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.

Having already fought a 2000 SW spam list, I can say that if you are going to spam, you better make sure you are bringing something that can actually fight all corners. Because from what I saw is that the slightest thing can bring you crashing if your ill prepared..

Kinda like a normal game really.

Myself, I think it's pretty cool. I however have my heart set on a tide of Hormagaunts.

Imagine. 360 Hormagaunts. In a 2000 point list.

Just going to point out the 360 hormagaunts is 2160 points minimum... so that's a no straight off...

2 FoC has the potential to be broken with things like extra long fangs or vendettas, but also can give a boost to armies with clogged up slots (tyranid elites spring to mind).

However the main problem is the sudden change from 1999 to 2000pts, which is a little silly of GW, as 1pt does not suddenly mean you need all those extra slots. A sliding scale of extra slots would have worked much better. (i.e. 1of each extra at 2000, 2 of each at 2500 or something along those lines).

I have always maintained the higher points you go, the larger the disparity is between certain armies and the more abusable they can be, this is the fault of a limited FoC, now with the option of doubling up.. well this disparity gets even worse, i wish they had just done away with the FoC

Here is an example

9 leman russ vs 3 predetors, my money is on the russ's
With double it can now be this
18 LR vs 6 preds

Formosa wrote:I have always maintained the higher points you go, the larger the disparity is between certain armies and the more abusable they can be, this is the fault of a limited FoC, now with the option of doubling up.. well this disparity gets even worse, i wish they had just done away with the FoC

Here is an example

9 leman russ vs 3 predetors, my money is on the russ's
With double it can now be this
18 LR vs 6 preds

6 sternguard, 5-10 combi melta's each in pods = alotta LR dead

Funnily enough though, if your hitting that point where an enemy can actually throw out that many and still feasibly win, just play apocalypse already.

At the OP: I have absolutely no idea what your original point was, but I think I speak for the majority (if not all) of the dakka community when I say that it is very unreasonable and narrow minded to say that other people's opinions on the game and their style of play is 'fethtarded.' I future, I would recommend presenting your opinions to the dakka forums in a more conservative manner, instead of your blunt and rude approach. FYI, I am not trying to appear rude and smart, just saying that there are better ways of presenting what you have to say.

Colonel Dakura wrote:At the OP: I have absolutely no idea what your original point was, but I think I speak for the majority (if not all) of the dakka community when I say that it is very unreasonable and narrow minded to say that other people's opinions on the game and their style of play is 'fethtarded.' I future, I would recommend presenting your opinions to the dakka forums in a more conservative manner, instead of your blunt and rude approach. FYI, I am not trying to appear rude and smart, just saying that there are better ways of presenting what you have to say.

This.

Your first post is all over the place. You need to post more legibly. Further, if you must call people that disagree with you fethtarded, then your argument is obviously weak.

30 missile launcher Long Fangs can glance a Land Raider to death

20 hits of which just over 3 glance. Assuming the LR is in plain sight of all 30 (which I feel is somewhat unlikely), they can do it with slightly better than average rolls, but it consumes your entire Heavy Support shooting for an entire turn.

While I'm fine with people disliking dual FoC at 2000 points, and my personal feeling is that 2000 might be a wee bit low because of the potential a few armies have to abuse it through cheap troop choices (fancy meeting 6 stormravens at 2000 points? Two inquisitor hqs makes that easily possible . . . ) and I'd rather have seen it as being akin to being able to buy an allied contingent of your own army (ie extra HQ, 1-2 troops, 0-1 of HS, FA, EL), I'm not certain it's actually so very terrible.

I will say though that I don't especially like the tone of the thread title, whatever one's opinion of dual FoC, it's not at all stupid to disallow it.

I am going to be very unhelpful by posting the following:

BA maxed out without transport

45490 pts

death company, jump pack, double hammer x 30 x 12
lemartes

vanguard vet, jump pack, double hammer x 10 x 6

termi, th/ss x 10 x 6

(devastator, seg w/ fist; las cannon x 4, max men) x 6

arstorach; dante, sanguiour, meph.

head count = 545.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

the real issue is not about the maxed army, but at 2000 pts what can be done.

I have to ask would I like to have 6 unit of eilite? it will be nice if I can have more chaplian / priest in 5th; not sure if I do want it in 6th though.

it is to have a balance army.

6 x 10 termi th/ss is 2700 pts you know....

Blood and Slaughter wrote:

20 hits of which just over 3 glance. Assuming the LR is in plain sight of all 30 (which I feel is somewhat unlikely), they can do it with slightly better than average rolls, but it consumes your entire Heavy Support shooting for an entire turn.

While I'm fine with people disliking dual FoC at 2000 points, and my personal feeling is that 2000 might be a wee bit low because of the potential a

I can get 2 glances on average from just logans long fang squad. If I am lucky, 3.

And that's using just 7 of my 38 mls in a 2k list, with double foc's.

2 FOC's existed in 3rd, 4th, and 5th ed. It just happened at 2500 points instead of 2000. Before 6th came out the point value of games I saw as legit were 500, 750, 1000, 1250, 1500, 1750, 1850, and 2000. Any time I had an opponent want to play at a different point value game the number was tailored to their codex, army and models. Every broken combo from any codex still has one of these as its sweet spot with a single FOC. Now I may not agree with the wording in the opening of this thread, but I would call 1999+1 events kinda silly for a couple major reasons.

A) Most 2000 point list are still good at a 1999 cap, seeing how it is common to be a point or two shy of the max. Competitive players at that point value will be adjusting their list to the new rulebook anyway. So with no real change to what you are doing just call the event 1999 points and avoid any arguments.

B) The TO should be taking into consideration restraints such as time and space for their event. While the final year of a major rules edition you can expect things to run as smoothly and quickly as possible for the games. The 1st few weeks of the new edition that will not hold true. 1500Pt games can easily take more time then the 2000pt games of the last edition.