How much sense does this make? - Warhammer 40K Fantasy

Welcome to Librarium Online!

Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!

Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!


Register Now!

User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15
  1. #1
    Member Cuddly Carnifex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    77
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    2 (x1)

    How much sense does this make?

    okay... so rules wise I understand that the force organization chart needs to be there. Otherwise the 'nids would get a leetle cheesy. However, how much sense does the chart make fluff-wise? (aka what is the hive mind doing reading the index astares or whatever). Why wouldnt a force of tyranids have a slew of gaunts and a slew of 'fexes or raveners... it doesnt make sense in my mind.


  2. Remove Advertisements
    Librarium-Online.com
    Advertisements

  3. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Oshawa, Ontario, Canada
    Age
    33
    Posts
    448
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    25 (x1)

    Its purely for gaming terms. Fluffwise, it makes no sense - you are right there. But without the FOC, games would fall apart. It is very necessary. In addition, however, I would argue that while the FOC for Warhammer Fantasy is superb, the FOC for 40k needs to be revamped a little. I hate seeing unfluffy armies with the bare minimum of regular troops while being maxed out with tanks and heavy weapons and toys. Its completely unrealistic to the way war is fought.

    It is really silly that the 40k FOC is the same for a 750 point battle as it is for a 2500 point battle. Elite, Fast Attack, and Heavy support choices should be more limited, with slots opening up as the points limit increases. In addition, in larger games, players should be forced to take more Troops choices than simply 2. In a 2000 point game, the minimum number of Troops choices should be 4. It doesn't matter for some players, because a lot realize that having more troops than other units is fluffy, more realistic, and generally makes for better games, but some players abuse the FOC and that's where a lot of cheese comes from.

    Revamping the 40k Force Organization chart would make games more realistic while also reducing cheese by a fair bit.

  4. #3
    Senior Member TzarNikolai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Sheffield, UK
    Posts
    838
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    14 (x2)

    yeah. i much prefer the fantasy one but it should be a bit different than what you described, ie certain armies who have really expensive troop squads may not be able to take the required limit and field anything else useful. so you could do a % points? personally i have loads of troops. 5 squads, but i play beil-tan, so i'm kinda cheating my way around it. :p

    anyway. the FOC is just to bring balance to the game and to make it a bit fluffier. its quite likely that a hive fleet won't have all carnefex's or all gaunts because it needs to come up with an army that can deal with anything.
    entirely fex's are slow and resource heavy (i'd imagine), and would probably take a long time to grow.
    gaunts would be cheap in resources, grow quickly. but gaunts don't hurt tanks and fortifications.

    etc.

  5. #4
    Member Cuddly Carnifex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    77
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    2 (x1)

    Quote Originally Posted by TzarNikolai
    entirely fex's are slow and resource heavy (i'd imagine), and would probably take a long time to grow.

    etc.
    you SO did not just call us 'fexes fat... we're just... big armor-plated.... yea... >/\__/\>

    heheh, anyways...
    The thing is though, Biel-tan are just that way... they like being all specialized and being funny colored meatba- I mean having funny colored armor. It's their way, which means that the aspect warriors are simply just troops for them. (personally I think for the idea they were trying to pull off, rules wise it was done well to represent the fluff) Obviously, I still have to stick to the rules, but it still feels like some hive tyrant somewhere has been reading the space marine chapter manual a little too closely.

    Anyways, how does the fantasy FOC work out? I have never even heard of it and it would be much appreciated if one of you would explain it to me (if it's not illegal to do so)

    keep on talking! ^/\__/\^

  6. #5
    Supreme Evil Overlord Dreachon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    the Netherlands
    Age
    34
    Posts
    4,873
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    189 (x8)

    the hanasty FOC works likes this, it has a fixed numbers of units you can field, for every 1000pts you play every selection, lord, heroes, core, special and rare choices get an extra slot, some choices can only be taken with a certain size, no Lord under 2000pts

  7. #6
    Dawn Under Heaven Triumph Of Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    MIA
    Age
    26
    Posts
    2,971
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    -170 (x0)

    Quote Originally Posted by Houston
    Its purely for gaming terms. Fluffwise, it makes no sense - you are right there. But without the FOC, games would fall apart. It is very necessary. In addition, however, I would argue that while the FOC for Warhammer Fantasy is superb, the FOC for 40k needs to be revamped a little. I hate seeing unfluffy armies with the bare minimum of regular troops while being maxed out with tanks and heavy weapons and toys. Its completely unrealistic to the way war is fought.

    It is really silly that the 40k FOC is the same for a 750 point battle as it is for a 2500 point battle. Elite, Fast Attack, and Heavy support choices should be more limited, with slots opening up as the points limit increases. In addition, in larger games, players should be forced to take more Troops choices than simply 2. In a 2000 point game, the minimum number of Troops choices should be 4. It doesn't matter for some players, because a lot realize that having more troops than other units is fluffy, more realistic, and generally makes for better games, but some players abuse the FOC and that's where a lot of cheese comes from.

    Revamping the 40k Force Organization chart would make games more realistic while also reducing cheese by a fair bit.
    Perhaps the game is not meant to be realistic? :mellow:


    Karmoon
    ... only triumph could turn pooing his pants into a good thing..

  8. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Oshawa, Ontario, Canada
    Age
    33
    Posts
    448
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    25 (x1)

    Quote Originally Posted by Triumph Of Man
    Perhaps the game is not meant to be realistic? :mellow:
    Touche. However, I play tabletop wargames because I like strategy and the tactics that go along with warfare. While we have no idea how warfare will be even 1000 years from now, let alone 40,000, if the game were not representative of modern warfare (specifically having each army being made up mostly of basic troops...which is a universal condition of army composition the world over and throughout time, with some exceptions, of course), I would probably not be very interested in it. It is a fictional game set in a fantasy setting, but it would not be nearly as enjoyable if we could not identify with it.

    I just don't buy into entire armies of elite superheroes...armies should be comprised of a solid block of basic troopers, to which elite units and special weapons are added.

  9. #8
    Member Cuddly Carnifex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    77
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    2 (x1)

    Quote Originally Posted by Triumph Of Man
    Perhaps the game is not meant to be realistic? :mellow:
    well, what I believe he is trying to say is that when people start trying to cheese their armies so that they win, it's really annoying, not that we're playing the game for realistic-ness. (this IS science FICTION, after all) However, the idea while playing is to have fun, and getting utterly crushed rapidly is absolutely no fun. Which games give you the most satisfaction, the win/loss where one side was utterly crushed in a matter of moments, or the one that lasted all night? most likely the latter.

    Furthermore, it's nice to play armies that seem like armies, not the spawn of a powergamer's wet dream. I personally dont enjoy playing against those kinds of people at all (and i've dabbled in DnD, MTG, pokemon, LARP'ing, and many more)

    ^/\__/\^

  10. #9
    Member donkey7890's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    87
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    2 (x1)

    the fantasy FOC is much better


    the 40000 needs to be revamped, possibly NOW!!!!!!!!!!!
    Go the Lizardmen Host of Quetzl, complete with loads of Skinks and Saurus....Death to Chaos




    Space Marine Chapter Master.........of the..........

    I still need a name for him.....and his Chapter.....but he has a combi weapon and a Power Chain

  11. #10
    Member JürgenMaïster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    76
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    1 (x1)

    I think the FOC is defendable fluff-wise.

    This is because a fleet will have much more gaunts than tyrants at their disposal, but the would need warriors or a lord anyway, to keep their troops from going crazy.
    My hate is contagious...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts