I'm planning to play competitively at stores, so I'll be playing by the book there.

But I also want to play with a group of friends who love 40k but are more into the fluff of games than being competitive. I've already showed them the alignment wheel, and they are completely turned off to the game because of it. They are only willing to play the game if we play mono-faction decks.

I'm pretty sure that there will be some factions that are weaker by themselves. I'm wondering if there are any factions that are completely overpowered in a mono-faction environment. I'm also wondering if tyranids (who cannot take allies) will be overpowered in a mono-faction environment because they have been built to not require allies.

Also, please understand that I'm not posting this thread to ask what you think of the alignment wheel. That has been discussed extensively already. Please don't try to convince me of your opinion of the alignment wheel, there are many threads for you to vent about that. I'm also not asking for your opinion regarding whether or not mono-faction decks follow the fluff more closely than decks with allies.

I'm simply asking about power levels.

It's impossible to say anything on the tyranids because no one(outside of playtesters) has seen a single one of their cards. I keep hearing that dark eldar may be the weakest faction for now, due to their mechanics, but that's an impression formed by folks who have only played for a limited amount of time. All in all, it may be a bit premature to answer this question with any great certainty.

I haven't really looked at the situation of mono decks, but the game can of course be played this way. Yet your correct, the game is designed for cross faction pairing. So I would say that playing full mono would be unpredictable balance wise as mono is not really something that the designers will push for. At least at this stage of the game, faction pairing will be greatly encouraged with effects split. So while you could make a nice deck with A, the same deck would be better with a splash of B.

Yet if you are all doing it, then I doubt there would be much of a problem. I am nearly certain a house rule of mono decks will still provide fun games foe you.

As for the mono tyrinids.. well.. you could be right.. this will be balanced to the meta level of the decks.. mono and mixed faction alike. So it could be very possible that they will more powerful. For the same reasons, Necrons could be very weak.

a group of friends who love 40k but are more into the fluff of games than being competitive. I've already showed them the alignment wheel, and they are completely turned off to the game because of it. They are only willing to play the game if we play mono-faction decks.

A lot of people I know who play 40K had the same reaction

I don't think the designers are pushing for -either- mono or mixed. I believe that at this early stage of the game of COURSE you may want to have a mixed deck...after a year, maybe not.

I plan to have a full on Space Wolves deck after the Ragnar Blackmane battle pack comes out. With what I have seen, I don't think I have to add Imperial Guard, or filthy Xenos to have a winning deck. A battle worthy Space Wolf deck is all I will need.

The point is that when designing balance into the sets vs the current meta they need to take duel factions into account, as it is an option players have. So regardless or w/e about mono vs duel faction power, a portion of the small card pool will have focus for mixed factions.. for easy sake lest say 2 of every 3 cards in a faction is keyed in a way to synergism with the faction of either side of the wheel. Regardless of the exact split, there is a split that will weaken mono options in relation to duel faction and Tyrinid's will not have this problem. It will be a solely coherent faction designed to work alone from the start. This will also make the pool you can use for a individual decks larger if you duel faction. More cards, more options, more ability to make a better decks, so I would postulate that duel faction will be the norm in competitive play for the foreseeable future. Ironically it is now in the core set that mono could be the strongest (assuming you use 3 cores.. Chaos for example makes a decent mono deck already)

If your friends are really into the fluff of things and cannot come up with a situation where the alliances presented on the alignment wheel would not fit their perception of the fluff, perhaps they are not very imaginative? The only one that really struck me as potential dodgy was Dark Eldar and Chaos, but more specifically Slaanesh and Dark Eldar. Even that could be explained away by the very fickle nature of the Chaos gods perhaps toying with the Dark Eldar.

I could go on about Orks & Imperial Guard, and the Eldar & Dark Eldar alliances which people have been moaning about, but that would be a bit off-topic.

As others have already stated, the game balance will be designed around cross-faction decks being a thing. House ruling mono decks does sound fun, but be prepared for a very distinct tier system to establish itself.

As others have already stated, the game balance will be designed around cross-faction decks being a thing. House ruling mono decks does sound fun, but be prepared for a very distinct tier system to establish itself.

Hmm. I'm not so sure about this. The game will clearly be designed in contemplation of cross-faction decks (otherwise, there wouldn't be an alignment wheel at all). But when it comes to building decks, the question really will become, "Does adding cards from this other faction make my deck stronger?"

If we assume a "very distinct tier system" would establish itself in a "mono only" environment, that implies we expect some factions to be stronger than others in a mono build and, by extension, some to be unable to compete without allies from other factions. But if that is the case, why do we also seem to assume that allies or cards from another faction will always make a deck stronger? Said another way, if we assume Faction A would need allies to be competitive against a mono build of Faction B, how do we know that adding allies to the Faction B mono deck will make it stronger instead of diluting its strength?

From what I have seen, despite the fact that cross-faction decks are contemplated and designed for, mono decks are designed for, too, and viable in their efficiency and focus (outside of the "one core" environment, anyway). I think it's likely that they will be a strong option regardless of whether a "mono only" house rule is instituted or not.

Mono factions will definitely be a thing for this game. In particular those factions that don't need to go out of faction for one of the board wipes in the game will have an easier time of going the mono route.

Mono factions will definitely be a thing for this game. In particular those factions that don't need to go out of faction for one of the board wipes in the game will have an easier time of going the mono route.

I started writing a long and detailed reply to ktom, but this kinda sums it up nicely really; board wipes. The factions that have access to the better ones will absolutely have an easier time being mono, and it is they who (in my opinion) will rise to the top of the tier system.

Sure. I get that.

My comments were more related to the seeming assumption some people are making that cross-faction decks will always be stronger than mono-faction decks. I was trying to point out that, just because AM and Tau might (almost always) benefit from adding Exterminatus to the mix, it doesn't necessarily follow that Space Marines will (almost always) benefit from incorporating something from AM or Tau.

But we seem to be on similar pages on that. A "mono only" environment would probably have some factions that are stronger and more consistent as others -- but in the "normal" environment, not all mono decks are automatically at a disadvantage to the point of being a poor deckbuilding choice.

An all mono environment I think will suffer and certain factions will dominate it. Not a good idea in my opinion.

An all mono environment I think will suffer and certain factions will dominate it. Not a good idea in my opinion.

I think this will be especially true the smaller the card pool.

With 3x cores, the first deluxe expansion, and 1-2 sets of cycle packs, mono might be a lot more balanced and viable.

I think Tau could easily make a strong "mono" deck - with all their other attachments for their guys. But, yeah, it leaves some weaknesses pretty bare for other factions - like Command Icons. Some groups (like Orks) just seem to have a terrible time winning command struggles and, thus, get shut down on resources.

If your friends are really into the fluff of things and cannot come up with a situation where the alliances presented on the alignment wheel would not fit their perception of the fluff, perhaps they are not very imaginative?

This is exactly the type of comment I was hoping to avoid. I didn't want to get into a discussion about the pros and cons of the alignment wheel. There are plenty of other places to vent at people who don't like the alignment wheel, please don't do it here.

If your friends are really into the fluff of things and cannot come up with a situation where the alliances presented on the alignment wheel would not fit their perception of the fluff, perhaps they are not very imaginative?

This is exactly the type of comment I was hoping to avoid. I didn't want to get into a discussion about the pros and cons of the alignment wheel. There are plenty of other places to vent at people who don't like the alignment wheel, please don't do it here.

He's not. He was simply saying your friends could come up with a way to accept it.

If your friends are really into the fluff of things and cannot come up with a situation where the alliances presented on the alignment wheel would not fit their perception of the fluff, perhaps they are not very imaginative?

This is exactly the type of comment I was hoping to avoid. I didn't want to get into a discussion about the pros and cons of the alignment wheel. There are plenty of other places to vent at people who don't like the alignment wheel, please don't do it here.

He's not. He was simply saying your friends could come up with a way to accept it.

My question was simply about whether mono-faction decks would be balanced. Not about whether or not my friends should accept anything, or the extent of their imaginations.

In that case, not particularly well. As I stated earlier some will rise to the top and others will fall behind

In that case, not particularly well. As I stated earlier some will rise to the top and others will fall behind

Thanks. I'm still going to be playing at stores, but my immediate home playgroup doesn't seem to have much interest in this game outside of mono-faction decks. And after telling them that balance will be an issue, interest in the game seems to have waned. There are just too many other games out there lol.

In that case, not particularly well. As I stated earlier some will rise to the top and others will fall behind

Thanks. I'm still going to be playing at stores, but my immediate home playgroup doesn't seem to have much interest in this game outside of mono-faction decks. And after telling them that balance will be an issue, interest in the game seems to have waned. There are just too many other games out there lol.

I never said it was gonna be imbalanced but some factions like those with the built in board wipes would have an easier time answering their opponents than those without them. Particularly in core set only. As the card pool expands this will likely become less of an issue. It's unfortunate your friends are hung up on the mono only.

I would go ahead and play the game with the "no allies" rule implemented. The balance might be off a bit, especially at first, but that will even out as the card pool grows. I know that I plan on playing mono-faction.

I very much doubt that the game would be unbalanced to the point of wrecking enjoyment in a mono-environment, and in terms of LCGs there's a natual ebb and flow in faction power level, I can't see that being radically different in mono. Besides, it sounds like the fluff is of great importance to your friends, so surely it'd be worth having a go, if only to see if any interesting narratives develop.

I very much doubt that the game would be unbalanced to the point of wrecking enjoyment in a mono-environment, and in terms of LCGs there's a natual ebb and flow in faction power level, I can't see that being radically different in mono. Besides, it sounds like the fluff is of great importance to your friends, so surely it'd be worth having a go, if only to see if any interesting narratives develop.

Definitely this.

Just a quick question. If you group is playing mono, how many starters are you spliting among your group? who is doing the deck building?

Just a quick question. If you group is playing mono, how many starters are you spliting among your group? who is doing the deck building?

ha ha yeah we hadn't really thought this through. So there are 6 people in my group, but usually the only time everybody is there is for RPGs. When we play other games, it's usually ~4 people. Only myself and 2 other people play 40k, and none of us currently play the game (one person has played since rogue trader, myself and another person has played since 2nd ed).

I've already preordered 2 sets of the core set, and I was planning to pick up a 3rd set at some point. Like I said before, this is mostly for playing competitively at my flgs. For my home playgroup, I was hoping to have a casual session, and we'd just split the pool of cards along faction lines to people who showed up. I hadn't really thought too deeply about exactly how we would be doing this.

In terms of ccgs, we have a few MtG cubes that we draft, and we also play a lot of Dune ccg (if anybody knows what that is). People are pretty interested in Doomtown reloaded as well. There was a bit of interest in 40k:conquest until they saw the alignment wheel :-/

I would go ahead and play the game with the "no allies" rule implemented. The balance might be off a bit, especially at first, but that will even out as the card pool grows. I know that I plan on playing mono-faction.

This. Particularly when you're all starting the game and no one has a great handle on strategy/tactics, anyway, I doubt the imbalance inherent in the available cardset is going to make a huge difference.

Plus, if you can convince them to play the game and they like it, they'll probably want to try constructing their own decks, at which point they may well have a "oh man, if only I could include X card" moment, in which case it is quite possible they might change their mind on how strictly they want to interpret their fluff.

And even if some factions end up being stronger mono-faction than others, with just four players you can probably construct a mono-faction deck for each faction and just restrict some matchups (or handicap yourself with the weaker deck, since you'll probably be the person with the best handle on the game).