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.

Eldercaveman wrote:
If someone says to me that they want to play 1999+1 or 2k with a single FOC ...

That wasn't the supposed issue...

This must be one of those things I am out of the loop on because I don't pay 6th edition. I have always played under the 4th edition version that multiple detachments was something that both players agreed to before the game, usually when playing with forces over 2000 points, like 2500 or 3000.

Sometimes rarely even with the requirement that all FOC slots must be filled before adding a second one, and that second one has to then fit the compulsory slots, like the first, before adding others.

Yeah, 6th edition changed that, with the second FoC becoming standard at 2000 points, rather than an option for larger games.

As someone just sticking in my head from fantasy I'd just like to point out that in my area under 5th I used to get in 2500 games all the time. Then I got sick of seeing people spam as many of the same overpowered/undercosted unit as the can moved to fantasy.

Now in my area 1850 is the norm and while I still see people spamming the best thing in their codex I think they all understand that being able to take 6 heldrakes/other flyers/whatever else is OP these days is just bs.

Now fantasy has the same system (though it is harder to break with %s) but the difference is at 3000, I've never actually played 3000 but I can go to a tourney and play 2400 happily. 3000 allows people who want to to play those huge, one off games without hindering normal play. 2000 seems to have only forced 40k players in my area to play smaller games.

 insaniak wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:
If someone says to me that they want to play 1999+1 or 2k with a single FOC ...

That wasn't the supposed issue...

Yeah sorry that wasn't an intentional change of issues, misread the context of the original post. However it does in a round about way offer an answer, no i wouldn't try to force any one top lay above a poi TS level or with double FOC, but what I did do was offer my way of discussing it with an opponent.

I find it absolutely hilarious and incredibly Ironic that the OP and a couple of others think that the person who wants to play 1999 or 1999+1 is trying to WAAC and somehow goes about making that list with the intention to subvert others who made 2000+ point double FOC lists. When in actuality, they made that list to play other like-minded people, or maybe they can't afford a more expensive spam list. Edited by Mannahnin

You want to FORCE people to play with 2 FOC? Guess what, you don't have that right. This game involves playing at agreed upon points value and rules set. If they made a list at 1999 to play single FOC games, then they are well within their rights to do so. If you made your list at 2000 with double FOC, don't play those people. It's fairly simple. Saying you want to force people to do something kind of proves that you're the unreasonable one.

1999 and 1999+1 games are becoming a large part of the gaming community as a whole, as evidenced by my local meta, a bunch of other posters metas, the prevalence of 1999 point lists and tourneys right here on dakka, and finally, your own pole, showing a majority of people don't agree with you. Denying a part of the hobby should exist just because it isn't how you want it is absurd, and I don't think it's going away any time soon.

Lastly, how would it ever be fair to take advantage of people who made single FOC lists when you made double FOC? You'll obviously be at a massive advantage, why would anyone want to get roflstomped because you're playing two different rules sets? For that matter, why do you want to play such an uneven match unless you're WAAC?

TL,DR? Find people who actually want to play the way you want to play, or be more accommodating of other players.

Isn't it just common courtesy to ask what kind of game you want to play before hand?

If someone decides he wants to hinder someone by playing 1 foc on purpose... Yep they are a douche, but the same is vice versa.

Ask before hand and no issue is made, simples

Why is dual FOC frowned upon so much? Its weird to me.

I think mostly because it's new, and because folks worry about the possibilty of a really great/underpriced HQ, EL, HS or FA unit (which is normally at least capped at two or three) having an even greater and more disproportionate impact on the game.

It's frowned on for the same exact reason that forge world in 40k is frowned on, people either have not bothered to try it and are thus against it for no legitimate reason, or they tried it against the minority waac people and got rofl stomped and cried cheese.

There of course is a 3rd option, some people simply cannot afford the toys to play at that level, thus giving people who have more disposable income an advantage over others who have to pay rent and feed kids and what not, a good example of this is myself and a friend at my local club.easily have enough stuff for. A apocalypse game, but most at our club do not, this would mean at 2k plus we have a distinct advantage over our fellow gamers, I consider this to be unfair to them.

 Mannahnin wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
Different people play at different point scales for a lot of reasons. 1999 is a way of saying "I don't want to play 2xFOC with all that is involved with that." I can see the point of that. Once you break that 2k limit, the game changes. It favors some armies, hinders others. You can get more of the same thing spammed. It's not as big a deal as saying "Let's use the Apocalypse rules" but it is different.

If someone says they want to play at 1999, then that's the game they want to play. If you agree to play at that point, do so. There is no "forcing" them. If they want to play at 2k, and only take a single FOC, that's fine as well. But unless they set different ground rules with you, at 2k you are entitled to the option of a double FOC.

1,999 (or 1,999+1) don't strike me as odd numbers. It's just a short hand for "I don't want to play with double FOC"

This. There's no forcing involved, and I really don't understand the original complaint. You AGREE to play to a specified point level, including whether double force org will be permitted. If you and your opponent haven't agreed on that before starting, how on Earth are you playing a game?

I think what the OP is getting at is this;
You show up at your LFGS with your 2k list, and because it's a 2k list, you've written it with the double FOC. You haven't used the extra slots to build some horrid spam-bot TFG monster list, but rather just built a decent competitive that takes advantage of say +1 additional Elite/Fast/Heavy for a total of upto 4 of each and perhaps 3 HQ's.
Someone asks you to play a game and agrees to match your 2k, but only buy the "house rule" of 1999+1, meaning you now have to completely re-write your list simply because your opponent is a big girl who doesn't want to play by the actual rules.

Imagine for example a Tyranid player in such a situation. Their opponent whining and saying 1999+1 only means that they've just outright gimped the poor 'Nid player who can't even make use of allies!
Most Xenos codicies honestly start to really run short of slots at even 1800pts - especially outside of their Troops slots since most non-Marine Elites/Fast/Heavies are very specialised and can't multi-task like Marines can.

Limiting larger armies to just 1 FOC is fine if you're an Imperial player. Tyranids, Orks, Tau, Daemons, Eldar, etc... on the other hand need those extra slots since we can't so effortlessly combine 2-3 combat roles into a single squad. (and not everyone wants/has allies to make-up the pts)
As a Daemon player myself, it's not actually possible for me to even build a good 2k pts list without the double FOC, unless I simply spam the currently broken 27Flamers + 27Screamers and/or spam 5 FMC's to make-up the pts! (and there's no point to playing with such a dirty, flithy hobo type of list anyways)


While it's not fair to demand an opponent *must* use the double FOC at 2k, it's also just as equally unfair to demand that a player re-writes their list to fit your ideals and/or automatically assume that anyone who plays double FOC is simply some spam-happy donkeycave TFG looking to roflstomp with 6x Misslefangs or 18 Flyers, etc...

Experiment 626 wrote:
I think what the OP is getting at is this;
You show up at your LFGS with your 2k list, and because it's a 2k list, you've written it with the double FOC. You haven't used the extra slots to build some horrid spam-bot TFG monster list, but rather just built a decent competitive that takes advantage of say +1 additional Elite/Fast/Heavy for a total of upto 4 of each and perhaps 3 HQ's.
Someone asks you to play a game and agrees to match your 2k, but only buy the "house rule" of 1999+1, meaning you now have to completely re-write your list simply because your opponent is a big girl who doesn't want to play by the actual rules.

Oh, I understand what he's getting at.

Leaving aside what kind of person you're making yourself look like by using "girl" as a pejorative, I will say that as soon as you start applying pejoratives to people for wanting to play a different way than you do, is when you lose the moral high ground and start being the jerk in the situation. If they agree to match your 2k, but actually say they want 1999+1, they haven't actually agreed to play 2k. The negotiation is still in progress. No one's broken an agreement, because one has not yet been made.

Experiment 626 wrote:
Imagine for example a Tyranid player in such a situation. Their opponent whining and saying 1999+1 only means that they've just outright gimped the poor 'Nid player who can't even make use of allies!
Most Xenos codicies honestly start to really run short of slots at even 1800pts - especially outside of their Troops slots since most non-Marine Elites/Fast/Heavies are very specialised and can't multi-task like Marines can.

Limiting larger armies to just 1 FOC is fine if you're an Imperial player. Tyranids, Orks, Tau, Daemons, Eldar, etc... on the other hand need those extra slots since we can't so effortlessly combine 2-3 combat roles into a single squad. (and not everyone wants/has allies to make-up the pts)
As a Daemon player myself, it's not actually possible for me to even build a good 2k pts list without the double FOC, unless I simply spam the currently broken 27Flamers + 27Screamers and/or spam 5 FMC's to make-up the pts! (and there's no point to playing with such a dirty, flithy hobo type of list anyways)

I can certainly see the merit in letting Tyranids getting extra slots to compensate for them not getting allies, but I can't agree with anything else you've written above. I've been watching Xenos codices have a great resurgence in 6th ed, and IME Tyranids, Orks, Tau, Daemons and Eldar can all kick butt and compete very strongly at 2k in 6th, though Allies can certainly help those codices who have access to them. Tyranids in particular can be amazing, and I've watched the trash people (including myself) at 1999+1.

Experiment 626 wrote:
While it's not fair to demand an opponent *must* use the double FOC at 2k, it's also just as equally unfair to demand that a player re-writes their list to fit your ideals and/or automatically assume that anyone who plays double FOC is simply some spam-happy donkeycave TFG looking to roflstomp with 6x Misslefangs or 18 Flyers, etc...

The statements you've just made are exactly as applicable to both parties. Each came to the store with a list they want to play; it's just that the single point difference between 1999 and 2000 in 6th radically changes the Force Org, which is neither player's fault. Both are equally responsible to be flexible and agree with their potential opponents, and both are being jerks if they expect the other guy to categorically bend to their preference.

Of course if someone wants to play a single-FOC game I would expect their list to be no more than 1999 points and we will play a 1999 point game. It's a weird point total, but I guess if you really want to play at that level it's still following the rules. However, it is NOT acceptable to insist that other people accept your house rule where you're allowed to go over 1999 points just because you want to be able to.

It's not acceptable to insist that the other person play your way. It's perfectly okay to ask politely.

 Mannahnin wrote:
It's not acceptable to insist that the other person play your way. It's perfectly okay to ask politely.

Sure, but then when they say "no, I don't want you to go over the point limit" you don't get to complain about it, you just have to accept that your opponent doesn't like your house rule and play a 1999 point game without going over. You're asking for special permission to change the rules of the game, and the default assumption is that you don't get to.

Of course. Or just play 2k and deal with your opponent using the extra Force Org slots if you don't want to change your list. That works fine too.

Experiment 626 wrote:
I think what the OP is getting at is this;
You show up at your LFGS with your 2k list, and because it's a 2k list, you've written it with the double FOC. You haven't used the extra slots to build some horrid spam-bot TFG monster list, but rather just built a decent competitive that takes advantage of say +1 additional Elite/Fast/Heavy for a total of upto 4 of each and perhaps 3 HQ's.
Someone asks you to play a game and agrees to match your 2k, but only buy the "house rule" of 1999+1, meaning you now have to completely re-write your list simply because your opponent is a big girl who doesn't want to play by the actual rules.

He wasn't asking about 1999+1. He was asking about people wanting to play 1999 points.

The 1999+1 thing is silly. But I see no problem with someone wanting to keep the game to a points limit where they are only using a single FOC.

I don't think 1999+1 is especially silly. The difference of 1pt between 1999 and 2000 causing the force org to double is arbitrary, after all. And in the last 5 years or so GW has made a much greater habit of making upgrades and unit costs in multiples of 5pts, and leaving fewer 1pt, 2pt, and 3pt upgrades with which to fill in odd numbered point values or leave you something tiny to drop. BA and GK still have 1pt Searchlights, for example, but SW, SM, and IG don't. So it's not quite as convenient for a bunch of the codices to build to 1999 or easily drop a small upgrade to hit it.

But 2k = double FO is the official rule now, so players building to 1999+1 should bear in mind that it's a house rule.

First off, it wouldn't come to that point. My opponent and I would agree on the game before hand. If we said 2000 point game, but he asked me to stick to 1 FOC, I'd probably have no problem with it.

No need to play the 1999 +1 game, no "forcing someone" to play something they don't want to play. Be an adult, make your wants and needs known, and agree to play or not.

With our without allies, forge world, 1 or 2 FOC, Cities of Death, whatever. Agree to a type of game and play it. If you can't agree, shake hands anyway and move on.

Other than the 149 points difference what is the difference between playing a 1850 point game and a 1999 point game?

Why is 1850 acceptable, but 1999 is not?

As a Tyranid player I often find myself wishing I had a 4th Elite or 3rd HQ slot, but then I think about facing a Space Wolves list with 6 squads of Lone Wolves with 6 Rune Priests and I'm suddenly less keen on double force org. For a casual game, double force org can be great fun, for a tournament I think it would be a recipe for disaster.

I wouldn't force someone to play at a points limit that they are not happy with, however whether or not I'd want to play said person at all has yet to be answered

It's frowned on for the same exact reason that forge world in 40k is frowned on, people either have not bothered to try it and are thus against it for no legitimate reason, or they tried it against the minority waac people and got rofl stomped and cried cheese.

There of course is a 3rd option, some people simply cannot afford the toys to play at that level, thus giving people who have more disposable income an advantage over others who have to pay rent and feed kids and what not, a good example of this is myself and a friend at my local club.easily have enough stuff for. A apocalypse game, but most at our club do not, this would mean at 2k plus we have a distinct advantage over our fellow gamers, I consider this to be unfair to them.

Glad I play 1850. I didn't realize there was an issue like this with 2000 point games. However, I think I'll try my hand at making these double FOC lists people speak of.

Before I play an opponent, we agree on the points limit. If it is 2000, we both come to an agreement on whether we use a single or double FOC. Usually it is double, as those are the rules. But this doesnt mean we will actually use it. But that we have the optiuon to have double FOC if we want/need it. I often do not need it as I play DA. Occasionally at 2k-3k I might field both Sammael and Belial and thus need 12 troop slots for all my DW and RW. But apart from that, I can usually fit my lists into a single FOC. But that doesnt mean I have any issue with the double FOC. Take what you like, as long as both the players agree before the game.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Other than the 149 points difference what is the difference between playing a 1850 point game and a 1999 point game?

Why is 1850 acceptable, but 1999 is not?

Because that's one fewer Leman Russ, putting the company total at 9, which is unfluffy.

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

For everyone's information, taking an addition FOC at 2000 points is optional. People who are trying to avoid getting to 2000 to avoid being required to take it are limiting themselves for no reason. It's also entirely optional for each player; one play can take one but the other doesn't have to.

you know that is like saying that roids are optional in pro bodybuilding or any form of enhancment in sports.
most of europe has tournaments starting at 1500 and ending at 1999 , no one save for maybe UK or the nordman have problems with that.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Other than the 149 points difference what is the difference between playing a 1850 point game and a 1999 point game?

Why is 1850 acceptable, but 1999 is not?

Because that's one fewer Leman Russ, putting the company total at 9, which is unfluffy.

Truth. We can't have less dakka. In fact, our local meta decided to have the next tourney at 1850 for funsies and the guard player just took out a russ.

As to the question, did you agree to play at 1999 or 2000 beforehand? Cause that's what you're playing a.


/thread?

EDIT: Also, I'm curious why there's such an insistence on writing it as 1999+1 instead of 2000, no double FOC? We all know that's what it means

I voted no, because you can't "make" anyone play a game if they don't want to. As many people have pointed out, just talk to your opponent and come to an agreement about what points level you're playing at, double FOC or not. If you can't agree, move on and find another opponent. Neither of you is wrong, you just want to play a different game which is fine.

grrr

We tend to do 1999+1 charts specifically to avoid the double force org charts. Avoiding 6 Heavy slots is usually the case... in otherwords a 1500 point force + 500 in heavies. I think it unbalances the forces too much. Now do a 3000 pt force and perhaps but doing the minimum force to qualify to me is a version of cheese.