Lord_Caerolion Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 The answer is fixing Terminators. Spam is bad for the game, always has been. Yes, but a blanket rule just causes headaches. At the risk of getting off topic, just take a look at the Dark Eldar, with their 1 HQ choice per sub-faction, without counting special characters. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/356289-terminator-consolidation/page/3/#findComment-5327462 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 If you want to play a themed army that requires you to spam a non-Troop unit more than 3 times then you probably should consider talking with your opponent not to use rules that are designed as only suggestions for tournaments and aren't part of the actual Matched Play rules for a reason. ;) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/356289-terminator-consolidation/page/3/#findComment-5327480 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord_Caerolion Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 I'm not talking about themed armies, I'm talking about making use of the Dark Eldar "Chapter Tactics" in larger matches, which requires each of the Kabals/Cults/Covens to be in their own detachments to benefit. However, yes, the Rule of 3 can just be discounted in that sort of situation, assuming the opponent agrees. Hopefully we'll get some form of lieutenant-equivalents in our next Codex. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/356289-terminator-consolidation/page/3/#findComment-5327498 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 I'm not talking about themed armies, I'm talking about making use of the Dark Eldar "Chapter Tactics" in larger matches, which requires each of the Kabals/Cults/Covens to be in their own detachments to benefit. However, yes, the Rule of 3 can just be discounted in that sort of situation, assuming the opponent agrees. Hopefully we'll get some form of lieutenant-equivalents in our next Codex. I didn't quote you so I wasn't replying specifically to you. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/356289-terminator-consolidation/page/3/#findComment-5327510 Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARK0SIAN Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 The rule of three is daft. If taking a lot of a particular unit makes your army overpowered then that’s a problem with the unit being overpowered/undercosted. If the unit was balanced properly in the first place you could take as many as you want and it would still be balanced. That is, after all, the whole point of balance/points. Currently there are way more units (including all the varieties of Terminators) that would not be a problem if you took 4+ units of them than there are units where it would cause an issue yet rather than address the specific units, GW have taken a lazy approach with a blanket restriction. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/356289-terminator-consolidation/page/3/#findComment-5327520 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dracos Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 The Force Deployment chart back in 3rd edition used basically the same concept. Up to 6 Troops and 3 of the specialty units. Actually without a "special" rule it was more restrictive if I remember correctly? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/356289-terminator-consolidation/page/3/#findComment-5327836 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.