CP regeneration. Degenerate or Ok?

[chapter master 454]

So, in a recent thought to myself and seeing some here and there on the forum regarding the very famous ability of some armies to regain CP, the question comes to a point regarding if these abilities are too much. Namely the "For every CP spent, roll a D6. On a 5+ you get that CP back" traits. These traits are extremely powerful more so for the commonly considered already powerful horde armies as they often have bucket loads of CP to play with and these traits just give them buckets more which furthers the disparity.

 

Are these abilities just too good? I personally would say yes. I mean, there is a reason people love to bring battery battalion guardsmen and though I would wager many would just to get an extra 5 CP, the access to the CP farm that is the warlord trait and relic is just stupendous. These traits can enable regular use of extremely powerful stratagems with furious abandon with no consideration for CP cost as their mountain of CP just doesn't seem to diminish at all. Meanwhile, while it may aid elite armies it doesn't show any true benefit until you can get some serious CP rolling in about the 10 mark (admittly not hard but we are talking double battalion and I wager your second is the famous battery battalion!) so you can have 13 in your pocket which with the trait jumps to 17CP on average (yes, I rounded down but 17 CP IS NUTS).

 

So I put it to the forum to discuss it, are these abilities ok? Are there abilities just seemingly more powerful because they appear in already strong armies or is it part of the reason those armies are so strong?

 

One idea I put out is changing it to "Roll a D6 everytime you use a stratagem. If you roll equal to or lower than the stratagems cost you gain 1CP". That is ofcourse if anyone believe it is overpowered and needs nerfed, otherwise...feel free to offer your own solutions.

[Azekai]

CP is badly implemented, period. Elite armies like Death Wing, Custodes and Death Watch should get more CP, not less.

 

The fact that some spent CP could be recouped isn’t a bad idea, but the biggest abusers of the mechanic are the armies who already have easy access to CP.

[armarnis]

like most things, it depends!

for me as a necron, hyperlogical strategist is more than welcome as i struggle between getting a batallion and a punchy army, in one game from my 8 CP i still had 7 in turn 4, streak of luck. other times, i had none turn 3 ;)

 

generating CP is okay on some armies but very :cussty when you can easily get 13 or more without hampering your listbuilding very much. there are also armies with very poor stratagems. maybe there should be a mechanic that prevents horde armies from stacking batallions but i guess it also depends on your player base. if there are people who openly abuse the system, talk to them, make them know its not a pleasure the way they use it for you. of course thats not an option for people mainly playing in stores and such but talking generally helps in almost every case ;)

[Jolemai]

CP is badly implemented, period. Elite armies like Death Wing, Custodes and Death Watch should get more CP, not less.

 

 

A slight tangent but a thought here, perhaps strategy rating could make a return in lieu of the 3 CPs for being battleforged?

 

So a Marine Warlord would get, say, five CP for leading a battleforged army whilst an Ork one would get two (or whatever it was)?

[Panzer]

Imo CP should be part of a units Datasheet. Each unit should give their own specific amount of CP (the more models in the unit the more CP as well of course). So spammable units like Guardsmen would give only very few CP (like 0.5CP per unit or something) and super elite units like Terminators would give more CP.

[Kinstryfe]

My main army is guard and I can say that, yes, it's absurd and not really implemented well. I've yet to finish a 2k pt game with 0CP because of how well I roll to regenerate, and often will blow thru 20-30 in the game. It was neat in theory but I think that it's a bit too overpowered. Going to the Ultramarines wording of 1CP back per Strategem, as recommended above, would be a good start. I also think there need to be changes to Warlord selection to prevent 200pts of Guard somehow leading 1800pts of Custodes. Those would both help the issue, but I'm not sure they would totally solve it.

[MARK0SIAN]

I would say that the ability to regain CP is only broken because the CP system itself is broken. On its own, and if the CP system was fixed they would be fine as a mechanism. It’s just that the CP system itself is rubbish at the moment.

 

With that in mind I wouldn’t advocate removing the mechanic because it’s removing a symptom rather than a cause.

[Kinstryfe]

I think the mechanic is mostly fine, with one particular exception, and that's Imperial Guard. Guard getting a bonus CP when the enemy uses a Strategem on a 5+ is fine and kind of fluffy. Guard being able to regenerate any CP on a 5+ should probably be 1 per Strategem like other armies get, but makes sense as so many armies get it. Being able to take a Company Commander in half the armies out there with those benefits is completely broken. Instead I would advocate some combination of the following:

 

All Warlords can regenerate a CP when a Stratagem is played on a 6+ as long as they are on the table. This makes the difference in CP regeneration less while still making the 5+ regens useful.

Your Warlord must belong to whatever army list makes up the largest points total in the army.

More characters having benefits like Marneus Calgar and getting +X CP for them being your Warlord.

[RandomMarine]

CP regen is a massive issue in my local meta I play a Imperial army but at this point it almost goes without saying that any form of Imperial army will include a guard battery if playing even mildly competitively.

 

I'd fix it by requiring warlord to be from the largest detachment and make regen on a 6 not 5+

[Rik Lightstar]

How about if Stratagems that weren't from your Warlord's Codex (or the BRB) cost you double to use?

 

That'd cut down on the Guardsmen leading Custodes at the very least.

 

Rik

[toaae]

Stratagems are one of the best parts of 8th edition. Command Points is one of the worst. The sheer variance in command points needs to be reduced, as one army have 6 while the opponent has 18+ is already a discrepancy that needs to be addressed, nevermind how the CP regen abilities of some armies push widen that gulf and become auto-includes and must-haves.

Make it so you get 1 CP per 200 points (or so), with bonus CP coming from units that make sense to give them, so that at 2000 points players have between 10 and 15. And CP regeneration either needs to be a game-wide thing (with some armies getting a +1 to the roll, say) or it needs to be gone.

[Skaorn]

Personally I'd rather see a limited set of CP, usually around 3-6 range, that you get each turn. This would mainly be by army with elites getting more base CP. You would probably have a warlord trait that gives you +1 and the detachments with high requirements would give you a bonus (DE would get this for taking multiple patrols instead, possibly). This way a horde army can still build up their CP to equal an elite unless an elite decides to invest more points into filling out those detachments with all those requirements. For soup, your main army would decide you starting CP and that would be based on the army you spent the most points on, to make it harder to do something like claim SM starting CP but only buy a patrol worth of them and buy mostly IG.

 

Keep in mind I'd also use this system to gut the current stratagems and do things like:

Players bid CP to see who gets first turn each round.

Deep Strike and similar abilities cost a CP to use.

+1 to shoot but can't move.

Gain cover or improve cover, but can't advance or charge on your next activation.

Enter Overwatch.

Have a rally stratagem, hopefully with a better morale system.

And other ideas that are more about form than Awesome!

 

Edit: Chrome and my Ipad key pad are having issues.

[Trevak Dal]

I would want there to be a standardized amount of command points per point level, and you would get more for each objective you hold at the end of each turn or wiping out an enemy unit.

[Servant of Dante]

I would want there to be a standardized amount of command points per point level, and you would get more for each objective you hold at the end of each turn or wiping out an enemy unit.

This sounds interesting, but I’d worry as it sounds like a “win more” mechanic. The player with the early advantage will have more CP, thus making it easier for them to widen their lead.

[Mileposter]

I don't think the command points system is a problem at all. If the Stratagems themselves were more balanced between armies (easier said than done) then far fewer folks would have an issue with CP.

 

By and large, most of the arguments I see about 'elites need more CP' are really saying 'Space Marines need more CP' - which would be less of an issue if the Space Marines Stratagems weren't crap.

[Kinstryfe]

One thing I think may be a sort of playtesting is how CP are gained in Kill Team (and actually I think similarly in AoS2.0), gaining 1 each game turn and 1 each game turn if your Leader is alive. A similar method could work in 40k, you get X per turn, and X for your Warlord.

[CaptainMarsh]

I don't mind Guard or the other Horde armies having more CP. I even don't mind them being able to regenerate. I mind how easy it is for them to do so. They should only be doing so on a 6, while Elite armies should have options at 5+ or even 4+ (depending on how elite we're talking about).

[Kinstryfe]

I don't mind Guard or the other Horde armies having more CP. I even don't mind them being able to regenerate. I mind how easy it is for them to do so. They should only be doing so on a 6, while Elite armies should have options at 5+ or even 4+ (depending on how elite we're talking about).

That's the kind of thing you need to fundamentally shift the whole system for though. Guard get Waaaaay too many CP and regenerate much much too easily, but making elite armies regen even more successfully would be a step in the wrong direction I think. I also have Marine and Custodes armies. Most CP spent on my Custodes do far more per CP than on my guard, and letting them get them back on a 4+ would just compound that. Assuming they don't overhaul the whole system, I think Regen should be more equal or less impactful, but armies should get closer to equal amounts. I actually think the changes to battalions and brigades were in the wrong direction, or the changes should have included a boost to the vanguard/spearhead/outrider Detachments to facilitate "elite" armies. That or even (and every time I mention this people go nuts) but give more CP bonuses like what Drukhari got for armies that make sense. Astartes talking 2 vanguard get +3CP, Guard taking two spearhead get +3CP, White Scars and outrider, etc etc etc. Not sure of the requirements and bonuses, but that would be another way to let elite play more elite-like.

[Captain Idaho]

Just for variance I'd like something to be done. Every Astra Millitarum army seems to have the farm going on, every army out there seems to concentrate on CP farming instead of Relics and Warlord Traits that might be more fun.

 

When the Ultramarines had their Adept of the Codex it wasn't such an issue as it made sense for Utranarines and the Space Marines Stratagems are underwhelming anyway. Since every army got that sort of duplication it took away the character and made it somewhat boring. Plus they all have superior Codex books and Strategums.

[totgeboren]

Imo CP should be part of a units Datasheet. Each unit should give their own specific amount of CP (the more models in the unit the more CP as well of course). So spammable units like Guardsmen would give only very few CP (like 0.5CP per unit or something) and super elite units like Terminators would give more CP.

 

This really is the issue. CP should be given by Datasheets, Detachments should be used to determine if you are Battleforged.

 

Elite stuff should give more CP, but taking more than one should give no extra or perhaps even be a negative. Like, say Terminators could have CP be 2/1/0, one unit gives you 2 CP. If you have 2 units you only get 1 CP and if you have 3 or more you get 0 CP for you Terminators.

 

Knights could be 0/-1/-3, and Ork boys 0/1/3 but only count units of 20+ and so on. Something like that, then you could make spamming less of a benefit, large units would also make a bit more sense, and CP could be easily balanced between armies.

[Ishagu]

CP should be granted based on the size of the primary detachment in your army. A detachment 1k in size would generate a specific number, and it would be more at 1500 and 2000 points.

 

It would also eliminate all the little allied battalions of Cultists or Guardsmen.

[Panzer]

 

Imo CP should be part of a units Datasheet. Each unit should give their own specific amount of CP (the more models in the unit the more CP as well of course). So spammable units like Guardsmen would give only very few CP (like 0.5CP per unit or something) and super elite units like Terminators would give more CP.

 

This really is the issue. CP should be given by Datasheets, Detachments should be used to determine if you are Battleforged.

 

Elite stuff should give more CP, but taking more than one should give no extra or perhaps even be a negative. Like, say Terminators could have CP be 2/1/0, one unit gives you 2 CP. If you have 2 units you only get 1 CP and if you have 3 or more you get 0 CP for you Terminators.

 

Knights could be 0/-1/-3, and Ork boys 0/1/3 but only count units of 20+ and so on. Something like that, then you could make spamming less of a benefit, large units would also make a bit more sense, and CP could be easily balanced between armies.

 

 

No, not that. I don't mind people spamming units at all. If you want to play a Terminator army or a Biker army it shouldn't be punished additionally to the actual units restrictions. Spamming units only becomes a problem when spamming one unit is way stronger than spamming another unit (like flooding the board with armour in a non-Knight army or flooding the board with cheap bodies that just drown you in dice while also denying deep strike space while also holding all the objectives with ObSec bodies).

 

 

Ultimately the main problem with the CP generation goes hand in hand with the problem of hordes being so strong compared to more elite armies. Hordes aren't so strong because of the amount of CP they get but they generate those CP way more easily than elite armies which buffs other strong elements in such lists etc. It's not one problem to look at, it's actually two.

[DreamIsCollapsing]

CP is badly implemented, period. Elite armies like Death Wing, Custodes and Death Watch should get more CP, not less.

 

The fact that some spent CP could be recouped isn’t a bad idea, but the biggest abusers of the mechanic are the armies who already have easy access to CP.

 

Some fluffy army like Ravenwing/Deathwing should have bonus for their adequat detachment, like Imperial Knight have. 

[chapter master 454]

Part of it I believe is one thing I have said before: CP should be done codex by codex, not one book for all. It is the classic "Equality vs. Equity" problem where it is equal to give everyone the same detachments but some benefit from there more than others.

 

If codexes had the CP bonuses for the armies instead of the rulebook then we would see a more balanced front.

 

For example: Marines would very likely benefit greatly from the specialist detachments but not so much from the bigger ones like brigade however the inverse would be true of guard where they benefit from having massive amounts of units and would likely see a massive CP boost if they brought a brigade (while easy for them to do, it wouldn't be so "pocket" as the current battalion).

 

I would also stress that you can only use stratagems from your warlords faction that binds his detachment and same with relics. This way, if you do want the farm you are surrendering all options. The point of having allies to have access to UNITS you normally don't have to fill gaps, not to bring two whole set of rules to bear.

I would go as far as even having a special rule that Custodes cannot have a supreme command detachment without having another custodes detachment in the army but that is me talking about an issue that might not really be a massive issue and just looks silly.

 

"Yea I brought custodes this game"

"I see 3 infantry squads, a shadowsword, 3 tank commanders and two company commanders...oh and there's 3 shield captains on dawneagle jetbikes"

"yea, My custodes army"

[MARK0SIAN]

 

 

Imo CP should be part of a units Datasheet. Each unit should give their own specific amount of CP (the more models in the unit the more CP as well of course). So spammable units like Guardsmen would give only very few CP (like 0.5CP per unit or something) and super elite units like Terminators would give more CP.

This really is the issue. CP should be given by Datasheets, Detachments should be used to determine if you are Battleforged.

 

Elite stuff should give more CP, but taking more than one should give no extra or perhaps even be a negative. Like, say Terminators could have CP be 2/1/0, one unit gives you 2 CP. If you have 2 units you only get 1 CP and if you have 3 or more you get 0 CP for you Terminators.

 

Knights could be 0/-1/-3, and Ork boys 0/1/3 but only count units of 20+ and so on. Something like that, then you could make spamming less of a benefit, large units would also make a bit more sense, and CP could be easily balanced between armies.

I don’t think people should be punished for taking certain units. It immediately rules out fluff armies like a death wing army or a white scars biker army.

 

If the game and units were properly balanced then spamming would either not exist or wouldn’t be a problem if it did. Spamming by it’s very nature means you should cover one area of the game really really well but be hugely vulnerable in other areas. Unfortunately that’s not how it works now because the units you see spammed don’t really force a huge downside on the player spamming them. That is a problem that should be addressed but it’s nothing to do with CP.

 

Also I don’t really see people spamming knights. Which is kind of ironic because they’re actually one of the few units in the game where if you do ‘spam’ them (in other words take a full knight army) then you are leaving yourself open to the types of game downsides I mentioned before. If everything that was spammed had the same types of downsides as an all-knight army then spamming would be balanced. Whether you agree with that take or not is obviously subjective but I think ‘taxing’ and all-knight army 3CP simply for existing is really unfair.