I'm bored at work, so I thought I would make a thread. Here's a few from me:

1.) In the fiction Bolter munitions are always described as being "case-less" however a lot of the figures show casings.

2.) A Rapid Fire weapon does not fire twice at half its distance. (i.e. 24" = 2x 12", 18" = 2x 9")

That is all.

Rapid Fire used to work like that. That's one of the big changes that came to 5th edition 40K. It still trips me up sometimes when I use my Sternguard Vets.

What gets under my skin is how Feel No Pain gets handed out like Halloween candy.

You can't shoot into a melee that contains one of your own men. Even if it is a hundred against one, you still can't do it. Seems kind of silly to me.

1) The fact that loyalist Marines are the most common armies on the tabletop, yet the smallest faction in the fluff. Such a great concept, ruined by the fact that almost every 12 year old plays them. The fact that said 12 year-olds also happen to play Ultramarines with Marneus Calgar in a Land Raider doesn't help. Because of this they now have a really bad stigma attached, which can ruin the fun for a lot of their players. Not good.

2) The fact ID weapons still have to roll to wound. If you've been hit in the face with a plasma rifle, you're not going to survive!

3)SPEHSS WULFS!!!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, and 4) being swept. A single Terminator deals a single wound to a 40-man blob and doesn't die afterwards. He then somehow manages to wipe 39 men off the table, in the space of time it would usually take him to shoot twice with his Stormbolter. Why?

How the ultra marines never loose in the fluff, tyranid invasion....ork waaagh.....they get apparently get through everything but "they take heavy losses" and they can STILL kill anything, I just want to see them killed

This edition: Sweeping Advance, Rapid Fire not being 1/2 of original range, and the S values for an exploding vehicle (S4 Ap- if you're inside a vehicle reduced to a crater? OMGWTFBBQ!1!).

Overall: I dislike the unbalanced nature of the codexes, and that large Torunaments are always 2K pts. Why not 500 or 1K instead, to force new list ideas other then "Carpool/Drop Pod Marines" or "Tanks Galore" for IG or some such...

darkPrince010 wrote:This edition: Sweeping Advance, Rapid Fire not being 1/2 of original range, and the S values for an exploding vehicle (S4 Ap- if you're inside a vehicle reduced to a crater? OMGWTFBBQ!1!).

Overall: I dislike the unbalanced nature of the codexes, and that large Torunaments are always 2K pts. Why not 500 or 1K instead, to force new list ideas other then "Carpool/Drop Pod Marines" or "Tanks Galore" for IG or some such...

Regarding the size of lists:

I believe the intent was to not only force the purchase of models for their tournaments, but to also allow flexibility in the effectiveness of army lists. A lot of armies do not even begin to stand a chance at 1000pts or less.

-J.

Here are my fluff complaints.

1. The Black Legion, no matter the circumstance, is never allowed to get a major, permanent victory. (Throw these poor guys a bone)
2. Ultramarines, no matter the circumstance, are never allowed to get a major, permanent defeat. (Stop throwing these guys bones)
3. The fact that every Space Wolf item, event, rank or base has to include to word Wolf (or a related term, like Fang).
4. Draigo; incase you haven't read the Grey Knights codex, this guy is a living "SCREW YOU" to every Chaos and Chaos Space Marine player, courtesy of Matt Ward.

Jimsolo wrote:You can't shoot into a melee that contains one of your own men. Even if it is a hundred against one, you still can't do it. Seems kind of silly to me.

Hehe, this would be a fantastic change! I'm pretty sure Chenkov would have absolutely no gripes about tarpitting something shiny and expensive with a blob of disposable guardsmen, moving his big guns into LOS then dumping enough live ordnance on the spot to ensure there's nothing left bigger than a matchbox.

Also far too many units are fearless and therefore immune to pinning and far too many have FNP as previously mentioned.

Half of the codexes are for Marines. Half are not.

Also, internet loudmouths. While this isn't necessarily a 40k issue, 40k does have them.

@Alazahr: I agree, and while I understand some armies need supporting units (Tau FW and pathfinders, Nid Guard, etc), I think that if the game isn't balanced at half the size, what makes it balanced at the full size? I can play chess against someone with only pawns and rooks, and it's a balanced game (Not trying to say W40K = Chess in every regard, but hopefully you understand my thoughts here)

The unexistance of plastic Ogryns and Commisars.

The main rulebook not containing a section dedicated to fast transports and all what its "precious cargo" can do.

Oh, and 4) being swept. A single Terminator deals a single wound to a 40-man blob and doesn't die afterwards. He then somehow manages to wipe 39 men off the table, in the space of time it would usually take him to shoot twice with his Stormbolter. Why?

But terminators can't sweeping advance
I do agree with your point, it's very quite strange, it would take him 20 rounds of assault to kill them all and he does it in one, as he "shoots them as they run".

My biggest gripe is newer codexes, seriously an eldar pheonix lord has the same WS and I as an archon, a pirate leader is as competent a fighter as the very first ever aspect warrior, sorry but i don't think so, in fluff Maugan ra stopped an entire tyranid hive fleet, by himself!!! I'd like to see an archon do that.
And yes FnP is given out way too readily, pretty soon it'll be:

Ork boy
6+ armour
Toughhide - Orks are naturally tough so have the Feel No Pain special rule.

Space Marine
3+ armour
Ultramarine - Ultramarines are great, so have the Feel No Pain special rule

DarknessEternal wrote:Half of the codexes are for Marines. Half are not.

+1!

Too many marines! Give the xenos some more love.

The vehicle rules. All of them. They're super-dumbed down and don't make any fething sense.

Why does Mr. Right Sponson Gunner have to sit pretty and not shoot anything because he can't see Mr. Left Sponson Gunner's target?

Vehicle rules have sucked in every edition of 40K since 3rd. Yes, they were clunky and overcomplicated in 2nd, and having a separate datasheet for every Bike or Jetbike in a unit was unwieldy and stupid, but God-damn it they were fun!

+1 Stupid vehicle rules. My tank can't move 12" AND fire because that kind of power would lead to another Heresy.

And the stupidness of the fluff in certain newer books. Grey Knights and Blood Angels, I'm looking at you.

The fact that if i move 12 inches in a transport my guys cant shoot out of fire points as the vehicle is moving to fast but are allowed to jump out then shoot. somehow the tank slowed down enough for them to bail out before shooting.

1. Codex Marines not getting Bolt pistols, bolters and a CCW.

2. Rapid fire bolters. Just give em 18" assualt 2.

3. No splitting fire. C'mon, really? I have a meltagun in that squad, who's in 6" of that nice juicy vehicle. But for some reason, peer pressure gets to him, so he wastes that shot on some Ork boy. Same goes for vehicles.

4. The number of marines. If you picked up Marines thinking, 'Awesome, just like in Heinlein's book!' you are perfectly excused. If you read a BL book and said, 'Man, I want a pre-Heresy Thousand Sons army!', go right ahead. But I think that every Astartes army could just be rolled into 1 book, with some special characters that unlock units and special rules to make your marines more bloody or more wolfy or more darky or more templary.

5. Shooting from vehicles. So, apparently the suspension in the 41st millenium is so bad that moving 12" jostles my 8' tall demi-gods around so much that they can't fire from the vehicle. They can, however, roll right out of one of the hatches and fire perfectly fine.

LoneLictor wrote:4. Draigo; incase you haven't read the Grey Knights codex, this guy is a living "SCREW YOU" to every Chaos and Chaos Space Marine player, courtesy of Matt Ward.

This right here is why I stopped playing 40K; the game isn't even a game anymore, it's just "Insult the dudes who AREN'T imperials, we get more money that way". Space Marines get fourty codexes in the time it takes the Dark Eldar to get one, and the rules are completely skewed in Space Marine Favor....

I agree with everyone of these things. Except the plastic Ogryns/commisars, but only cause i don't collect guard.

And some armies really suck at lower than 2k. Necrons have 1 (viable) list at 500, 20 warriors and lord with res orb. A bit higher and maybe you can add a few units. woopdy-******-doo

Damaging vehicles. It just blows. This literally happened in a game the other day:

My brother: "so I just rolled a 4 against your predator, what is that?"
Me: "immoblized"
Bro: "awesome, so it can't shoot anymore?"
Me: "nope, I can shoot all my guns next turn, and they can swivel too"
Bro: "now how does that work?"
Me: "beats me. Oh look my immoblized pred just put a lascannon through your zoanthropes face. Sucks"

Also, there need to be more modifiers to the damage table. Because even though it was just a glance, my opponent always rolls a 6. So my tank is immobilized because you glanced it?

Wouldn't it be more interesting if the vehicle damage table was based on 2d6 instead of 1d6?

I have a feeling it's a topic that's been discussed to death in Proposed Rules however.

The built in bias towards marines irks me.

The marines codexes being half the available forces is irritating.

The tournaments where the same netlist for the same army show up in all three games, due to lack of internal balance and the prevalence of no brainer uber units in certain (*cough* mostly marine *cough* ) codexes.
I'm not kidding on this one. I played exactly the same list on the same table 3 games in a row. The only difference was the rules arguments and the face of the player opposite.

Black Library fluff. They really REALLY need to read the existing fluff sometimes. Let the IOM lose heroically (if you must) sometimes, for gods sake, or write from a non-human perspective.


Also the plot armour on Marines in General and the Gray Knights in particular. There isn't a single loss in their timeline, as far as I remember, and Draigo is a touch much, even for Ward's Marineophilia...


Above all the assumption by the hordes of IOM fanboys (GW writers included) that whatever an alien race can do Humanity is or was automatically better at, despite the lack of any prior fluff proof (beyond a mention that humanity had better tech in the Golden Age than the bolt-on boxes it uses now.. )

Ascalam wrote:The built in bias towards marines irks me.

The marines codexes being half the available forces is irritating.

The tournaments where the same netlist for the same army show up in all three games, due to lack of internal balance and the prevalence of no brainer uber units in certain (*cough* mostly marine *cough* ) codexes.
I'm not kidding on this one. I played exactly the same list on the same table 3 games in a row. The only difference was the rules arguments and the face of the player opposite.

Black Library fluff. They really REALLY need to read the existing fluff sometimes. Let the IOM lose heroically (if you must) sometimes, for gods sake, or write from a non-human perspective.


Also the plot armour on Marines in General and the Gray Knights in particular. There isn't a single loss in their timeline, as far as I remember, and Draigo is a touch much, even for Ward's Marineophilia...


Above all the assumption by some folk that whatever an alien race can do Humanity is or was automatically better at, despite the lack of any fluff proof (beyond a mention that humanity had better tech in the Golden Age.

It irks alot of people i do beleive.

Biel-tan and Saim-hann differ greatly in their tactics and fighting style, but they're stuck in the same codex
Night Lords and Word Bearers differ differ greatly in their tactics and fighting style, but they're stuck in the same codex

I don't think it's ever going to change however, as GW has a raging hard on for anything IoM

As one guy i work with is far too overfond of quoting (at least i assume it's a quote)


' God has a hard-on for Marines ! '

Maybe that explains why the Emperor created so many little boytoys in big shoulderpads

If he said it, you can quote it (you could even quote that!)

It all makes sense now

darkPrince010 wrote:This edition: Sweeping Advance, Rapid Fire not being 1/2 of original range, and the S values for an exploding vehicle (S4 Ap- if you're inside a vehicle reduced to a crater? OMGWTFBBQ!1!).

Yeh and S3 outside the vehicle because shrapnel doesn't exist or is covered in bubble wrap in the far future...

Sweeping advance negating WBB, when normally a mob of grotz with rocks would have no chance of running down and destroying a Necron Warriior unit

The current rules for combat resolution.

PraetorDave wrote:

Also, there need to be more modifiers to the damage table. Because even though it was just a glance, my opponent always rolls a 6. So my tank is immobilized because you glanced it?

Yes, because a 'glance' can be that lucky shot that i took where i broke a link in your tracks (or some stupid design for the floaty controller thingy if you are a race that has grav or "floaty tanks")


Assaulting out of vehicles... if im running my marine army, seriously.. i just dropped from space in a tin can, and the flower petal doors just opened, but all we can do is groggily stumble out a couple inches and shoot at something?? should be assault ramps on drop pods.

Nids... seriously, at this point in their evolution they still use weak hormagaunts and termagants?? they havent evolved themselves a tad bit more strength or WS, or BS.. or anything? i mean seriously, if a unit of 30 gaunts gets into assault with 30 ork boyz, 25 should die on both sides.. they are supposed to be CC monsters, not expensive grots. Also, why nerf the Carnifex 'squadron'?? seriously, every other army in 40k that has a unit which can be taken in a squadron can have options.. but the fex has to be 3 of the SAME EXACT thing???

Umm, I'm still new to 40k so I want to ask,
I keep hearing stories about Matt Ward and how he can basically go *beep* himself. What has he done that's so bad? Does he truely deserve all the hate? Or is it just a dude didn't like what he did with something and everyone is now on the hate Matt Ward band wagon. Not defending the guy, I honestly don't know ^^

Also, I play Chaos and I keep hearing that grey knights just get a "iwin" button against my army. What actually do they get that allows them to be awesome? Not played them yet (hell, I've yet to play a game AS chaos) and I've neglected to glance the grey knights codec to see why

I know this isn't the place for the questions, but I've seen these points come up in this thread

But, back on track, being new, the only things that bothered me was;
Not being able to use rapid fire before assaulting. Umm, the guns are rapid fire. Not like you really need to aim. Just run forward towards the enemy and hold fire, you're bound to hit SOMETHING. Although, I guess it makes sense to some degree, otherwise there wouldn't be a need for assault/pistols weapons (unless the guns itself is awesome enough to want them over your standard rapid fire buttons)

Oh, and the fact that Rapid Fire double shot range is 12“ without fail. Hated this about Tau. Surely if my gun range is bigger then most rapid fire weapons it should have a further double shot range...
Oh, and the fact that moving has no effect on double tap range its always two shots within 12" even if you moved.
Also the fact there's a clear defined line between moving, then in the shooting phrase not being able to shoot or firing two shots. Hate to play a game where I'm 1/12th of an inch off double fire range and I give up my shooting on that unit xP

But yeah, like I said, this is things I hate from a newb perceptive. I might learn to love these rules and learn to hate others x3

MittinsKittens wrote:Umm, I'm still new to 40k so I want to ask,
I keep hearing stories about Matt Ward and how he can basically go *beep* himself. What has he done that's so bad? Does he truely deserve all the hate? Or is it just a dude didn't like what he did with something and everyone is now on the hate Matt Ward band wagon. Not defending the guy, I honestly don't know ^^

Matt Ward writes codices (yes that is the proper plural form of codex). AFAIK, he has currently written Codex: space marines and Codex: grey knights. He is known for completely blowing out of proportion fluff, and for making an army completely unbalanced. He has a tendency to make an army that was "good" before, into "OMG I'm a beast, I own everyone while blindfolded with both arms tied behind my back". For instance, in the C:SM book, the Ultramarines don't lose a single fight. Not one. Ever. I will say however, he does write his rules well, and they usually require very little explanation or FAQ.

MittinsKittens wrote:Also, I play Chaos and I keep hearing that grey knights just get a "iwin" button against my army. What actually do they get that allows them to be awesome? Not played them yet (hell, I've yet to play a game AS chaos) and I've neglected to glance the grey knights codec to see why

Are you playing Chaos space marines or straight Chaos? Grey Knights fluff wise are built to hunt down demons and only demons. Before they were Codex: grey knights, they were Codex: demon hunters. They have multiple things that will screw up deep strike, and special weapons that do extra damage to demons. They also (I believe) have the ability to make demons reroll their invuln saves, but I think this is a psychic power (someone correct me if I'm wrong). Overall, grey knights are geared towards beating Chaos demons, so I have heard its a difficult fight for demons to win. I haven't seen a game of demons vs GK, so I can't say if this is actually true.

Tau, eldar.

Stupid ork "latent psychic powers".

Lame chaos gods and daemons fluff.

Fluff in general.

People that whine on and on about how GW loves marines/the Imperium and hates xenos. They do lots of marine stuff because they are popular and sell well. They are popular and sell well because they are fairly well-designed, combining the relatability of the "good guy humans" with the awesome badassery usually reserved for non-human/non-good guy factions. People act like everyone at GW HQ is super into the fluff and emotionally vested in making marines look good. When people stop buying marines and start buying Eldar, then you'll start seeing Codex: Ulthwe and Codex: Exodites.

Also, Matt Ward hate. Yes, he's bad at writing background. No, that doesn't mean he's a space marine fanatic who refuses to let his fictional space men lose in a fictional battle. It means he can't write believable background, nothing more. I would also point out that despite their silly fluff, Ward's 3 recent Marine codexes are all a hell of a lot more balanced and, dare I say, fluff-appropriate than Kelly's Wolves. BA and GK may have some ott options, but both are at the end of the day fairly well balanced internally and externally compared to stuff like Kelly's SW (some crap units no one takes, conveniently balanced by hilariously underpriced cheap units that everyone takes), or Cruddace's IG (again, useless units balanced out by units so good that it can't possibly have been missed in testing), or Tyranids (useless units balanced out by... other, expensive but useable units.) Also consider the fact that most competitive GK, BA, or SM armies look fairly-fluff appropriate in terms of composition, while competitive Wolf or IG lists focus on units that in fluff-reality should be fairly rare.

the color purple wrote:People that whine on and on about how GW loves marines/the Imperium and hates xenos. They do lots of marine stuff because they are popular and sell well. They are popular and sell well because they are fairly well-designed, combining the relatability of the "good guy humans" with the awesome badassery usually reserved for non-human/non-good guy factions. People act like everyone at GW HQ is super into the fluff and emotionally vested in making marines look good. When people stop buying marines and start buying Eldar, then you'll start seeing Codex: Ulthwe and Codex: Exodites.

If you think about it, it's a self perpetuating circle. The marines sell well, so they get more attention. And since they get more attention, they sell even better.

bombboy1252 wrote:How the ultra marines never loose in the fluff, tyranid invasion....ork waaagh.....they get apparently get through everything but "they take heavy losses" and they can STILL kill anything, I just want to see them killed

Actually if you read iron warriors they attack a space vessel with a dp guarded by ultramarines and guard, curbstop them, capture the ven dred leading the smurfs and make it get possessed by the dp and are on their way to attack ultramar

the best part in that novel was when the secondary commander of the ultras was like "its time to die traitor"
Iron warrior: "think again" *melta to the face*

And Dragio is pure bs fluff everything else is quasi feasible but the ironic this is that everything he does is futile as all his damage is erased

Oh, thanks for the replies people

I'm Chaos Space Marines, I keep forgetting that there's a Chaos Daemon codex. Thank god its not against me
Still, that does sound a little unfair...

And Matt Ward doesn't sound THAT bad then, just sounds like he drops the ball with the fluff stuff. Least it isn't in the rule sections
Rather have dodgy fluff then dodgy rules

MittinsKittens wrote:Oh, thanks for the replies people

I'm Chaos Space Marines, I keep forgetting that there's a Chaos Daemon codex. Thank god its not against me
Still, that does sound a little unfair...

And Matt Ward doesn't sound THAT bad then, just sounds like he drops the ball with the fluff stuff. Least it isn't in the rule sections
Rather have dodgy fluff then dodgy y rules

He's been blown out of proportion and his rules are mostly fine (if a lttle over-powered/complicated), but he's added some real abominations to the fluff, such as Draigo (who alone curbstomps a Deamon Primarch and all his greater deamon bodyguards, before carving his master's name on it's HEART and going on a rampage in the Warp).
5) vehicles. They should at least blow up at strength 5 and have some AP, even APd6 would be good. They need a more realisitc, possibly 2d6 damage table, and they should be able to fire all weapons on the move.
6) Being unable to split fire. As people have said, if Johnny wants to shoot a Terminator in the face with a plasma gun, why doesn't he ignore that Ralph is shooting a Rhino? It doesn't make any sense.

I totally forgot to mention how fething lame fire points are. Specifically pertaining to IG's mobile bunker (AKA Chimera). It's not the Chimera and its 5 fire points that's broken... No, it's the fire points rules. The simplest fix to this... Vehicles with fire points must remain stationary for the embarked unit to fire out of the fire points. Bam... Fixed!

Wow, lots of people wanting to buff vehicles. That seems very strange to me. Vehicles are already a bit OP in 5th. Why make them better? Do we want an all vehicle game?

oni wrote:Rapid Fire used to work like that. That's one of the big changes that came to 5th edition 40K. It still trips me up sometimes when I use my Sternguard Vets.

darkPrince010 wrote:This edition: Sweeping Advance, Rapid Fire not being 1/2 of original range, and the S values for an exploding vehicle (S4 Ap- if you're inside a vehicle reduced to a crater? OMGWTFBBQ!1!).

Rapid fire has been 2 shots at 12" since 3rd edition. And, before that, it wasn't a property of the gun, but of the model.

It has NEVER been 2 shots at half distance.

Grakmar wrote:Wow, lots of people wanting to buff vehicles. That seems very strange to me. Vehicles are already a bit OP in 5th. Why make them better? Do we want an all vehicle game?

I don't think it's that people want to buff vehicles necessarily, it's that people want to vehicles to work more appropriately (which would include some nerfs as well). I'd like to see them faster and able to actually utilize their firepower on the move (which is the whole purpose of building a tank and not a pillbox), but at the same time, I think disembarking under fire should be riskier, using fire points should have some risk of taking fire in return, being in a transport that gets penetrated should be potentially dangerous (perhaps a "hits passengers" result on the damage table), and, particularly, being in an exploding vehicle should be punishing.

I also think that there should be an attacker/defender split in at least half of the rulebook missions, like what FoW does, with infantry-heavy forces automatically becoming defender against vehicle-heavy forces. That, plus allowing units with different weapons to fire each group of weapons at a different target, would I think make tanks alot more fun to use while at the same time making foot infantry more viable against them.

I can see that codex:space marines is getting a lot of hate here and may I ask why? The codex it self is really balanced (in my opinion) and the fluff is good. The new space marine codexes (blood angels, space wolfs...) are just copies from the codex astartes book and gain all the fun stuff. For example: we are blood angels so we get big mini thunderhawks and you dont. Well the grey knights have them so why dont we? They also have the most stupid unit ever... damn flying dreadnoughts and elite chaplains, plus some damn super chaplains that own everybody, so why all the hate? Codex: space marine has an big moving cannon that no body uses and an HQ choice that is also never used (master of the forge). All the other stuff goes to every friggin non codex astartes chapter . The fluff of the Ultramarines is little goofy, but they lost at the "Damnos Incident". And the "battle for macragge" tyranids were just an splinter fleet if memory serves. And has anyone ever read the necron fluff? Those things are potrayed as almost unstoppable killing machines which cant be destroyed. Whole space marine chapters have been lost to their attacks.

Well now that I have settled my outrage, these are the things that bugger in wh40k:
1.Units only getting one save at a time? So if I wear an power armour, force field and Im in cover, I can only use one of them?
2.Stupid, overpowered fluff in the new codexes.
3.Too much FNP.
4.A lot of totally useless units.
5.All the damn Ultramarine hate . If every kid would start wh40k by starting an blood angels army then everybody would hate them and no one would give a damn about the smurfs. Same with the grey knights, space wolves etc.

Daedricbob wrote:I'm pretty sure Chenkov would have absolutely no gripes about tarpitting something shiny and expensive with a blob of disposable guardsmen, moving his big guns into LOS then dumping enough live ordnance on the spot to ensure there's nothing left bigger than a matchbox.

I agree it should be possible to shoot into melee. I'm sure the Hive Mind or a Necron Lord wouldn't care too much about hitting a few of their own troops if it helped them win, and that was before I even remembered guys like Chenkov...

H.B.M.C. wrote:Why does Mr. Right Sponson Gunner have to sit pretty and not shoot anything because he can't see Mr. Left Sponson Gunner's target?

Indeed, you'd think that if each weapon has its own operator they could at least all try to do something useful.

infinite_array wrote:5. Shooting from vehicles. So, apparently the suspension in the 41st millenium is so bad that moving 12" jostles my 8' tall demi-gods around so much that they can't fire from the vehicle. They can, however, roll right out of one of the hatches and fire perfectly fine.

Apparently so, and I think some factions wouldn't even care about stuff like this. I find it hard to buy the idea of, say, an Ork in a moving vehicle not just sticking his slugga out the window and hoping he hits something even if the vehicle's going at top speed.

I also agree that the sweeping advance rules can lead to some unintentional laughs, along with the rule that a falling back unit whose path is blocked by enemies is wiped out. I think I'd laugh if a squad of Space Marines fell back and found themselves blocked by a few Gretchin who had been trying to stay out of the way.

PraetorDave wrote:Damaging vehicles. It just blows. This literally happened in a game the other day:

My brother: "so I just rolled a 4 against your predator, what is that?"
Me: "immoblized"
Bro: "awesome, so it can't shoot anymore?"
Me: "nope, I can shoot all my guns next turn, and they can swivel too"
Bro: "now how does that work?"
Me: "beats me. Oh look my immoblized pred just put a lascannon through your zoanthropes face. Sucks"

Also, there need to be more modifiers to the damage table. Because even though it was just a glance, my opponent always rolls a 6. So my tank is immobilized because you glanced it?

I miss the good old days when the Gauss and Glancing rules gave a lone Necron Warrior the ability to blow a Land Raider to smithereens.

The Epic Chaosdude!!! wrote:I can see that codex:space marines

If it were one codex, no one would care. It's seven.

Grakmar wrote:

oni wrote:Rapid Fire used to work like that. That's one of the big changes that came to 5th edition 40K. It still trips me up sometimes when I use my Sternguard Vets.

darkPrince010 wrote:This edition: Sweeping Advance, Rapid Fire not being 1/2 of original range, and the S values for an exploding vehicle (S4 Ap- if you're inside a vehicle reduced to a crater?

Rapid fire has been 2 shots at 12" since 3rd edition. And, before that, it wasn't a property of the gun, but of the model.

It has NEVER been 2 shots at half distance.

Actually your wrong Grakmar. Both oni and darkPrince are correct. In 4th rapid fire was half weapon distance.

Ascalam wrote:Sweeping advance negating WBB, when normally a mob of grotz with rocks would have no chance of running down and destroying a Necron Warriior unit

The current rules for combat resolution.

And Ascalam, sweeping advance does not actually negate WBB. It's just very rare that there is another squad within 6". Took me 3 hours of intense reading over the codex and rulebook after falling foul of that trick. I have an obsession of checking rules that can be used against me. Not many people know it, but everyone I have shown it to has agreed (Friends, random 40K players, GW store staff).

Yes it does. I really really wish otherwise, but it does. In any case the tournament i play at rules that it does, so i'm SOL anyway

WBB doesn't specifically allow you to use it after being swept, and the sweeping advance rules say you are removed from play if you are swept successfully, unless you have a rule that specifically saves you (the only one that does that i know of if ATSKNF for marines.. convenient, huh..).

The previous edition rulebook actually came out and said it in the sweeping advance rules.

PraetorDave wrote:

MittinsKittens wrote:Umm, I'm still new to 40k so I want to ask,
I keep hearing stories about Matt Ward and how he can basically go *beep* himself. What has he done that's so bad? Does he truely deserve all the hate? Or is it just a dude didn't like what he did with something and everyone is now on the hate Matt Ward band wagon. Not defending the guy, I honestly don't know ^^

Matt Ward writes codices (yes that is the proper plural form of codex). AFAIK, he has currently written Codex: space marines and Codex: grey knights. He is known for completely blowing out of proportion fluff, and for making an army completely unbalanced. He has a tendency to make an army that was "good" before, into "OMG I'm a beast, I own everyone while blindfolded with both arms tied behind my back". For instance, in the C:SM book, the Ultramarines don't lose a single fight. Not one. Ever. I will say however, he does write his rules well, and they usually require very little explanation or FAQ.

He also wrote Codex: Blood Angels.

The Grey Knights codex required a FAQ entry for pretty much every unit.

To be fair he was probably going blind by the time he wrote the GK codex.

So very true.

Disgusting... Gods knows what he'll do to my beloved Necrons.. I may end up feeling soiled by association :(

mat ward will take codex:necrons and they will become codex:Iron hands

+1 to every complaint about vehicle rules. As someone who picked up guard because I liked the look of the tanks (ok, shoot me) I find that their armoured shell seems to suck utterly.

The Epic Chaosdude!!! wrote:5.All the damn Ultramarine hate . If every kid would start wh40k by starting an blood angels army then everybody would hate them and no one would give a damn about the smurfs. Same with the grey knights, space wolves etc.

This made me chuckle. Don't think you've been paying attention, but people have the same general complaints about Blood Angels, Grey Knights and Space Wolves as they do about the smurfs

Irony as it may seem, I dislike Space Marines with a passion. All Space Marines, that is started playtesting a couple of SM armies to see how things went... what happened really did not seem possible, particularly given that I know I made mistakes with it. This just heightened my dislike of them

Oh and people always claiming "X does not fit in with 40k". It's not like everything 'fits in' in the real world... and in 40k it has even less reason to, because it's all made up

Although I have to disagree with the Ultramarines hate and Chaos people that really think, Chaos is anywhere on the downside of GWs love.


I really think tanks should at least bcome tanks. Not more pwoerful but more ,,realistic" tanks.

Would love to see crew for tanks, that can bail, be killed. Burning Engines, that leaves you with the choices to bail or fight a round and die a horrible death.

Armour should be more solid (Penetrate or nothing at all) but tanks should be hindred by bad vision.

Honestly, I dislike people who get all annoyed that they can't move their vehicle and fire all their weapons, because they seems to utterly forget about game balance.

Luke_Prowler wrote:Honestly, I dislike people who get all annoyed that they can't move their vehicle and fire all their weapons, because they seems to utterly forget about game balance.

Surely that could be fixed by making them cost about three times as much?

Simple things to fix vehicles:

1. Make 'em faster than people in foot. Move 8/16/24". That means they're no faster overall (still can't go above 24"), but their 'steps' are faster.
2. Make Defensive Weapons S6 and below (or at least S5 and below).
3. Define what 'Turret' and 'Sponson' and 'Hull Mounted' and 'Fixed' mean specifically, and give rules to that effect.
4. Allow weapon on a vehicle to fire at separate targets.
4a. If you can't do that, at least allow weapons classed as 'Defensive' to fire at those separate to the 'Main' weapons.
4b. Treat all Sponsons and Pintle-Mounts as 'Defensive' regardless of type so they can act like sponson.
5. Rather than contracting and dumbing down the damage charts, expand them back into 2 tables (3 if you count ordnance), and make the Glancing table range from (1: No effect; 2: Shaken on a 4+; 3: Stunned on a 4+; 4: Stunned; 5: 1-3 Immobilised, 4-6 Weapon Destroyed; 6: Roll on the Penetrating Chart). That way a glance can occasionally kill something, but it can also occasionally do nothing because it's a glancing hit. Then pen would simply be Stun/Immob/WeaponDes/Wrecked/Destroyed/Explodes.
6. Make Hull Down something that can be beaten, rather than a save. 3rd Ed Hull Down didn't work because it was an all-or-nothing premise (you were either Hull Down, and therefore immune to penetrating hits, or you weren't, and all penetrating hits could get you). We tried it as Hull Down = can only glance unless you roll a 6 on your To Hit roll. It stops it from being an all-or-nothing situation.

We've been playing with most (not all) of the above rules since just after 4th Ed came out, and they work fine. The Land Raider's a little bit overpowered, but beyond that everything else works. Russes that can fire all their guns at different targets are fun!

MittinsKittens wrote:And Matt Ward doesn't sound THAT bad then, just sounds like he drops the ball with the fluff stuff. Least it isn't in the rule sections
Rather have dodgy fluff then dodgy rules

You need to be educated. Mind the bad language.

htj wrote:Surely that could be fixed by making them cost about three times as much?

Vehicles in general or just ones with multiple weapons? My observation is that most vehicles only have one worth firing or never get a chance to fire because they're always going cruising speed/flat out.

The Epic Chaosdude!!! wrote:
1.Units only getting one save at a time? So if I wear an power armour, force field and Im in cover, I can only use one of them?

It's assumed that if it can punch through your force field (which I'm guessing is your best save), then it can also punch through the leaves in front of you and your fancy armour.

The Epic Chaosdude!!! wrote:
2.Stupid, overpowered fluff in the new codexes.

Believe it or not, GW is a business. They want to sell models. If they make that army sound fething awesome, then people are gonna want to buy it. Besides that, it's their codex. Where THEY are explained. If you're a Tau player, you're not gonna want to listen to some wonderful Daemon victory. That, and it's CODICES. Not codexes

The Epic Chaosdude!!! wrote:
3.Too much FNP.
.

I haven't seen that much FNP actually. Probably due to my lack of ever actually playing

The Epic Chaosdude!!! wrote:
4.A lot of totally useless units.

There are always gonna be useless units, whether that's because the current meta makes them useless, or because they don't work with that player's army.

Luke_Prowler wrote:

htj wrote:Surely that could be fixed by making them cost about three times as much?

Vehicles in general or just ones with multiple weapons? My observation is that most vehicles only have one worth firing or never get a chance to fire because they're always going cruising speed/flat out.

I think it would have to be an adjustment by vehicle, so it'd take ages. However, I quite like the look of H.B.M.C.'s proposed rules there.

Thanks.

But I don't want to derail this into a wishlisty/proposed rules thread, as that's not the topic.

Sorry if I've derailed this.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Thanks.

But I don't want to derail this into a wishlisty/proposed rules thread, as that's not the topic.

Sorry if I've derailed this.

Go post them in another thread, then, so we can discuss them.

Back on topic, I've always been annoyed at how, in a galaxy in which there are 1000 chapters of Space Marines and countless regiments of Guard, how come the battles keep getting fought by the same few? And furthermore, Special Characters in general. They shrink the universe even more so. Now it's not just the same regiments and Chapters, it's the same people fighting every battle. Bah.

Thanks for the link H.B.M.C. It made my day.

n0t_u wrote:To be fair he was probably going blind by the time he wrote the GK codex.

Hairy palms do make it hard to type, it's true.

Sabet wrote:Actually your wrong Grakmar. Both oni and darkPrince are correct. In 4th rapid fire was half weapon distance.

No, you, oni and DarkPrince are all wrong. In 4th, rapid fire was two shots at 12". I even remember a big YMDC bruhaha because Tau wanted to rapid fire their guns at 18" since they top out at 36".

Check p29 of the 4th edition rulebook.

Omegus wrote:

Sabet wrote:Actually your wrong Grakmar. Both oni and darkPrince are correct. In 4th rapid fire was half weapon distance.

No, you, oni and DarkPrince are all wrong. In 4th, rapid fire was two shots at 12". I even remember a big YMDC bruhaha because Tau wanted to rapid fire their guns at 18" since they top out at 36".

Check p29 of the 4th edition rulebook.

Bah! Omegus beat me too it.

p29 of 4th edition BGB: "An infantry model armed with a rapid fire weapon can shoot twice at targets up to 12" away."

Sabet wrote:Actually your wrong Grakmar. Both oni and darkPrince are correct. In 4th rapid fire was half weapon distance.

It's weird how some people just get the wrong rule lodged so firmly in their minds. I've known a couple people who insisted that rapid fire weapons could also fire one shot, and then charge, in both fourth and fifth editions.

You'd be amazed at the "Dreadnought Close Weapons always get 2D6 pen" interpretation. We played that way for years. When someone here finally said "No, it's 1D6" there was a litany of posters going "Really?" "Are you sure?" "What? We've been getting it wrong?".

That has to be the most common rules error in the game.

I think what bugs me most is how cover works. It shouldn't be a save, it should modify the shooter's ballistic skill. If you shoot a meltagun at me, a bush isn't gonna negate the hit, it's just gonna make it harder for you to hit.

The Epic Chaosdude!!! wrote:
1.Units only getting one save at a time? So if I wear an power armour, force field and Im in cover, I can only use one of them?

Yeah, this doesnt make sense, but lets do some math.

A TH/SS termie in cover takes a wound from a shot.

2+ armor- 1/6 chance of unsaved wound.
3+ invul - the chance of an unsaved wound is now 1/18.
4x cover - the chance is now 1/36.

So I would have to deal 36 wound to said squad to kill one termie.

Now imagine if said squad had FnP.
chance of unsaved wound is 1/72. 72 wounds worth of shooting to kill one 40 point model.



I totally agree that it's stupid you have to choose, but it would be even dumber if you didnt.

I hate it that a unit is destroyed if it's transport is destroyed and it cannot disembark because there is an enemy by the door. Just kick it open and jump!
I had a squad of sternguard with Pedro Kantor wiped out that way in my last game. Stupid hordes of gaunts. A chaptermaster can't open the door and get out because a gaunt is there.

thesearmsarerob wrote:I hate it that a unit is destroyed if it's transport is destroyed and it cannot disembark because there is an enemy by the door. Just kick it open and jump!
I had a squad of sternguard with Pedro Kantor wiped out that way in my last game. Stupid hordes of gaunts. A chaptermaster can't open the door and get out because a gaunt is there.

That's not actually the rules; please see emergency disembarkation.

Alazahr wrote:1.) In the fiction Bolter munitions are always described as being "case-less"

They are almost never described as being caseless.

Whoops my noob must be showing!

I thought it didn't make sense but it was ratified by a couple of other people at the club so I went with it.


I really need to get back back up to speed with 5th ed.

Melissia wrote:

Alazahr wrote:1.) In the fiction Bolter munitions are always described as being "case-less"

They are almost never described as being caseless.

Rogue Trader munitions were caseless to the point that their equivalent to a Bolter round would be a 40mm Self-Propelled Grenade. The current standing is that they do throw off casings now. See below:

http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/4397/boltershell.jpg

-J.

MandalorynOranj wrote:I think what bugs me most is how cover works. It shouldn't be a save, it should modify the shooter's ballistic skill.

It's a save so your opponent has something to do during your turn and feels like he has the power to save his troops. In 2nd Ed it was a modifier, and you'd just sit there removing models.

Slarg232 wrote:

LoneLictor wrote:4. Draigo; incase you haven't read the Grey Knights codex, this guy is a living "SCREW YOU" to every Chaos and Chaos Space Marine player, courtesy of Matt Ward.

This right here is why I stopped playing 40K; the game isn't even a game anymore, it's just "Insult the dudes who AREN'T imperials, we get more money that way". Space Marines get fourty codexes in the time it takes the Dark Eldar to get one, and the rules are completely skewed in Space Marine Favor....

So I take it you bought into the internet draigo hate craze instead of actually thinking about his fluff.

He's an analogy for the Imperium. Full of heroic deeds, super strong and great. You think that is dumb, because you can't understand that nothing he ever does is significant. He wrecks stuff in the warp, and it doesn't matter. It's all the same the next day. It's exactly like how the Imperium is faring, heroically holding the line while at the end of the day evil still grows stronger and humanity fades ever so slightly more away.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

PraetorDave wrote:Damaging vehicles. It just blows. This literally happened in a game the other day:

My brother: "so I just rolled a 4 against your predator, what is that?"
Me: "immoblized"
Bro: "awesome, so it can't shoot anymore?"
Me: "nope, I can shoot all my guns next turn, and they can swivel too"
Bro: "now how does that work?"
Me: "beats me. Oh look my immoblized pred just put a lascannon through your zoanthropes face. Sucks"

Also, there need to be more modifiers to the damage table. Because even though it was just a glance, my opponent always rolls a 6. So my tank is immobilized because you glanced it?

Immobilized means not mobile any more, I'm amazed by the fact that you find difficulty understanding that.

This thread is getting pretty terrible.

my biggest problem with the game is with the codex. seriously. Space wolves is one of the most overpowered and poorly written codex ever, next up gaurd. But i am not going to pick on these .... instead i will pick on Nids.

New Nids codex and it sucks. yep.
No longer are we a good melee army. No... instead since we lost flesh hooks the way to win is to sit in cover and shoot our guys down. then when we charge you simply win in the ensuing melee and the fearless wounds do the rest of the work wiping out the assaulting nids unit.

Armor. Yeah we suck at anit armor to so if you have some vehicles we have an impossible time dealling with those too. It can be done, but it is much harder than it needs to be.

Crappy units. Pyrovore, spore pod, harpy, ripperswarm, spore mine. they all suck. Lictor got the nerf and the new lictor is the Ymgarl. what was wrong with leaving lictor the way they were.

Impacted eliete slots. Anyone can tell that the elite slots are over impacted.

Armies that you just loose when you face them.
Dark eldar (poison, more maneuverable, better shooting and melee)
Orks Better melee and shooting plus cheaper and better models.
Blood angels and space wolves... see above.
Ig...did someone say better shooting.
eldar. How do you catch what is faster and better armed than you are.

so yes. MY biggest prob. with GW rules is that they have such crappy rules for some armies and such great rules for others. I wont even go into how they make a few good units and then dont supply you with a model for the afformentioned unit ( tervigon comes to mind.)

I really dislike how in the fluff, bolters and chainswords can destroy anything and everything, yet in game they are only AP 5 and not a power weapon.

Sky57 wrote:I really dislike how in the fluff, bolters and chainswords can destroy anything and everything, yet in game they are only AP 5 and not a power weapon.

Try BoLS's 'Movie Marine' codex. 12 Marines and a Razorback = 1500 pts, and I was able to tear through anything my friend threw at me. We did a game where it was 2000 pts of Marines vs. a good 3000 points of Chaos Marines, Orks, and Imperial Guard, played longways.

I was able to kill over half his army, but we cheered every time a Marine fell. I mean, T 6, S 6, I 5 Marines with power armour with a 3+ reroll save and a 4++ save, with Fleet, Bolters that are assault 4 rending 36", chainswords that are power weapons, with rending, and reroll failed to wound? It was nuts!

Also, another thing that erks me: U-Go-I-Go. I like Integrated Turn games much more, since it's not a 'I kill everything on this side, then you kill everything on this side'. IT games make you think more, since that unit you're planning on assaulting may not be within range by the time you get to move your assaulting unit.

Another thing that irks me about vehicles - Assaulting vehicles and always attacking rear armour. I much preferred it when manoeuvre and positioning was an important part of assault.

I agree with the people about vehicle rules.

Tanks are important because they are mobile, not because they are armored. Otherwise, a pillbox is usually better armored.

Tanks had sponsons so they could enfilade two units on either side in a trench. Not so they had to awkwardly pivot to bring two guns to bear on one target.

DarknessEternal wrote:

thesearmsarerob wrote:I hate it that a unit is destroyed if it's transport is destroyed and it cannot disembark because there is an enemy by the door. Just kick it open and jump!
I had a squad of sternguard with Pedro Kantor wiped out that way in my last game. Stupid hordes of gaunts. A chaptermaster can't open the door and get out because a gaunt is there.

That's not actually the rules; please see emergency disembarkation.

I can't seem to find that in my rulebook, could you give me a page number?

Also, one that that really bugs me is having to roll to hit and missing something 3 inches away from the firing unit , I wish GW would re-institute their short range-long range modifiers from second edition.

We did this for Vehicles/Monstrous Creatures/Walkers. If you were within 6" of it you got +1BS.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Another thing that irks me about vehicles - Assaulting vehicles and always attacking rear armour. I much preferred it when manoeuvre and positioning was an important part of assault.

I'm sure that makes sense in your head, but I'd like to be able to destroy a leman russ with my Orks

Luke_Prowler wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:Another thing that irks me about vehicles - Assaulting vehicles and always attacking rear armour. I much preferred it when manoeuvre and positioning was an important part of assault.

I'm sure that makes sense in your head, but I'd like to be able to destroy a leman russ with my Orks

Yeah but when did this happen in real life, okay so my rhino (which in this case has an armored assualt ramp just for kicks, just to give an image of it) is raming a leman russ and it hits its back armor immediately what the gak?

Also I hate VechileHammer right now it is getting annoying to see people play a load of different vehicles in just one game, its really getting annoying to see and play.

Asherian Command wrote:

Luke_Prowler wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:Another thing that irks me about vehicles - Assaulting vehicles and always attacking rear armour. I much preferred it when manoeuvre and positioning was an important part of assault.

I'm sure that makes sense in your head, but I'd like to be able to destroy a leman russ with my Orks

Yeah but when did this happen in real life, okay so my rhino (which in this case has an armored assualt ramp just for kicks, just to give an image of it) is raming a leman russ and it hits its back armor immediately what the gak?

Ramming doesn't hit the back armor.

Luke_Prowler wrote:

Asherian Command wrote:

Luke_Prowler wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:Another thing that irks me about vehicles - Assaulting vehicles and always attacking rear armour. I much preferred it when manoeuvre and positioning was an important part of assault.

I'm sure that makes sense in your head, but I'd like to be able to destroy a leman russ with my Orks

Yeah but when did this happen in real life, okay so my rhino (which in this case has an armored assualt ramp just for kicks, just to give an image of it) is raming a leman russ and it hits its back armor immediately what the gak?

Ramming doesn't hit the back armor.

DRAT!
I have been fouled again!

The Epic Chaosdude!!! wrote:

3.Too much FNP.

I haven't seen that much FNP actually. Probably due to my lack of ever actually playing

Haven't seen that much FNP

Orks - Painboy, gives squad FNP
IG - Medics, gives squad FNP
Gk - Apothacary, gives squad FNP
C:SM - Apothacary, gives squad FNP
Blood angels - Priest, gives squad FNP
DE - Pain token/haemonculi, gives squad FNP

There's a gak tonne of it about

Luke_Prowler wrote:I'm sure that makes sense in your head, but I'd like to be able to destroy a leman russ with my Orks

Then charge its rear armour.

Sorry, but Orks managed in the past, they can manage in the future with armour on vehicles counting completely when in assault. Movement becomes more important and HTH becomes less spammy.

Shooting at vehicles. Shouldn't you have a higher chance to hit a Rhino than an Ork?

Thing is, you're not aiming at JUST an ork, you aiming at a mob of orks. You can't really miss when you have a massive green wave running at you

Unless they're down to a single model. Then I see your point

ph34r wrote:

PraetorDave wrote:Damaging vehicles. It just blows. This literally happened in a game the other day:

My brother: "so I just rolled a 4 against your predator, what is that?"
Me: "immoblized"
Bro: "awesome, so it can't shoot anymore?"
Me: "nope, I can shoot all my guns next turn, and they can swivel too"
Bro: "now how does that work?"
Me: "beats me. Oh look my immoblized pred just put a lascannon through your zoanthropes face. Sucks"

Also, there need to be more modifiers to the damage table. Because even though it was just a glance, my opponent always rolls a 6. So my tank is immobilized because you glanced it?

Immobilized means not mobile any more, I'm amazed by the fact that you find difficulty understanding that.

This thread is getting pretty terrible.

You missed the fact that I knew how the rules worked. My brother seems to have an inability to read the rulebook, so therefore it's my job to tell him all the rules as we play.

Skimmers not being able to ram.

coolyo294 wrote:Skimmers not being able to ram.

Skimmers can ram.

DarknessEternal wrote:

coolyo294 wrote:Skimmers not being able to ram.

Skimmers can ram.

They can?

PraetorDave wrote:You missed the fact that I knew how the rules worked. My brother seems to have an inability to read the rulebook, so therefore it's my job to tell him all the rules as we play.

Alright, my b.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

coolyo294 wrote:

DarknessEternal wrote:

coolyo294 wrote:Skimmers not being able to ram.

Skimmers can ram.

They can?

Yes.

MikZor wrote:

The Epic Chaosdude!!! wrote:

3.Too much FNP.

I haven't seen that much FNP actually. Probably due to my lack of ever actually playing

Haven't seen that much FNP

Orks - Painboy, gives squad FNP
IG - Medics, gives squad FNP
Gk - Apothacary, gives squad FNP
C:SM - Apothacary, gives squad FNP
Blood angels - Priest, gives squad FNP
DE - Pain token/haemonculi, gives squad FNP

There's a gak tonne of it about

You forgot Nid tervigon with Catalyst pyshic power....


Automatically Appended Next Post:

coolyo294 wrote:

DarknessEternal wrote:

coolyo294 wrote:Skimmers not being able to ram.

Skimmers can ram.

They can?

If it is also a tank aka Eldar Grav Tanks, has skimmer and tank rule, therefore it can tank shock while being a skimmer

IIRC Tau neutering humans that actually join thier stupid greater good. No body in thier right freakin' mind would join forces with someone if thier crown jewels were the price. No matter how comfy or even 'relatively' safe Tau space is. I'd rather get atomized then lose the canoles!

Also I've heard in the new GK fluff they kill thier none GK allies to prevent knowledge from leaking out about daemons. Le Hell? There has been Inquisitors that have personal IG armies in thier back pocket to call on. And it's the Witch Hunters that are supposed to be the ones, that kill for whatever reason suits them, not the GKs. Hell the GKs didn't kill the IG they fought beside in the first war for Armaggedon. Also I'd have a feeling no contingency plan is safe, and when word gets out that guys in silver carring halberds and storm bolters show up...every non GK would shoot them too just because at least the fights against the daemons are the devils you know.

I could see vows of serecy, I could even see sending the surviving IG into the teeth of the next Ork or Nid army while still wearing thier medals for killing a daemon or too.

I can even see the GKs keeping IG units around that seeme to handle and excel at blasting daemons because any advantage is a good one.

So ya...shooting your allies and neutering are 'no-nos'

I wouldnt be unhappy to see +1/-1 modifiers for shoots und 6" or over 48".

i must say having cover armor and force field would make tau/ig/sterngaurd behind a wall nigh on unbeatable, also the fact that a chainsword, possibly the coolest weapon in 40K is a bog standard CCW, also the way units are shoe horned in for false variety, no matter how long i play IG i will not use penal legion, as what skills they have is random, also the same goes for rules whilst im on it, i know this is again from an ig perspective but grav chuting out of a flat out valk, having to take a difficult terrain test for each model and then losing the whole unit if one model fails their test? whats the point

The fact that if so much as an inch of one member of a squad's behind is showing from behind a building, all of his comrades will leap in the way to take any shots thrown at it: That's the only logical reason for why a squad can be wiped out because one model is visible. You should only be able to take wounds for each model the opponent can see.

Order of gameplay, i.e. one player moves & shoots everything, then the next player, etc. I've just always thought activating alternate units or activating in Initiative order would be better and more balanced. You can then try and out-activate your opponent but risk giving up more kill points if you do.

In the fluff Space Marines enter combat via Thunderhawks, yet regular Space Marines don't have that option.

Most of the Xenos get screwed in the fluff in their own Codex. Take the Tyranid 'dex; and this Hive fleet was destroyed, and this Hive Fleet was destroyed, and this Hive Fleet was destroyed... Yet Space Marines wrestle gods with their pinky and they're all so wonderful. Sorry, a bit of Space Marine rage coming out there

Shayden wrote:Shooting at vehicles. Shouldn't you have a higher chance to hit a Rhino than an Ork?

It's not a matter of just hitting it, it's a matter of hitting it where it counts.

That's the same reason why assaults always hit rear armor. Infantry in close proximity is absolute murder on tanks(IRl, at least).