# Force Organization Chart



## Treesnifer (Jun 13, 2010)

I've searched for a bit through the forums, but I can't seem to find the answer I'm looking for.

The two army books (codexes?, codexci?) we have are eldar and csm. They have the same FOC charts: Compulsory, Elite Option and Fast Attack Option. I have no idea if other armies have different choices, or they are all the same and each codex gets to adds its own tweak. In reading people's list choices, I am regularly confused as to how they fit into the FOC. This morn, while rereading the FOC rules and chart, it dawned on me that the Fast Attack option does not list the required HQ. If you followed this third option, technically you would be unable to win a standard scenario for there are no troop slots available.

In the battles we, Anfo (my son) and I, have played we have followed the basic FOC choices - HQ, 2 Troops, 1 Elite, 1 Fast Attack, 1 Hvy Sup. Anfo has wandered off the reservation a couple times, but I have been resolute. The Elite Option I like, but I have been stymied by being obligated to purchasing a second HQ in order to have access to some Hvy Sup.

Would a list like this be considered legal?

Detachment 1; Elite Option - HQ x1, Troop x3, Elite x2
and 
Detachment 2; FA Option - Fast Attack x2, Hvy Sup. x1

Each detachment is shorted unit slots. Detachment 1 is short a troop and an elite. Detachment 2 is missing a Fast Attack and two Heavy Support choices. Is this legal at a GW store/event?

My overall goal is that when Anfo moves to the LGS, his lists are legal and not built on house or misunderstood rules. I don't care how screwy other player's lists are. They cheat? Their choice. But I'll be damned if I or mine are accused of cheating. I'll happily carry a red hot iron bar as far you feel I need to in order to prove my honesty. I hold my son to the same standard.


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

Sorry I'm confused as to what you're on about?

The compulsory choices are 1 HQ & 2 TROOPS- you have to have these for an army to be legal.

Then you can add another HQ, 4 more TROOPS, 3 ELITES, 3 FAST ATTACK, and 3 HEAVY SUPPORT to your army to have a completely filled FOC.
You don't have to use any of the options above or you can mix and match as long as you don't go over the maximum for each Option (i.e you can't have 4 FA or 7 TROOPS choices unless the mission specifically says you can).


----------



## Daniel Harper (May 25, 2008)

So the standard chart is 2x HQ, 6x Troop, 3x Elite, 3x Fast Attack, 3x Heavy Support. Out of these an army must consist of 1 HQ and 2 Troop. Every army follows this list when playing in standard games, however some armies have rules such as Imperial Guard being able to take tanks in squadrons so 1 heavy support can be 3 tanks.

The only time the structure of this chart changes is when playing non-standard missions (such as from the Battle Missions book) and the other expansions.

As from your example, if I read it correct detachment 1 is fine as a stand alone list whereas 2 would be illegal in standard games (which is normally played in GW)

If I have read it wrong then sorry. Hope this helps.


----------



## aboytervigon (Jul 6, 2010)

also space wolves can take 4 hqs


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

To be more precise the Space Wolves can take 2 HQ characters for each HQ slot- they still stick to the 2 HQ slots maximum technically but with a clever loop hole.


----------



## aboytervigon (Jul 6, 2010)

like daemons can take 4 if they take heralds as heralds count of half a hq slot.


----------



## Viscount Vash (Jan 3, 2007)

The answer is still the same though.

You *must* have 1x HQ (what counts as 1 HQ may vary in various Codices) and 2 Troop.

You *may* have up to a _maximum_ of 2 HQ, 6 Troop, 3 Elite, 3 Fast Attack and 3 Heavy Support within the points set for a game.

Thats the same in all Dexs,
certain Characters can change some squads into different choices, ie Big Mek makes up to one Deffdread (normally Heavy Support) count as a Troop choice etc but the basic Organization Chart stays the same.

Hope that helps.


----------



## Treesnifer (Jun 13, 2010)

Baron Spikey said:


> The compulsory choices are 1 HQ & 2 TROOPS- you have to have these for an army to be legal.
> 
> Then you can add another HQ, 4 more TROOPS, 3 ELITES, 3 FAST ATTACK, and 3 HEAVY SUPPORT to your army to have a completely filled FOC.





Daniel Harper said:


> So the standard chart is 2x HQ, 6x Troop, 3x Elite, 3x Fast Attack, 3x Heavy Support. Out of these an army must consist of 1 HQ and 2 Troop. Every army follows this list when playing in standard games, however some armies have rules such as Imperial Guard being able to take tanks in squadrons so 1 heavy support can be 3 tanks.


Excellent!! This is what my mistake was, and now that you've pointed this out...I feel rather foolish. :blush: I did not read the options as a complete list, but instead as three different suggestions of play. Hence my confusion, seeing the last list of options that allow for 3 Fast Attack and 3 Support as a stand alone detachment and no HQ present.

Thank you very much! :clapping:


----------



## ROT (Jun 25, 2010)

Yeah, I can see why you've made that mistake; they're in two boxes, but just remember that the 2 boxes aren't different options entirely; Just the 2nd box is an extension to the first.


----------



## Daniel Harper (May 25, 2008)

Don't feel bad mate, everyone has trouble with one rule or another. Just glad to help.


----------



## Hellados (Sep 16, 2009)

me and mine got the rule on tech priests muddled, none of us noticed the change from something like 'unit must be in contect at start of turn' to 'tech priest must be in contect with tank at start of shooting phase 

completely changes the usefullness of the unit


----------



## SGMAlice (Aug 13, 2010)

FOC blows dead donkeys in hell  Seriously though: No FOC and Epically Huge Scale battles = Apocalypse. Much More Fun 
Play Apocalypse!! :grin:

SGMAlice


----------



## Azezel (May 23, 2010)

SGMAlice said:


> Play Apocalypse!! :grin:


Or, better yet - don't.

At least, not until you are comfortable with the game that most people play and the game you will almost certainly be playing if you roll up at a shop looking for a pick-up game.

Baby steps.


----------



## SGMAlice (Aug 13, 2010)

Azezel said:


> Or, better yet - don't.
> 
> At least, not until you are comfortable with the game that most people play and the game you will almost certainly be playing if you roll up at a shop looking for a pick-up game.
> 
> Baby steps.


Boooooring!!! 
But true none the less, Apocalypse is for those who have been into the game for a while and those that have the space and/or time.

SGMAlice


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

Now that we've sorted that out - to hijack slightly:

Does anyone regularly break the FOC? Obviously not in tournaments or pick-up games, but against someone you play a lot?

I've always stuck to it hard and fast, but since I've been playing the same person for a few weeks now, I recently suggested that we could have an extra "slot" for our armies. I chose an extra HQ because I can't fit Vect, The Baron and Haemonculi in my 2k list without detachments, and he would like to have 4 Reaver jetbike squads in 2k, so has an extra FA slot.

Given that neither of us are trying to "power game" much, would you be happy if I fielded it against you? Or would you demand I followed the chart (and you're well within your rights to do so of course)? Have you ever altered the chart yourself? Did it change the shape of the battles at all?


----------



## Treesnifer (Jun 13, 2010)

Shoot! I'd run with it. I could see doing that in a scenario, but we've done that in Epic SM as well. Our Eldar player HATED the Eldar company cards (something about guardians not being as good a x, y, or z) - we allowed him to make up his own. Needless to say, it was rather interesting to face companies made up of a detachment of Wave Serpents with Banshee, War Walkers, and Falcon Tanks. In the end, all it did was make it difficult to get points out of him since you weren't ever sure what the break point of his company was.

Here in 40K, I think it'd amount to the same thing. Just think if you had your 3 HQs, say having a conference at their bunker, and got caught by an elite deep strike force or a raid of opportunity by a force of skimmers. One of the things I like with the 40K scale is the ability to make a story out of the battles...in Epic SM the battles became very repetitive, even after the siege rules came out.


----------



## SGMAlice (Aug 13, 2010)

When I do play 'Nilla 40k with a few friends, we have been known to add another slot or two to it. Usually by D6'ing it:

1-2=Troops
3-4=Fast Attack
5=Elite
6=Heavy Support

It seems to make no difference, at least in my experience.
Its just another Unit on the battlefield which evens out with the 'Other' unit on the battlefield.

SGMAlice


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Sethis said:


> Now that we've sorted that out - to hijack slightly:
> 
> Does anyone regularly break the FOC? Obviously not in tournaments or pick-up games, but against someone you play a lot?


My group does on occasion when we're playing more background-based games. Last time was a 4,000 point-per-side affair with 2,000 points each of Blood Angels and Black Templars against 4,000 points of Tyranids (the idea was that the battle would be one of those being fought against Hive Fleet Leviathan in the Baal system). We allowed everyone to take a normal FOC plus a single extra HQ choice to allow for a General-like HQ. The objective was to use your General to kill the other side's. Pretty fun stuff.


----------



## Agemo (Jan 14, 2010)

A couple of times in low point doubles (pick up games), we've had the two teammates share a FOC chart between them. This has potential to break stuff, but like somebody mentioned above, we're not really power gaming


----------



## Azezel (May 23, 2010)

Sometimes in doubles games we let allies from different codices share a chart. Fr'ex the last time My Sisters fought alongside the Grey Knights the GK player and I shared a chart. He didn't want to bring an HQ since it's hard to get a good force of GK in 1'000 points.

It's a little bit exploitative, but no-one objected and I think it's actually against the law to accuse a pure Grey Knights player of power-gaming.


----------



## jfvz (Oct 23, 2010)

Sethis said:


> Now that we've sorted that out - to hijack slightly:
> 
> Does anyone regularly break the FOC? Obviously not in tournaments or pick-up games, but against someone you play a lot?


I dont think i would mind, ild probally want an extra heavy support choice though. I generally just use the FOC as a seed to grow my lists around.


----------

