Incentives for full sized squads

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

For armies like marines that can take squads at very different sizes, would the community like incentives to bring full powered squads?

 

as it stands the blast rule tends to disincentivize taking full sized units.

 

i was thinking that you cut the PPM by half for the second half of the squad

[Marshal Mittens]

Horus Heresy generally does that, with a full squad being cheaper, PPM, than two squads at half strength. Same for vehicles in a squadron. Seems to encourage it in that game. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

59 minutes ago, Marshal Mittens said:

Horus Heresy generally does that, with a full squad being cheaper, PPM, than two squads at half strength. Same for vehicles in a squadron. Seems to encourage it in that game. 

I’m a genius!

[Cleon]

HH also doesn't have the Blast rule making the larger squads functionally worse than two small squads standing next to each other (There are still some benefits for templates) - Really the best arguement for using big squads in both is to get more bang for your buck for the strategms/reactions that effect 1 squad, but they are already too much of the game for my liking.

[Cpt_Reaper]

You mean you don't run 10 man squads all the time? If I ever played with a 5 man squad (other than my Terminators) I'd feel dirty. And I plan to increase my Terminators to 10 man squads soon.

[Xenith]

The incentives for full squads is that things like auras, psychic powers etc effect 10 models instead of 5, so they are all automatically better, however this is in terms of offensive power, defensively, you might as well take 5 of weaker units, as they'll just die anyway and 5 models might be overkilled, wasting the opponent's shots. As such, when there are weapon upgrade, or better squad members like sergeants, taking 2x5 is plain better than 1x10, like with 2x5 marines you get 2 thunder hammers, 2 combi plasmas and 2 plasmas, while 1x10 gets you 1hammer, 1 combi, one plasma and one heavy.

 

I'd agree that additional unit members could have a point reduction.

[sairence]

4 hours ago, Marshal Mittens said:

Horus Heresy generally does that, with a full squad being cheaper, PPM, than two squads at half strength. Same for vehicles in a squadron. Seems to encourage it in that game. 

 

How does that work with combat squads? Or is that not a thing in heresy?

[lhg033]

I haven't played marines in a good while but in older editions the advantage would be fitting more bodies in the FOC then being able to combat squad them in to 2x 5 men and split the sergeant and heavy/special weapons as fitted the squad/mission. it wasnt a huge advantage though and there was still very much the case of min/maxing squads, particularly for units with transports

 

[Casual Heresy]

In the metas I play in, I've never found blast weapons to be a deterrent to taking 10 man squads. Indeed I usually go ten man squads for the likes of my Templars as they are mostly a close range force and will lose models on the way to the enemy. A few ablative wounds can preserve those special and melee weapons until they're really needed.

 

That being said minimum sized squads have advantages in that they are easier to hide behind LOS blocking terrain, and they represent a lower point investment in a list. Incentivising larger squads would in effect penalise smaller squads which I think is a bad idea. Squad sizes is just one way a player can tailor their army to suit their own play style and vision, which shouldn't be taken away.

[Jings]

I think a small way to encourage larger squads would be to flatout require them to be 10-man for some units (Skitarii troops, DEldar Kabalites/Wyches etc.) and allow for those that can feasibly be run as 5-man units to count as two slots for detachment requirements (Tacs/Intercessors etc.). Further emphasis? Maybe allow for free or discounted upgrades in 10-man units.

 

A 10-man Devastator Squad is fluffy, but not exactly efficient. A 10-man Devastator Squad where Lascannons dip from, say, a 20-point upgrade to 10 if part of a full squad? Well, yeah you're paying 80 points extra for the ablative wounds, but if those same Lascannons then only cost 40 points, you're paying only 40 points. 

 

That said, 40K in its current state is basically broken so who knows how you can fix this. Hard to incentivise things like this when the game is focused on pandering to the competitive crowd who find their fun exploiting the game to the best of their ability. Can't have nice things in that sort of environment. 

[Guest Triszin]

I think bonuses, and all or nothing.

 

Bonuses:

Ex. Guard troops - squad size, 10,20,30

Squads of 20, get a extra -1 ap when firing Las guns at the same target.

Sub 20 they lose it.

 

Marines:

5 man, pay for 1 special option

10man, free 2nd special option

 

All or nothing.

Squad sizes are 10,20, or 30.

You cannot take 15.

 

 

[MARK0SIAN]

I think a discount like in HH would be a good way of doing it. It’s worth noting there are other incentives in HH to go for larger squads though, one is that the slots in the foc are generally a lot more restricted than in 40K so you want to get the most from limited slots by using larger squads. 
 

The other is that it’s a lot rarer for troops units to get the opportunity to take special weapons or upgrades other than the Sergeant so there’s less incentive to go for smaller units. Likewise when units can select some special upgrades the amount that can be selected tends to scale uniformly with the number of models so you get the same number of upgrades whether you take 2 five man units or 1 ten man unit. 

[TrawlingCleaner]

Age of Sigmar has bonuses for the horde-esque units if they're taken in large numbers. For example:

Moonclan Stabbs can contest Objectives from 9" rather than 6" if they have 20 or more models in a unit

Moonclan Shootas get 1 extra shot each if they're 10 models or more additionally if they're 15 models or more they get +1 to hit

 

There's an interesting design space for units to get fluffy and interesting bonuses if they have X-amount of models or wounds outside of just giving them free equipment

 

6+ intercessors gain +1 to hit

6+ Flash Gitz gain an extra shot

6+ Assault marines get +2" to their move 

Etc etc

 

All of the above would require a full rework of the current edition of course, and isn't plug and play as is.

[Guest Triszin]

To add to this.

 

With what trawling brought up

We have (blast)

We should have (horde) 20,30 models

(With the req of forcing squads to be 10 or 20 or 30. To prevent min maxing)

- a generic usr that gives benefits like the above

Ex.

As trawling gave examples above
15 + models (+1 to hit)

 

 

Could make (horde) a keyword then that faction has a specific horde rule

 

 

Edited March 20, 2023 by Triszin

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

9 hours ago, Casual Heresy said:

In the metas I play in, I've never found blast weapons to be a deterrent to taking 10 man squads. Indeed I usually go ten man squads for the likes of my Templars as they are mostly a close range force and will lose models on the way to the enemy. A few ablative wounds can preserve those special and melee weapons until they're really needed.

 

That being said minimum sized squads have advantages in that they are easier to hide behind LOS blocking terrain, and they represent a lower point investment in a list. Incentivising larger squads would in effect penalise smaller squads which I think is a bad idea. Squad sizes is just one way a player can tailor their army to suit their own play style and vision, which shouldn't be taken away.

I disagree, incentivizing larger squads does nothing to disincentivize smaller squads.

all the incentives you mentioned to take smaller squads still exist regardless of the incentives to take larger squads. It’s just up to the individual to weigh those incentives.

as it stands blast weapons are common and could very easily deal with those ablative wounds plus some.

 

8 hours ago, Jings said:

I think a small way to encourage larger squads would be to flatout require them to be 10-man for some units (Skitarii troops, DEldar Kabalites/Wyches etc.) and allow for those that can feasibly be run as 5-man units to count as two slots for detachment requirements (Tacs/Intercessors etc.). Further emphasis? Maybe allow for free or discounted upgrades in 10-man units.

 

A 10-man Devastator Squad is fluffy, but not exactly efficient. A 10-man Devastator Squad where Lascannons dip from, say, a 20-point upgrade to 10 if part of a full squad? Well, yeah you're paying 80 points extra for the ablative wounds, but if those same Lascannons then only cost 40 points, you're paying only 40 points. 

 

That said, 40K in its current state is basically broken so who knows how you can fix this. Hard to incentivise things like this when the game is focused on pandering to the competitive crowd who find their fun exploiting the game to the best of their ability. Can't have nice things in that sort of environment. 

Yep, the fact that people are actively looking to find ways to exploit the rules is what really breaks the game imo, an exploit that is super powerful in 1 specific build and combo gets needed, but in the process one or more aspects of the combo that are nerfed aren’t individually that powerful and made almost useless if not used in that specific combo.

[Warhead01]

I stopped fielding full squads of space marines because the game seemed to be pushing list building in that direction. Point costs are/were bad everything seemed like it was over priced and my lists were no longer able to have a reasonable showing on the table. I used to run a lot of troop choices and prefer those squads to be full.
Blast is a small issue for SM's but the unit coherency being shorter than in earlier editions is also an issue. There's enough going on in 9th that it seems counter productive to field full squads or not use combat squad if it's a possibility.  Unlike HH, at least in the previous edition, where I prefer to field tactical squads 20 models strong. Only have 3 tac squads like that but that's just all I own.  
Even my Orks, the last time I fielded them there was no good incentive to field mobs of boys above 10 models.  The "thematic core" of an Ork army and little reason to field any more than I have to, yuck. 
9th seems to exist to discourage fun thematic armies. 

[Closet Skeleton]

1 hour ago, Warhead01 said:

9th seems to exist to discourage fun thematic armies. 

 

Top tier armies tend to be a lot fluffier in 9th than they ever were in any previous edition. It just doesn't help marines much.

[jaxom]

At the end of the day, I'm cool with GW basing squad sizes on what comes in a kit box. I think overly large squad sizes are a relic of more limited force organization charts.

 

44 minutes ago, Closet Skeleton said:

 

Top tier armies tend to be a lot fluffier in 9th than they ever were in any previous edition. It just doesn't help marines much.

My pet peeve for awhile has been Space Marine Combat Squads vs 2x5 Squads. Strats and psychic powers are going to be used with whatever your army's linebreakers are, not the  majority of the units which are actively made worse by not MSU'ing. The design of Marine squads hasn't helped... almost ever. Until (relatively) recently, MSU would give you more special and heavy weapons, and to this day you get more Sergeants - i.e. more weapon options - by taking two individual squads than taking a 10 man and Combat Squading it. The foot print will be similar and isn't a disincentive for benefiting from auras, which is what they'll benefit from as non-linebreakers.

 

If one wants more full-sized squads, I think it has to be handled at a faction level.

• Imperial Space Marines - Max size squads can also include a Veteran with the same stats and options as a Sergeant; they can be made into Combat Squads. If they're not Combat Squads, then only 5 are needed to do an Action and any remainder can still shoot.
• Chaos Space Marines - Max size squads can also include a Veteran with the same stats and options as a Sergeant. Some sort of rule reflecting squad members competing to draw the attention of their warlord or gods; more members to against against , more bonus.
• Necrons - Doing it okay at the moment. The buffs characters hande out are mostly "pick a squad" type, which benefits larger squads.
• Orks - Lower their Leadership across the board (average should be 5) and remove all bonuses to Leadership except an updated version of Mob Rule where they get +1 Leadership for every 5 boyz (for bog standard infantry that usually starts at 10) over minimum squad size that the unit starts with.

Etc. Then armies like all stripes of Aeldari, which I think make sense not to have jumbo-squads, are not encouraged or penalized by core rules.

 

 

[Galron]

8 hours ago, Cleon said:

HH also doesn't have the Blast rule making the larger squads functionally worse than two small squads standing next to each other (There are still some benefits for templates) - Really the best arguement for using big squads in both is to get more bang for your buck for the strategms/reactions that effect 1 squad, but they are already too much of the game for my liking.

HH doesnt have the blast rule, but they have 1" coherency and actual templates which are generally more punishing than 40k's blast rule.

8 hours ago, sairence said:

 

How does that work with combat squads? Or is that not a thing in heresy?

No combat squads. A 10 man squad of marines(which is the minimum size) has 9 dudes with bolters and a sergeant with options. Then you can add 10 more dudes with bolters. There are a lot of 5-15, 10-20, and 5-10 squads in 30k.