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.

It would be coo , if AM could take multiple command squads to get more orders around . No idea what the forged bonus would have to be to counter people playing unforged.

I'm baffled by so many people NEEDING a rule book to tell them to play without FOC.

Like..really guys? You have never come to the conclusion before that you might just not pay attention to it? Or..play Apocalypse? Oo

 Deadshot wrote:
An army of all Wave Serpents and Wraithknights.

Just pointing out this isn't possible. Units are still limited by their purchaes options, and you can only buy Wave Serpents as DTs for other units.

So you're stuck buying some dudes to go into those Serpents.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sigvatr wrote:
I'm baffled by so many people NEEDING a rule book to tell them to play without FOC.

Like..really guys? You have never come to the conclusion before that you might just not pay attention to it? Or..play Apocalypse? Oo

I'm baffled that so many people take it as an affront that this now exists in the game.

Nothing stops you from only playing against Battle Forged armies, same as nothing stopped them from "breaking the rules" before.

 streamdragon wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:
An army of all Wave Serpents and Wraithknights.

Just pointing out this isn't possible. Units are still limited by their purchaes options, and you can only buy Wave Serpents as DTs for other units.

So you're stuck buying some dudes to go into those Serpents.

Even so, Eldar's Troops aren't exactly tax. Hell, take Fire Dragons, or Wraithguard or Harlequins.

 streamdragon wrote:


Nothing stops you from only playing against Battle Forged armies

The problem becomes if this becomes a "standard" thing that you can expect from pickup games, it will make getting games much more difficult.

 Deadshot wrote:

 streamdragon wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:
An army of all Wave Serpents and Wraithknights.

Just pointing out this isn't possible. Units are still limited by their purchaes options, and you can only buy Wave Serpents as DTs for other units.

So you're stuck buying some dudes to go into those Serpents.

Even so, Eldar's Troops aren't exactly tax. Hell, take Fire Dragons, or Wraithguard or Harlequins.

Absolutely true. I just wanted to correct that technicality is all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 streamdragon wrote:


Nothing stops you from only playing against Battle Forged armies

The problem becomes if this becomes a "standard" thing that you can expect from pickup games, it will make getting games much more difficult.

Agreed, and a point I touched on in the News & Rumors discussion. Probably should have crossposted into this thread as well.

The people most hurt, as you said, are people that play mostly pick up games. I'm not sure how much that genuinely changes though, as even in Pick Up Games you can and will (I assume, I don't play in a store) get some truly lopsided matches even with both sides using the FOC. Does Unbound make the chance of a lopsided game higher, probably, yes. (We don't know the 'balancing' rules that GW has for BF vs UB, so I'm trying to avoid definitive answers.) Does that mean 100% of Unbound armies will be absolute beat-down monster nightmares? Probably not. One example was an Ork Bikeboss with a bunch of Buggies to recreate Road Warrior. I can't imagine any army, FOC or not, that would struggle against Warbuggies.

Like I said elsewhere (which I fully understand you may not have seen), I empathise with players who play almost exclusively PUGs. If GW drops the ball on Unbound vs Battle Forged balancing (which given their history is not unlikely) then it can certainly make for some frustrating games. Until we see the "balancing" and the way that the new objectives function, I'm not willing to make the call that Unbound has destroyed game balance though. And mind you, I'm usually against the whole 'wait and see' mentality. (see my posts in the Tyranid Codex or SoB codex rumor threads. )

 Sigvatr wrote:
I'm baffled by so many people NEEDING a rule book to tell them to play without FOC.

Like..really guys? You have never come to the conclusion before that you might just not pay attention to it? Or..play Apocalypse? Oo

This is exactly what I've been thinking. Did putting this in a rulebook really unshackle them? Were they afraid the GW police were going to knock on their door if they played without FOC?

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
I don't think it's as much "you don't have to take Troops" as "you can take more than 3 of the Best Units in the Codex".

This, we still don't know if Troops will be the only scoring units or not.

 DarkWind wrote:

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
I don't think it's as much "you don't have to take Troops" as "you can take more than 3 of the Best Units in the Codex".

This, we still don't know if Troops will be the only scoring units or not.

And if that riptide lists tables you at the end of turn 3, you won't have anyone left to score, so it won't matter.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 DarkWind wrote:

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
I don't think it's as much "you don't have to take Troops" as "you can take more than 3 of the Best Units in the Codex".

This, we still don't know if Troops will be the only scoring units or not.

And if that riptide lists tables you at the end of turn 3, you won't have anyone left to score, so it won't matter.

Let's see those riptides table my 125 squads of three henchmen!

If you supported 6th edition you were naive. If you support these rumored/confirmed changes to come with 7th, you are a plain idiot.

40k has been dwindling fast over the last year in the NY Metro Area and this looks like the final nail in the coffin. I am so disappointed.

Theoretically getting rid of the FOC isn't really that unbalanced as long as you have a classic 0-3 or 0-6 restriction per unit rather than per slot. It opens up some fluffy lists, like being able to create a true 1st company of vets or an allied deathwatch killteam of sternguard+ captain. Unfortunately, GW has shown minimal interest or competency in balance, which means there is a significant chance that they really will just blow the whole system to pieces.

You guys are thinking too small. Fortification spam.

10 man Kroot squads with ADL and lascannons cost 155 points.

Get enough walls to make deepstriking impossible on your half of the field. Kroot infiltrate to limit reserves as much as possible or spaced out between the defense lines as much as possible.

I'm actually thinking of doing this now.

 rabidguineapig wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 DarkWind wrote:

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
I don't think it's as much "you don't have to take Troops" as "you can take more than 3 of the Best Units in the Codex".

This, we still don't know if Troops will be the only scoring units or not.

And if that riptide lists tables you at the end of turn 3, you won't have anyone left to score, so it won't matter.

Let's see those riptides table my 125 squads of three henchmen!

That sounds like an incredibly stupid game.

Yonan wrote: It's been repeatedly shown that symetrical gameplay is not required for balance.

It's been postulated and asserted. Never proven.

No sense comparing anything real to some imaginary perfect that doesn't exist.

jamesk wrote:

jasper76 wrote:

jamesk1973 wrote:If you unbalance me do I not bleed?

Seriously, if you have an unbalanced situation and you unbalance it further doesn't it regain...balance?

I think it just falls over...

So basically the good hard shove that destroys entire rotting tower of corruption.

Only for those people who see 40k as a serious strategy game.

As mentioned, though, it makes it easier, not harder, for those kinds of people to have a balanced game.

Vaktathi wrote:I'm imagining armies composed of things like single Obliterators/Crisis Suits/Zoanthropes with a couple scoring units just for good measure.

Or possibly not even that.

You don't need scoring units to win a game of 40k, you just need enough units that can contest objectives to shove it over to who got first blood. Or just enough to kill your opponent's scoring units, which will shove it over to who got first blood. Plus, if you table your opponent, you always win the game anyways...

 Ailaros wrote:
Or possibly not even that.

You don't need scoring units to win a game of 40k, you just need enough units that can contest objectives to shove it over to who got first blood. Or just enough to kill your opponent's scoring units, which will shove it over to who got first blood. Plus, if you table your opponent, you always win the game anyways...

Keep in mind that the new objective system for the new missions do not seem to have this limitation. You get objective cards that seem to apply to you as a general, rather than being specific points/objects on the table.

It will be highly abusable and serve to show you pregame which people you do not want to play against.

Oh, you are bringing a WaaC list, no thank you, and don't ask again.

On the flip side you get to play incredibly fluffy armies:
Space Army Aircav with each Valkyrie a separate unit
Valhallan 12th field Artillery(really any Field Artillery regiment)
Any other specialist regiment
Space Marines 10th Company
Any Space Marines Company really
If Allies do not require Battle forged armies, then you can make 3rd edition Iron Warriors(Basic Chaos Space marine force with just Basilisks as Allied IG)
Court of the young King
Dark Eldar Flying Circus
Kroot Mercenaries
Ork Speed Freaks
And many others.

 rabidguineapig wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 DarkWind wrote:

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
I don't think it's as much "you don't have to take Troops" as "you can take more than 3 of the Best Units in the Codex".

This, we still don't know if Troops will be the only scoring units or not.

And if that riptide lists tables you at the end of turn 3, you won't have anyone left to score, so it won't matter.

Let's see those riptides table my 125 squads of three henchmen!

This. I think the worst part of unbound is going to be MSU abuse. There's absolutely no reason to take large units with unboud as having more units gives the player more "tactical" shooting options (little to no overkill) and makes it hard for the other army to take it down in the 5+ turns we have in a game. How about an army of 37 single Attack Bikes 50/50 multi melta to heavy bolter ratio at 1850? or 26 War Walkers with pretty much any load out you like? Obviously these are worst case scenario type lists, but just for the possibility that these lists exist AS RULE SANCTIONED kinda gets my goat. I've been playing since 3rd and the FOC has always seemed somewhat sacred. Allies was cool, then they went kinda overboard with formations, inquisitors, and knights (IMHO), and now have thrown the whole damn thing out. Lame.

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
I don't think it's as much "you don't have to take Troops" as "you can take more than 3 of the Best Units in the Codex".

That

Youre right on the Tau one, about all we can do to be uber cheesy is field pure riptides + troops and markerlights. GL killing 5+ riptides with 1750pts of stuff lol. Outside that, nothing all that broken. I dont think the "unforged" would allow us to have multiple buffmanders since thats not a FOC thing thats a "per army" thing, and double foc is still 1 army (unless i am totally misunderstanding the "unforged" terminology here)

Other army i play is Orks, and usually my FA or my Heavy is stressed because of only 3 available slots. Technically my elites are never filled as every Nob unit has a boss to become troops, and its too expensive to bring more than 3 nob units (hell even 2 is nuts on the price range). However if i could field 3 battlewagons AND some Looted Wagons AND some Kannons, you'd be HATING me quick lol. Ork costs + no foc = i will spam the hell out of a lot of stuff you normally ignore because i cannot get enough of it, or it plus good side units, to be a real threat.

 Deadshot wrote:
Multiple Lords of war? Spamming Superheavies in a regular game? How about 3+ Transcendent C'tan at 1500?

I'd have to look at home, but I think the best build for a T-C'tan is something over 800 points. Still, in a 2000 list, it's possible to get two of them and a Shard. It's a C'tan Super Best Friends Force.

Yes, 2 D-weapons will cost you just about 800 points for the C'tan.

On the one hand I am not looking forward to a riptide and buffmander lists. On the other hand I am drooling at the prospect of all of my Vanquishers having BS4 and Beast Hunter shells.

That and a Revenant titan. Why is a lone Revenant titan helping out the Imperial Guard? feth if we know.

It's starting to feel less like a wargame and more like nine year olds playing "war."
"I shot you!"
"Nuh uh! I have an invisible cloak. I shot you!"
"Well I had industructable armor!"
"Well I have bullets that can kill anything!"

 astro_nomicon wrote:

 rabidguineapig wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 DarkWind wrote:

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
I don't think it's as much "you don't have to take Troops" as "you can take more than 3 of the Best Units in the Codex".

This, we still don't know if Troops will be the only scoring units or not.

And if that riptide lists tables you at the end of turn 3, you won't have anyone left to score, so it won't matter.

Let's see those riptides table my 125 squads of three henchmen!

This. I think the worst part of unbound is going to be MSU abuse. There's absolutely no reason to take large units with unboud as having more units gives the player more "tactical" shooting options (little to no overkill) and makes it hard for the other army to take it down in the 5+ turns we have in a game. How about an army of 37 single Attack Bikes 50/50 multi melta to heavy bolter ratio at 1850? or 26 War Walkers with pretty much any load out you like? Obviously these are worst case scenario type lists, but just for the possibility that these lists exist AS RULE SANCTIONED kinda gets my goat. I've been playing since 3rd and the FOC has always seemed somewhat sacred. Allies was cool, then they went kinda overboard with formations, inquisitors, and knights (IMHO), and now have thrown the whole damn thing out. Lame.

I'm Fine with that. MSU abuse goes 2 ways; it takes multiple turns to kill them all(often far more turns than the game allows), but you can focus on the objectives more. Kill the units coming for your objectives or huddled around their objectives; then ignore the rest, 125 3-man henchmen are not going to cause that much damage even if they are all outfirtted with a roughly 50/50 mix of Melta/Plas(which leaves quite a few points), if they are pretty much any other models within the units they do even less damage over most of the game. Not to mention every henchman other than the crusader is made of tissue paper and gore.

37 Single attack bikes? Take pot shots at them with your scoring units and take all the objectives.

Unit destruction VP scenario, just shake your opponents hand and say good game, every unit you have should drop a unit and gain a VP every turn.

26 War Walkers? More with the score objectives and take pot-shots. Multi-charge any near each other and laugh at how they can niether shoot nor effectively kill the engaged units.

MSU Moderate to good quality troops are the only real issue. SM 6th and 7th companies are an issue since that can be 20 5-man tac squads with roughly 10 points per unit in special/heavy weapons(but you can get the same effect with 10 full tac squads with 30 points in special/heavy weapons combat squadded).

Unit restrictions/sizes/requirements/detachments all still exist with unbound armies; this is stated in the WD.

 MWHistorian wrote:
It's starting to feel less like a wargame and more like nine year olds playing "war."
"I shot you!"
"Nuh uh! I have an invisible cloak. I shot you!"
"Well I had industructable armor!"
"Well I have bullets that can kill anything!"

I love you

 streamdragon wrote:
I'm baffled that so many people take it as an affront that this now exists in the game.

Nothing stops you from only playing against Battle Forged armies, same as nothing stopped them from "breaking the rules" before.

Because I'd rather not have a personal argument with every person I play. Most people try to avoid negative social interaction, and any discussion that starts with "I'm not going to play against that" is never a fun one.
If that list is illegal per a common set of pre-determined rules, one side of the argument wins pretty handily, cause it's the rules. But if someone brings a legal list, my objection is purely based on my personal preference, and the resulting conclusion of the argument (regardless of whether it actually concludes or not) is that one of us is either a jerk or a coward.

Being forced into an awkward debate about whether or not you'll play against another grown man's toy soldiers is something most people are not looking forward to experiencing on a semi-regular basis.

Nobody knows what the bound army bonuses will be yet, they could be huge if playing unbound.

MSU doesn't prevent you from focusing your army. You can still have good force concentration with MSU. The only difference is that you have a lot more flexibility.

Anyways, I could easily see plenty of MSU spam. A henchmen army where you were fielding a foot horde except everyone has a meltagun as their small arm?

... yeah.

In my meta I reckon it's a good thing. A Lot of the time we come up with a theme such as 'imperial city fallen to chaos' or some such, make up a story about why our army is there and then write a list. Due to how we play this could be pretty cool in allowing fluffy and imaginative army creations and also I'd like to see the FOC bonuses. I'm not going to lie I'm a little excited. But then I don't play tournaments outside my group and am only really thinking in context of how I play.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As I finished writing my post I realised...
I could finally ally in and use various different codex's troop types to field my extremely short and bearded miniatures from rogue trader era as a legal (sort of) force if rumours are to be believed. I am now all for this unbound nonsense and will be buying 7th on release day. The possibilities...

 Perfect Organism wrote:
How many armies will actually be able to abuse the system?

If it's applied to allies too, I'd say : all of them.

If not applicable to allies, all of them, except Imperial Knights and maybe Sisters of Battle.

On the other hand, it would also allow you to field a grot army : grots, killa kanz, grots, moar grots, grots everywhere. Without being limited to 6 units of troops.

But I don't know one player that wouldn't already be willing to bend the FOC rules to play against a full-grot army.