Jump to content

What's Still Left That Needs 2-Detachment Limits?


WestRider

Recommended Posts

Since it was suggested I bump this out into its own thread:

 

I've been kind of thinking about this since the Necron Codex was released, and Annihilation Barges and Night Scythes got nerfed. At this point, what's really left that's broken when spammable, and primarily limited by FOC slots rather than Points cost? What of that is more problematic than the stuff you can take in an ITC-style 2-Detachment list as it stands, like 5 Flyrants or 5 Riptides?

 

Is there a solid reason for this restriction to be a standard anymore?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, every SINGLE Imperial list would include an Inquisitor practically because he's cheap and VERY useful in a variety of roles.  

 

It's not necessarily SPAMMING that is the issue, but cherry-picking cheap formations or the like to get maximum value in 2k.  The 2 source limitation is at least a limitation.  Also, the Decurion detachment isn't just carte blanche formation building, it is pretty restrictive still, so claiming that it just opens the door is a bit specious.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Inquisitors, Assassins, and Flyrants would be the three things I'd be concerned about, yeah. If you just drop the two-detachment limit, spamming CADs isn't an issue (because you still can only take one of each detachment, leaving you exactly where you were before with 'Nids), but then you still have the issue of every army in the game taking a Cheapquisitor and/or Culexus to hard-counter other stuff.

 

I don't really know just how much of a problem it would be and I think it's worth exploring, but my gut instinct is not to like it.

 

However, Adepticon is allowing EVERYTHING this year, so we'll get to see what that results in (at least to a degree.)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said GW seems to ignore "balance." Sisters are certainly an unbalanced army, and I don't mean they are overpowered. I mean the army list lacks balance.

 

Sad perhaps, but GW needs to make a proper codex that is designed to stand being printed into the physical world, or they should drop it.

 

As for the models, look at the CSM players using SW rules. There's no real requirement to use GW models to represent their intended role. I'd much rather see sisters models representing a current, balanced codex, than to see their lacking PDF that gives false hope to sisters players.

 

Anyway, my opinion is certainly my own. It is not wrong, though you may certainly disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even GW printed books lack this balance you speak of, sisters are every bit as "finished" as dark eldar. Sisters even have great allies to fill in for weaknesses just like dark eldar.

 

To be fair, Pax didn't suggest that the printed books are balanced.  He did suggest that if GW can't publish a balanced book, they shouldn't publish it at all.

 

Personally, I don't feel every army should be able to build a perfectly balanced TAC list.  To me, at least in theory, that kills the flavor of armies in a lot of ways.  Should they have some tools to be able to take something out?  Sure.  Does it need to be the best way possible every time?  F'k that noise, we already have SM, DA, BA and SW.

 

 

As for more on topic, I can't attest to anything needing a 2 detachment restriction, but I do feel that restrictions such as those can really lock down a lot of creativity in lists.  I'm also more of an unbound mindset, though.  I think it's silly to describe all these types of situations in the fluff, and then not allow for it in list creation.  I'm excited for the direction 7th has gone for those reasons.  Can it make for cheese dick stuff?  Sure, but cheese dick stuff will always exist, and so will super weak options.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mr. Bigglesworth

I don't think 2 cad is necessary but limit the amount of sourcebooks might be the better route.

 

As an example limit to 3 codices and 3 data slated to build your force.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sisters are certainly an unbalanced army, and I don't mean they are overpowered. I mean the army list lacks balance.

 

Sad perhaps, but GW needs to make a proper codex that is designed to stand being printed into the physical world, or they should drop it.

 

As for the models, look at the CSM players using SW rules. There's no real requirement to use GW models to represent their intended role. I'd much rather see sisters models representing a current, balanced codex, than to see their lacking PDF that gives false hope to sisters players.

 

Anyway, my opinion is certainly my own. It is not wrong, though you may certainly disagree.

Sisters are certainly balanced, but their army list lacks depth. That's a big difference. Sisters have not had a print codex since 1998 or so. They have been shoehorned into a variety of WD lists, sub-codexes, digital codexes, etc. since then and have been fine. I've been playing them for over 15 years in this state of affairs and saying that just because right now they have a digital codex they should be eliminated, that's silly.

 

Hope, that and faith in an eventual return, is the thing that makes a true SOB player. The current codex is actually my second favorite in their history (behind the no-doubt-nostalgia-tainted 3rd edition Codex:Chapter Approved). As with most things, just because you don't like it or think it is good, doesn't mean that it shouldn't exist. :)

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mr. Bigglesworth

You mean 3 codices or 3 data slates total? I.e. 3 sources total?

I threw out an example not what I would sell. I don't think I have a full enough understanding to say if that is correct. But I would think codices and data slates\fw should have separate limitations.

 

If I were to guess what I think is apporiate I would say this per list:

2 codices

2 alternative sourced units, ie, white dwarf, dataslates, forgeworld, ia entires, a codex beyond first two. Meaning you can only have 2 unique units from alternative sources.

 

I think this limits the mystery of the unknown for your opponent, which I think is the real issue at play in the tourney scene.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...