PDA

View Full Version : 5th edition = more models on the table = trend for the future



jma037
16-07-2008, 00:20
From 2nd to 3rd edition, the rule changes means you have to have more models on the table. 3rd to 4th is similar in that respect. Now 5th, with the troop only objective capture rule means that you need even more models on the table to play a game. I might be paranoid, but it's as if GW want us to buy more models. I dare say that in 6th edition, there will be rule changes that will make you buy even more models.

What do you guys think?

azimaith
16-07-2008, 00:22
Or you just play smaller games and use smaller troop units unless of course you play kill points, in which case use what you want.

shark3y06
16-07-2008, 00:24
i agree with that same thing

MrGiggles
16-07-2008, 00:32
Pretty much. You can set the scale of a battle pretty easily when you use point limits. Smaller point games definitely make things more accessible to new players. I know that the 1800 odd point minimum for the tourneys at the FLGS limits the number of folks playing. A good many of the younger kids and/or newer gamers just don't have the raw point totals to get into the larger tourneys.

Templar Ben
16-07-2008, 01:00
Not everyone plays Apocalypse so they need to make sure you have lots of models in your normal games.

Lord Inquisitor
16-07-2008, 01:04
I don't know... with 5th edition in mind, I for one am looking at really expensive elite Troop units (such as Noise Marines).

While the Troops scoring does have some incentive to put more models on the table, the Kill Points system means that there is a counter-incentive to have as few units as possible.

TheDarkDuke
16-07-2008, 01:07
I think the objective and kill point missions were designed to balance lists out. If you go really heavy on troops (more or less usually an armies easier to kill units) you will have more available KPs where as if you take an army with only 2 troops options, you will usually be reducing KPs but lacking in the objective capturing.

So when it comes to tournies now, you need to really think about what to take, reducing min/max units and many other things. It creates the need to figure out just what to take. Perhaps now two DP with lashes is not the best plan due to the points spent on them for objective based missions now. min/max is not not a very great tactic for KP missions.

TheDarkDuke
16-07-2008, 01:09
As to the need for more models...

How? I can still take the same list of 1500 points in 4th and it works in 5th just fine.... if not better for my BT and DG.

Codex is where you usually end up needing to tweak more things in an army resulting in "more" models, not core rules.

GrandReaper
16-07-2008, 02:01
I don't really see many armies needing to add more troop choices for 5th, just look at and use them differently. All decent SM and CSM builds should have had at least three troop choices before, and they still should now.

Orks: Already used lots
Tau: Already had 3+ usually
Necron: This rule is the least of their problems
Tyranid: Either had tons of troops or was Nidzilla (which they no doubt wanted to curb anyway)
Eldar: Usually had a couple Dire Avenger squads plus another troop, or played the Eldar Flying Circus (which they wanted to curb anyway)
Daemons: Haven't used or played against them, sorry.
Dark Eldar: You can't factor in an army that old.
IG: How many scoring units do they need, anyway. The army minimum is 4 without doctrines.
SOB: Basic sister squads are the heart of the army
Grey Knights: You needed basic squads for the numbers before anyway. You will never see more than 3 squads of Grey Knights regardless of the rules.

So, overall, I don't see the change being drastic. And remember, you still need models to take opponents objectives away. Troops are not usually the best for that!

cailus
16-07-2008, 02:10
Codex is where you usually end up needing to tweak more things in an army resulting in "more" models, not core rules.


I totally agree with this but the new rules do go a long wat to promoting larger size armies simply because the rules favour cheaper units points wise. Small units become a recipe for disaster so are phased out in favour of bulking out core units.

Though the codexes are where the real model increases happen.

Look at the last Ork codex with the savings made on the cost of core troops. My 1,500 point army with 97 models went down to 1,100 points. Another example is the Chaos codex where Daemon units went from an average points cost of about 19 points to 13 points. In fact a unit of 8 Bloodletters went from 208 points to about 104 points.

Slashing of wargear options also means more models as you cannot spend points on upgrades. For example my brother's Aspiring Champions used to have about 40-50 points of wargear (daemonic attacks, powerfists, master crafted etc) whereas now they have only 25. Similarly my Ork warboss lost about 20 points in Wargear in the new codex. This means more points for more models.

Even heavy weapon restrictions mean more models. Looking at Dark Anel tactical squads or Chaos Space Marine squads. Before you could min max on heavy/special weapons and acquire two 5 man tactical squads with lascannon and plasma cannon for about 200 points for both units. Now you need to have 10 guys to have a lascannon and plasma gun in a squad. The cost remains the same but your two efficient las/plas squads have become one oversized inefficient las/plas squad. So many players will drop heavy weapons from such tactical units thereby saving points which again means more models.


The big problem with ever growing armies is that it removes maneouvring as an option as more models means less room to maneouvre. Often the only way for units in horde armies to go is straight forward. It also means more boring movement phases as players spend more time moving larger quantities of models.

Personally I preferred the amouint of models you had in 2nd edition armies. Lower numbers of models also mean greater possibilities in terms of characterful rules design.