40k Game Balance Thoughts, Pt. 1 Unbound

40k Game Balance Thoughts, Pt. 1 Unbound

There has been a lot of recent debate around the ITC regarding the number.  The recent poll results came back with a limit of 2 detachments.  There was some debate about a runoff to determine if it should be 2 or 3.  The bigger question has been whether to impose any limit at all and what effect it has on the game.  I would like to explore unbound, multiple detachments, codex balance, forgeworld, and super heavies/gargantuan creatures as different posts.

I don't intend to focus on this from a grand tournament perspective that gets the attention of people on the major blogs and sites, but, rather, on the smaller tournaments that are struggling to maintain numbers year over year.  Our own shop has seen attendance slip from around 20 attendees down to 8-12.  Even our local 'con' has dropped dramatically from 50-60 people down to 20-30 last year.

The first topic is also the easiest to dismiss, but tells us a lot about the state of GW's internal teams, their target audience, and how they see themselves.

Bringing all your toys

I'll start off by saying that I believe anyone who thinks the game straight out of the rulebook is 'balanced' if you include everything is wrong.  Games Workshop wants to provide a framework for people to use their model in any way they want.  It isn't designed for tournaments, but can be used in that manner.  GW has been pulling back of their tournament support for a long time.  We do know that their business plan is to sell models and most people will agree that they create some of the best looking and highest quality (remnants of finecast not-withstanding) models on the market.  Their system wide rules writing (i.e. game balance), rule wording , and editing leave a lot to be desired.  They don't care, have admitted that they barely play test beyond their own very small internal teams, and don't have a marketing team that will tell them otherwise because--ooh look, new shinies.

I don't believe they have a grand vision for balance but we just have to trust them is naive.  Working for a large corporation (not in the gaming industry) has taught me a lot about the inner workings.  Much like everyone who become a parent realizes that their own parents were just winging it, I realize that almost no one knows what they are doing from the highest levels to the lowest and planning, estimates, forecasts, and the like are all complete jokes.  Even if, at one time, they had a vision for game balance it would be the first thing to get sacrificed when their stock dropped a pence.

The game has to have some limitations in place.  Specifically, unbound is not a balance against anything.  I also don't think it's some malevolent plan to sell us more models.  It's just them throwing their hands in the the air and saying 'fuck it' play with whatever you want.  It isn't a strategy it's a cop out.

I've never played unbound, have never seen anyone play unbound, and would never play a pick up game of unbound.  There are very few reasons you would want to play unbound -- to spam a specific unit or force org slot (most likely heavy) or because you don't want to take a shitty hq or troop due to poor GW rules (this is where I say screw you GW for taking away assault marinse as troops from Blood Angels).  If I knew someone who wanted to do the latter, I might be inclined, but almost never the former.


Here are some examples of unbound lists that are utterly ludicrous, and yes they all involve spamming some unit an ungodly amount of times:

This squad 97 times

1843 points
19pts Inquisitorial henchmen squad with 1 psyker, 1 acolyte, 1 acolyte with meltabomb
x97
If you thought 20 warp charge armies were bad, try 97 WC, all with psychic shriek, and they can charge vehicles with melta bombs

19 of these pricks, hiding and making baby daemon love children

1805
95 Herald of Tzeentch w/ML3
x19
Similar to the above list, but can count on summoning at least 7 units or a dozen heralds a turn.

This guy is bringing his 9 closest friends

1850
10 Dreadknights, each with an incinerator, hammer, and teleporter.
Has the mobility, shooting power, and assault ability to kill anything else.

Don't forget the 204 Grots

1836
102 Mek Guns with kannons
408 T7 wounds!!!  You could sprinkle in some lobbas for barrage in case things try to hide, but the basic fact is there isn't enough shooting in the game that can put enough wounds on this to dent it.

These lists are in no way unbeatable.  In fact I don't want to even speculate on which is more powerful.  There are hundreds of other lists we could come up with.  These are just a handful of ones I thought up from armies I have.  No balanced list could really hang with these.  Or maybe they could, but the one thing they would not be is fun to play against.

I'm sure that for every 20 players that want to bring their fluffy list based on a book they read, there is only 1 player who wants to bring 37 Thudd Guns.  But it only takes that 1 d-bag to come to the tournament and ruin it for others.  Maybe at a grand tournament, there might be a hard counter to the list, but at a local tournament, it's completely unworkable.  Do you think his opponents are going to have fun watching him roll 148 blast templates a turn?

The "let me bring all my toys" crowd can, but not at a tournament.  There are other hobby aspects of the game that let you do that, but tournaments are about trying to achieve some sort of competitive environment.

Unbound becomes an arms race on who can take the most units that can be exploited in the game system and that's pretty terrible.  Any tournament will devolve into a few people willing to wade into that filth to see who's asshole stinks more.  Maybe it's just for a laugh at first, but people won't return and you die off as a tournament scene.  It only balances itself if everyone uses insane unbound lists, but that doesn't mean you're having fun.

You need a structure in place to be able to run tournaments or play the game in general, otherwise, what's the point.  Not everyone can come up with their own house rules and game system, that's what we expect (to pay) GW to do by purchasing rulebooks. 

My fun list

I think my first conclusion is the tournaments should be fun.  I always want to bring out the most people possible and want everyone to enjoy themselves.  We will not allow unbound armies because their fundamental nature will be exploited.  The number of individuals who will only attend a tournament if they can bring 10 dreadknights is vastly inferior to the number who would never attend a tournament where someone could bring 10 dreadknights.

Next up we'll examine the confusing world of battle-forged armies in 7th.  People are still frequently confused by detachments, formations, CAD, and how to properly build an army.  These solve some of the issues outlined above, but do we need a limit on how many and does it affect the pwoer curve.