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.

I've noticed a lot of people playing their 30k armies vs 40k armies, and then adapting the 30k to 40k.

Can the reverse be done? Like maybe increasing unit sizes? Decresing costs? Using 30k FOC?

30k FoC plus FW units bassicly. Some house rule no relic wargear unless all the 30k lists get theirs also.

 Lockark wrote:
30k FoC plus FW units bassicly. Some house rule no relic wargear unless all the 30k lists get theirs also.

I like it. Should unit sizes be touched or left alone?

I've seen this tried for Orks..
Essentially..
up the units sizes with a points drop per model after minimum size
Let vehicles squadron
Ignore relics..
Use the 30k FOC (No. No.No. formations. )

1) 30k FOC
2) No formations
3) Only troops + units similar to terminators/vet. tactical squads score
4) the 40k army can double the max squad size of every unit (if the time is taken, generally charge 2/3 the starting point price for every aditional model. if the model is 30 base, future models in the unit cost 20, etc.)
5) Point 'standard' being 2000+

really, once steps 1-3 are done, the game would be pretty balanced, step 4 being more to keep the scale of 30k rather than balance, and step 5 being a good middle ground point cost for both games.

We just play games. We don't do anything special to make things different between the two. Basically the 30k armies are just another army list. I don't expect my opponents to change their armies and get rid of their formations just to play me.

We sometimes play 30k missions with my opponent's 40k armies. That's fun. That firestorm mission is a blast.

I see, thanks guys, this really helps.

I'll be running Eldar versus a friends Iron Hands

To be honest, the missions are the key one - the "only troops score" was one of the key things 40k has becone poorer for losing.

At the sametime, brennonjw's pretty much got it.

Also - note that you could look at doing 'counts as' forces - I keep meaning to do some ork freebootas hired by Horus' forces using the Militia list.... WS4, T4, I2 A2 'guardsmen' with S4 assault weapons can easily be made using the provenance rules....

I really only play my 30k army against 40k... And honestly there's nothing needed for the 40k side. Unless you are asking how to make the 40k army less competitive?

Depends on the points level too. 2k and below 40k needs no help except toning down.

I play Night Lords Legion, Word Bearers Legion, and Thagmata Mechanicum for reference.

I just ran a 40k necron decurion at 2,000 pts against a 2,200 Salamanders and Emperors Children army. Necrons lost less than half the models, pretty much tabled the 30k, which included squishing Vulcan (my overlord now wears a nice lizard skin cloak).

I get why formations in 40k are powerful but the rites of war thing with +1 to S of flamers seemed pretty balanced, especially vs the massed ranks of warriors.

IMHO, an extra 10-15% points for the 30k army is essential, before any other changes.

Ffyllotek wrote:
I just ran a 40k necron decurion at 2,000 pts against a 2,200 Salamanders and Emperors Children army. Necrons lost less than half the models, pretty much tabled the 30k, which included squishing Vulcan (my overlord now wears a nice lizard skin cloak).

I get why formations in 40k are powerful but the rites of war thing with +1 to S of flamers seemed pretty balanced, especially vs the massed ranks of warriors.

IMHO, an extra 10-15% points for the 30k army is essential, before any other changes.

The problem is that RoW really only balance with other 30k RoW and come nowhere near what formations give 40k armies. It becomes an even worse comparison when it's the formations of formations that really make a laundry list of rules. One person pretty much figured out the formula FW uses to price the point cost of models and units HH; if FW's formulation were used most of the formations in a formation would add as much as 6-7pts per model. It only serves to underscore the challenges of balancing a balanced system with one that is so drastically inconsistent from army to army.

 foto69man wrote:
I really only play my 30k army against 40k... And honestly there's nothing needed for the 40k side. Unless you are asking how to make the 40k army less competitive?

Depends on the points level too. 2k and below 40k needs no help except toning down.

I play Night Lords Legion, Word Bearers Legion, and Thagmata Mechanicum for reference.

This is more or less my experience. I don't feel the 40k lists need bigger unit sizes or squadrons added to their vehicle entries. Age of Darkness FoC (Witch dosen't allow formations) and no relics. Puts them on par with the 30k lists. Generally 40k needs this to tone them down to the 30k levels. The no relics is the only house rule needed on the 40k side to make them work correctly.

Playing mostly Iron Warriors, I find the Eldar, orks and Necrons work perfectly well dropped right into age of darkness. Tau have issues. They outshoot all the shooty 30k lists, and are kinda unplayable if your playing a shooty legion, SA or milita. I know people say to use the list to repersent minor xenos in 30k, but the truth is that they are super OP agiest alot of 30k army lists in my experience. Unless your playing a CC focused legion with other enough bodies to get across the board (I.E. World Eaters) or the speed to get across (I.E. White scars) your in for a bad time.

Haven't played agiest nids in age of darkness, so can't comment to much.

 aka_mythos wrote:

Ffyllotek wrote:
I just ran a 40k necron decurion at 2,000 pts against a 2,200 Salamanders and Emperors Children army. Necrons lost less than half the models, pretty much tabled the 30k, which included squishing Vulcan (my overlord now wears a nice lizard skin cloak).

I get why formations in 40k are powerful but the rites of war thing with +1 to S of flamers seemed pretty balanced, especially vs the massed ranks of warriors.

IMHO, an extra 10-15% points for the 30k army is essential, before any other changes.

The problem is that RoW really only balance with other 30k RoW and come nowhere near what formations give 40k armies. It becomes an even worse comparison when it's the formations of formations that really make a laundry list of rules. One person pretty much figured out the formula FW uses to price the point cost of models and units HH; if FW's formulation were used most of the formations in a formation would add as much as 6-7pts per model. It only serves to underscore the challenges of balancing a balanced system with one that is so drastically inconsistent from army to army.

I agree with that. But I would suggest that if formations are banned, then 40k armies need a primark equivalent as compensation.

Ffyllotek wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:

Ffyllotek wrote:
I just ran a 40k necron decurion at 2,000 pts against a 2,200 Salamanders and Emperors Children army. Necrons lost less than half the models, pretty much tabled the 30k, which included squishing Vulcan (my overlord now wears a nice lizard skin cloak).

I get why formations in 40k are powerful but the rites of war thing with +1 to S of flamers seemed pretty balanced, especially vs the massed ranks of warriors.

IMHO, an extra 10-15% points for the 30k army is essential, before any other changes.

The problem is that RoW really only balance with other 30k RoW and come nowhere near what formations give 40k armies. It becomes an even worse comparison when it's the formations of formations that really make a laundry list of rules. One person pretty much figured out the formula FW uses to price the point cost of models and units HH; if FW's formulation were used most of the formations in a formation would add as much as 6-7pts per model. It only serves to underscore the challenges of balancing a balanced system with one that is so drastically inconsistent from army to army.

I agree with that. But I would suggest that if formations are banned, then 40k armies need a primark equivalent as compensation.

Not particularly. Primarchs can only be seen at the higher end of points, and at those higher points, 40k armies then have a ton of synergetic options and powerful equipment.

Agreed. 40k armies are far superior to 30k armies when you include formations and are still a bit better until you hit the 2500 point then it evens out a little.

One suggestion we do in our group is LoWs. If one person isn't bringing a LoW, neither is the other. Balances things out a bit.