Gentlemanloser Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 NSF HQ: Libby (115) Troop: Strike x5 (110) Formation: NDK Bretheren DreadKnight, Personal Teleporter, Gatling Psilencer, Heavy Psycannon (230) Warlord DreadKnight, Personal Teleporter, Heavy Psycannon, Hammer (205) DreadKnight, Personal Teleporter, Heavy Psycannon, Hammer (205) DreadKnight, Personal Teleporter, Heavy Psycannon, Hammer (205) Formation: NDK Bretheren DreadKnight, Personal Teleporter, Heavy Incinerator, Hammer (185) DreadKnight, Personal Teleporter, Heavy Incinerator, Hammer (185) DreadKnight, Personal Teleporter, Heavy Incinerator, Hammer (185) DreadKnight, Personal Teleporter, Heavy Incinerator, Hammer (185) Total: 1,810 Battleforged. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolemai Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Was that one of the Xmas formation releases? Also, I expect you to run this one and report back :) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3945668 Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndigoJack Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 No, it's an apoc formation. Since when have apoc formations been ok for regular 40k? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3945688 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolemai Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Generally, they aren't. So it's only with your opponent's permission. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3945695 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted February 9, 2015 Author Share Posted February 9, 2015 RD, why are you allowing Apoc formations in your Tourny? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3945736 Share on other sites More sharing options...
DinoDoc Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Am I OK if I dislike unbound and Apocalypse? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3945905 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bionicman Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Codex: Dreadknight. But honestly, would you like to spend money on 8 dreadknights?? Its not even a good looking model plus it feels like playing transformers or something like that. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3945947 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quozzo Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Codex: Dreadknight. But honestly, would you like to spend money on 8 dreadknights?? Its not even a good looking model plus it feels like playing transformers or something like that.I think that's subjective. I like the model. I also don't see the fuss about having an Apoc formation in 40k when there are Titans, Lords of War and super heavies running around like they own the place. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3946224 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reclusiarch Darius Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 RD, why are you allowing Apoc formations in your Tourny? Because GK have no 40k ones that are even vaguely good, and even our Apoc formations are mostly awful with the except of the DK Brethren, which gives 'Shred'. Considering Necrons are now Codex: Formations, and Tau get a whole swag of 40k legal formations that stomp face, I see no reason to make a distinction. There are already super-heavies in 40k anyway (Imperial Knights), and Lords of War let people field their racial ones anyway. It's 0-1 Formation of any type, it just has to be the same Faction as the primary detachment (so it's at least vaguely thematic). Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3946467 Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndigoJack Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 This sounds a lot more like a case of, "everyone has cool toys but us so I'm gonna use whatever I can find" rather than a legit use of formations. Apoc formations are different than formation detachments. The biggest difference is that there are several different type of apoc formations, There are psychic choirs, armored spearheads, flyer wings, etc. This particular formation is a battle formation and has a few limitations. First, units bought in a battle formation are deployed simultaneously, but move and fight separately. They only count as a single unit for deployment and strategic reserves (which aren't a thing outside apoc, so that's already an issue). Then when deploying, you nominate a single point on the table, and you must deploy within 36" of that. Additionally, when arriving from strategic reserves, the whole unit must arrive together. The thing about apoc is that reserves work very differently. The turn you come in on is determined by your unit type, rather than rolling for it like in regular 40k. Unless you're going to use house rules, apoc formations really don't work in regular 40k. If your gaming group is fine with you using apoc formations, then it's not really a big deal. I just wouldn't expect to do that at any tournament or in anything outside of a friendly game as there is nothing that allows you to take apoc formations in regular 40k. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3947296 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reclusiarch Darius Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 This sounds a lot more like a case of, "everyone has cool toys but us so I'm gonna use whatever I can find" rather than a legit use of formations. More like levelling the playing field slightly. I mean, it's not like the Dreadknight Brethren formation is that strong. It just gives re-rolls to wound. That's it. Not re-rolls to manifest psychic powers, or free Tank Hunters etc. It's literally 'take 3+ Dreadknights without needing to use up Heavy slots, get some re-rolls to wound, but only if that one DK doesn't die'. I see no reason to enforce some arbitrary distinction between 'normal' formations and Apoc ones. It's still 0-1 (well except for Necrons, but Decurion only allows codex formations), and you still need a primary detachment, and they have to have the same faction. It's also not till larger games anyway. Apoc formations are different than formation detachments. The biggest difference is that there are several different type of apoc formations, There are psychic choirs, armored spearheads, flyer wings, etc. This particular formation is a battle formation and has a few limitations. First, units bought in a battle formation are deployed simultaneously, but move and fight separately. They only count as a single unit for deployment and strategic reserves (which aren't a thing outside apoc, so that's already an issue). Then when deploying, you nominate a single point on the table, and you must deploy within 36" of that. Additionally, when arriving from strategic reserves, the whole unit must arrive together. The thing about apoc is that reserves work very differently. The turn you come in on is determined by your unit type, rather than rolling for it like in regular 40k. Unless you're going to use house rules, apoc formations really don't work in regular 40k. If your gaming group is fine with you using apoc formations, then it's not really a big deal. I just wouldn't expect to do that at any tournament or in anything outside of a friendly game as there is nothing that allows you to take apoc formations in regular 40k. Yeah well obviously we'll just houserule 'ignore all that blah, use normal 40k rules'. I'm not Reserving the DK's anyway, no point, they have teleporters for a reason. So, none of the Apoc stuff matters to me. My plan is to Shunt Turn 1, and try and keep the 'Shred' aura DK alive as long as possible. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3947316 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted February 11, 2015 Author Share Posted February 11, 2015 I mean, it's not like the Dreadknight Brethren formation is that strong. 8 DreadKnights in Battleforged under 1,850. Formations are just unbound lite. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3947385 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reclusiarch Darius Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Ah, but you can't just take the Formation. You need a primary detachment first as well ;) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3947401 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted February 11, 2015 Author Share Posted February 11, 2015 Yeah, that's 225 points taken. With formations you just then load up, unbound style. As shown, if you allow the NDK Brethren formation, that's 8 NDK in a Battle Forged army. Slips past the "I don't play Unbound" restriction with only a single less NDK than an Unbound list running 9. Plus bonus Shred. At this stage in 40ks life, it's pointless trying to comp anything. GW don't want you to, and will make it harder and harder to do so. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3947454 Share on other sites More sharing options...
raverrn Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Solution: Don't be an :cuss and don't play with those who are. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3947683 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted February 11, 2015 Author Share Posted February 11, 2015 And we're back to 1 Riptide is ok. Maybe 2. Three possibly not. And 4+ Douche territory. So you neuter thier Riptides. And in turn they do the same to your NDK... Who are you to decide what an opponent should or should not bring in their army? As long as it's 'legal'. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3947718 Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndigoJack Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Ah, but you can't just take the Formation. You need a primary detachment first as well ;) Not true, a formation is just another type of detachment. A formation can even be your primary detachment. It is entirely possible to have an army comprised entirely of formations Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3947772 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reclusiarch Darius Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 Not true, a formation is just another type of detachment. A formation can even be your primary detachment. It is entirely possible to have an army comprised entirely of formations I was referencing my local group. As in, the way we do things, we have 1-2 detachments, 0-1 formations, 0-1 Lord of War (and we only add formations and Lord of War to larger games). Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3948561 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted February 12, 2015 Author Share Posted February 12, 2015 But, in general, if you want a 9 NDK Unbound army, and were told to get bent - we don't play unbound. If the NDK Bretheren formation were approved for normal play, you could run three of those, with three NDK each, and have a 9 NDK Battle Forged army. What's the difference? Oh and you gain Shred! But Unbound is the devil, for some reason. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3948719 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucien Eilam Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 I imagine, like most arbitrary restrictions, it must be a handicap system to make things as easy and predictable as possible for the Tau and Eldar players. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3948814 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted February 12, 2015 Author Share Posted February 12, 2015 And Necrons now. Who have Unbound in their Codex... Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3948960 Share on other sites More sharing options...
thade Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 Who are you to decide what an opponent should or should not bring in their army? As long as it's 'legal'. Okay, so...this sets the player/player relationship up to be purely adversarial, and it doesn't have to be. When I play, I set up in advance with my opponent this kind of agreement: "No fliers, no formations, no min-max-y silliness. If you bring it, you auto-win; we won't play." Because, frankly, I don't have (or care to purchase) more stuff (which is more expensive by the month) to compete with whatever they have. I'm not being difficult or a curmudgeon: I just won't give them a good game if they bring stuff I know for a fact I can't compete with. Games I've played recently have been with lists both I and my opponent could have played in 5th Ed (using the modern rules, of course). And those games had two things in common: they were REALLY fun; they felt REALLY well balanced; they were tight and exacting tactical matches right to the end. One of the games had spectators who commented that our lists could've been used in 5th and that made the game very interesting to watch. Now...that's not to say you can't play with your astonishingly expensive (and, let's face it, aesthetically unattractive) army of Dreadknights. You sure can, assuming your opponent is cool with it. We're beyond any pretense of "competitive 40k" now that it's overtly a pay-to-win arms race with obvious power creep. (The fate of Magic the Gathering, a thousandfold.) But 40k still has the sweetest looking models (barring the unmodded DK) a cool setting, and a ton of flexibility in what you can play. It's still a ton of fun, assuming both people at the table are invested in both people there having a good time. So, if your opponent asks you not to run with all Imperial Knights, that right there is a-okay. They're in their right to say they don't want to lug their 20 lbs kit of models to the club after work on a 40 minute train ride just to get stomped by the new expensive net list. If you're playing in a "tournament" well, anybody in that should know what they signed up for. <3 Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3949299 Share on other sites More sharing options...
thade Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 In addition, I think Unbound is awesome: if you're using it to build a heavily themed list and not some min-maxed gamey load of beardy cheese. ;) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3949302 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reclusiarch Darius Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 But, in general, if you want a 9 NDK Unbound army, and were told to get bent - we don't play unbound. If the NDK Bretheren formation were approved for normal play, you could run three of those, with three NDK each, and have a 9 NDK Battle Forged army. What's the difference? Oh and you gain Shred! But Unbound is the devil, for some reason. But we're not doing that GML. We're limiting ourselves to one Formation and one Lord of War. I imagine, like most arbitrary restrictions, it must be a handicap system to make things as easy and predictable as possible for the Tau and Eldar players. At least they have to field token units to unlock their broken combos. The difference between 3 Riptides and 6+ is pretty stark. And Necrons now. Who have Unbound in their Codex... No they don't. Decurion is broken, but you can't take normal units, you can only take the listed Formations. Also, it has a pretty heavy Core tax with Overlord+2x Warrior units (which you'll probably want at max size, because they're actually quite good Troops now) and 1x Immortals + 1x Tomb Blades (Tomb Blades are good now, so again points will be spent upgrading them). The formations all have hidden taxes in that you must take all mandatory choices to have the Formation. They get amazing bonuses for being Decurion, and some of the Formations don't have much drawback, but you still need to spend the points. Unbound is nothing like that. Unbound is literally 'I'm too lazy to write a token list using Force Org or even a Formation'. It's panned by the playerbase because it's mini-Apoc and people barely play Apoc as it is (mainly because it's 'who brought more Super-Heavies/Titans Edition'). Who are you to decide what an opponent should or should not bring in their army? As long as it's 'legal'. I'm their opponent. 40k is based on mutual agreement for all kinds of things. At bare minimum, GW even states you must agree on the mission and deployment types, not to mention the format. This is why my group has our limitations. We're playing a narrative-based campaign, using escalating point levels to represent the increasing presence of each faction as the end-game draws near. That way, people are eased into 40k (we have returning and new players in the League), and not forced to fight TripTide or Serpent Spam or whatever else in their first game. That stuff is at least pushed out to Round 3-4, by which point everyone has played 9 or 12 games (4x 200pt Kill Team, 4x 750pt Strikeforce, 4x 1500pt Incursion etc). Maybe it's not for everyone, but even our Tau players are sick of auto-winning most matchups (its why one has switched to BA for the campaign, and another is running Necrons). GML can keep trolling about this issue, but 40k isn't and never will be balanced. I ignore Unbound and I place bare minimum boundaries around 40k because without that, it descends into exactly the 9x DK stupidity that is boring to play with and against. It irritates me to no end, because I hate comp and I especially hate the way Australian comp has been implemented in the past (thankfully 6th and 7th have largely disintegrated all attempts at comp). As I mentioned, you can still field broken stuff within my restrictions, I'm not trying to prevent such things. But, being an escalation League, it means people get a chance to build up a force and get a feel for other armies, before they have to fight the end-tier lists. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3949348 Share on other sites More sharing options...
thade Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 40k isn't and never will be balanced. I ignore Unbound and I place bare minimum boundaries around 40k because without that, it descends into exactly the 9x DK stupidity that is boring to play with and against. I certainly agree that balance in 40k is infeasible (and the computational complexity of that problem swells with each new release) but I don't agree that the necessary end result of Unbound is cheesy-silliness. Unbound can be a good way to introduce new players to the game (in that it lets them play with whatever they have) and an interesting tool to set up narrative games and campaigns. Without discretion (and with, frankly, a selfish disregard for one's opponent's experience) then I think you're right: you do end up with beardy lists featuring only Primarchs and Imperial Knights. Nobody at my club has yet brought a single Imperial Knight to club night: to tournies they travel to, I understand, but not to game night. Games can get pretty cut throat and people test out some of their min-maxed-for-Temple-Con lists, but they do so with the open admission that it's their goal for the week, so nobody rolls in for a "friendly game" only to get trampled by a surprise net list. Such discretion (or, in the case of your club, Darius, pre-agreed-to restrictions) are the solution to our Unbound problem, in my mind. <3 Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/303257-so-you-dislike-unbound/#findComment-3949891 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.