First bans in tournaments in place, implications for Chaos

[Iron_Within]

Although I'm not a tournament player I know how they drive meta and builds. Feast of Blades seems to be the first tournament organiser who has come out and out with a particular set of rules dealing with some of the issues of 6th, you can read them here:
http://www.3plusplus.net/2013/12/feast-of-blades-will-be-enacting-restrictions-and-bans/
 

1.) The Grimoire of True Names from Codex: Daemons is banned
As of right now, this is the only true banning. We feel there is too much potential for abuse, and disagree with the effect it has on the army and the game.
2.) A few units will receive 0-1 status
For those of you who weren't around when 0-1 was a thing in codecies, means that a maximum of 1 of that unit may be taken per army. These are all units whose mass inclusion limits the potential lists in the game, and will thus be restricted. (As none of them are a problem on their own.) Rest assured that this will be a very short list, we are not interested in creating very restricted armies.
3.) Supplemental Codecies will no longer be able to ally to their base codex
There will be no more self-allying, no more cherry picking the best parts of a supplement while paying none of the costs, and no more force-org bloat from doing so.
4.) Dataslates will take an ally slot
Taking units from many, many different books and ignoring the force organization chart is too much. This change will make dataslates an interesting addition to the game, without allowing for truly bizzare armies.
5.) The number of psychic mastery levels in an army will be limited
This change will eliminate a great many power combos from the game, and will stop a player from making a lot of lucky rolls on the psychic power tables to effectively win the game before it begins.
6.) Strength D is out, Lords of Battle are in
We feel the the Lords of Battle are not overpowered on their own, the fact that they give the opponent some advantages (bonus to seize, and especially victory points) balances out their fearsome firepower and powerful endurance. Strength D, however, is too powerful. This is well-known by every apoc player (and I am one of them), and has been the case for the past two editions. (Yes, it was even overpowered back in 5th, and it was much worse then.) There is some debate still going on, but it looks like S:D will become S:10, ordinance, ignores cover. That still makes it very powerful, but more in line with the price paid for the superheavy as well as it's other weapon options. In addition, superheavies will have to start on the table.
7.) Super-forts are gone, or at least downsized
No AV15, it will be AV14 instead. Every individual fortification from Stronghold Assault is allowed, but the “network” choices are simply too big and unwieldy to allow for tournament play. (As a consolation, they're pretty terrible, so I think it's OK.)
8.) Dedicated transport flyers will be limited
Flyers are not the be-all end-all of this edition, but all-flyer and mostly-flyer armies change the meta in uncomfortable ways and are notoriously unfun to play against.

 

So it's rather interesting that they are targeting the Grimoire, kind of feel they are losing perspective on that one especially when you've other horrible combinations. I like the idea of bringing back the 0-1 restriction, yes GW don't like it because they think it limits sales, but interesting for these because while likely the Baledrake will be 0-1 what about the Hadesdrake? Riptides are a sure bet for 0-1 treatment 

[Sception]

Grimoire isn't even the only re-rollable 2+ save, iirc eldar can do that, too.

 

Better would have been restricting the grimoire to only affect daemon saves, rather than invulnerable saves in general.  Oh, well.

 

We can count on the drake getting the 0-1 treatment as well.  Also, unless they amend their dataslate rules, Be'lakor would either A: take up your whole allied detachment, or B: be unfieldable at all, since he doesn't come with the troop slot required for allied detachments.  Hopefully their final version moves the restriction to dataslate formations rather than dataslates in general.

 

Oh, and the bar on self allying via the BL codex, which feels kind of arbitrary, I guess?  Especially if they're already presumably putting a 0-1 on riptides?  Other than riptide spam, what problems were even created by self allying?

[Ammonius]

That's just the man trying to keep Chaos down.

[Kol Saresk]

Or they could do it as things like Be'lakor(a single unit) just become an additional HQ choice for the Primary detachment. These restrictions and bans are still being discussed and are still subject to who knows what kind of changes.

[Odsox]

That's just the man trying to keep Chaos down.

 

Testify!

 

Od.

[Ordo Machinum]

Now I'm tempted to model a church choir of bloodletters, daemonettes, nurglings, and flamers.

 

just gimme that ol' time heretical religion.

[Xenith]

^^ Well if it's good enough for me Father Nurgle, then it's good enough for me.

[Tenebris]

Bans yes, I can stomach them, but the question is who is the target for the ban hammer. Is the Chaos Space Marine Codex or simply the Helldrake, is it the Taudar combination or their books... that is the problems with bans of any kind.

 

I understand certain bans on games up to 2k points, and with the advent of Escalation and Stronghold we can expect an "Euro" format for 40k, but as it is the case of Fantasy, many clubs and many tournament will ignore it. The FOC is destined to be changed, sooner or later, it will happen and I think it is not problem of the core rules but the ever present problem of balance. When you have two strong books like Tau and Eldar, which both have highly optimized units, than you add detachments for allies, detachments with special rules outside the FOC, you add one slot armies and you evenly spread the boon of Divination and Telepathy across the said army, you can expect only trouble and broken combination.

 

It is not the fault of GW, they have the sole goal to drive their sales and they will use every dirty trick in their book, be it called Dataslate, Riptide or Chapter Master, matters not for the problem is not them but we players. The goal is to win, to elude that is to be fools, some like me and many of you chaos player like to play for fluff and the occasional challenge, but some play for win. The Play for Win means trouble, regardless of game system, especially if it becomes Pay for Win.

 

In short, bans will be ever more present but also the current books are on a power level way above all the previous editions, superheavies will be a threat but I do not expect to see them much, on the other side two Chapter Masters with a ton of Stormravens and all kinds of allies tricks is a broken thing in its very essence, and no ban will solve that.

 

So is this the future? Yes, expect an "Euro" 40k setting, and house rules and bans. Is this proper, well it is, for GW provides us with the tools to play and game, it is we and we alone that decide how we play. My club would allow no bans, never it did and never it will, straight out of the book we use to say and we enforce official tournament rules. IF the said rules become official and long standing that we will have to take them in consideration, but again the problem is not GW and their OP stuff, the problem is the player who is unable to enjoy a game without ruining the day to all present at the tournament...

 

Alas, ban it is... now the question is, is it really needed?

[A D-B]

 

I like the idea of bringing back the 0-1 restriction, yes GW don't like it because they think it limits sales...

 

I know GW is expensive. I'd never argue otherwise. I'll never argue that I love their prices, or anything of the kind. I know it's a business, and blah blah blah. 

 

But honestly, hyperbole aside, the internet would be amazed at how many decisions are made on the basis of "So people can play with what they want" rather than just "LOL MONEY LOL." Rules changes... Shifts in the lore... I don't expect people to believe me, let alone care, but just as there are apparently insane deeds GW does that go unanswered because of their blanket silence on responding to feedback, there're plenty of good things that go equally uncommented on. Or that get misinterpreted because GW never comments on the reasoning.

 

I've been in meetings where Idea X or rules limitation Y was discussed, and when I've asked some pretty senior folks why, the answer is often "To let people play with what they want." "To let them use their toy soldiers however they like."

 

And before there's the usual anti-hero nonsense about "Of course ADB says that about his publisher", remember it would be infinitely easier to stay silent like I do about any number of other things, whether they're good, bad, up, and down. I don't need to be nice about GW in public. I feel no need to white-knight for them, especially when - like any hobbyist - it's a freaking expensive hobby for me, too. But they like me already, and would rather I said nothing at all, so don't assume any knee-jerk defensiveness, please.

[alex567]

But why should it be the responsibility of the player to fix what games workshop puts out? Gw builds a system and we the player live within that system, it should not be our responsibility to build lists that don't ruin the game for others. Every person shield be allowed to play the game they want to, irrelevant of "how much of an ork sergeant they are being"

 

I oppose bans unless absolutely necessary. And I also agree with A D-B about allowing people to use what hey want. If someone wants to field a baneblade with 9 void shields they should be able to, and you should be allowed to say no if you dont want to play them. A tournament is a competitive environment where the people who want to play hard core doomsday lists want to play. I also agree with these tournaments that offer bans, they should be available to play for those competitive but don't want to play against 4 riptides. I think we need both and it allows for a rich diverse gaming environment.

[Sception]

ADB: That's a fine sentiment, and I never really put any stock in the claims that GW are 'ruining their game on purpose' in some sort of 'hamfisted money grab'.

 

But still, there needs to be some structure & balance to a game's rules, or 'let them play however they want' turns into just waving the models around shouting 'pew pew'.  40k feels like it's reaching a point where it isn't even a game anymore, where I can't play with my models 'however I want' because I can't actually play with my models at all.  All my friends have quit the game outright, and it's getting harder and harder for me to find pickup games at the local store.

[Tenebris]

But why should it be the responsibility of the player to fix what games workshop puts out? 

 

the "Forge your own narrative" part... in the 40k books from day one, oh so many years ago

[Sception]

Which is fine, when you're playing alone by yourself, or making fanart or writing fluff or just modeling.  But if you want to play a game with another person then that game needs rules which are rational, coherent, and fair.  I know the game is just one facet of the hobby, and not even the most important one in the minds of those at GW, but without an actual game that can actually be played, there's not really a lot of reason for the rest of the hobby, whether the models or the lore or what have you, to exist.

[alex567]

If you're in a gaming environment which wishes for a bee all and end all doomsday death list, then you dont need rules that restrict gameplay. Although maybe nit the most vocal a surprisingly large number of people actually dont mind playing within games workshops new rules outlet. Some will take a sensible course navigating away from over powered unbalanced armies and others will enjoy the chaos, why should you be allowed to lay your way and yet the person who wants to field super heavies in their 40k army not be allowed to? You dont have to play that person, but at least the rules allow for that take place. Why not have the option and not take it than not have the option and yearn for it?

[the jeske]

But let them play what they want is about sells . If they can't play 1+ raptors outside of a NL army , then they either won't buy raptors[or chaos] , or they play NL , but then they may not buy stuff that NL can't take . The whole codex opening change back at the end of 4th was done , so that people wouldn't be limited by legion/codex and could play with what ever they want ? Although the fact that chaos ended up the DP+oblit faction was unintended , I guess .

 

 

As the limitations go . D is not ment for non "narrative" play , neither are some of the fortifications . This hursts [without seeing the 0-1] a lot of armies[demons, tau , necron] , but does not make them unplayable. oddly eldar are hurt the least , even if the psy power level is realy low [lower then 7] they can still play well , they just won't get the stupid seer council .

 

0-1 helldrake expected .

 

I have problem with one thing.  nids being balanced around stuff ,I can be sure to be limited to 0-1[or you can take X or Y not both]. also snigger about even TOs hating on 1ksons , but I guess it is better to make the whole community happy , then a few 1ksons players.

[Tenebris]

Well I hail for a fairly aggressive and competitive background, due to the limited number of regular 40k players most of the "gaming" is done in tournaments but the point is simple, adapt or prepare yourself for an actual "casual" game for you and another victory for your powerplayer opponent. Speaking as a soon to be lawyer to me the rules are a cardinal thing but I think the problem more than the rules is the attitude of the players. From my experience usually the mature and seasoned players favor more fluffy armies while on the other side newcomers try to impress and bring netlists and broken combinations, most of which simply copy pasted from the net, with little to no actual knowledge on how to make the work as intended. 

 

The rules of the 6th (bar a minimal deficit for melee combat) are quite strict and allow for cinematic battles, that is their main virtue, the problems became apparent with the introduction of the Riptide but that was due to the Tau being so neglected for such a long time that they needed a strong boost to bring them back, same can be said for Craftworld Eldar. Even the Allies are not a troublesome thing, sure Inqusition Divination is troublesome but I know of several thing that are way more tough to swallow than that, point is that the ban is done in the dread of D-weapons and the superheavies.

 

Should they leave them to Apocalypse, no need to, we speak of very expensive models which will be the province of either people who have been playing a long long time to actually have them for Apocalypse, or they will be simply the province of the young upstarts, more familiar with the Pay to Win concept. I personally would face them in the same way I do always, with my fairly basic Chaos Space Marines army, with a single Helldrake, with perhaps Daemon allies (Noise Marines + Daemonettes still are a great combo) and two squads of Obliterators, my staple from day one and a legacy from the old codex.

 

If I win or I loose is all up to myself and to the dice gods, but I see no need for bans of anykind to make the game more balanced, on the other side I like the way of my gameclub who is rather strict on rules (usually following to the letter whenever it is possible) and with an always present game judge to decide on spot. 

[the jeske]

 

Should they leave them to Apocalypse, no need to, we speak of very

expensive models which will be the province of either people who have

been playing a long long time to actually have them for Apocalypse, or

they will be simply the province of the young upstarts, more familiar

with the Pay to Win concep

That is no longer the case . If it is w40k main you can counts as a raver with WK .

[A D-B]

 

ADB: That's a fine sentiment, and I never really put any stock in the claims that GW are 'ruining their game on purpose' in some sort of 'hamfisted money grab'.

But still, there needs to be some structure & balance to a game's rules, or 'let them play however they want' turns into just waving the models around shouting 'pew pew'.  40k feels like it's reaching a point where it isn't even a game anymore, where I can't play with my models 'however I want' because I can't actually play with my models at all.  All my friends have quit the game outright, and it's getting harder and harder for me to find pickup games at the local store.

 

Well, here's the thing. I play in a huge campaign, and I play with a lot of people, all of varying skill and experience with modelling, painting, and gaming. Which is what I've done for years with various people, in various games.

 

And half the time, I'm left looking at a lot of the complaints on here - with stuff like Titans with one foot on a Skyshield, etc. - and I don't think the rules are broken, I think "Who in the Christing balls are you people playing with? How is that fun for you?"

 

Every game has its exploits. And again, I don't champion GW's rules quality, nor do I attack it. I'm indifferent to it - it's a way to play games in the 40K setting, and that's all I need from it. It does that, no matter how many times guides tell me Possessed Marines suck, mine still kill other units and that's fine for me. People have the ugly reaction sometimes of assuming any opinion that isn't vitriolic melancholy about how terrible it all is, is somehow naive or misinformed. That listing all the ways void shields can be abused is "telling it like it is", and the only reality.

 

I don't need to say everything's great or that everything sucks, because the truth is neither. Changes don't have to be universally loved or hated. Maybe I'm some magic demographic were the rules as they're written let me and my friends play games in the 40K setting, but not for anyone else who's now lamenting that someone might bring a Baneblade to their tables. Given the discussion lately, am I supposed to believe me and my friends are the only people not screwing each other over with the rules and terrified of someone spending 1,000 points and a million hours painting up a Lord of Skulls? Now, objectively, I know it's because the vast majority of the hobby isn't worried the way the bleeding edge of the internet loves to dramatise stuff. But more personally, I'm starting to think a lot of you just play with jackholes. I sincerely doubt I have the only peer group in the world where someone standing a Titan on Skyshield would be laughed out of the campaign. Why would you even do something like that? Why would you ever bring an army of raw, unfair devastation to a 40K game with your friends?

 

And if your answer is that "I don't play with my friends" or "I mostly play at tournaments" then try to respect the fact that the overwhelming majority of the hobby doesn't function like that, no matter how it looks online, no matter how loud tournament players are, and how their guides are considered accepted wisdom. Other people are allowed opinions. Chrissakes, we have to put up with tournament wisdom and THIS IS THE END TIMES enough. If you have to be told not to bring an army consisting of three Baneblades to a game of 40K, then I'm sorry, that makes you someone I don't want to play with rather than making the rules awful. And you know what? Bring those Baneblades. We can still make a cool scenario out of it. The game's more like Rogue Trader now than it's been since Rogue Trader first showed up.

 

We may want to be careful that we don't reach a point where anything even remotely neutral - not even massively positive, but simply not WOE, OH NOE - becomes considered something that needs to be argued against. 

[alex567]

Me and my friends have a sort of small club going, and when hearing about the new escalation book many of them expressed their disdain for super heavies and how they would break normal games, I just turned and said it'll be fine as long as it is sprinkled with common sense. I think that's what 40k is becoming (how it should be). It wouldn't surprise me if by 7th edition we had instead of "forging a narrative" or "the golden rule", you will open the first page and it will say in big old emperor style letters "Don't be a D#*&", fade to black... 

[Warsmith Aznable]

I don't know. It seems like a whole lot of the Chicken Little stuff, to me. Escalation and Stronghold haven't been out for a week, and lots of people are moaning that it's destroyed the game. The same thing happened when flyers first came out, but most people have learned to deal with it.

 

Every time something changes in 40k it seems like a significant portion of the player base rage-quits and declares 40k to be ruined. I don't get it. For most games the majority of this stuff would be too crippling in points cost to take.

[alex567]

@-Max-, it wouldn't let me like your comment, so here's a metaphorical like instead.

[Tenebris]

I think the problem is that many seasoned players, especially a bit older ones, tend to find their fix of 40k gaming only at tournaments and that is more so the case when you more away from the main centers and cities, there are many 40k fans but there are only few places where you can meet up and play a 40k game, and this is usually in an organized tournament, so it is in Italy, so it is in Slovenia and so it is in Croatia, been there and done that, so I can at least speak from my situation. My personal view of bans is that I was never inclined to them be it in Fantasy or in 40k, sure in Fantasy make some sense due to some really really really scary things that people can do, but in 40k a ban is a bit of a strange thing in my book. As for me I say make the army you like to play and roll with it for good or for bad, want an advantage or some victories, than by all means usurp the rules, but do not expect a welcome or an invite to the next tournament. People usually police themselves quite successfully and I have really found no needs for limitations of any kind, in any type of 40k game, hell even in Fantasy games. If my list holds than it is good, if my list does not hold the first blame is usually mine for poor generalship and only after several games if the results persist I might question the validity of my list or the validity of my codex or the rules in general... 

 

 

So far, powerplayers will be powerplayers, if they are allowed to persist in their practice than it means that the gameclub or the event organizer is a poor one at his job. 

[Brother Ambroz]

I don't know about escalation or the stronghold thing, but the other codex books are really getting ridiculously powerful. I haven't played a game since the last tournament I went to back in May I believe. I'm not a tournament player either, but as Tenebris said before me, many people don't have anymore friends that still play 40k. Even the hobbyist that is more interested in painting and modeling (like myself) still likes to play the occasional game with their plastic men and its pretty annoying when almost every pickup game you play is against crazy over the top armies. Thus some of us go to tournaments to be able to get in multiple games. Usually I can find at least one other gamer like me (as I did at the last tournament).

 

This ban to me sounds like a good thing though. If they can balance out some of these over the top and overpowered codex books then maybe it'll give some of the more casual players more of a chance.

[Kol Saresk]

Escalations pretty much brings Forgeworld's "Lords of War" idea into 40K mainstream. Basically, you can take one superheavy in a non-Apoc list. Not sure of the exact specifics on it though. From what I've heard of Strongholds is that it is a direct counter by bringing in Apoc fortifications.

 

Granted, this is all hearsay.

 

If I had to guess, it would be in an attempt so if players wanted to, they could do something like Hunt for Voldorius where a small marine army had to face against a Baneblade. Or Blood Reaver where Talos and gang had to lower the defenses of the Fortress-Monastery and then run diversions until Huron began his siege.

[Scribe]

Just like any complex problem, there is no single issue, and therefore no single answer.

 

The vast majority of the complaints I see are 'This ruins pick up games at my local' because yes you truly will not know what to expect and/or 'This breaks tournaments' because tournaments have ran with a mostly completely rules set (Double FOC is ignored or largely not hit in the events I see).

 

Outside of those 2 admittedly valid issues, it really does boil down to 'who cares, dont be a dick, and dont play with dicks'.