Balancing a Great Crusade campaign: Rules Question?

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.

**Totalwar1402**

Me and a friend have had a long running fued between our Iron Warriors and Dark Eldar. Since he has just finished his Forgeworld Heresy army we've decided to do a themed campaign set during the Great Crusade.

Now, he believes that even with the legion rules and access to Primarchs n Super heavies its still possible to play regular games with non-marine codexes without an obvious power imbalance. I mean for example every basic marine in heresy is only 10pts. Which is the same as your average dark elder. Plus legion rules to make them unable to be routed by shooting. Stubborn in fortifications. Can rapid fire and charge. Have dreadnoughts with 4+inv saves. etc etc

My view is that its not all that balanced against Dark Eldar. Was just after a second opinion on this.

I was also considering suggesting that we make slight adjustments to the rules to compensate for this. Namely that every dark elder model has max pain tokens to start the game. TBH it is mainly the imbalance in the rank and file units rather than expensive super heavies and Primarchs which bothers me.

The campaign is for fun but I'd prefer if it weren't woefully one sided.

**Fenris Frost**

I'm pretty sure in one of the earlier 30k books it mentions that, while they technically work, 30k would be pretty imbalanced against a 40k army. Can anyone confirm? I have no idea and no longer have the book.

**Desubot**

On the bright side i do believe the marines lost ATSKNF so phantasm grenades work

But unless you go nuts with FW or some sort of super heavy of your own it probably wont be a good time.

**Totalwar1402**

Well he doesn't have Perturabo and the only super heavy he has is a Shadowsword which he doesn't like using. Most of his army is composed of breacher squads and devastator marines. His nastiest unit by far is his storm eagle and havocs.

But yeah its mainly the advbantages the rank and file has which bug me.

**Desubot**

Totalwar1402 wrote:
Well he doesn't have Perturabo and the only super heavy he has is a Shadowsword which he doesn't like using. Most of his army is composed of breacher squads and devastator marines. His nastiest unit by far is his storm eagle and havocs.

But yeah its mainly the advbantages the rank and file has which bug me.

They are still Marines and should as such.

As well they should be suseptable to LD checks now not any better but its something.

**Deadshot**

There definitely is a power imbalance. I would suggest that there be a points handicap of around 20-25%

Quite frankly, the HH era Marines just walked all over the Xenos. They may have taken casualties but the Legions never actually lost a battle entirely. Just the way it was written. And if Perturabo or any other were leading, the battle was pretty much over anyway.

**Totalwar1402**

Deadshot wrote:
There definitely is a power imbalance. I would suggest that there be a points handicap of around 20-25%

Quite frankly, the HH era Marines just walked all over the Xenos. They may have taken casualties but the Legions never actually lost a battle entirely. Just the way it was written. And if Perturabo or any other were leading, the battle was pretty much over anyway.

Oh yeah the narrative of the campaign is that the DE lost. This is just to see how badly they lost.

Not so sure about pts adjustments as he actually has more IW than I have DE. Maybe the same now with some new stuff and if I include the wraithknight.

**Tannhauser42**

Totalwar1402 wrote:
Me and a friend have had a long running fued between our Iron Warriors and Dark Eldar. Since he has just finished his Forgeworld Heresy army we've decided to do a themed campaign set during the Great Crusade.

Now, he believes that even with the legion rules and access to Primarchs n Super heavies its still possible to play regular games with non-marine codexes without an obvious power imbalance. I mean for example every basic marine in heresy is only 10pts. Which is the same as your average dark elder. Plus legion rules to make them unable to be routed by shooting. Stubborn in fortifications. Can rapid fire and charge. Have dreadnoughts with 4+inv saves. etc etc

My view is that its not all that balanced against Dark Eldar. Was just after a second opinion on this.

You might want to make sure you have all of the rules straight before making judgments.
1. Basic marines are NOT 10pts each. The first 10 marines in a tactical squad still cost 15pts each. Marines #11-20 do cost the 10pts, however. These marines do not have ATSKNF, and they do not get any special or heavy weapons in the tactical squads, they're all marines with bolters (ooo, scary) and they die the same as any other marines with bolters.
2. So what if their particular legion rules make them immune to morale tests from shooting? Is that really so different to the SM Chapter Tactics in 40K?
3. I do not see where they are Stubborn when in a fortification. (honest question, as I'm not seeing it in my books)
4. They can rapid fire and charge, but only if using that one specific Rite of War (which has several force construction requirements that must be met, not unlike the formations we see in 40K that also give free benefits), and it counts as a disordered charge if they do so, and since when has anybody been afraid of tactical marines in close combat? Keep in mind, 30K armies receive no automatic benefits from the 30K force org chart (no rerolling warlord traits, no objective secured, like in 40K's CAD).
5. Where do they get dreadnoughts with 4++ saves? (honest question, as I'm not seeing it in my books)

Primarchs and Superheavies? Unlike normal 40K, 30K imposes strict limits on Lords of War. You must be playing at least 2000pts, and the LoW cannot exceed 25% of your total points.

I would suggest playing against it first and seeing for yourself what works and what doesn't work. Treat it like any other army you're not familiar with, and please don't automatically assume any losses are because it's FW/30K, etc. After all, how many times have you won your first game against an army you've never played against before and weren't familiar with?

In closing, this is FW's response to the question of 30K vs. 40K:

Spoiler:

Q: Are the armies and units in the Horus Heresy books by Forge World meant to be used in
games against regular Codex armies, such as say Grey Knights or Orks?
A: While Forge World’s on-going range of Horus Heresy books and their game content are all
designed to use and be compatible with the Warhammer 40,000 rules, they have been fine-tuned and
focused on playing battles in the milieu of the Horus Heresy rather than in conjunction with the
Codexes representing warfare in the 41st Millennium, and this will remain the case.
Designer’s Note: This means that while you are, of course, free to have fun and play games against
your friends using any forces you like, and Horus Heresy forces will be broadly ‘a fair fight’ with
Codex forces of the same scale, certain rules anomalies and inconsistencies may be thrown up that
you have to deal with, although these should not seriously affect the game in most cases. (For
example, certain units, such as those with the Stubborn special rule are at a premium costing in
Horus Heresy armies over their regular Codex counterparts, owing to the results of play testing
within their own sphere.)
In terms of using Lords of War and the Primarchs, however, these are definitely not intended to be
used in standard Warhammer 40,000 games, but only in games where both sides use the Age of
Darkness Force Organisation chart, and the specific provisions within, and in games of 2,000 points
or greater.
Designer’s Note: So if, for example, you wanted to play a battle representing a narrative where the
Sons of Horus Legion fought Orks or Eldar during the Great Crusade, you could quite easily use
those xenos forces’ Warhammer 40,000 Codexes (possibly house-ruled to accommodate larger
squads) to proxy for their Heresy-era counterparts. In this case, however, both sides should be using
the Age of Darkness Force Organisation chart, with the army’s own Apocalypse level units and flyers
available as Lords of War entries following the guidelines found on page 184 of Betrayal.

**Totalwar1402**

I hear what you are saying.

However I am not using the Age of Darkness force org as it would mean I wouldn't be able to take bonuses that have been specifically tailored for the Dark Eldar army; namely getting cover saves in the first turn. This is especially true because each Age of Darkness army has access to either specific legion rules or placeholder special abilities until their legion is made ie universal stubborn. Not being space marines I would not have access to those abilities. So any non space marine army using the Age of Darkness chart would be a specific disadvantage since it doesn't reflect the specific strengths and weaknesses of that army. ie More fast attack and bonuses to survive (I must stress that word BTW) the first turn of enemy shooting.

I am not sure why you are implying that you should tone down one of the weakest codexes in the game versus the really OP units available to a Horus Heresy army. I will be very lucky to do much more than dent a few of his squads much less actually get to charge.

Again it is going to be a narrative based campaign, not competitive, but I don't see any reason to nerf a weak 40k codex further than it already has.