The Rise and Rise of the 'Combo'

[Denzark]

I am interested in the increasing prevalence of the term ‘combo’ in 40K. Whilst I am sure such things have always been out there, it seems to have been becoming more common throughout 6th and now into 7th Ed. Read any of the most popular 40K blogs and you will see it used more and more.

What is a combo? I understand this to mean a group of units who when used together, the combined results of their special rules/abilities and/or their wargear are highly efficient and deliver a greater effect than they would do if used in isolation of each other. Not all combos are deathstars, but a lot of deathstars would seem to be combos.

Neither would I consider a unit and its transport used for best effect, a combo per se – for example Sternguard in a drop pod. That is just tactics.

Examples of combos may be things like a psyker who reduces a unit’s Ld, followed by an attack that works against said unit’s Ld instead of the normal T (An early example from Codex Daemonhunters with assassins). Or, using allies to create an unmovable super unit. Maybe like a guard blob, with a Commissar, a Priest and then say Azrael to give all 50 a 4++.

So, having established what we are talking about by the term ‘combo’, there are some questions to be asked. Combos seemed to be a bring back from Warmachine, where an entire gameplan can be based on bringing off the desired effect of your combo. But is this good for 40K? Many players comment they would rather win by skill than the random effects also becoming more common in the last 2 editions – but if a combo has a disproportionate affect, is the game being decided by skill on the tabletop, or list building? After all, list building is surely a part of the game – but it can be done with no knowledge, flair or panache just by pressing print on the latest cookie cutter internet list.

So, combos. The latest WAAC fad, or part of the game and here to stay? One thing is for certain, with unbound and allies a staple part of the game in 7th, we’re all likely to be exposed to combos and forewarned is to some extent, forearmed.

[Mr Mystery]

Synergy.

Synergy is a good thing.

It changes up the game, and in theory, should help promote variety.

The fact that a handful of people will freely abuse this just to bag wins is just a downside to any game ever made.

[Wolfshade]

Combos or synergy has been in 40k as you say for quite awhile. Though I think at one stage it wasn't really thought of as a "combo" like a commisar and guard blob. Solid combo that the one enhances the other.

I think it is a "good" thing. It adds a level of tactical expertise so you end up with something that is worth more than the sum of its parts.

With these simple combos (unit+character) from the same codex these tend to get better the bigger the unit. So for instance Lemartes with a 3 man Death Company is good, Lemartes with a 30 man Death Company is crazy.

Yet, unlike something like the Bonding Knife, it isn't possible to price these for the scalability of the cost of this combination so they can be overly/under costed based on the total size.

With the ability then to take allies and then these allies be able to interact with their special rules you then increase these sorts of comboninations "exponentially".

My biggest concern with them is you end up with people being told "oh you are playing eldar & dark eldar therefore you must take this combination". This is a concern for me and you have it all over the shop, people thinking that there is one way to 40k and with that it misses out on all these lovely different synergies that may or may not be optimal or fluffy

[Mr Mystery]

Yup.

Phrases I utterly despise are along the lines of 'sub-optimal'. Put your e-peen away. Nobody has played anything like enough games to be able to make such a statement. Just because you consider it good, doesn't actually make it so!

[Path Walker]

Its when they've not even played a game and make the judgements on "Sub-Optimal" units or "points efficient combos" that really gets to me.

[daboarder]

synergy is probably the most poorly used buzz word in 40k.

The good kind is things like the sanguinary priest, AM orders or psykers. and thats great, force multipliers are a good thing.

The bad kind is the kind every apologist starts repeating when the nids are discussed, throwing more points/units at a unit/combo just to get the models to do their basic job/not kill themselves, is TERRIBLE codex design

[Path Walker]

Actually, I'd not say any of those things are synegistic, as they're doing the one job they're intended to do, not working better together with another unit to do a job even better.

In fact, I'd say that Tyranids need to be used in combinations with each other, each allowing another part of the swarm to do its job, that is synergy.

Because you don't want to use your army in that way doesn't mean its bad codex design.

[daboarder]

In fact, I'd say that Tyranids need to be used in combinations with each other, each allowing another part of the swarm to do its job, that is synergy.
Because you don't want to use your army in that way doesn't mean its bad codex design.



:rolleyes: point made?

[Wolfshade]

I think that the mono-codex synergies are quite well know and used fairly regularly.

Priests + Any BA unit
DC + Chaplain


Some are so ubiqutious that we don't even see it as a combo and instead it becomes outstanding not to see it.
Boyz + Nob w/ PKlaw & Boss Pole
Painboy + Nobz (though I never really got the points of units of nobz if I am honest)
Any ork vehicle + red paint

it is as we move forward with new codecii being released that we see more and more different combos that may or may not be used together for effect.

[daboarder]

I think that the mono-codex synergies are quite well know and used fairly regularly.

Priests + Any BA unit
DC + Chaplain


Some are so ubiqutious that we don't even see it as a combo and instead it becomes outstanding not to see it.
Boyz + Nob w/ PKlaw & Boss Pole
Painboy + Nobz (though I never really got the points of units of nobz if I am honest)
Any ork vehicle + red paint

it is as we move forward with new codecii being released that we see more and more different combos that may or may not be used together for effect.

I dunno mate, 7th made a big step into really putting the brakes on some of the cross faction force multiplication, particularly where tau and eldar were concrened,

Id expect to see the mono-codex force multipliers remain, but I wouldn't really expect a lot of cross detachment buffs.

[Path Walker]

:rolleyes: point made?

You did make my point very well for me, yes.

[Wolfshade]

I dunno mate, 7th made a big step into really putting the brakes on some of the cross faction force multiplication, particularly where tau and eldar were concrened,

Id expect to see the mono-codex force multipliers remain, but I wouldn't really expect a lot of cross detachment buffs.

Yes I suppose you are right. But I think that this is a good thing, it helps with balance.

What I meant that what with more codecii being released the potential for units to work together increases.

[daboarder]

You did make my point very well for me, yes.

Im sure I did, it was a very elaborate look into the synergy of the Tyranid codex, allow me to extended it with some of my personal favourites.

The Pyrovore, Whose job is done by almost every monstrous creature, without the drawback and for 35 points cheaper

The Tervigon, who actually had his synergy rules taken away and was left with a little boost that doesn't actually work because half the rule is missing

The Trygon tunnel, such a wonderful piece of writing that thinking about it for 5 mins shows why its a head scratcher.

and my favourite, the core army theme where you are only actually functional when within synapse range.....

See here's the thing Path Walker, Synergy is about making your units more than the sum of their parts through the use of intelligent strategic and tactical choices.

There are armies whose design lets this concept work very well, Astra Millitarum is one of these, taking no Command squads is a perfectly viable option because the units all still work independently. However there are additional bonuses gained by building your list around these units (Orders).

When you have a core list that actively punishes you for NOT choosing those units, then you have the opposite of Synergy, its bad codex design. And that is what the Nids have, couple that with so much redundancy between units that codex weaknesses are covered by only one or two unit choices and you have a recipe for a mono-list codex from day 1. Because why would you ever take a pyrovore when Thorax swarms exist?


PS: Because you seem to not understand the basic concept


Synergy:

the interaction of elements that when combined produce a total effect that is greater than the sum of the individual elements, contributions


Yes I suppose you are right. But I think that this is a good thing, it helps with balance.

What I meant that what with more codecii being released the potential for units to work together increases.

I agree, I would think it was a bit much to ask any design team to balance such unforseen interactions. And would be even harder for the GW team given their track record.

But then I much prefer the more Xenophobix 3rd ed Imperium where the Blood Angels would fight the Tyranids and THEN attempt to wipe out the Necrons, even in the face of certain death, because they are Xenos and deserve to die!

Edit: Though I LOVE the theme options opened up by the rules

[Path Walker]

And as usual, everything you say is laughable.

You've not pointed out a single way these units can't be used effectivley together. You're blinded by your own bitterness and unwilling to even think for a second of ways to combine your army to work effectively as one, which, incidentally is how a swarm of Hive Minded creatures should work.

Its obvious you have a huge chip on your shoulder about not being able to win games and, instead of learning from this and seeing it as an oppurtunity to develop yourself and improve your abilites to enjoy your hobby, you've decided to attack and attempt to belittle any one with a differing opinion.

You have pointed out individual units as week in your claim that there is no synergy in the Tyranid codex.

Think about that for a second.

You think synergy has to be written as a rule affecting another unit. You can't bring your mind around the fact that say, Blinding a unit with one unit and Charging in with a smaller but more powerful unit, or tieing up enemy Units with cheap fast swarms until your powerful monsters can come into play would be synergy.

You haven't the imagination to come up with your own stratergies, thats your failing, not the failings of the people writing the rules.

[daboarder]

And as usual, everything you say is laughable.

You've not pointed out a single way these units can't be used effectivley together. You're blinded by your own bitterness and unwilling to even think for a second of ways to combine your army to work effectively as one, which, incidentally is how a swarm of Hive Minded creatures should work.

Its obvious you have a huge chip on your shoulder about not being able to win games and, instead of learning from this and seeing it as an oppurtunity to develop yourself and improve your abilites to enjoy your hobby, you've decided to attack and attempt to belittle any one with a differing opinion.

You have pointed out individual units as week in your claim that there is no synergy in the Tyranid codex.

Think about that for a second.

You think synergy has to be written as a rule affecting another unit. You can't bring your mind around the fact that say, Blinding a unit with one unit and Charging in with a smaller but more powerful unit, or tieing up enemy Units with cheap fast swarms until your powerful monsters can come into play would be synergy.

You haven't the imagination to come up with your own stratergies, thats your failing, not the failings of the people writing the rules.

http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?40556-Daboarders-Nid-Review-and-Tactics

Sure thing Path...whatever helps you sleep at night

Though I guess one good thing has come from this, I now have a reason to update that thread for 7th ed

edit: PS: Thats not synergy, thats using tactics

[Wolfshade]

I would appreciate not having to moderate this thread, so please on topic and try not to re-hash the same old arguments.

Thanks.

[daboarder]

I would appreciate not having to moderate this thread, so please on topic and try not to re-hash the same old arguments.

Thanks.
No worries mate, I've said my peace, I'll let others weigh in for now

[Wolfshade]

Sorry, i don't mean to stifle conversations on combos and synergy but the nid discussion was one that we have had before and it was unproductive.

:)

[daboarder]

Sorry, i don't mean to stifle conversations on combos and synergy but the nid discussion was one that we have had before and it was unproductive.

:)

Hey its all good, to be honest I only brought them up because in my opinion they are basically the prime example of how not to write synergy. Though to be fair I guess I did kind of expect someone to start that argument again, I had hoped the flippancy of my initial post would have dissuaded however

[Caitsidhe]

I use the term "logistics" when it comes to building lists. You build your list to do several things:

1. To use the the most efficient army possible for the job (or possible jobs) at hand.
2. To compliment your own play style.
3. To utilize certain available tactics.
4. To work together toward a certain strategy, and within this framework combinations apply.

Logistics is a game skill. It is important. It does not decide games against worthy, i.e. equal or better opponents. Equal or better opponents also show up having done their homework, i.e. logistical planning. Games that are won by lists alone are the result of either an inferior opponent or a game badly out of balance. Since 40K has no balance whatsoever, that part is kind of moot.

The best players (in my opinion) utilize logistics, tactics, strategy, and can improvise. No plan survives contact with an enemy, so you have to be able to improvise and thereby adjust your tactics and strategy to a specific battlefield. You cannot adjust your logistics. You have what you have. You either have options or you do not. If you don't do your homework, you will get the outcomes you so richly deserve. What have been called combinations here are simply part of the game. Anyone can (and often do) ignore any particular facet I have mentioned, but simply because you don't like it doesn't mean it is somehow "bad".

An interesting combination (if we want to call it that) will be to run Imperial Knights w/an allied detachment of Imperial Guard (I hate their new name). Using the new Formation with the 3" requirement between them allows them the 3+ Invulnerable save. spread properly and aimed at the opponent they make a HUGE line of destruction which should allow maximizing sweeping up opponents. The biggest issue facing the Knights is people getting behind them (Drop Pods full of Melta is quite popular) but the the allied detachment can be quite effective at dealing with that. You run your little detachment behind the Knights to prevent anyone from dropping too close. This will help prevent getting full melta benefit. Also, if you take that gentlemen who allows immediate free shots at deep striking targets you can usually DELETE such incoming units with Plasma before they get a shot off.

The combination mitigates the only weak spot in the Knight. Moreover, the Imperial Guard have some excellent anti-air options which can sit back on their side of the board (The Sabre is one) and blow any plane that come in to hell. That, of course, depends on the points. The Knights can and will destroy pretty much everything in hand to hand or with Rapid Fire battle cannons (I prefer these to the Melta). Their backs are covered and the anti-air by their allied pals. Hell, an allied detachment of Imperial Guard can put a LOT of Sabre Platforms in.

The reason I've gone off on this tangent is to demonstrate the interaction of all points of game skill. Logistically someone is planning for each unit to have a specific job, how they will interact, what tactics are to be employed, and then the overall strategy (simple as it may be) for most battles.

[Nurglitch]

I think it's worth noting that the Warhammer 40k community lacks a standard, systematic way for talking about the features of the game. Everyone has their own jargon, and that isolation. I like to think of building an army able to maximize all three of the following:

Synergy (special rules synergy, basic rules synergy)
Flexibility (anti-infantry, anti-armour, anti-air; longer range, more units addressed, more actions to do)
Redundancy (# of weapons, # models, #units; lower cost tends to mean greater redundancy)

[40kGamer]

I dunno mate, 7th made a big step into really putting the brakes on some of the cross faction force multiplication, particularly where tau and eldar were concrened,

Id expect to see the mono-codex force multipliers remain, but I wouldn't really expect a lot of cross detachment buffs.

Not sure we won't see a good deal of new cross detachment buffs with the long list of Imperial books getting updated and the Dark Eldar looming again. Getting rid of the Tau Swiss army knife commander fixed a symptom but Battle Brothers is the disease. :)

[Denzark]

I think there is a difference between synergy - how 2 things work well together - and a combo. It might be semantics, but I think of combos as having a root in the video game sense of the word - if I do this, this and this together at this moment, the effect will be epic.

[Wolfshade]

Perhaps we need a community deffinition

Synergy - This consists of unit + character with various wargear. This combination is optional from the codex choice, where the character acts a force multiplier buffing the entire unit. Typically, the larger the unit the more formidable the buff, but importantly the cost remains the same.

e.g. Assault squad + Priest, the priest grants to the unit a FnP

not an example: chaos bikers + mark of nurgle (though T6 bikers are sweet)
not an example: gretching + runtherder (as it is a mandatory choice)

Combo - Two or more units working in combination to achieve a goal.

e.g. Storm Raven with Death Company & Death Company Dreadnought

not an example: melta-sternguard vetrans in a drop pod