Relative army caps.

This was brought up in discussion with testers the other day, and the infiltration post on min/maxing brought it to my attention just now.



When I played tabletop, you werent limited to 6/3/3 type limits, instead you had % of cost. Eg, allowed to spend 0-25% on command, 0-25% on vehicles, minimum of 50-100% on mainline troops.



Given the dynamic nature of dow, it means you can max one cap out and ignore the rest in effect ignoring any constraints on army lists. Meaning you could have 0 mainline troops but spam elites and heavy support.

That being the case, I think the caps aught be put in relation to the amount of main troops(as the core units of any race army).

Instead of just being given 3 of each every game, gain the special caps relative to amount of troops on the board.

1 hq cap for each 2 troop choices.
1 fast attack for each 2 troops
1 hs for each 2 troops.

So there will always be a core of main troops to flesh out a race without focusing purely on the special stuff.
That means you will always have a core of marines in any force, instead of only having 3 land speeders and 3 terminator squads.
It means to get all those hwt's you need platoons first, needing 6 platoons before you get your 9 sentinels out.

I am all for this type of system and have been since I played TT, it always appeared right minded. Good flash from the past VGF. What does everyone else think...by that I mean MK, Melooo, Homer and Che...you know the active posters.

It sounds good to always have your standard as the core. This resembles the force organization chart in some way. It is absolutely doable coding-wise but not so sure about the AI.

Not quite sure how to do this with Elites and Fast Attack choices though, as those use commulative cap.

This can only be achieved by using scar code...... ive been told that there is a way to stick a scar as a permanent default game rule without even appearing as win condition and there is a fuggles (i think) win condition around that simulates these sort of limits at some extent, though it has to be checked if we can group squads in types, as right now that piece of code only makes limits like "1 terminator squad per 2 tactical squad".

"Enforce unit ratios" is the name of that scar win condition, can look for it at Relicnews.

ps: this could also work to limit 1 transport per each squad.

As interesting of an idea as this is, and it is really interesting, it limits gameplay styles. There are times when I don't want to spend money on mostly 'core' troops. Also, it will be really really annoying to the average player, I'm pretty sure. "Why can't I build my heavy support? Oh, I first have to invest money in 'normal' troops."

When it comes to selecting armies it is Table Top and Codex kosher to pick one HQ selection, two troop selections, and then buy nothing other then Elites, Heavy Support, or another Character with the rest of your army's points. Given that every army starts with a HQ building, I suspect that is treated as required HQ selection one has to make on the Table Top. The two troops selections needed are given. Since this as the starting point, one then further fills out their army however they see fit based on the points(blue and green collected) left at the commander's disposal. The current method is a good approximation of the Table Top.

You pretty much state my point in your own justification of your opinion..

You say, in kosher, you pick a hq section, and 2 troops. You then spend the rest of the points on an elite and a heavy support.

thats a rounded army.

The size of the armies in dow are bigger than that, with more options open.

In Tt, is it valid to field an army that has 1 hq, 2 troop choices, 3 heavy support and 3 elite choices? Or, if the game is going badly and you only want to field what is best for the situation, is it valid in Tt to field 1 hq, 0 troops, 3 elite and 3 HS?