How Much CP is *Just Right*

[The Unseen]

So, working on a set of houserules for some of my local group for CP generation to help level the playing field between mono factions and allied soup.

 

Trying to decide between flat amount based on points level of the game, and bringing

back the old Force Org Chart+allied detatchments (one of which of course will be a knight one, and Dark Eldar would need there own rules still) subtracting for each different keyword in your army, or just saying only your warlords faction detachments generates CP, and any strats used by allied detachments cost 1 extra CP.

 

The 2nd one is simpler to implement, but I feel it just means that you'll still see a lot of guard backed up by a knight and a marine vanguard detachment, because those allied guys weren't adding CP anyway, the only change will be that the warlord will be a guard commander.

 

Whereas the first one makes more logical, intuitive sense, in that an army composed of more disparate parts won't function as smoothly as one with clean chains of command, and would make taking allies a trade off between getting units that fill holes in your army at the cost of cohesive action represented by CP.

 

But, for that to work, you have to figure out what amount of CP feels right for each common point level.

 

Everyone wants as much CP as possible, but at some point, having to much makes strats not really a choice, you just use ALL of the best ones the first few turns, like what guard can do with a brigade+battalion, which really doesn't feel all that rewarding for either player.

 

So simple question, how many CP do you think strikes the right balance between not having enough to pull off your armies unique stuff vs having too many.

 

Was going to make it scale for every x amount of points, so every 250 or 500 add X# of CP.

 

Rough idea is for every 500 pts, have 4 CP.

So at 2k, everyone is effectively playing with a battleforged brigade if they are mono faction.

For every keyword your army doesn't have in common, subtract 1 for each.

So if your running Valhallans and Catachans, every 500 pts your getting 3 pts instead of 4.

If your only shared keyword is say Imperium, because your running guard, knight, and marines, your getting 2 per 500, rather than 4.

Which still leaves you with 8 at 2k, but it's a hefty penalty.

You could also lower it to 3 CP per 500 chunk, but start with a bit more to fine tune it and have more in smaller games.

 

What do members of the board think?

[Panzer]

Honestly, that's impossible to say. Different factions require different amounts of CP and even within those factions there are different lists requirering different amount of CP. A fix rule of "x CP for y amount of points" doesn't work.

[Slasher956]

Personally CP should be fixed to the level of the HQ... and only HQs of the warlords faction should generate it!

 

However to answer the OP - the chelmsford meta average is 10 CP @ 2K lists...which can be used in a single turn!

 

In my last game if I'd have had 25CP I'd have used it all by turn 3.....Sisters beta can burn through CP... as can Craftworlds (its easy to spend half a dozen CP pre game with them)

[Marshal Valkenhayn]

Honestly, that's impossible to say. Different factions require different amounts of CP and even within those factions there are different lists requirering different amount of CP. A fix rule of "x CP for y amount of points" doesn't work.

 

Hit the nail on the head. At the moment, i primarily play Black Templar and Khorne Daemons. Out of those 2 armies, the strategems that I will almost always use mid game are +3 cp to fight again and +2 CP to interrupt charge combats. I very rarely ever use any other strategems on Daemons mid fight unless it's a cheeky double perils damage or the very rare Warp surge, but with BT I often use the psychic deny, various mortal wounds strats, and Only in Death. So out of those 2 armies, BT eats more CP mid flow.

 

Where the armies differ is in how much CP they can eat pre game. Marines will eat 1 CP for an extra relic, 1 CP for special detachment, and maybe 1 CP for an extra warlord trait. That's roughly 3 CP to get them set up, and as an army their troupe choices function well as MSU units, meaning double battalions work fine.

 

In contrast, Khorne daemons have access to 1 troupe choice, Bloodletters, and they only function well in groups of 20 or more. Preferably groups of 30. That makes double battalions too expensive to be worth it. Those 30 man bloodletter squads are pretty awful if you start them on the table, so you need to deep strike them. It's 2 CP to deep strike a squad of 30, 1 CP to deep strike a squad of 20. It's an additional 1 CP per squad to upgrade their banners, which you want to do because you're already investing a lot of points and CP into making them functional units, so the worst thing that could happen is them not making their charges. That means you're spending 2-3 CP on each unit you deep strike, which will likely be at least 2 of them. that's 4-6 CP at the start of the fight, and they have a harder time earning it than marines. That's also assuming you aren't taking Skarbrand for the +1 attack aura, which demands another 2 CP to deep strike him.

 

Compare that to the other daemon armies, which either have access to shooting blobs with better invulns,t he ability to turn 1 charge you on the table, or access to cheap troupe choices with the ability to take forward positions and fill out battalions plus the most survivable troupe blobs in the game. The other three chaos gods aren't nearly so dependent on deep strike, and so though they come from the same codex they're going to have more CP free to play around with in the mid game.

 

The question is a complicated enough one that I don't think it can be answered in terms of just setting a set amount of CP on the table. Not without then going back and balancing all strategems for the various armies, and taking into account how essential they are to the function of that army. A better practice might be custom detachments,b ut I know how that makes people nervous to hear. But rather than custom detachments giving free units, let them give more CP, rewarding you for taking a certain unit.

 

IE, have a custom detachment called the Blood Hunt. 1 Karanak, 3-6 units of bloodhounds, gives 3 CP instead of 1 despite basically just being an outrider detachment. It's slightly Sigmar in its construction, even if Sigmar does theirs very very differently.

 

Or, hell. Just look over some armies and let them use certain units as troupes if they're mono. Mono Khorne being able to take Flesh Hounds as troupes would turn them into a double battalion army and help fix their CP problems.

[MARK0SIAN]

I think trying to decide a flat amount of CP is really difficult as different armies work with different amounts.

 

If you’re concerned about stratagem spamming, you could instead create a rule that only X amount of CP can be spent by either player each round (including before the game starts).

 

That way, armies that can generate lots of CP are automatically limited and will have to make a choice between one or two expensive strats or 3 or 4 cheap ones. Whereas armies that struggle for CP won’t really be effected as they generally have to make that same choice anyway.

 

It also stops everyone spamming everything in the first turn and might make the games less likely to be decided by turn 2.

[Dolchiate Remembrancer]

I would say limit it to points of troops.

So a brigade still generate the same amount but it has a point restriction of a minimum amount of troops.

I would use primaris or old marines as the standard and then try building some lists of other armies to see how that works out.

[Trevak Dal]

I really wish it was capped at points levels, and as you achieved in game objectives you would get more to kind of get "points streaks"

[Ficinus]

There isn't a perfect solution. If we make it flat amount for points level, that will help armies with powerful, but expensive units and good strats (Knights and Custodes, for example) while making the battalion an almost useless force org chart. If we tie it to troops, armies with really powerful troop units (like GSC) will benefit. If we tie CP generation to points scoring, it could very well lead to snowballing. If you tie it to HQs, armies with cheap or powerful HQ units (who want to or can max them) benefit.

 

Also, Slasher956, how are you burning through 8-9 command points a turn with Sisters? Are you using Vessels every turn? I usually make it to turn 4 or 5 before running out of my 14 command points.

[Slasher956]

Also, Slasher956, how are you burning through 8-9 command points a turn with Sisters? Are you using Vessels every turn? I usually make it to turn 4 or 5 before running out of my 14 command points.

 

went 2nd... 1 re-roll in opponents turn to keep a domino alive (immolater blow up) plus 2 for auto passing a moral check on a battle squad half a board away from my HQs

 

2 for arcos strat (how to wipe out 2 units of marines 9 attacks an arco...)

2 re-rolls (exorcist shots + charge distance)

1 for the storm bolter strat + 1 for the re-roll 1's to wound

 

my other CP was for an extra relic... run a battalion, heavy support & FA formations.... lost about a 3rd of my force his turn 1 against Crimson Fists list

[Lexington]

Rather than trying to find a way to balance CP/Stratagems, I’d suggest just removing them entirely.

[PeteySödes]

The further we get into the edition and stranger my desired lists become the more CP bums me out.

[Marshal Valkenhayn]

The further we get into the edition, the more certain i am that Sigmar handles CP right. Spent on command abilities that originate from generals/heroes and depend on what that general/hero's command ability is. It's a much more fun way to handle it, and most everyone generating 1 per round makes it easier to balance, relatively speaking

.

[Panzer]

I haven't played much AoS yet, but I definitely prefer how CPs work in Kill Team which is quite similar. If GW wants to keep the approach in 40k I think CP should be part of a units datasheet (could be noted on the top like the power level for example) so it can be more for more expensive units and less for cheap spammable units. Or add a percentage requirement to Troop choices so that the Battalion CPs cost the same amount for everyone.

[Special Officer Doofy]

Rather than trying to find a way to balance CP/Stratagems, I’d suggest just removing them entirely.

Ditto

[chapter master 454]

A fixed level just doesn't really work. A lot of armies that struggle with CP generation have it because by all accounts their stratagems tend to be potent ether because the stratagem is good by itself or the way it benefits the army is multiplied by the quality of the units (Double Fight in marines is extremely potent but Double Fight in Guard armies?).

 

However in counter point to that, some armies swim in CP but look at it thinking "What now?" like Guard armies (All this CP and all of near nothing to use it on).

 

I do agree there is some degree of need for it to be tied to something more faction specific as the "one size fits all" detachments don't sit right with me.

 

To use an example, it would be cool if in marines if you had a Chaplain, Captain and/or a Lieutenant in a detachment as 3 of the HQ choices, this would give you a CP boost as it represents the company command being present on the battlefield. Would be cool to consider the impact of choosing between bringing all 3 for a massive CP boost or just 2 of them for a minor boost (would also mean bringing Captain and Lieutenants feels better than just "This is re-roll hits" McDude and this is "Re-roll to wound" McGuy).

 

Reward the players for bring various elements because as it stands, why should be bring Techmarines outside of fringe cases? Maybe add a bonus to spearhead detachment CP when they are lead by 2 techmarines and all Heavy Support choices are vehicles. 

[PeteySödes]

I guess I just dislike the that specialized fluffy armies of the past like (surprise surprise) company of the great wolf get punished with a CP drought.

[mughi3]

lexington is correct. CP and stratagems is the new power creep. just look at what the power gamers have done to break the game and tournaments.

 

A battalion of IG tax for max CP and then your actual army list.

 

I think infinity the game got it right. every player only gets 4, you can never get more or get them back. each only usable once per game and only on a few very specific things. making the player using them really have to think about when and where to use them.

[Gederas]

The further we get into the edition, the more certain i am that Sigmar handles CP right. Spent on command abilities that originate from generals/heroes and depend on what that general/hero's command ability is. It's a much more fun way to handle it, and most everyone generating 1 per round makes it easier to balance, relatively speaking.

I haven't played much AoS yet, but I definitely prefer how CPs work in Kill Team which is quite similar. If GW wants to keep the approach in 40k I think CP should be part of a units datasheet (could be noted on the top like the power level for example) so it can be more for more expensive units and less for cheap spammable units. Or add a percentage requirement to Troop choices so that the Battalion CPs cost the same amount for everyone.

To explain what Marshal Valkenhayn is referring to:

 

In AoS you start the battle with 1 Command Point, plus 1 for each battalion (note: not the 40k Detachment, basically think of the specialized formations from 7th and you're on the right track) you have and 1 for each 50 points you didn't spend on your army (for example, 2000 point game, spent 1900 points on army, get 2 bonus command points at start of game). You also gain 1 point at the start of each of your hero phases [read: Kind of like the Psychic phase in 40k, but comes before movement in AoS as it's not just spell-slinging]. Command points can ONLY be used on specific Command Abilities that a Hero has. These are abilities that Heroes can use in the Hero Phase (unless said otherwise) that give buffs that cannot be stopped.

 

A couple examples:

• Bloodthirster of Insensate Rage: Bloodthirsty Charge: You can use this command ability at the start of your charge phase. If you do so, pick a friendly model with this command ability. Until the end of that phase, you can re-roll charge rolls for friendly Khorne Daemon units wholly within 16" of that model when the charge roll is made.
• Great Unclean One: Grandfather’s Joy: You can use this command ability in your hero phase. If you do, pick a friendly Nurgle Daemon unit within 21" of this model. Add 1 to the Attacks characteristic of all melee weapons used by that unit until your next hero phase.
• Syll'Eske: Regal Authority: You can use this command ability at the start of the combat phase if this model is your general and is on the battlefield. If you do so, until the end of that phase, you can re-roll hit rolls of 1 for friendly Chaos Slaanesh units while they are wholly with 18" of this model. In addition, you can use this command ability at the start of the battleshock phase if this model is your general and is on the battlefield. If you do so, until the end of that phase, do not take battleshock tests for friendly Chaos Slaanesh units while they are wholly with 18" of this model.

I used Daemons as the examples because they're also in 40k, but those are a few examples of what I mean.

 

There's still cheesy lists in AoS, but none of this crap like command point farming and Loyal/Unworthy 32/Rusty 17 so you can squeeze out as many command points as possible.

 

AoS has a good way of doing it. 40k.... Not so much. That being said, sfPanzer, your idea also sounds like it could be good. Like, lower model count unit armies (like Custodes) could [and should] have an equal amount of Command Points as high model count armies (like Guard or Tyranids) with your idea. Which is good.

[Guest Triszin]

I think elite armies should have utility cp rules baked in, making them less reliant on cp.

 

 

While armies like gaurd should need loads of cp.

 

 

Representing elite armies are more trained and don't need micro managing.

[Ciler]

I'm probably not going to make many friends saying this, but how about we stop beating around the bush ? The real issue, I believe, is CP batteries, those (usually cheap) units taken in minimal size solely for the purpose of generating CP and for no obvious battlefield role (except maybe to occupy space).

 

I do not believe there is a simple straightforward solution, because players that maximise CP do it for a simple reason, because it works. I'm not saying - mind - that we're dealing there with the Win At All Costs guy (although some are), but that stratagems are the key to winning a game in the current edition/meta. You can't expect a player to sabotage his list.

[Exilyth]

When you constantly end up with leftover CP, you can lower your CP count.

When you constantly end up running out of CP, you need to up your CP count (or reduce CP reliance).

 

There is no formula - which is the case for your army and how much to adjust by can only be evaluated by playing a large number of games against various diverse enemies.

[helterskelter]

The new marine codex stuff has dealt with this to an extent and should be applied mercilessly to other factions, you want to use your fancy rules, mono army only. That way you're only really having an effective force with 9 ish CP for the game. Just so happens i also think 9 is the CP sweetspot. Lets you do relic/warlord trait shenanigans if you want and gives you a nice pile for the game, but you still have to think what to use and try not to burn them all on re-rolls

[Vermintide]

Honestly I think it'd be interesting to see how each army stacks up if they don't get any CP at all, just pure list building strength. I think if you are trying to make CP fair for each player in terms of balance, you'd need a different approach for each army- There seem to be some armies that are strong on their own and CP is a bonus, but there are also armies that only become strong with and NEED access to CP.

[Schlitzaf]

Honeslty? About 10-13. 2 Battalions and a Speciality Detachments. Which almost every army should be able to reasonably able to do frankly.

 

Also for those who are saying and complaining Rusty 17/Loyal 32, you all do realize that....competitive players don’t use them. Because Rusty 17 and Loyal 32 is actively bad? Unless you design your list to use them.

[Guest Triszin]

Honeslty? About 10-13. 2 Battalions and a Speciality Detachments. Which almost every army should be able to reasonably able to do frankly.

 

Also for those who are saying and complaining Rusty 17/Loyal 32, you all do realize that....competitive players don’t use them. Because Rusty 17 and Loyal 32 is actively bad? Unless you design your list to use them.

Wolves can't really, we have no cheap troop choice. Our scouts are elite, and don't have any rules to show for it