it is because it's actually 50% or more FW. I mean remember how intense the speculation was that Orks were going to rip the meta apart? They might have shifted it slightly, but they aren't winning tournaments. SOup armies just have too many tools to balance out
|
|
|
Post by kingwalnut on Apr 18, 2019 15:19:41 GMT -6
I think I would like to see the GSC-Guard allies system implemented across the board.
1) You have to choose one of the factions of your list as your "Main Faction". All others are "Secondary Factions".
2) Your Warlord and relics have to be from the main faction.
3) You get 1/2 CP bonus (rounded up) from detachments that are not from your Main faction.
It is how it works for the GSC right now and I think it could be a really nice change to make soup armies less efficient. This change also outright kills the current Castellan combo.
|
|
cj
neophyte
Posts: 734
|
Post by cj on Apr 18, 2019 15:41:22 GMT -6
Is there any rule that says you can't use command points from one detachment for another's strategems unless they are the same army, or battle brothers, or something like that? From what I've heard guard armies can generate a ton of command points, particularly if they are allied with something like custodes, but I don't think it makes sense to beef up the custodes with guardsmen command points. (I think that's what the soup is, but as I am solidly in the realm of casual player I could be waaaaaaaay off and talking nonsense)
|
|
|
Post by kingwalnut on Apr 19, 2019 7:44:25 GMT -6
No, you've got it pretty much except people are using Guard to back up Knights (the Castellan in particular). And there is no rule against it. CP earned from other army detachments can be used anywhere in the battleforged list. I don't think that is the best way to go about it because it just adds unneeded, in-game complexity to an already complex game. You won't only be tracking CP, you'll be tracking which CP from what detachment and if you refund CP, where does that go?
|
|
|
Post by Nick P on Apr 19, 2019 10:41:03 GMT -6
doubleback I agree, the non-allied armies need something, or Soup needs to be nerfed (leave it for narrative or open play but remove it from matched play maybe?) in order to bring them up in comp level. I really don't want to see necrons and tau allying with tyranids and chaos etc though, reminds me of 6th ed armies like Tau-Dar that just never made sense. Hopefully mono codex armies get a boost in the new FAQ, or at least locally we can make a gentlemen's agreement not to soup or something like that.
|
|
doubleback
novice
I rock harder than most, yet less hard than some.
Posts: 1,262
|
Post by doubleback on Apr 19, 2019 12:26:16 GMT -6
I think limiting CP to it's originating faction would help a lot.
That said, I think balance issues would be much less pronounced if it was all mono faction.
|
|
|
Post by kingwalnut on Apr 19, 2019 13:19:18 GMT -6
I think making everything mono-faction would help balance a lot, but then some armies would completely vanish from competitive. It would be Chaos Demons, Orks, Guard, and Eldar as far as the eye can see.
|
|
mike
Butts
Posts: 628
|
Post by mike on Apr 19, 2019 16:00:18 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Eric formerly Eric on Apr 19, 2019 22:13:39 GMT -6
I think command point nerfs for soup. Regardless, my main point is certainl units have gone through some crazy twists and turns this edition and it seems like gw is using these new detachments to fix things. Exhibit 1: warp talons (+2 to charge) Exhibit 2: cult ambush (reroll charges) Common thread: deep strike shenanigans
|
|