AgentP Posted June 18, 2015 Report Share Posted June 18, 2015 That's why I limited it to to jump packs and excluded terminators Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huggies01 Posted June 18, 2015 Report Share Posted June 18, 2015 Yup should have read that. Whoopsies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indytims Posted June 18, 2015 Report Share Posted June 18, 2015 I don't particularly care for the 2d6 for charge range. GW loves it's 'randomosity' crap, but that's one that is just annoying. I also don't like the "target closest model" aspect of shooting. In 6th - didn't we allocate wounds as equally as possible to the whole squad, and not just start rolling saves on the nearest models first? Maybe I am mixing editions. But taking your one guy with the best save with invuln and re-rolls and putting him in the front to soak fire is just meh to me - as if that one model has some sort of magical super-magnet that directed ALL fire to him 'just until he dies'. I know in the past I've read where people say it's "more realistic", but honestly, I don't agree with that. I hate the allies matrix with a passion. To me, allies should be limited to narrative/scenario-based games. The idea of Tyranids teaming with -anyone- just doesn't make sense to me. Yeah, I've read 'scenarios' on Dakka where it 'would make sense', but... they really don't. Eldar and orcs? And of course allies allows all sorts of different flavors of cheese. If you're going to have an 'allies matrix', the 'downside' for allying should be much more harsh. And for sure, allies shouldn't be able to hitch a ride in ally transports, etc. If you're going to go this route, just get rid of army lists altogether and let people pick anything they want. Rules for GCs... I honestly don't feel GCs have a place in the 40K game. In Apoc? Ok, I get it. But bringing models that take up THAT much of the table is just silly to me. Not real fond of Super Heavies, either. I am sure there are other things, but I can't think of them while in work-mode. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steel Angel Posted June 18, 2015 Report Share Posted June 18, 2015 Could worst in 4th you need a LD test to target anything other than closest unit. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chappy Posted June 18, 2015 Report Share Posted June 18, 2015 Assault out of stationary or destroyed vehicles. This needs to be brought back. Random charge range sucks too. 6" charge was just fine. All of my other dislikes fall in line with Bronson's post. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugarlessllama Posted June 18, 2015 Report Share Posted June 18, 2015 Yeah, I would love to be able to assault out of a Rhino if it were stationary. That would be neat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestRider Posted June 18, 2015 Report Share Posted June 18, 2015 3. GCs and super heavies -- blessings/maledictions should cost more to affect them I was going to say just slap Adamantium Will on them all. But that doesn't effect Blessings, which is probably the bigger issue. Anyhow: - Random Wound Allocation - There are a number of ways to fix it, but the balance between MCs and Walkers in particular is way off - No Charging from Stationary Vehicles - No Charging when arriving from regular Reserves. I can see why not Charging from Outflank and (particularly) Deep Strike are general Rules, but your guys who are just straight up held back as Reserves should be able to get stuck in as soon as they show up. - The Assault Pile-in system. Takes too long, just go back to Defender Reacts and an End of Combat Pile-In - How harsh failing Morale is on non-ATSKNF Units. Go back to no further movement in the Movement Phase and count as having moved for firing Heavy/Salvo Weapons. - I know it fits the name, but making ATSKNF Units immune to Fear pretty much completely nerfs Fear. Give 'em a re-roll or something. - Preferred Enemy should also affect 1s on rolls to penetrate Armour - Sniper Weapons need some buffs. Twin-Linked and Shred, maybe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugarlessllama Posted June 18, 2015 Report Share Posted June 18, 2015 I like ATSKNF as is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 18, 2015 Report Share Posted June 18, 2015 6. All fear checks should be made on 3d6. Love all of them save this guy. Given that almost everything is immune to fear, making fear more potent to the few units that actually test seems unreasonable. Also think that like snap fire, a failed fear test should subtract WS, not move it to a fixed WS. I really don't like GW's push of status effects which apply fixed attributes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted June 18, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 18, 2015 I would love the opportunity to react to assaults similar to fantasy. Choosing to fall back a randomly rolled distance or stand and fight with over watch would be great. We're almost there with overwatch! Fleeing should be an option. Count as failing morale and move d6" If they still can reach you, you are wiped per sweeping advance. Fleeing should be declared after charge is declared but before distance roll. Get rid of the inability for a unit to assault in the following turn, who is embarked in a "non assault" transport, that is destroyed during the enemy turn. Obviously they have not gotten pinned or failed a morale test. Agree with this. 1. Flying MCs and inability to assault the turn they switch modes. 2. GCs getting cover like MCs. I disagree though that MCs should get cover like vehicles. It should represent an MCs ability to manuver and shift on the fly which a vehicle doesn't have. 3. GCs and super heavies -- blessings/maledictions should cost more to affect them 4. Swooping MCs getting cover like infantry. 5. Sky shield landing pad rules. They suck for so many reasons. Ditch the inv and make them a building instead of an indestructible block of stupid. 1. I don't have a problem with this as long as there is a consistency between it and transport assaults and the like. 2. I agree, though I go further and wish MCs didn't either. 3. Would be interesting. Not sure how to implement. 4. Yeah, just say they can't get cover from area terrain or intervening terrain. Simple. 5. Yeah, this thing is really poorly thought out. Guess range...bring it back ! I was REALLY good at guess range, but, if they do that, then all blasts need to be bigger. Not going to happen though. :P 1. Should be able to assault from infiltrate on first turn. 2. Should be able to assault from an outflank move onto the board. 3. Should be able to assault from a deep strike arrival via a jump pack (but not from a teleport / summon / gate). 4. Any unit should able to declare this turn, that they will be skyfiring next turn. When that next turn arrives, they are at full ballistic skill for shooting at fliers, but snap shooting at anything else. 5. Perils should be much much scarier 6. All fear checks should be made on 3d6 7. A unit should fight at initiative step 1 only if the majority of the unit charged through cover, not just one model. 8. Who controls an objective should be determined by comparing the point values of the models within 3" of the objective (crazy you can contest an objective with 1 model against an entire unit). 9. Allies should never be allowed to use each other's transports 10. Random game length should die the death it deserves. Worst rule ever. 1. Nah, I like the no assaulting from reserves thing, I don't like the things that are allowing it. 2. Same 3. Same 4. I like this. 5. Yes 6. NO! GOD NO! My Orks already have a hard enough time against GCs and Super Heavies. 7. I like this. 8. Would be too much bookkeeping IMO. And, besides, I like the cinematic nature of it. Forge the God-Damned Narrative! 9. Yeah, I hated that we couldn't in 6th, now I think it's dumb in 7th. Give like a few minor exceptions, maybe just ICs. 10. HELL NO. Random Game Length is good because knowing without a doubt when the game will end favors certain playstyles that I find boring. - Random Wound Allocation - There are a number of ways to fix it, but the balance between MCs and Walkers in particular is way off - No Charging from Stationary Vehicles - No Charging when arriving from regular Reserves. I can see why not Charging from Outflank and (particularly) Deep Strike are general Rules, but your guys who are just straight up held back as Reserves should be able to get stuck in as soon as they show up. - The Assault Pile-in system. Takes too long, just go back to Defender Reacts and an End of Combat Pile-In - How harsh failing Morale is on non-ATSKNF Units. Go back to no further movement in the Movement Phase and count as having moved for firing Heavy/Salvo Weapons. - I know it fits the name, but making ATSKNF Units immune to Fear pretty much completely nerfs Fear. Give 'em a re-roll or something. - Preferred Enemy should also affect 1s on rolls to penetrate Armour - Sniper Weapons need some buffs. Twin-Linked and Shred, maybe? 1. Yeah, terrible, though, I typically ignore it. 2. It's gotten better with smash vs the 2d6 pen and the damage chart being altered. I'm not sure what else should be done. 3. I can see this. 4. I agree with this too, was a core element of my Ork strategy that has gone away. :( 5. as I said, I agree. 6. I'm ok with how it is now, honestly. 7. I agree with this. 8. yes 9. Yes. Though, not sure on that, I'd say they should get ignore cover and always be AP2. Then stay at regular BS and 4+ wounding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbusePuppy Posted June 19, 2015 Report Share Posted June 19, 2015 Man combat takes way too long with all of these pile-ins and special rules and things to do. Let's add in charge reactions so there's another step in every fight! You guys amuse me sometimes. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted June 19, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2015 You guys amuse me sometimes. LOL, I appreciate the irony, but if I can AVOID the combat entirely then it should be less time, yes? There's already a pre assault step: overwatch. Basically, go back to 5th ed style in assault movement (defender react, pile in at the end) but keep overwatch and add flee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hanaur Posted June 19, 2015 Report Share Posted June 19, 2015 Psyker Phase: I feel the chart should eat you on a 1. I also think there should be a maximum amount of dice usable per round, like 12 or something. Shooting: Snap Firing is fine but the whole thing with Templates not being able to snap fire mystifies me. Blasts I could kind of see but Templates? Assault: AP on melee weapons is just too annoying. I've disliked that since day one that it started. General: The "one model in a unit" thing annoys. Making an artillery unit relentless because one dude has Megaarmour? One dude knows how to sneak around and this magically confers stealth on a unit? Incongruities, while fun to come up with ways to abuse it, don't make a lot of sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathanvoodoo Posted June 19, 2015 Report Share Posted June 19, 2015 Meh. It's all a game. Some of it is dumb, but I have fun either way. One thing I really think is stupid is folks other than Space Marines riding in drop pods. I mean WTF? Isn't the G force supposed to be crushing to the normal Joe. It's just dumb. I can see a rhino being loaded up with a bunch of Guardsmen or , and Landraider full of Skitarii, but Drop pods are for Marines. It's a thing. Also... I'm always slightly pissed that drop pods have guns and shoot as well as marines!?! Who's shooting that thing? Dumb. Most servitors are pretty bogus on their BS- and certainly not SM caliber. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted June 19, 2015 Report Share Posted June 19, 2015 Sisters have used drop pods going back to second or third. Used to have their own short drop pod, Dominica pattern. Smaller people means more padding. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathanvoodoo Posted June 19, 2015 Report Share Posted June 19, 2015 My jokes are lost. I tried. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steel Angel Posted June 19, 2015 Report Share Posted June 19, 2015 they must have been using Apple Maps app. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sorienor Posted June 19, 2015 Report Share Posted June 19, 2015 Flying MC's should have a limited firing arc 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 19, 2015 Report Share Posted June 19, 2015 LOL, I appreciate the irony, but if I can AVOID the combat entirely then it should be less time, yes? There's already a pre assault step: overwatch. Basically, go back to 5th ed style in assault movement (defender react, pile in at the end) but keep overwatch and add flee. Or better yet, a "suicide pact" option, where your infantry opt to kill themselves instead of firing overwatch.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 19, 2015 Report Share Posted June 19, 2015 A bonus to BS against immobile targets. I can't believe that rolling to hit a moving target and one that just sits there is the same thing. I would also, really like 40k to remove the limitation on firing on friendly units. You should totally be able to wreck your own vehicles, flamer your own troops if they get in the way, and fire blast weapons really close to your tank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfestedKerrigan Posted June 19, 2015 Report Share Posted June 19, 2015 I hate that players abusing Black Templars ability to run Twin Heavies on Termies and Heavy/Special on 5 man Squads with Razorbacks after Codex Marines lost it changed up how GW handled Templar in subsequent editions. And [big bad swear word] them for taking away rolling combats. Sheep [big bad swear word]ers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted June 19, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2015 A bonus to BS against immobile targets. I can't believe that rolling to hit a moving target and one that just sits there is the same thing. Agreed! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.