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.

Why not just use %caps on armies?

HQ: only up to 25% of the points played

ELITES: only up to 50% of the points played

TROOPS: must spend 25% of the points played, but can spend as much as they want after

FAST ATTACK: only up to 25% of the points played

HEAVY SUPPORT: only up to 25% of the points played.

The % system would make it way more balanced, like in 2nd edition Warhammer 40k and current Warhammer Fantasy Battle.

This isn't the first time this has been proposed.

First, the consequences of such a change aren't immediately clear. Though this would solve some problems, it would inevitably create others - the same thing happens with almost any change to the rules.

Second, the way the FOC is set up is far from the only criticism leveled at 40k in terms of game balance. This change alone will not fix every problem.

well, it keeps people from using a bunch of the same thing. You'll probably only have one terminator squad or land raideer in most games. no multipe mini titans like wraithknights and riptides, especially fliers.

 FJ wrote:
no multipe mini titans like wraithknights and riptides, especially fliers.

Is that what you think the main problem with balance in 40k is?

Yes, lets house rule more things into 40K.

Hmm.

 liquidjoshi wrote:
Yes, lets house rule more things into 40K.

Hmm.

With the advent of unbound lists, homebrew is probably going to be more widely accepted.

Some units are undercosted, some are over costed, some abilities aren't linear and may be ok at small or large values, but over the top in the opposite.
Then there's shooting vs assault...
A foc change won't fix that.

It is nice to see something proposed as a change to bring "balance".

The problem is some elements of armies have more of a "points break" for what you get than others so points percentages may benefit some armies more than others.

You mentioned terminators and do not forget that for Grey Knights they can be fielded as normal troops as well as for Dark Angels.

What is making people "crazy" at trying to even get balance is assessing a single codex army against another is hard, assessing allies with "Gods of War" in your army and all their combinations (never mind Inquisitors or Imperial Knights) it is too much to figure out.

We are in a fine time of "forging the narrative" and I think the days of competitive play are just not there.

The rules work well when you create a scenario and had played both armies before and make the game like you could play either army. It works out.

Good luck.

It's okay guys I got this.

*resets clock on the "Number of days since percentage FOC for Warhammer 40k has been suggested"*

 Madcat87 wrote:
It's okay guys I got this.

*resets clock on the "Number of days since percentage FOC for Warhammer 40k has been suggested"*

It's been under 7 for years.

Its a fallacy to reject an idea just because it won't solve "all the problems".

If a % based FoC would solve a significant problem or problems, then it should be tried out. But the fact that it doesn't fix assault means nothing.

 Dakkamite wrote:
Its a fallacy to reject an idea just because it won't solve "all the problems".

If a % based FoC would solve a significant problem or problems, then it should be tried out. But the fact that it doesn't fix assault means nothing.

At this point the only thing that would fix assault is to go back to 5E or before.

Well the OP has highlighted that fact that the current F.O.C IS part of the problem with 40k current balance issues.
I think we can all agree on this?

(The other problems arise because the rules are not written with the current game size in mind.However as a complete re-write is not the subject of this thread..)

I would prefer to use a simpler proportional system that is based on a system proposed by Andy Chambers.

Where units are classed as how rare they are ,(depending on the HQ taken.) common , specialized and restricted.And the relationship between units is proportional.

For each HQ unit taken the player must field 2 to 8 Common units.
(Option of up to 1 'Support' units to include fortifications, super heavies, special detachments etc.for larger games?)

For every 2 Common units , a Specialized unit can be taken.

For every 2 Specialized units a Restricted unit can be taken.

This way lots of factions themes can be covered with the same F.O.C.The HQ specifies which units are common , specialized and restricted when that particular HQ is selected.

A Force has to include the HQ and a minimum of 8 units before another HQ can be taken,

Just another option , that allows more thematic freedom, while achieving a similar goal.

Why 50% into elites? Why that love for elites? And where will dedicated transports go?

Just make 25% for everything.

Any FOC slot except for troops can't exceed 25% Dedicated transports have their own slot also without possibility to exceed 25%.

Viola! No spams except for troop spams with biker troops or pally troops but i'm fine with it since no more nightscythe-spam, no more rerollable 2++ spam, no more serpent spam, no more riptide spam. It's gona solve a vast ammount of ballance problems the moment it gets introduced to your games. What not to be happy about? Maybe unless you're the one fielding all that spams. But than just play unbound and you're good to go.

The issue is this hurts some armies a lot more than others.

For nstance, My Necrons would not be bothered at all.

My Tyranids on the other hand, would be absolutely crippled by % FOC.

How're they gona be crippled. Remember, others won't be able to spam too. Theese are gona be tac ballanced lists all around with a strategy in mind.

Ain't it less crippling than FMC spam in 6 ed? Or seerstar?

Let's spend some time to make a 1500 list with this restrictions in mind! And see what we get.

I propose:

No more than 25% of total army cost can be spent on a single section (HS, FA, etc) except for troops. Dedicated transports count as a separate FOC section.




Automatically Appended Next Post:


It's a tac list. Which is fairly decent and still has strong elements. 3 Battle wagonz just because one can be dedicated transport. Try to do it with a serpent-spam eldar and you'll see that he will be able to include just 3 of them and not 6. 3 are also hard to deal with but not as rediculous as 6. And he'll be able to take 2 Wraithlords max. With nothing else in HS. Which is hard to deal with also but not as bad as 3.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
And now look at 1k pt games. No more 2-3 riptides there. No more 3-4 serpents there. What's not to like, please tell.

 koooaei wrote:
How're they gona be crippled. Remember, others won't be able to spam too. Theese are gona be tac ballanced lists all around with a strategy in mind.

Ain't it less crippling than FMC spam in 6 ed? Or seerstar?

Let's spend some time to make a 1500 list with this restrictions in mind! And see what we get.

I propose:

No more than 25% of total army cost can be spent on a single section (HS, FA, etc) except for troops. Dedicated transports count as a separate FOC section.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoiler:

HQ:

1 Warboss - Warlord (HQ) @ 140 Pts
Power Klaw; Slugga; Bosspole; Cybork Body; Warbike

1 Big Mek (HQ) @ 90 Pts
Choppa; Bosspole; Kustom Force Field

Troops:

3 Meganobz (Troops) @ 230 Pts (troops)
Shoota/Skorcha (x2); Twin Shoota

Dedicated transport: 1 Battlewagon @ [100] Pts
Big Shoota (x1); Reinforced Ram

19 Ork Boyz (Troops) @ 175 Pts
Shootas; Big Shoota (x2)
1 Nob @ [51] Pts
Power Klaw; Slugga; Bosspole; 'Eavy armour

19 Ork Boyz (Troops) @ 170 Pts
Shootas; Big Shoota (x2)
1 Nob @ [46] Pts
Power Klaw; Slugga; Bosspole

20 Ork Boyz (Troops) @ 130 Pts
Shootas; Big Shoota (x2)

10 Gretchin (Troops) @ 40 Pts
1 Runtherd @ [10] Pts
Grabba Stikk

Fast attack:

5 Deffkoptas (Fast Attack) @ 175 Pts
Twin Big Shootas

1 Battlewagon (Heavy Support) @ 100 Pts
Big Shoota (x1); Reinforced Ram

1 Battlewagon (Heavy Support) @ 100 Pts
Big Shoota (x1); Reinforced Ram

Elites:

5 Lootas (Elites) @ 75 Pts

5 Lootas (Elites) @ 75 Pts

Models in Army: 94


Total Army Cost: 1500
HQ: 15,3%
Troops: 43%
Elites: 10%
Fast attack: 11.7%
Heavy support: 13.3%
Dedicated transports: 6.7%

It's a tac list. Which is fairly decent and still has strong elements. 3 Battle wagonz just because one can be dedicated transport. Try to do it with a serpent-spam eldar and you'll see that he will be able to include just 3 of them and not 6. 3 are also hard to deal with but not as rediculous as 6. And he'll be able to take 2 Wraithlords max. With nothing else in HS. Which is hard to deal with also but not as bad as 3.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
And now look at 1k pt games. No more 2-3 riptides there. No more 3-4 serpents there. What's not to like, please tell.

It's not just about spam. TMCs are pretty expensive in the Heavy support slot, when just two MC or a single unit can cost 25% or more depending on the points level. And this is 2000 points. When you get lower points, it cripples your choice to only basic things. For instance, A single uniit of three carnifexs, with Dual-twin linked devourers nearly approach the threshold of 25%. Or I can take two Trygon primes... That's it. WHen you have an Army like Tyranids, where a lot of the heavy lifting is done in points-heavy MCs it unfairly nerfs them.

Now, let's look at Necrons.

I can still have 3 Annihilation Barges, and a unit of 3 Spyders under this 25% rule.

Do you see how that unfairly punishes an Army like Tyranids, and does nothing to Armies like Necrons?

Maybe you won't need to spam things when the enemy won't be able to spam things? Necron lists you're proposing are reasonable and i see no problems with them.

 koooaei wrote:
Maybe you won't need to spam things when the enemy won't be able to spam things? Necron lists you're proposing are reasonable and i see no problems with them.

Then you really don't have a clue about balance, if you can't see how this hurts Some armies more than others.

I clearly see how it can fix many issues right now. Post a list pls and tell what exact problems it's gona have and vs whom and why. If possible ofc, i'm not trying to force you by no means

 koooaei wrote:
I clearly see how it can fix many issues right now. Post a list pls.

I just gave you an example.... I don't need to post an entire list to illustrate my point.

Point: This hurts some armies a lot more than others. I provided an excellent example for you, to illustrate it. An army like Necrons can easily spread it's points around this system and spam what it needs to, while suffering no drawbacks. An army like Tyranids that rely on more cost heavy units like TMC cannot and is significantly more damaged by this ruleset.

This fixes some issues, but creates almost just as many for some armies. All it will do is just shuffle around who is on top, it doesn't solve the fundamental balance issues at all.

 koooaei wrote:
How're they gona be crippled. Remember, others won't be able to spam too. Theese are gona be tac ballanced lists all around with a strategy in mind.

Ain't it less crippling than FMC spam in 6 ed? Or seerstar?

Let's spend some time to make a 1500 list with this restrictions in mind! And see what we get.

I propose:

No more than 25% of total army cost can be spent on a single section (HS, FA, etc) except for troops. Dedicated transports count as a separate FOC section.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoiler:

HQ:

1 Warboss - Warlord (HQ) @ 140 Pts
Power Klaw; Slugga; Bosspole; Cybork Body; Warbike

1 Big Mek (HQ) @ 90 Pts
Choppa; Bosspole; Kustom Force Field

Troops:

3 Meganobz (Troops) @ 230 Pts (troops)
Shoota/Skorcha (x2); Twin Shoota

Dedicated transport: 1 Battlewagon @ [100] Pts
Big Shoota (x1); Reinforced Ram

19 Ork Boyz (Troops) @ 175 Pts
Shootas; Big Shoota (x2)
1 Nob @ [51] Pts
Power Klaw; Slugga; Bosspole; 'Eavy armour

19 Ork Boyz (Troops) @ 170 Pts
Shootas; Big Shoota (x2)
1 Nob @ [46] Pts
Power Klaw; Slugga; Bosspole

20 Ork Boyz (Troops) @ 130 Pts
Shootas; Big Shoota (x2)

10 Gretchin (Troops) @ 40 Pts
1 Runtherd @ [10] Pts
Grabba Stikk

Fast attack:

5 Deffkoptas (Fast Attack) @ 175 Pts
Twin Big Shootas

1 Battlewagon (Heavy Support) @ 100 Pts
Big Shoota (x1); Reinforced Ram

1 Battlewagon (Heavy Support) @ 100 Pts
Big Shoota (x1); Reinforced Ram

Elites:

5 Lootas (Elites) @ 75 Pts

5 Lootas (Elites) @ 75 Pts

Models in Army: 94


Total Army Cost: 1500
HQ: 15,3%
Troops: 43%
Elites: 10%
Fast attack: 11.7%
Heavy support: 13.3%
Dedicated transports: 6.7%

People should try this, test it out on vassel. If just to prove it one way or another.
No good saying "It won't work, unless you can prove it."

Unit # limitations can be useful.

Like, no more than 2 of any type of unit...stuff like that.

 jasper76 wrote:
Unit # limitations can be useful.

Like, no more than 2 of any type of unit...stuff like that.

But what about CSM's infantry units? They suck as 2 or fewer units. Need around 3+ to get any sort of cohesion.

The biggest issue you run into is that some armies have really good Troops and some armies have Troops that are a waste of space and you cripple some armies that don't need to be crippled while doing nothing to stop some of the more abusive strategies available.

Some armies have their goodies concentrated into a few expensive units in a few slot groups and would pretty much flop without them. The Chaos Space Marines and Tyranids for example; absolutely need their HQ, FA, and HS slots to pull their weight to victory because their troops, dedicated transports, and elites are worth a resounding "meh". And the problem is that these units that a CSM or Tyranid player pretty much needs to use to win in a hyper-comp setting tend to not be cheap. Here, you want toys before boys because your boys are generally fodder who's only goal in life is to take up as little of your points as possible so you can use actually good units and maybe score if they somehow survived to the end of the game.

Armies like White Scars bikers, Serpent/Jetbike Eldar, Transport spam DEldar, Space Wolves, Paladin/Purifier spam GKs, or Cron air however; have troops who most definitely are not a tax on your army and can thus wring out as much out of their bigger troops allotment as possible, while they tend to have reasonably affordable yet still potent options in other slots. A necron list can still keep on spamming night scythes, annihilation barges, squeeze in some wraiths and deathmarks, and ultimately only really loses out on royal courts. Meanwhile models like the C'tan shard which are already high points density units, get skipped over harder.

The game is not balanced on the assumptions that WHFB made when it introduced it's new FOC rules. (It isn't balanced at all because Jervis wouldn't know game design theory if it slapped him on the face and ate him but w/e), using these rules would require rewriting every codex so that you don't have armies that are completely screwed by them or even more models that will never see the battlefield because they eat up your points allotment like a fatman eats cake.

In addition, this rule served to drive up the average points limit in WHFB games which made the game even harder to get into due to you needing to buy even more models. WHFB games are generally 2.5k-3k because you need to be at that points level to really field the interesting parts of your army (and also because the rules are designed for battalion and not company scaled engagements). GW has long been trying to force people to field bigger and bigger armies, so I'd rather not back any rule that plays into their hands.

No.

 Sasori wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
I clearly see how it can fix many issues right now. Post a list pls.

I just gave you an example.... I don't need to post an entire list to illustrate my point.

Point: This hurts some armies a lot more than others. I provided an excellent example for you, to illustrate it. An army like Necrons can easily spread it's points around this system and spam what it needs to, while suffering no drawbacks. An army like Tyranids that rely on more cost heavy units like TMC cannot and is significantly more damaged by this ruleset.

This fixes some issues, but creates almost just as many for some armies. All it will do is just shuffle around who is on top, it doesn't solve the fundamental balance issues at all.

So, you're happy with the current system?

Codex ballance is allready totally screwed with op and useless stuff alike. This limitations just don't allow you to go overly spammy. I clearly see your point but i don't see any bad in it, really. There's allready no sence of ballance as it is. We can't go worse. I do want to face more stuff than just "Unit X backed with unit Y". I'd like to see variable lists with lots of different stuff in them. And i think it's way easier to ballance out than it is now.

 koooaei wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
I clearly see how it can fix many issues right now. Post a list pls.

I just gave you an example.... I don't need to post an entire list to illustrate my point.

Point: This hurts some armies a lot more than others. I provided an excellent example for you, to illustrate it. An army like Necrons can easily spread it's points around this system and spam what it needs to, while suffering no drawbacks. An army like Tyranids that rely on more cost heavy units like TMC cannot and is significantly more damaged by this ruleset.

This fixes some issues, but creates almost just as many for some armies. All it will do is just shuffle around who is on top, it doesn't solve the fundamental balance issues at all.

So, you're happy with the current system?

"I dislike changing the law to make the rich richer and the poor poorer."

"So you're happy with our current system where the rich can get away with snorting mountains of cocaine with a slap on the wrist but the poor get thrown into jail for smoking one wad of pot? "

This isn't a binary choice.

You haven't even put any effort in it yet.

Not saying that percentage limitation system is gona be a brilliant magic fix to the mess 40k currently is. But i don't believe you when you say that it's impossible to play without something like double flyrants and heavy slot spam. Especially when the enemy won't spam his own op units too.

This solution will fix SPAM. It won't buff a crudely-written codex, sorry. Nothing will except for waithing faithfully for a new releaze or homebrewing.

Not a perfect change, but I'd prefer it to the current system. Are you guys seriously looking for a panacea for the current mess that is 40k? Get real.