PDA

View Full Version : Poll: Would you play a 1000-2000 point apocalypse game?



Scaryscarymushroom
17-02-2011, 02:23
I got a hold of the apocalypse rulebook just a little while ago, and I must say... the allies rule, elimination of the FOC and elimination of 0-1 limits makes me want to play apocalypse all the time.

Not to mention that some of the superheavies are simply awesome. And I'd love to field a horde of zombies with my inquisition/guard.

BUT: I tend to enjoy smaller point games that don't take a really long time to finish.

What do you guys think?

ehlijen
17-02-2011, 02:48
I personally wouldn't. I happen to like the structure that the FOC and the codex limitations add to the game.

The Marshel
17-02-2011, 02:48
the allies rules, elimination of the foc and elimination of the 0-1 limits were all created to accommodated huge games using massive collections.

your question really comes down to would you let me ignore all conventions of individual factions and army building rules in regular sized games of 40k, to which i say no

Mannimarco
17-02-2011, 02:54
You know, if zombies alongside a guard army are your thing you can do it with the Servants of Decay list in Vraks 3.

You will lose all the fancy toys and characters that make the guard so powerful but for zombies and guardsmen thats the list for you.

Superheavies you can get away with if you play with the spearhead rules, you dont need apocalpse for it.

unheilig
17-02-2011, 05:21
Ridding the game of the FOC only works if players care about formations and the background of an army's organization (which luckily my group does).

Armies should always look and feel like armies, regardless of a rigid FoC.

PatchOnMyShoulder
17-02-2011, 05:34
I say yes, in the sense that here...

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=291633

... it's currently a topic of discussion (I suspect this thread is motivated by that).

People really want to use units from codex's not their own. Their is some arguement that can be fun (cause in the very right circumstance it can, even if not as the norm).

It certainly isn't legal in the regular rules though. What's in your 'dex and what GW 'chapter approves' is all you can use then.

So Apoc. is the only way to do both while using some form of GW rules. So yes, if my opponent really wanted to cross codex mix, and he wasn't a douche and I was inclined to give him his fun, I'd slide towards Apoc rules at a small level so we could do that but still have some rules without needing to write up house ones or make exceptions.

The question after all isn't "Would you play it all the time" or "Would you play it in a tournament".
The way I read it if I'd do it even once for fun I should answer yes, and with the right opponent (either in trusting them or humoring them), I'd do it.

Hendarion
17-02-2011, 06:38
Well, for a fun-game, why not.

Azzy
17-02-2011, 08:47
Yeah, why not? Probably not all the time, but sure. While I have enough Orks to field a huge Apoc army (and I still want more), my friends and I don't usually have as much time to dedicate to such large-scale battles as we'd like.

AndrewGPaul
17-02-2011, 08:47
Apocalypse? No. Not with the silly huge templates and instant-kill weapons and all that other rubbish.

Ignoring the Force Organisation Chart, and using allies and the like? Yeah, go for it. The more you can do to break the ridiculous "official rules" stranglehold the better, I say.

Minsc
17-02-2011, 10:19
your question really comes down to would you let me ignore all conventions of individual factions and army building rules in regular sized games of 40k, to which i say no

This pretty much.
I also don't fancy the idéa of facing a Baneblade or Reveant in very low pts.

Lord Damocles
17-02-2011, 10:27
Superheavies generally at less than Apoc levels of points are somewhat horribly broken.

marv335
17-02-2011, 10:58
No.
It does not sound like a fun game to me.
Apoc. does away with the restrictions because it needs to to make the game work at high points levels.
At low points, the lack of restrictions breaks the game, and could easily hoover all the fun out of it.

Gingerwerewolf
17-02-2011, 11:24
Im a bit weird, as I count anything that comes from the Imperial Armour books as Apocalypse, thus if I want to take my Plague Drone, or Zombies, Im playing Apocalypse.

However I still obey the FOC's, and these games are against friends and usually have a story to them, thus Im not really breaking any rules or taking Superheavies when I know that my opponent cant do anything about it.

Lothlanathorian
17-02-2011, 11:32
Apocalypse? No. Not with the silly huge templates and instant-kill weapons and all that other rubbish.

Ignoring the Force Organisation Chart, and using allies and the like? Yeah, go for it. The more you can do to break the ridiculous "official rules" stranglehold the better, I say.

This. Create your own scenarios and play them. Change the rules of some of the Apocalypse vehicles so they aren't so damn powerful and play missions where you/your opponent are playing a small force sent to destroy a superheavy of some sort behind enemy lines, so there isn't a huge battle happening. Make up your own Missions and FOC's for them, etc. Ignore the chart entirely and just field what you and an opponent feel like fielding simply because you want to.

40K is a game and you and the people you play with are free to play it however you want.

ehlijen
17-02-2011, 11:52
Change the rules of some of the Apocalypse vehicles so they aren't so damn powerful and play missions where you/your opponent are playing a small force sent to destroy a superheavy of some sort behind enemy lines, so there isn't a huge battle happening.

Or use the pre-Apocalypse Imperial Armour rules for them. They were much saner.

MajorWesJanson
17-02-2011, 12:46
Try Spearhead. Additional Formations, ability to take a single superheavy, better vehicle rules.

thoughtfoxx
17-02-2011, 14:47
I would 100%! this is what narrative war gaming is all about. I would be leery of having a no holds barred apoc rules game at low points though. I would have to get seriously scenario on it. Picture 2 Baneblades cut off from imperial lines and all the enemy has to take them out is a couple of units of tank buster boyz. Would the orks turn around and say something like "err boss we no doing this we have no big stompa" or somesuch drivel? Of course not. Firstly the Boss would be wearing their teef in short order, but secondly they would jump at the chance however long a shot it might be.

hell I'm getting stoked over the possibilities just thinking about it!

Suspicions
17-02-2011, 15:13
I'm all for a fun-game with few restrictions, but Super Heavies in 1-2k? I rather feel that Spearhead was created to bridge the gap between "normal" 40k and Apoc (as well as to create an excuse to buy more models) Why not simply use Spearhead?

IcedCrow
17-02-2011, 15:16
Where can one obtain "spearhead"

Suspicions
17-02-2011, 15:19
It's a rule compilation that is free to download from the GW website (just put up for public consumption last week after premiering in White Dwarf Magazine months ago)

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=cat440134a&categoryId=1000019&section=&aId=9800021a

IcedCrow
17-02-2011, 15:26
Cool thank you for the info.

Chem-Dog
17-02-2011, 16:41
I would give it a go, but I'll be bringing three Baneblades :evilgrin:


Apoc isn't the same thing as 40K, it uses the rules and background but it's not the same game. In Apoc you can be removing models that account for 1-2k points every turn, so be careful what bits of it you choose to use.

As for the speed issue, I don't find Apoc games are all that slow once they get going, you do get a little bit of lag stacking up with more players at the table, arriving on time/not showing up, toilet breaks, snack breaks, random phonecalls of varying importance ect ect. It's the number of turns you really need, not the length of turns.

Navar
17-02-2011, 17:11
Well, for a fun-game, why not.

This. I would try it out. Would I play it that way all the time? Oh Hells know. And I own a Thunderhawk.

Killgore
17-02-2011, 17:57
Sure id give it ago, it'l be FUN, I'll even leave the Reaver at home

Azzy
18-02-2011, 07:47
I'm all for a fun-game with few restrictions, but Super Heavies in 1-2k?

Well, that's kinda the thing. Apoc is mutable for the enjoyment of you and your opponent. Don't think SH are appropriate at that point level? Just arrange with your opponent that no SH are allowed. That, of course, applies to other Apoc elements as well... be it the Apoc Mission, Stratagems, Fliers, Strength D weapons, etc.

Instead of thinking of Apoc solely as big points, SH and fliers, think of it more simply as 40K with mutually agreed removal of limitations and added options. Think of it simply as an excuse to do something different. Something doesn't work? Do it different next time.

Carlosophy
18-02-2011, 08:13
If you ban every blast above the 5" and units with structure points you'll be fine.

Rolf
18-02-2011, 08:23
I'd have a go as I think it would be fun, but spearhead would be your best bet.

jt.glass
18-02-2011, 09:37
This pretty much.
I also don't fancy the idéa of facing a Baneblade or Reveant in very low pts.

Superheavies generally at less than Apoc levels of points are somewhat horribly broken.I'm going to disagree here. IMO a baneblade fits fine into lower PV games. It is a bloody site less scary than 2 monoliths!

As for a Revenant, you aren't going to be facing one of those in 1000 point games at all ('cause they are more than 1000 points), and even at 2000 it would not leave a lot of space for scoring units...

To the OP: I'd give it a go.


jt.

mughi3
18-02-2011, 10:23
To the original post, i say bring it on. we actually do mini apocalypse at 500 points, sort of a kill team/combat patrol meets apocalypse. for fun though we kwwp it all infantry, nothing with an AV.

It always turns out to be a fun game with lots of terrain on the table and we usually toss in the night fight rules for the entire game as well.

pigsey1972
18-02-2011, 12:42
At our club we regulary play kill the baneblade

1 x Baneblade (approx 500 pts) always in defense
1000 pts chosen from the any 1 codex. always attacking

standard deployment of 24 inches away. attacker goes first.

makes for a fun and very quick silly game, it can be done!!!!!!

DeeKay
18-02-2011, 13:25
Short answer: yes.

Long answer: yes, but with some limitations.

I don't mind people using some of the datasheets to build an army around (one of the reasons I got annoyed with GW was that Sonic Cult armies became illegal or had to be broken down) but I would draw the line at superheavies.

Honestly can't see why some people would be so dead set against the idea, after all 40k isn't a tournament-friendly game. Doesn't make it less fun in the right mindset though.

With regards,
Dan.

Torpedo Vegas
18-02-2011, 17:08
I'd rather just play Spearhead then. A bit more toned down than Apoc so people don't bring anything to earth shattering, and you don't run the risk of someone bringing a bunch of baneblades to a 2000 point game and wiping out your army turn 2.

Stormfather
18-02-2011, 17:29
If my opponent and I had some time to sit down beforehand and make sure that we were plotting out a fun, fair game that happened to use some of the Apocalypse rules? Sure, I've done it before, and will do it again.

However, if we didn't have the time to do that, or if I couldn't reach some sort of compromise on what we'd field, I'd steer it towards Spearhead, which has provisions for one superheavy or one gargantuan creature per side.

And adding on what Pigsey1972 said 2 posts up, my friend and I have started planning a 'kill the scout titan' game where my scout titan and a platoon of infantry (1k pts) have to hold out against multiple waves of Orks (not sure how many, or how large; possible 1k point waves, until the Imperial forces get wiped or we get bored). However, the titan is only basecoated, and the cityfight board is still under construction, so it'll be a while before it becomes a reality.

Still Standing
18-02-2011, 19:11
So long as I can take my Reaver in a 1500 point game (leaves me 50 points to buy something nice... Maybe an Engiseer!) and kill everything that can hurt it in turn 1.

In other words... No.

Col. Tartleton
18-02-2011, 23:09
It seems like no one on the Internet actually enjoys playing the game. They either think the regular game is crap or anything other than orthodox is a waste of time.

I think Apocalypse is the better version of the game however it tends to be too congested to maneuver. I think 1-2000 points on a big board using apoc rules is good stuff. A baneblade is not all that much tougher than the point equivalent of land raiders or leman russ or monoliths. A Titan is likewise not all that much better. A reaver titan is the same as like six Land raiders or like ten russes which are possible in a Templar or guard list. You just need to bring the guns and the muscle to conquer.

AndrewGPaul
19-02-2011, 01:05
I don't see any problem in using superheavy vehicles, titans, special formations, etc, in smaller games. I'm not sure the various "streamlining" rules from Apocalypse - the large templates, strength "D" weaponry, etc - are as appropriate. Those rules are there to speed up resolution of battles with lots of models, which isn't an issue with a smaller game.

Grand Master Raziel
19-02-2011, 05:57
I don't really care for Apocalypse. Eliminating the FOC just turns the game into a tank-fest. Infantry need not apply. I'd rather just play larger 40K games and allocate more time to finish them than play using the Apocalypse rules.

Eldoriath
19-02-2011, 10:35
Anything below 3000p isn't apocalypse IMO, just a large regular game that perhaps need to add 0-1 to all FOC slots.

Cry of the Wind
19-02-2011, 13:28
I would never agree to play apocalypse below 3000pts. I don't think it is the right ruleset. That said I would be fine to use odd army lists and allies as long as it is for the sake of a cool idea and not just for some silly over powered combo.

yabbadabba
19-02-2011, 13:43
Of course - there really isn't much argument in my mind against the "why".

However the "how" and the "who" might need a little work :D

Scaryscarymushroom
24-02-2011, 05:44
Wow. Lots of replies. Cool.

Another reason that I'd be so interested is because there are tons of armies that I like about 25% of the models for. I like Tau pathfinders and devilfish, for instance. But I don't care about hammerheads, stealth suits, crisis suits etc. I like the Eldar Avatar, farseer, warlocks. I don't like guardians one bit. Stormboyz rock. So do Deff Dreds. I think that tons of lesser daemons (old and new) look really cool. But I don't care for greater daemons much. Chaos obliterators rock pretty serious socks.

So for me... Apocalypse is an excuse to buy what looks cool, paint what I want, and my friends and I can use it for gaming, relatively free of restrictions. I don't need to have units of ugly(imo) troops or hqs in order to get my models on the tabletop.

mdauben
24-02-2011, 12:36
Personally I would say; no.

I remember playing the game before there was a FOC and I like it much better now. Uncontrolled allies, particulary in smaller games, destroy the balance (such as it is) built into the game and lists.

As others have said, the Apocalypse are intended to allow huge games where the standard rules start to break down. Certainly if you and your opponent want to play "mini-Apocalypse" games then more power to you. I'll stick with playing the standard rules in 1000-2000 point games.