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.

My initial thoughts on balancing an unbound list vs. a battle-forged list.

This also seems to check all the boxes as far as nerfing deathstars without telling anyone what they CANNOT bring to a game.

Tweaks to the Tyranids/MC side might be in order since that codex seems to be generally thought of as under-powered.




Battle-forged - you obey all FOC rules and stick to one Codex.

If you bring a battle-forged list and play against an unbound list you immediately receive the following VP bonuses.

You receive Victory Points determined by what your OPPONENT brings.

For every Codex/Dataslate/Formation after the first one that your opponent brings, you receive two VPs.

For every duplicate of a unit your opponent brings (other than troops and their transports) you receive one VP.

For every superheavy your opponent brings you receive five VPs.

For every flyer (including FMC) after the first one your opponent brings, you receive two VPs.

For every MC your opponent brings after the first one, you receive two VPs.

For every D strength weapon your opponent brings, you receive three VPs.

For every 2++ rerollable your opponent rolls during the game you immediately receive seven VPs.

Victory Point conditions stack and are cumulative. Ergo, the second FMC in your opponent's list will yield you five VPs (+2 flyer, +2 MC, +1 duplicate unit).

In all instances in which a dispute arises the maximum number of VPs must be conveyed to the battle-forged list player.

So you as the Battle-forged list could take as many of these things as the shaky "limitations" of the FoC allow and receive all these benefits?

This seems ill conceived. Perhaps for every one of these things your opponent takes over the number you have would be a better jumping off point.

Or how about this one.

"Both players agree beforehand if the game will be using Battle-forged or Unbound lists."

 Eldarain wrote:
So you as the Battle-forged list could take as many of these things as the shaky "limitations" of the FoC allow and receive all these benefits?

This seems ill conceived. Perhaps for every one of these things your opponent takes over the number you have would be a better jumping off point.

I like this. Damn fine idea.

or

The benefits could work both ways.

You list can give your opponent VPs just as his list can give you VPs.

How about Battle Forged lists get an additional 25% in points to spend on their army? This might actually be worth it.

 techsoldaten wrote:
How about Battle Forged lists get an additional 25% in points to spend on their army? This might actually be worth it.

No. Too easy.

I want TFG to feel the pain when he pulls out his WAAC virus bomb of a list and puts it on the table...

As far as I am concerned the ONLY reason to assign point values and use force organisation restrictions.Is to allow players to arrive at an engaging and enjoyable game quickly.

Eg To allow players to pick any units allowed in thier F.o,C , up to a set point value and have an enjoyable game.Ideal for random pick up game at a store/club , or tournament type play.

As opposed to players taking lots of time to write scenarios and campaigns they all agree they want to play through, before they even start placing terrain on the table.

Most other companies , invest enough time play testing to clearly define what point value allocation and force organization results in 'engaging and enjoyable fun pick up games'.
Realizing the groups of gamers in clubs etc, are free to play as far away from thier defined level of balance for random pick up games as they want to.
They assume the players can use their own imagination for creating narrative driven cool games .

GW corporate management are not bothered about game play.They just want customer to engage in the GW hobby of buying GW product.
Unbound is the latest manifestation of this IMO.

jamesk1973 wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
How about Battle Forged lists get an additional 25% in points to spend on their army? This might actually be worth it.

No. Too easy.

I want TFG to feel the pain when he pulls out his WAAC virus bomb of a list and puts it on the table...

You have to get TFG to agree to play by these rules first. If he's really and truly a munchkin he's not about to let you claiming you should get VPs in response to his cheese get in his way. That or he'll accept your terms, ignore VPs entirely, table you, and win that way.

jamesk1973 wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
How about Battle Forged lists get an additional 25% in points to spend on their army? This might actually be worth it.

No. Too easy.

I want TFG to feel the pain when he pulls out his WAAC virus bomb of a list and puts it on the table...

Has anyone considered that someone might use unbound to just.. y'know... not be a douchebag, and just bring fun stuff?

If I decided to bring an unbound list, that does not make me automatically a waac tfg, unless I specifically went for the cheese.

I could just have a bunch of mediocre things from everywhere.

^That too.

TFG is about attitude, not about what specifically is in the army; regardless of list restrictions someone is going to be a jerk about it.

Do you really need proposed rules to "fix" rules you're almost entirely unaware of?

 DarknessEternal wrote:
Do you really need proposed rules to "fix" rules you're almost entirely unaware of?

Yes.
We are speaking in the land of hyperbole, procrastination, exaggeration and assumptions. Rage must be instigated.

/kindasortaseriousbutnotreally