Fixing the loyal 32 without breaking the Guard

[domsto]

As the next big FAQ is imminent and it is more than safe that we will get some beating couse of the Loyal 32.

I read a lot of ideas how to fix this and in most cases it couse some serious Problems for Guard, like a prise hike for the humble Guardsmen or something like that.

When i look at Consripts and how they destroyed them i am a little consern that the same will happen to our most basic Infantry.

Instead of nerfing Guard to the Ground i think it would be better to buff pure Armys or something like this.

 

What do you think?

Will Guard be once again punished for a Crime they didn't comit?

Any Ideas how to Fix the CP Battary?

[sairence]

In order of what I consider most to least useful:

 

-Make Grand Strategist and similar traits only work on generic and Armykeyword-specific strategems

 

-Make it so the Warlord HAS to be from the largest army keyword/biggest detachment pointswise

 

-Make separate CP-pools based on army-KWs that can then only be used on that kw or on generic strategems.

 

Combining the first two would probably solve the worst excesses. The last one would be less practical in mixed forces.

 

 

I hope they learned from the conscript debacle and try to go for a fix to the fundamental problem instead of beating on Guard some more. I remain pessimistic in that regard though.

[duz_]

In match play CP's generated by detachments can only be use for their own Faction (sub Imperium Level)

Gained/ Regenerated CP's can only be done for the faction with the same keyword and used on that faction 

 

 

A bit of a pain to track, but will solve the guard CP battery at once... 

[Colonel Bindoff]

I think ‘a bit of a pain to track’ might be an understatement Duz!

 

On a side note, how many Aquilae did Kurov make?! The guy must have spent literally his whole career stuffing servitor bits into wildfowl

[duz_]

I think ‘a bit of a pain to track’ might be an understatement Duz!

 

 

But is it really?

Most tournaments are 2000pts, which means max 3 detachments and there for max 3 factions, more likely 2.

 

So you have to use different colour dice to track CP's and which you used on what.

Doesn't seem any more complicated than tracking multi wound models and profiles or orders and stratagems and everything else we track in a game.

The more I think about it, the more I think that its a poor cop-out on why its shouldn't be adopted and the simplest way of fixing it without nerfing everything particularly guard

[WarriorFish]

I think it's a good idea, perhaps alternates could be limiting Stratagems to a single main Faction? At the moment allied lists have no drawbacks which is silly, but at the same time it shouldn't be excessively penalised - CPs/Stratagems seem like an easy way to do this.

 

I'll be glad to see the end of Guard CP batteries so long as the solution doesn't mean hurting Guard directly. I'm yet to be fully convinced "New GW" knows exactly what it's doing but as always I shall wait and see

[Colonel Bindoff]

Maybe; I’m just mindful of the potential for opponents getting ‘confused’ or accidentally putting CP counters in the wrong pile!

 

I agree it is the best way of solving the problem though

[Tirak]

Separate CP pools I think would go a long way to curbing Guard Battery Lists, and I'd welcome that change. I honestly get annoyed with lists that bring a token guard force just to power the stratagems of other armies as it leaves us vulnerable to nerfs for abuse, when Guard armies aren't the abusive ones. Conscripts and Commissars, two of our most iconic units got utterly gutted because other armies tossed in a minimum battalion to farm for cheap bodies and cheap CP. The CP cost rework was of course meant to curb this by making the Battalion more attractive and encourage you to run your main faction, but that just made Guard CP Battery even better because for the same cheap price you could get even more CP. If GW doesn't take that route in the upcoming CA, then I predict they'll be bringing the nerfhammer down more on Guard because they don't mind going after a relatively "minor" faction if they can keep selling Space Marine kits.

[FallenSoldiers]

I’d be happy if Strategist only let you regen points spent on AM stratagems. The Aquila getting you 1 back isn’t bad, but when you’re using a 3CP knight stratagem and you get 2CP back... that’s abuse.

 

Sadly I think the Guard are in for another beating with the nerf bat, potentially right out of existence.

[Colonel Bindoff]

(Snip)

Sadly I think the Guard are in for another beating with the nerf bat, potentially right out of existence.

Report to the commissar at once, lest your lack of faith in the might of the guard rubs off on the rest of the barracks!

 

We may take a beating; our soldiers may increase in points to reflect their courage; the enemy may bring a nerf bat hand crafted by Lord Vulkan himself; but there will ALWAYS be men and women of the guard ready to march into the hell of unjust rules edits with fire in their hearts, knowing that they command the awe of every other factions’ players, who just don’t have the steel to play imperial guard.

[FallenSoldiers]

Oh no! Not ME persay! I love the Guard! I just think when arent going to be seeing them as part of many high end tables at top tier events after this FAQ!

 

GW... please prove me wrong!!

[domsto]

but a point hike of a Guardsmen would be the absolut worst that can happen!

It wouldn't change anything for the CP Farmers because they will still be the cheapest way to get CP but for a pure Guard list this will be a heavy nerf.

Guard is already the worst Horde army out there.

[domsto]

In order of what I consider most to least useful:

 

-Make Grand Strategist and similar traits only work on generic and Armykeyword-specific strategems

 

-Make it so the Warlord HAS to be from the largest army keyword/biggest detachment pointswise

 

-Make separate CP-pools based on army-KWs that can then only be used on that kw or on generic strategems.

 

Combining the first two would probably solve the worst excesses. The last one would be less practical in mixed forces.

 

 

I hope they learned from the conscript debacle and try to go for a fix to the fundamental problem instead of beating on Guard some more. I remain pessimistic in that regard though.

I Like your Idea of splitting the CP pools after Keywords

That would solve the abuse Problem at once but will make it still possible to mix Factions for a Thematic List.

I realy Hope GW will be this forward-looking

[-Nemesis-]

You can only use stratagems from the Warlord's codex?  Custodes/Angels/Knights will be reconsidering the Guard CP batteries if they have to give up all their stratagems for it.

[H311fi5h]

What about lowering the CP for all detachments, but giving some extra CP for detachments from the same faction as your Warlord.

For example two AM battalions and one AM spearhead could be (3+2) + (3+2) + (0+2), while AM battalion (with AM WL) + BA battalion + Custodes Supreme would only give (3+2) + 3 + 0. So you would "pay" 4 CP for souping in this scenario.

[KhorneHunter57x]

In match play CP's generated by detachments can only be use for their own Faction (sub Imperium Level)

Gained/ Regenerated CP's can only be done for the faction with the same keyword and used on that faction

 

 

A bit of a pain to track, but will solve the guard CP battery at once...

I don't think it'll be a pain; in fact, I think it would be a simple and effective solution that rewards 'pure' forces.

 

Two or three sets of CP-tracking dice instead of one, or an extra set of tally marks on a sheet of paper.  A tiny bit more book-keeping for mixed forces, and no change for pure ones.

 

Maybe; I’m just mindful of the potential for opponents getting ‘confused’ or accidentally putting CP counters in the wrong pile!

 

I agree it is the best way of solving the problem though

I don't think it'll result in too much more confusion or accidents (legitimate or otherwise...) than the current system.

[Tirak]

but a point hike of a Guardsmen would be the absolut worst that can happen!

It wouldn't change anything for the CP Farmers because they will still be the cheapest way to get CP but for a pure Guard list this will be a heavy nerf.

Guard is already the worst Horde army out there.

 

We're actually not. 'nid Hoards are in a bad spot, there's a reason why all the 'nid lists that have been competitive have been some form of Flying Hive Tyrant (leading to the stupid datasheet rule) or Carnifex spam. Close friend of mine runs 'nids, adores his hoards, but when it comes time to play serious, the Gaunts go in the box, and the Carnifexes come out. That isn't to say there aren't other aspects of the Tyranid army that aren't very good, just that when they try to hoard like in their fluff, they get stomped.

[Shamansky]

I see too many defeatist speculations here. That's ignominious, gentlemen. What if your troops will see this? Our duty demands we stand firm with the faith in our hearts, weapons in hands, holding our heads up high and be ready for the worst. If we should inevitably die, then let's at least die with honor.

[duz_]

Well I do see many good suggestions in here.

 

I would suggest we take the time to contact GW with the suggestions to CPs and raise the concern of nerfing IG is more of penalty to actually guard players as opposed to those who take them for CPs alone.

 

40kfaq@gwplc.com

 

:tu:

[domsto]

a good idea duz_

i will send the suggestions to GW.

Maybe they will listen this time

[Shamansky]

Well that's the spirit!

[Beams]

Warlord should have to have the highest LD in your army, like they used to be.

[domsto]

Warlord should have to have the highest LD in your army, like they used to be.

That wouldn't change mutch

A AM Battalion would still be the most point effectiv way for soup armys to get more CP

[Beams]

 

Warlord should have to have the highest LD in your army, like they used to be.

That wouldn't change mutch

A AM Battalion would still be the most point effectiv way for soup armys to get more CP

It would limit the warlord trait to pretty much guard only, since guards highest generic leadership is 8-9, so Space Marines would generally beat that. At the very least, it'd get rid of Guilliman/Knights and guard.

[robofish7591]

What if you had to choose a faction and only that faction would be allowed to have chapter tactics, relics, or stratagems?  For example, if you took a list with guard, blood angels, and a knight, you would have to pick one of those to be your faction.  So if you chose guard, you could still take blood angels and a knight, but they would lose access to their stratagems and chapter/household tactics.  If you chose blood angels as your faction, you could still bring guard for bodies, but you wouldn't get all the extra bonuses.