30k vs 40k after the Conquest

[AekoldHelbrass]

I hoped that Conquest will take into account 7th edition and we will get clarified rules for detachments, "Objective Secured" and such. Instead we got rules from 6th edition copied back. And even without "double FOC over X pts".

 

So, what is the best way to play 30k vs 40k now? Ask 40k player to use rules from 30k, use 40k rules ourselves, or some mix of both?

[hisdudeness]

Just bring your list and opponent brings their list...put models on table...roll dice.

 

With the inclusion of Unbound, there is no expectation that lists need to be built the same way to play against each other. 40k scoring units are governed by Dettachments. 30k scoring units are by the slot they are in.

 

If it's an issue for your group, house rule that your primary FOC has Objective Secured.

[Nusquam]

Book 4 did clarify scoring on pg 240.

 

I agree with hisdudeness. Just bring your armies and play. Point out any important rules and give them the option to use the AoD FOC. The first game will be slow, but the first game playing against a new codex is also slow, or new army. It's a hurdle every single player has to over come until they know all current armies. I recently played a tau player who's been playing since 5th but has never fought space marines other than Space Wolves once or twice. He thought Lysander's warlord trait was OP.

 

Point is: 30k vs 40k is surprisingly balanced, even more so with book 4. Just roll dice and have fun.

[Kilofix]

Where I'm at we've been using 7th/ BRB rules but always treated AOD / HH FOC as its own thing. Even with 6th, we did similar as AOD / HH had like 4 Elite slots, etc.

[Galron]

I build my armies according to my Force org and my opponent uses theirs. If something in my list says counts as scoring then it has Objective Secured. Very easy to understand. Not sure where any confusion comes in.

[AekoldHelbrass]

I build my armies according to my Force org and my opponent uses theirs. If something in my list says counts as scoring then it has Objective Secured. Very easy to understand. Not sure where any confusion comes in.

How many detachments do you usually field, and what will you do in case of 3500pts game when your opponent will take two of primary and allied detachments plus couple of data-slates?

[Moonstalker]

I hoped that Conquest will take into account 7th edition and we will get clarified rules for detachments, "Objective Secured" and such. Instead we got rules from 6th edition copied back. And even without "double FOC over X pts".

 

So, what is the best way to play 30k vs 40k now? Ask 40k player to use rules from 30k, use 40k rules ourselves, or some mix of both?

 

Double FOC was not permissible in 30k under 6th ed.  Betrayal told you to use one AoD primary detachment between 1500-3000, and then Massacre clarified that you should never double FoC (along with tweaking the suggested points values). 

 

That aside, I think the best way to play 30k vs 40k is to get your friends on board the 30k train, even with their filthy Xenos armies.  If you look at a lot of tournaments, they're basically adopting an AoD-style FoC by limiting the number of sources/detachments players can use.  But if that won't happen, the safest route is to just build your army using a Combined Arms FoC.

 

 

 

 

I build my armies according to my Force org and my opponent uses theirs. If something in my list says counts as scoring then it has Objective Secured. Very easy to understand. Not sure where any confusion comes in.

How many detachments do you usually field, and what will you do in case of 3500pts game when your opponent will take two of primary and allied detachments plus couple of data-slates?

 

 

I'll bring 100 tactical marines, 2 Knight Titans, a Warhound Scout Titan, a half dozen Predators, a talon of dreadnoughts, a couple Lightnings, and a Spartan full of Terminators?  How is this even a problem?  The army list is design to soak up huge numbers of points in every slot to be playable at higher levels.  One of your heavy support slots is the equivalent of 3 of theirs, through squadrons.  Why is this an issue?

[Brofist]

I hoped that Conquest will take into account 7th edition and we will get clarified rules for detachments, "Objective Secured" and such. Instead we got rules from 6th edition copied back. And even without "double FOC over X pts".

 

So, what is the best way to play 30k vs 40k now? Ask 40k player to use rules from 30k, use 40k rules ourselves, or some mix of both?

 

I tend to do this way: if my opponent uses the 40k FOC, then we both use the 40k FOC (which means objective secured etc). I use the Legion allies matrix, but the rules out of the BRB.

 

If my opponent wants to use the 30k FOC, then we both use the 30k FOC. I use the allies matrix out of the 30k book while my opponent uses the one out of the 40k BRB with the restrictions of the 30k one on top.

 

That's why I make distinction of '30k in 40k' and '40k in 30k'. By and large I play the former.

[Dono1979]

I'm with the camp that says play your own FoC rules. 30K armies use the 30K rules, 40K use the 40K rules. No objective secured in 30K, if you want house rule it, we have a few times and works ok but nothing huge or game changing.

 

More points are not an issue, the 30K FOC scales very well. I play 5,000pt games using 30K FOC without an issue in the world, I've even gone up to 10,000pts, starts getting a little difficult but still doable.

 

In the end though, play how you like amongst friends, that is one thing that FW continually say, use their books as guides. Just keep in mind that 30K is not designed or balanced for 40K army building styles or scoring methods.

[Nehekhare]

Well, first of all "Battles in the Age of Darkness" is an expansion for Warhammer 40k, so there is no way to seperately play "30k" without the "40k" rules.

 

Just like Planet Strike or Cityfight, this expansion uses its own special rules, missions and FOCs, but it's still "40k". Just like with Planet Strike or Cityfight, you wouldn't expect to walk into a store and force everybody to play by your sub-system rules without having to agree about using them beforehand.

 

The Legiones Astartes, Solar Auxilia, Tagmatah Omnissiah and Knight Household army lists are an entirely different matter and can be used with or without either expansion, just as any other Codices. There are a lot of opinions about balance issues, but frankly, so are (and more) about codex balance and none of those are relevant to army composition rules.    

 

As far as I can see, the only rules matters at this point are 6th to 7th ed. transition problems:

- the implacable advance rule and whether it makes a unit count as troops for purposes of getting objective secured in a CAD/Allied detachment [i'd say positive]

- the faction of these army lists (since the BitAoD allies matrix doesn't apply outside of the expansion) [i'd say apply it anyway and just don't ally outside of HH lists]

 

Thus, the most logical conclusion would be to use the HH army lists without the BitAoD expansion and just play by the BRB.

[Galron]

I don't have any problem with higher point games with one primary force in the points I field. We typically play only 2500 -3000 as a standard game but when you have one squad that can easily be 450 points, jumping up to 3500 would be fairly easy. I never actually have used allies as in my lists, or even considered using them as I have felt they were un-needed.

[Nusquam]

As far as I can see, the only rules matters at this point are 6th to 7th ed. transition problems:

- the implacable advance rule and whether it makes a unit count as troops for purposes of getting objective secured in a CAD/Allied detachment [i'd say positive]

- the faction of these army lists (since the BitAoD allies matrix doesn't apply outside of the expansion) [i'd say apply it anyway and just don't ally outside of HH lists]

 

 

 

Book 4 did clarify scoring on pg 240.

 

Both are addressed in book 4.

 

30k armies can only use AoD FOCs and only things in troops or specific scoring rules(Implacable Advance etc) score. There is no ObjecSec in AoD unless you use one of the optional FOCs from the Crusade book. Even then they emphasis those FOCs are not for competitive play and are only for fun/narrative play. Everything still denies normally.

 

Factions are not used in conjunction with 30k armies. There is only Loyalist and Traitor for campaigns. Besides you can't ally with non-30k armies anyway so the factions thing is unnecessary.

 

With the new in-depth "how to 30k" section in book 4 there really isn't any reason to do anything outside of allowing your opponent the option of using the AoD FOC. Then it's just playing the game an explaining anything they are unfamiliar with.

 

 

I don't have any problem with higher point games with one primary force in the points I field. We typically play only 2500 -3000 as a standard game but when you have one squad that can easily be 450 points, jumping up to 3500 would be fairly easy. I never actually have used allies as in my lists, or even considered using them as I have felt they were un-needed.

 

I used AdMech allies once to try them out for fun. It was. I also used a Knight to fill points a few times. Allies aren't really needed, but rather add more diversity if you want it.

 

I've also never had a problem with points upwards of 3,500 with the AoD chart. Beyond that you should use apoc anyway.

[Galron]

Well the Objective secured thing is solved now at least. Common sense prevailed for once :)

[Nehekhare]

 

30k armies can only use AoD FOCs and only things in troops or specific scoring rules(Implacable Advance etc) score. There is no ObjecSec in AoD unless you use one of the optional FOCs from the Crusade book. Even then they emphasis those FOCs are not for competitive play and are only for fun/narrative play. Everything still denies normally.

 

Factions are not used in conjunction with 30k armies. There is only Loyalist and Traitor for campaigns. Besides you can't ally with non-30k armies anyway so the factions thing is unnecessary.

 

With the new in-depth "how to 30k" section in book 4 there really isn't any reason to do anything outside of allowing your opponent the option of using the AoD FOC. Then it's just playing the game an explaining anything they are unfamiliar with.

 

What exactly do you mean by "30k", the expansion or the army lists?

 

HH p.240 applies to the "Battles in the Age of Darkness Expansion" only, so answers none of the rules questions about the HH army lists when used outside of the expansion

- which, frankly, should be the norm (unless you want 30k to develop into a niche position that will ultimately lead to nothing but disconnection and discontinuation)

[Nusquam]

If you use a 30k army you use Age of Darkness Expansion, to which the above applies. No no Combined Arms, no double FOC after 2k etc. There is no "outside the expansion" if you use a Heresy Era Army.

 

Or at least until today.

 

However, with the new FAQ that came out today you can opt to not use AoD rules and ignore them all together for freindly games and use CADs, everything scores and so on. Implacable Advance uses ObjecSec. They also obviously use Armies of the Imperium Faction.

[Nehekhare]

Thanks for pointing out the new FAQ!

 

However, it directly proves my point and contradicts yours on p.2: "if you are using Forge World’s Horus Heresy era army lists in non-Age of Darkness games using Battle-forged armies"

 

That's what we did all the time, because most people around here play Orks, Tyranids, Guard, SM or Chaos. Noone is interested in a niche rules system.

 

That said, the FAQ answers the implacable advance question, but still leaves the faction problem open to discussion. 

[Nusquam]

I saw the FAQ before my last post and after the one before, so I was just reading Book 4's rules and a previous FAQ. Now it's different as of today. Or rather expanded.

[Nehekhare]

Understandable. So would you now agree that 30k lists with 40k basic rules are the least complicated way to play anachronistic battles? 

 

I think people are more willing to accept army lists unknown to them than having to play by quite different basic rules/missions/FOCs themselves.

 

Bascially ignoring the 7th ed. scoring changes is big. To me it seems they invented AoD in 6th ed and now cling to it regardless. This is not good - see what happened to the other expansions. Even if AoD draws enough players to keep going, two versions of warhammer means half the players for each, and those books are very expensive for not being able to actually play.

 

And then there are all those problems that come with updates and codex creep. 30k Grav weapons are the new storm shields. Even now the differences between 30k and 40k versions of certain units raise all sorts of questions. Why does a "rapid-fire" battlecannon have less shots than a normal one? Where are the HH centurions that 40k SM supposedly dug out recently?

 

Compatability must be prerogative.

[Brofist]

I'm happy that the FAQ basically outlined how my group already played- choose either the BRB or the 30k book. Since I'm the only guy with a heresy army you bet that I almost always use whats in the 7th edition BRB and FOCs. It's just fair to both groups this way and by far the the easiest way for people unsure about 30k armies to begin with.

 

If we ever play battles in 30k, we'll use the 30k rules and all the quirks in those books.