Fixing the loyal 32 without breaking the Guard

[Halfpint100]

I don't think limiting stratagems is the best way. It removed a lot of options, which is often a lot of the fun!

 

The easiest way to fix the loyal 32 IMO is to make it that Grand strategist and the carbon copy versions in other codexs, only work on that factions stratagems which means these 2-3CP strats people use for BA and knights have all the CP lost, only CP from the opponent can be used to replenish using the aquila. 

 

I don't think the aquila is an issue since you get only 1 cp per 3 strats your opponent plays on average which may net you 1-2CP on average. The warlord trait is the issue, you regain an average third of the CP you spend which is big on those knight/BA strats. 

[Brother Captain Ed]

I'd make one sweeping change: You can only use stratagems from your warlord's faction. You want to make Colonel Dudebro to generate command points for you? Fine. He is a skilled astra militarum commander and his 31 subordinates appreciate his experience. The 1800 points of Knights, however, will have a harder time coordinating their tactical resources as their commander is less attenuated to their needs.

[Chris521]

I know that limiting CP usage to single factions or to the gernerating factions is currently a popular idea, but I'm not a really big fan it.  I would prefer to keep the sharing but maybe tone it down a bit.

 

A couple possibilities (These are separate ideas):

 

-Factions that don't contain a the Warlord have +1 CP cost per strategem.  This still allows sharing make tones it down.  I'm personally very open to more complicated ways of doing this that could scale better, but I know some people may be against the extra rules and book keeping so I'm keeping it simple

 

-remove the Battle forged 3 CP bonus and change it to a 6 CP Bonus for monofactions.  This wouldn't stop soup, but the bonus being at 6 CP (greater than a battlion) at least would cut down on adding a simple Guard battalion to any list.

 

-I'm prepared to give up Grand Strategist and the Aquilla.  I'm sick of hearing about them

 

 

For Infantry specifically I would simply add platoons back in.  It's both too late right now and a little off topic  to go into details but I've been thinking about some platoon rules that could be interesting enough that guard players wouldn't mind having 5 ppm.  Though, as it stands right now, I would keep them at 4.

[Tokugawa]

Grand and Aquilla would be axed, no doubt. How could you dream that GW keep them untouched?

 

They sacrificed, then other parts of IG would have chance to survive the nerf. Do you like to see 6pts guardsmen?

[domsto]

Grand and Aquilla would be axed, no doubt. How could you dream that GW keep them untouched?

 

They sacrificed, then other parts of IG would have chance to survive the nerf. Do you like to see 6pts guardsmen?

Grand strategist is only broken if you use it on the big Knight or Custodes Stratagems but not for the little Guard Strats.

So i little extra that you can only Roll for Stratagems from the Codex Imperial Guard( or Astra Militarum as the fancy ones would say) could help stoping the abuse of this.

 

6ppm for a Guardsman would make him unplayable

[sairence]

I mean...I guess we'd see Conscrupts again, but whether that'll make our opponents happier is really something I doubt.

[FallenSoldiers]

Just make strategist unable to regen CP from non-AM stratagems. Aquila can stay the same. I’d say that would fix a lot. Also, remove the ability to double roll for CP back. Shouldn’t roll twice for 1 CP with GS and Blood Angel relic

[Thorakitai]

Really, half of the complaining would be gone if GW hadn't been stupid enough to add CP regeneration into the game. Where present, it renders most other warlord traits and relics irrelavent, because they are so much worse than getting to use an extra stratagem or two. Frankly, I think that ALL CP regeneration should be removed. Everyone's not just the Guards.

[Shamansky]

 

Except maybe the Ultramarines one, to reflect their strategy schtick.

 

 

 

Really? Why? Why is Creed denied to be a strategy genius then? No, sir. 'All' means all.

[walter h]

Agreed all is all!

[Are Verlo]

There are a lot of ideas here I like. Some of them i like better than others. I´d like to share some of my ideas and I´m open for c&C. We all want a balanced game, don´t we?

 

I dislike the "different CP-pools". It is unnecessarily complicated and adds to little for the extra effort. Same goes for "paying CP to soup/include more fraction keywords".

 

How about increasing the cost of all stratagems from other fractions than your warlord´s fraction?

 

It lets you play with guard and marine support (Not too uncommon in the fluff) but you have to pay extra for any marine stragagems. Doubble CP cost would be extreme, but increasing CP cost by 1 would bring "Slamguinus"/Smash captains in line when you have to pay 1 extra, effectively doubble cost for both Death Visions of Sanguinus and red rampage. 

 

A possible fix for the "regain CP" traits and relics would be reducing CP cost?

Grand strategist would be completely reworked, but I think something along this line "As long as your warlord is alive and on the table, reduce the cost of one *keyword=warlord* stratagem by 1, to a minimum cost of 0" per turn (Not sure if player turn or game turn is the most balanced"

 

And those relics that regain CPs could reduce the cost as well. Take the Third eye or the Aquilia and rework them. "Each time your opponent plays a stratagem, roll a D6. If you roll one or more 5+´s, one stratagem you play this turn cost 1 CP less, to a miniumum of 0" (The wording can be changed, the whole idea is that it works on cost and once per turn.

 

Edit: Or let the abilities work like the cerebral mite from the mechanicus codex. It flat out grants 1 CP. No dice rolls included, just flat out 1 CP. Grand strategist could also grant the re-roll and a whooping 1 CP. That will make it less of an autoinclude both in guard armies and as allies.Especially with increased  CP cost from stratagems from other fractions. If I played a mix of BA, IK and guard, I´d think hard about what model that gets to be my warlord if my suggested rules are applied.

 

What do you think gentlemen/ladies?

[MARK0SIAN]

Sadly I think the only way to truly fix the loyal 32 problem is to actually fix the CP system itself. I say sadly because GW won’t make such a big overhaul and thus I believe Guard will be punished with arbitrary and unfair price hikes along with some nerfs to warlord traits and relics.

 

Personally I am a supporter of the different CP pools idea, each faction may only use their own CP, however I would only like to see that implemented alongside a change to allow each faction equal access to cp.

[domsto]

Sadly I think the only way to truly fix the loyal 32 problem is to actually fix the CP system itself. I say sadly because GW won’t make such a big overhaul and thus I believe Guard will be punished with arbitrary and unfair price hikes along with some nerfs to warlord traits and relics.

 

Personally I am a supporter of the different CP pools idea, each faction may only use their own CP, however I would only like to see that implemented alongside a change to allow each faction equal access to cp.

I really hope GW isn't THAT stupid. Talking as a Guard player and a Person which wants a balanced game.

Raising Prices of Guard Units would just make the Loyal 32 into the Omnissiahs 17

So it wouldn't have much of an impact to the Soup lists.

[MARK0SIAN]

 

 

Sadly I think the only way to truly fix the loyal 32 problem is to actually fix the CP system itself. I say sadly because GW won’t make such a big overhaul and thus I believe Guard will be punished with arbitrary and unfair price hikes along with some nerfs to warlord traits and relics.

 

Personally I am a supporter of the different CP pools idea, each faction may only use their own CP, however I would only like to see that implemented alongside a change to allow each faction equal access to cp.

I really hope GW isn't THAT stupid. Talking as a Guard player and a Person which wants a balanced game.

Raising Prices of Guard Units would just make the Loyal 32 into the Omnissiahs 17

So it wouldn't have much of an impact to the Soup lists.

Oh I agree with you, but based on their track record of the rules changes they’ve made this edition I sadly believe they are THAT stupid.

 

They’ve made several changes already that have rendered entire units basically useless and went so far in the commissar example they had to walk it back some a short time later. Their responses have always seemed very knee jerk to the problems that have arisen. The Loyal 32 is probably one of the most complained about things so they’ll hit it with a wrecking ball with scant regard for what that does to the army as a whole.

 

This is one of those times where I’d dearly love to be wrong though so fingers crossed :)

[duz_]

This why I strongly suggest y'all msg GW directly to share your thoughts.

 

They do seem to be open to feedback this edition.

 

Agreed if they increase the cost of guard people abusing it will just find the next cheapest option.

 

 

40kfaq@gwplc.com

[domsto]

This why I strongly suggest y'all msg GW directly to share your thoughts.

 

They do seem to be open to feedback this edition.

 

Agreed if they increase the cost of guard people abusing it will just find the next cheapest option.

 

 

40kfaq@gwplc.com

I already send them the Ideas we gathered here

Now everything we can do is pray to the Emperor;)

[duz_]

Great work domtso!

Although the more the merrier! As all good guard commanders know, quantity is a quality of its own! :tu:

[JBugman]

"The Loyal 32"?  I looked this up and there's a single vague reference from another forum about a AM/IG Battalion made of two commanders and three squads somehow being a bone of contention in today's meta.  Can someone explain to me why this Battalion is such a problem?

 

Regards,

JBugman

[Chris521]

In short, it's 180 points for 5 command points.  It's also common to take Grand Strategist and the Aquilla for additional CP Generation.  Then there is the fact that Infantry squads are seen by some as overpowered.

[duz_]

In short, it's 180 points for 5 command points.  It's also common to take Grand Strategist and the Aquilla for additional CP Generation.  Then there is the fact that Infantry squads are seen by some as overpowered.

 

Not so much that the cheap battalion is OP

Its that it enables players to leverage what would normally be once or twice per game stratagems to be used somewhat more indiscriminately because they end up with 5 extra CP + any additional CP's that are generated as a result

Epitomised by the current Blood Angles, Imperial Knight, IG lists that are floating around

These lists would be more difficult to run without the extra bonuses the minimum sized IG battalion provides 

[JBugman]

Thanks, Chris and Duz_.

[dakkamasta]

Split CP pools is the easiest and most effective solution whilst indirectly giving mono-faction armies a bit of a boost:

 

1. Having seperate CP pools is NOT confusing. You're playing a game where you have wound counters on multiple units across the table, psychic powers, special rules here and there etc. I don't see how having 2 or 3 different coloured dice for your CP is so difficult to manage.

 

2. A pure army with CP regen like Ultras, Guard, Black Heart Drukhari etc. will feel stronger now, since they will have 13+ CP that they can regen all going into one pool (as it currently is) whereas the person with 2-3 detachments will probably find by turn 2-3 that they have a few CP in each pool, so they can't pull of some crazy wombo-combo by combining several strategems due to the list they brought. All of a sudden there is a genuine reason to bring a mono-faction army vs allies.

 

3. Adding to my number 2. point, this system will almost completely eradicate the abusive combos that people are using. 3 Dawneagle Shield-Captains in a supreme command detachment now only have 1 CP to use for their codex strategems. That means no Swooping Dive, no Victor of the Blood Games and only 1 use of Shoulder the Mantle (instead of 3). Similar principle for BA captains and Knights. By limiting CP to each faction it will indirectly buff mono-faction lists as they will have the CP to fully utilise the Stratagems that make their star units shine.  E.g. A Shield-Captain in a supreme command will be inferior to a shield-captain in a battalion due to not having the ability to use the stratagems that give them that extra edge.

 

This will make multi-faction lists require more finesse to play since the use of stratagems becomes must more difficult since you can't just pop everything whenever you want and get 1/3 CP back. Mono-faction on the other hand will be laughing all the way to the bank as they can continue to spend CP liberally and regenerate on top of that, as it is currently happening today.

 

Remember guys, it's allies that people are crying about. No one cries about a pure Guard list anymore. This change will leave the Guard totally unaffected, and comparatively better compared to soup lists.

 

 

 

 

[MARK0SIAN]

Split CP pools is the easiest and most effective solution whilst indirectly giving mono-faction armies a bit of a boost:

 

1. Having seperate CP pools is NOT confusing. You're playing a game where you have wound counters on multiple units across the table, psychic powers, special rules here and there etc. I don't see how having 2 or 3 different coloured dice for your CP is so difficult to manage.

 

2. A pure army with CP regen like Ultras, Guard, Black Heart Drukhari etc. will feel stronger now, since they will have 13+ CP that they can regen all going into one pool (as it currently is) whereas the person with 2-3 detachments will probably find by turn 2-3 that they have a few CP in each pool, so they can't pull of some crazy wombo-combo by combining several strategems due to the list they brought. All of a sudden there is a genuine reason to bring a mono-faction army vs allies.

 

3. Adding to my number 2. point, this system will almost completely eradicate the abusive combos that people are using. 3 Dawneagle Shield-Captains in a supreme command detachment now only have 1 CP to use for their codex strategems. That means no Swooping Dive, no Victor of the Blood Games and only 1 use of Shoulder the Mantle (instead of 3). Similar principle for BA captains and Knights. By limiting CP to each faction it will indirectly buff mono-faction lists as they will have the CP to fully utilise the Stratagems that make their star units shine. E.g. A Shield-Captain in a supreme command will be inferior to a shield-captain in a battalion due to not having the ability to use the stratagems that give them that extra edge.

 

This will make multi-faction lists require more finesse to play since the use of stratagems becomes must more difficult since you can't just pop everything whenever you want and get 1/3 CP back. Mono-faction on the other hand will be laughing all the way to the bank as they can continue to spend CP liberally and regenerate on top of that, as it is currently happening today.

 

Remember guys, it's allies that people are crying about. No one cries about a pure Guard list anymore. This change will leave the Guard totally unaffected, and comparatively better compared to soup lists.

You are right but in my opinion it needs to be brought in alongside changes so that every faction has reasonable access to CP. the reason we’ve seen so many guard CP batteries is because it is extremely difficult to generate CP for some armies like Custodes.

 

Whilst I support this change, I believe without additional measures it will disproportionately affect elite armies, which are already at a disadvantage in 8th anyway.

[duz_]

I do agree with Mark0's point

 

A lot of this stems from how difficult some armies have filling out the requirement given is based on the FoC

 

Elite armies need CP bonuses like Knights, cheaper strats or even some strats included as baseline army bonuses

 

Both should be addressed together

[domsto]

The Command Point System as a whole is one of the biggest disbalances in 8th.

I also think some armys need a CP bonus like Knights,Custodes and so on.

 

But this would be such a big change in one of the key features of this Edition that i think we will see a rework of this in 9th ore so