Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Now, I am seeing people playing unbound a lot, especially newbies who can't be bothered to think of a legal list with CAD and allies. I don't think I am into it. Warhammer 40k is a game of science and strategy where you follow the rules as written and strive to bring victory within their limitations. Being able to deploy any unit does not seem fun at all. It's mindless and pathetic. The Nazis' Blitzkrieg wasn't 100 Tiger tanks steamrolling everything, so Warahmmer 40k should not be 10 Leman Russes against 200 Ork Boyz in a normal game.

The only exception is a skirmish where both players decide the match up. For example, 10 Wraithkinghts against a 15 Riptides.

I have had a 1000 points game where my opponent brought a Lord of Skull. I tried unbound as well by using Wraithguards proxied by Grey Knight Terminators. But in the end, whether they were Wraithguards or Terminators did not matter. I cracked the big bad thing open with 3 Vortex of Doom. Apart from the duel between it and the Dreadknight, it wasn't much fun because technically all game I just want to cast more Vortex of Doom on it. All other shootings were ineffective. The D weapon psychic power was the only thing I have to kill it, hence, many units don't have any role at all. The proxied guys were completely unnecessary.

How do you thing about unbound? Thanks for sharing.

The few times I played was with friends and pure fun. I do not see it as a go to for a PUGs or anything. Unbound can get out of hand easily, but sometimes they can be one of the more fun times playing.

bibotot wrote:
Now, I am seeing people playing unbound a lot, especially newbies who can't be bothered to think of a legal list with CAD and allies. I don't think I am into it. Warhammer 40k is a game of science and strategy where you follow the rules as written and strive to bring victory within their limitations.

This unfortunately is not what Warhammer 40k is, nor what GW will tell you it is. From GW's perspective, 40k is a framework with which to "create compelling imaginary narratives" using the plastic army men they sell you for you to play with.

I wish it were what you describe it as, but, particularly in 6th and 7th edition, GW has been relatively open and honest about 40k not being a balanced tactical wargame as opposed to a vague sandbox to tell stories. In practice, it's just turned in a gigantic mess.

Being able to deploy any unit does not seem fun at all. It's mindless and pathetic. The Nazis' Blitzkrieg wasn't 100 Tiger tanks steamrolling everything, so Warahmmer 40k should not be 10 Leman Russes against 200 Ork Boyz in a normal game.

Well, you can do that without Unbound, have been for many years and I think every edition (there was a 3E and 4E armored company list, from GW's old Chapter Approved stuff, a 4E and now 6E Armoured Battlegroup list from Forgeworld, and since 5E you've been able to take squadrons of Russ tanks).

How do you thing about unbound? Thanks for sharing.

I vehemently dislike the idea. However, given the absurdity of formations and some of the ridiculous abilities they grant (to say nothing of the army construction gimmicks), the fact that you can take multiple CAD's (traditional FoC), allies, etc, Unbound isn't any worse than anything else, in fact, you can probably get much nastier stuff out of formations and allies shennanigans than you can from Unbound armies.

The way the Detachment rules work now there's almost no difference anyway.

 Vaktathi wrote:

bibotot wrote:
Now, I am seeing people playing unbound a lot, especially newbies who can't be bothered to think of a legal list with CAD and allies. I don't think I am into it. Warhammer 40k is a game of science and strategy where you follow the rules as written and strive to bring victory within their limitations.

This unfortunately is not what Warhammer 40k is, nor what GW will tell you it is.

Yeah, 40k isn't like this at all.

If you want to play a serious strategy game, you have to go find one that doesn't use a random element to determine if a player's actions succeed or not. Among many, many other reasons 40k isn't a particularly serious strategy game.

As for unbound in particular, not unlike regular games of 40k, the fun depends on who you play with. As before, as now, as in the future.

Depends on the units and situation. Unbound can be a lot of fun, or even a good way to try out how units interact without being bogged down by the troops tax. I can definitely see how it can get stupid, though, i.e. 8 Wraithknights. I still use the normal CAD, just because I prefer that style and the Objective Secured.

It's unfortunately not a huge shift in the game the way it is currently.

Once upon a time, a single leman russ was a heavy support choice, not a squad of 1-3. A carnifex was a heavy support choice, not 1-3. A squad of stormtroopers was an elites choice, not 1-4 squads. Space Marines maxed out at 6 squads, not 12 five man squads.

The force org at one point in time was an important element of balance since your opponent couldn't take more than 3 of any unbalanced unit and there were required minimums based on the mission. As is, the FoC is completely meaningless for most armies, and it's opened the flood gates. Nothing ever stopped you from playing willy nilly with your friends, but it's aggravating that there's no longer any framework for casual/pick-up games.

The new formations are the best evidence that there's no real trade-offs or limits left in unit selection. The new Necron book has a formation that lets you re-roll reanimation protocol saves, and the only requirement is that you take 3 troops choices. Similarly the adamantium lance formation just requires 3 Imperial Knights and you can re-roll your 4+ invul save. There's no points cost and no real sacrifice/limitations.

My games are alright for now since most of us are old school players who adhere to the 1 HQ, 2 Troops, and general force org out of habit, but it's going to be hard introducing or playing with any newcomers pulling out 5 flyrants in a 1,000 point battle because they can.

Right, all that.

I'd also remind people that FOC used to be even more limited. Imperial guard veterans, for example, used to be a 0-1 choice, meaning that even if you had extra elite slots left over, you could still only take one of them.

What balance FOC gave became critically ill early in 5th edition, and was out the door before 6th even dropped allies and multiple detachments, followed by dataslates and formations, and unbound, and all that stuff that we've been getting since then.

that said, unbound CAN occasionally be a fun way to be goofy. try things you'd not be able to try otherwise etc

bibotot wrote:
The Nazis' Blitzkrieg wasn't 100 Tiger tanks steamrolling everything, so Warhammer 40k should not be 10 Leman Russes against 200 Ork Boyz in a normal game.

Best argument ever.

 Ailaros wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

bibotot wrote:
Now, I am seeing people playing unbound a lot, especially newbies who can't be bothered to think of a legal list with CAD and allies. I don't think I am into it. Warhammer 40k is a game of science and strategy where you follow the rules as written and strive to bring victory within their limitations.

This unfortunately is not what Warhammer 40k is, nor what GW will tell you it is.

Yeah, 40k isn't like this at all.

If you want to play a serious strategy game, you have to go find one that doesn't use a random element to determine if a player's actions succeed or not. Among many, many other reasons 40k isn't a particularly serious strategy game.

As for unbound in particular, not unlike regular games of 40k, the fun depends on who you play with. As before, as now, as in the future.

The strategy can come in positioning yourself to make the odds more in your favour, but 40k isn't really good at being tactical I agree. Just games can be tactical with a randomised element as well.

The part that makes it painful after playing all this time is treating the stories / fluff like it does not exist.
Playing any army with a detachment of any other.
Orks and Tau would be funny.
Can we do CSM with DA? Make sure we field Cipher for giggles.
Ah, forget it, unbound is fun because you can do what you want.
Games without limits are much more fun...

n0t_u wrote:The strategy can come in positioning yourself to make the odds more in your favour, but 40k isn't really good at being tactical I agree. Just games can be tactical with a randomised element as well.

You're a strategic genius. You run rings around your opponent - they never saw it coming. You are the pinnacle of military cunning. You have an IQ of 150. You played a literally perfect game with no mistakes at all.

And those 3 BS4 meltaguns all missed that tank, and you roll to continue and the game ends. Because you didn't kill the tank, you lose. All the genius of Erwin Rommel botched by a few die rolls.

40k is a tacticsish role playing game with lots of characters, not a serious strategy game.

 Ailaros wrote:

n0t_u wrote:The strategy can come in positioning yourself to make the odds more in your favour, but 40k isn't really good at being tactical I agree. Just games can be tactical with a randomised element as well.

You're a strategic genius. You run rings around your opponent - they never saw it coming. You are the pinnacle of military cunning. You have an IQ of 150. You played a literally perfect game with no mistakes at all.

And those 3 BS4 meltaguns all missed that tank, and you roll to continue and the game ends. Because you didn't kill the tank, you lose. All the genius of Erwin Rommel botched by a few die rolls.

40k is a tacticsish role playing game with lots of characters, not a serious strategy game.

Exactly, its baby's first strategy. I was saying others would do a much better job at it.

 Ailaros wrote:

n0t_u wrote:The strategy can come in positioning yourself to make the odds more in your favour, but 40k isn't really good at being tactical I agree. Just games can be tactical with a randomised element as well.

You're a strategic genius. You run rings around your opponent - they never saw it coming. You are the pinnacle of military cunning. You have an IQ of 150. You played a literally perfect game with no mistakes at all.

And those 3 BS4 meltaguns all missed that tank, and you roll to continue and the game ends. Because you didn't kill the tank, you lose. All the genius of Erwin Rommel botched by a few die rolls.

40k is a tacticsish role playing game with lots of characters, not a serious strategy game.

Its no different then poker which is massively competitive despite being at its core a game of random outcomes.

And is a far different game played over a far larger number of sessions with far fewer variables.

Unbound is fine if it's not being used to powergame. This usually means pre-set games against friends and not in tourneys or PUGs

 Talizvar wrote:
The part that makes it painful after playing all this time is treating the stories / fluff like it does not exist.
Playing any army with a detachment of any other.
Orks and Tau would be funny.
Can we do CSM with DA? Make sure we field Cipher for giggles.
Ah, forget it, unbound is fun because you can do what you want.
Games without limits are much more fun...

There are stories of SM and CSM teaming up. I forget the story, but they teamed up on a planet when a Necron Tombworld woke up. That's part of the reason Come the Apocalypse exists, to account for the fluff.

 Ailaros wrote:

n0t_u wrote:The strategy can come in positioning yourself to make the odds more in your favour, but 40k isn't really good at being tactical I agree. Just games can be tactical with a randomised element as well.

You're a strategic genius. You run rings around your opponent - they never saw it coming. You are the pinnacle of military cunning. You have an IQ of 150. You played a literally perfect game with no mistakes at all.

And those 3 BS4 meltaguns all missed that tank, and you roll to continue and the game ends. Because you didn't kill the tank, you lose. All the genius of Erwin Rommel botched by a few die rolls.

40k is a tacticsish role playing game with lots of characters, not a serious strategy game.

Luck though plays a big part in war. the Tone's searchplanes at midway, just for example. sometimes even though you do everything right, things don't go your way. especially when you add in the "human element"

What's so bad in not directly following foc? As if there are no serpent spam and pentyrants following foc. The problem lies within codexes - not unbound.

There was nothing stopping anyone from playing with whatever units or armies they wanted in the past. My buddies and I played all sorts of ridiculous alliances and 3-way battles that I cooked up all the time.

It's just disheartening to have unbound codified into the official ruleset. With my buddies you could always straighten things out and say "let's just do a straight up mission" where now it's more "let's do a mission using only bound armies, no formations, a two source max, no lords of war, and flyers." Instead of unbound being a fun sometimes thing, it's now inescapable.

I lost it when you said 40k is a game of strategy. 40k is a game of throwing buckets of dice, arguing over rules and either roflstomping the opponent or being roflstomped by him even in a 2 source, CAD and allies only system because the game is horribly broken and unbalanced. WMH is a game of strategy. Your units actually interact with each other instead of having a slightly different gun or a 3+ instead of 4+ armor save.

To answer your question, no unbound is not "fun". It is about as fun as a trip to the dentist. I play 2 different 1850 tournament lists and they get pwned by things like the c'tan. When drop pod melta with invisible grav cents and serpent spam with WK, fire prism and night spinner support both get blown off the table by unbound lists, that tells you how fun they are.

 TheSilo wrote:
There was nothing stopping anyone from playing with whatever units or armies they wanted in the past. My buddies and I played all sorts of ridiculous alliances and 3-way battles that I cooked up all the time.

It's just disheartening to have unbound codified into the official ruleset. With my buddies you could always straighten things out and say "let's just do a straight up mission" where now it's more "let's do a mission using only bound armies, no formations, a two source max, no lords of war, and flyers." Instead of unbound being a fun sometimes thing, it's now inescapable.

Exactly this. We've resorted to using a bunch of limitations on what can be in lists for our competitions, especially when we're dealing with small points values. Our 500 pt "Skirmish Tournament" would have gone dreadfully if we hadn't set strict list rules.

I only see unbound as useful when you want to re-create a historical battle and the forces participating do not conveniently fit into an FoC.

 Talizvar wrote:
The part that makes it painful after playing all this time is treating the stories / fluff like it does not exist.
Playing any army with a detachment of any other.
Orks and Tau would be funny.
Can we do CSM with DA? Make sure we field Cipher for giggles.
Ah, forget it, unbound is fun because you can do what you want.
Games without limits are much more fun...

At my local store we joked about doing a story based game where, the dark angels get Cypher, he needs to survive to be captured but they have to kill the grey knights the enemy would field or attack him out of line of sight of them so that the GK don't know/see what's going on.

I think that could actually be a lot of fun, basiclly Kill Doctor Lucky the 40k edition. I really want to find a way to make this work cause it could be a lot of fun.

Unbound when used to not power game is fine, one friend brought an army that had a theme, a mad warp smith testing out a bunch of his creations, a bunch of various walkers with different upgrades vs some Necron. It really is all how people use unbound.