What if WarmaHordes used Force Organization for army builds?

It seems really odd to me that there are people that don't give a Firetruck about how PP is doing things that they are desperately trying to Socially Engineer an Alternative for wide spread consumption. When the obvious solution, to me at least, is to just go up to someone at the club/FLGS/Local Facebook group and say "Hey, I want to play a Non Theme game. Any takers?"

Why is there a need to make it into a big "this is going to take over conventions!" thing?

I'll stop arguing about it cause I don't feel like I'm contributing positively.

Basically what I was trying to say is themes in their current form are like one step removed from force org charts

Actually I do play another game that uses force org charts and I Firetrucken love it.

Seems less restrictive than themes and actually discourages spam. I'd be all for it.

Jesus, does every thread on this page have to be about wishlisting game design changes regarding themes? It’s so played out. They are here, adapt or move on.

Not sure who that’s directed at.... but atleast it’s something new.

The rampant wishlisting in general is one of the worst things CID has lead to.

I am not sure what you mean. I think a limiting system which forces players to build balanced, varied armies is better than one which forces them into building skews. This is because I believe the most important part of the game is what happens on the table, and it should be the deciding factor. With balanced armies everyone can take on everyone and gameplay is king, with skews facing skews what you buy and your luck with pairings is much more important than I would like it to be.

An example of bad FOC style limits is vanilla WFB / WH40K. For example the excellent idea of Lord-Hero-Core-Special-Rare introduced in 6th edtion WFB was compromised by choices that were available in those categories. For instance Core was supposed to be the army's solid backbone of regular troops. Vampires could satisfy the minimum requirement of 3 such units/2000pts game with tiny units  of Dire Wolf fast cavalry and Ghoul skirmishers for the total of 150pts, which in no way looked, felt or played like a solid backbone of regular troops.

An example of good FOC style limits is the excellent Swedish comp system created for 6th edition WH40K/ 8th WFB or Polish Balancing Patch for 7th ed WFB which evolved into the ETC Balancing Patch. Those things limited the spam builds which made games into what now is called "gear checks" and made playing those baaaadly balanced systems actually possible and enjoyable.


Of course it's all good assuming you are the kind of player who, like me, thinks the tabletop part of the game is the most important and a sensible, balanced army should have a chance against everyone if you play it competently.

Some people must believe the opposite, that victory achieved by putting as many pre-nerf Mad Dogs/ untargettable Griffons/ mk2 Bradigus Watchers etc  in your shopping basket with the goal of never giving your opponent  a meaningful game on the tabletop is a perfectly good kind of victory. Some people bought into those armies without feeling bad about it after all. For them the less balance, the more skews and spams, the better, because they can out-purchase their opponents to victory.

This is most definitely not true.  Warhammer was not balanced around movement, and units were not sectioned according to their movement.  Warhammer sectioned units according to the fluff around how common the units were in the army.

This is why you would have Knights in the Core of Bretonnia and the Empire, while pretty much everyone else had them relegated to Special or Rare.  The same could be said of the Tomb King Chariots as well.  Tomb Kings had so many Chariots (in the fluff), that not only could they be taken Core, they could be taken as units.  Dwarfs and the Empire could take artillery in the Special slot, while almost everyone else had their artillery in the Rare slot.

So, no, movement wasn't a factor in determining if a unit was Core, Special, or Rare, just how common GW thought the unit should be in the army.  If you look at some of the more specialized armies that were introduced in 6th Edition, such as the Southlands Lizardmen, the Blood Dragon Vampires, or Clan Moulder Skaven, which rearranged the organization of units (or even eliminated them as an option), you would see that the commonality of the unit was the rule of the day for Fantasy.

40K is a different story.  Part of what they used was the commonality of the unit, but that usually only applied to the Troops.  The other part was the role that unit had in the army.  Cavalry, Beasts, light Vehicles, scouts/infiltrators, or dedicated Mechanized Infantry are Fast Attack.  Heavy (or heavier in the case of Dark Eldar) Vehicles and Heavy Weapon Squads are Heavy Support.  Veteran or highly trained infantry were usually relegated to Elites, though this sometimes was used for rare infantry like Ogryns.  And so on.  So, while movement was a factor for the Fast Attack units, it rarely was in the case for any other Role's assignment.