5. High volume of flyers
4. Ignores cover
3. 2++ Re-rollable saves
2. D Weapons
1. [MOD EDIT - Please don't try to 'workaround' the expletive filter - thanks! - Alpharius] who forgot the first rule

I got one: Rule lawyers who are always wrong. If your right that's one thing, if you wrong .

The IGOUGO system.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I got one: Rule lawyers who are always wrong. If your right that's one thing, if you wrong .

I hate this one.

Its always one guy and usually involves miss remembering a rule from a previous edition.

Mass fliers i have no issue with, or ignore Cover
2++ can be dealt with if you see it coming.
But nothing Ruins the game more than 50% of your gaming going back and forth through 2-30 codexs to figure one thing out. And no i will not roll a 4+ because i know im correct.

Allies shenanigans.

Not anything in particular, but all the small things in the course of a game that adds up to my games being twice as long as they were in 5th.

The IGOUGO system has always been a part of 40k so you can't really say it's a problem with 6th Ed.

tremere47 wrote:
The IGOUGO system has always been a part of 40k so you can't really say it's a problem with 6th Ed.

Doesn't mean it doesn't take the fun out of the edition.

Its just even more apparent with the increase of bloat and messy rules slowing down the turns more.

5. High volume of flyers
4. Ignores cover
3. 2++ Re-rollable saves
2. D Weapons
1. People who forgot the first rule

My list would be composed of one thing and would say:

"lists like the one I just quoted"

I (as well as my group) enjoy all of those things.

But nothing Ruins the game more than 50% of your gaming going back and forth through 2-30 codexs to figure one thing out.

Agreed. It's starting to get back to the 2nd ed days when you had your rule book, your codex, whatever supplements you needed (Dark Millenium etc), plus the 5 or 6 White Dwarf "supplements" to every game. I would personally enjoy a slightly more streamlined experience.

The IGOUGO system.

Yeah, it's an inherent limitation in the 40k rules. Nothing drove that point home more for me than all the fun I had playing MGP's Starship Troopers game. Man that was a blast!

Why not keep a Quick Reference Sheet for any Codex-specific rules that come with the army you're fielding, so you don't have to keep flipping through books?
You could even laminate it, and have one each for your various lists.


Just an idea.

 Psienesis wrote:
Why not keep a Quick Reference Sheet for any Codex-specific rules that come with the army you're fielding, so you don't have to keep flipping through books?
You could even laminate it, and have one each for your various lists.


Just an idea.

Not what i meant. stats are fine but half the arguments come from things like rules interactions such as Searchlights and night fighting "benefits", PE with blast templates and rerolls.
basically Look at YMDC

- The sheer amount of tables in this edition. Seriously, you have terrain effect tables, vehicle damage tables (which admittedly are much simpler than the previous editions), warlord tables, mission tables and of course, psychic power tables. And then there are the codices...

- First Blood.

- Wound allocation nonsense.

- Ignore Cover, ignore cover everywhere.

- Allies. Call me a traditionalist, but I prefer the days when Tau was Tau and Eldar was Eldar and inquisitors really hated Aliens. None of this Taudar and Coteaz BFF nonsense.

Why not keep a Quick Reference Sheet for any Codex-specific rules that come with the army you're fielding, so you don't have to keep flipping through books?
You could even laminate it, and have one each for your various lists.


Just an idea.


Not what i meant. stats are fine but half the arguments come from things like rules interactions such as Searchlights and night fighting "benefits", PE with blast templates and rerolls.

This is more what I was getting at. Most of the "regulars" do have quick ref. sheets, but you it becomes difficult when you're constantly needing to expand that sheet and on top of that, there are more and more odd or unexpected interactions that require looking up. Plus, the reference sheet can be tough if you like to play different lists on a regular basis.

5.) Re-rolls in general (this is the re-roll edition, lets roll lots of dice, pick them up and roll them again, this includes 2++ saves, but also prescience on tons of things, twin linking all over the place etc.)

4.)TLOS (while not 6th Ed specific this is an annoying, and often argued part of the game, that adds nothing to the game in general.)

3.) Randomness in the game...random events that are beyond the control of players having a large impact on the game are bad (warp storm table, new synapse, Instability rules, random charge range to an extent.)

2.) Ignores Cover- this rule when easily accessable is far too powerful and negates the inherent benefit of many units. Having specific units with it is not too bad...having whole armies with access is bad. The same was true for DE poinsoned shooting.

1.) Volume of fire - the game is not all that fun when armies can put out 80 to 100 wounds per turn...picking up models with no response is boring.

Pay to win crap

1 - battle brothers. Allies itself isn't bad. Sharing abilities is.
2 - random charge distances.
3 - battle brothers. Yep so bad it's two of my top three.
4 - no way to stop psychic buffs (save rune priests)
5 - battle formations that don't take foc space.

1) Assault rules in general. It ruins the tension of having beefy assault units close the gap when its possible for me to have a free round of shooting in the opponents assault phase. Overwatch is fine but assault distances need to be fixes. Units should be able to assault out of deep strike though maybe at a reduced distance.

2) Raaaandomn taaaaaables. Or random rules in general. They slow down the game so much. Just price whatever benefit you can get and let players agree on what rules the terrain will follow. Night fighting is dumb because it also slows down the game.

3) Ignores Cover. It dumbs down the game to be a shooty uppy fest and it screws over foot armies. At least make people pay out of the bottom for it.

4) Monstrous creatures everywhere. If you think the walker rules are too weak to peddle your latest big dumb kit then buff up the walker rules. At least control the amount armies can take besides nids.

5) AP 3, AP 3 everywhere. In general too many weapons negate any sort of armor save. Rending on Eldar troops is just a kick in the nads towards marine players. And those poor 4+ save troops...

Sorry guys i am fairly new here, What units have a 2++ rerollable save? and what does IGOUGO mean?



Automatically Appended Next Post:
The main rule that bugs me is that you should get a cover save and an armour save or a negative BS effect for cover. Also the weapon strength of some weapons doesn't seem fair, rather than having so much str 8,9 or 10 out there weapons should have more shots.

1- Allies
2- Rerollable 3++ or better invulnerable saves
3- Strength D
4- Ignores Cover, the new band aid of this edition (like Rending last edition)
5- Including a challenge mechanic without implementing overkill

madd_leeroy wrote:
Sorry guys i am fairly new here, What units have a 2++ rerollable save? and what does IGOUGO mean?

Screamers plus Heralds with a certain wargear item grant it a boost to its unvuln save (from 4++ to 2++) and the nature of Tzeentch daemons allows them re-roll ones, meaning they're effectively re-rollable 2++'s. Eldar can do very similar with Dark Eldar and some bikes with farseers and whatnot.

IGOUGO is exactly what it sounds like. I go, then you go. I go, you go. Its a turn system where each player does their entire turn, then the other player does their entire turn and so on. As opposed to, say, alternating activations, like the entirety of the Spartan Games line.

When ther FAQed the Wound alication. I was fine with it before, it was quick and simple.

IGOUGO, yeah it has been around since the beginning, but it should definitely be re-thought.

I think that Warzone was squad by squad if I recall correctly, but I haven't played that in 15 years.

Anyone ever play Battle Masters? Now that turn system was a blast. There was a huge deck of cards with units on them, that's how you determined who went. You could have ten or twelve units go in a row and then not have an action for the same, so it looked like you were winning and then your opponent really beat up on you. Intense game.


I'm having a hard time getting into 6th. I like overwatch being back again and snapshots. I always hated the heavy weapon guy not being able to fire at all if one guy moved.

I am pretty wary about fliers... flyers? waited forever for them and they seem broken. IDK. I just like to play to have fun and every time I pick up the new rulebook it just seems like a chore. Soooooooo Maaaaaaaaany Ruuuuuuuules.

1) too many rules
2) Night fighting (it's just stupid)
3)IGOUGO
4) Fliers
5) I've hated wound allocation for a long time, it's just silly and easily abusable. Just let the owning player take whoever they want when wounded. Streamlines the game.

Data-slates

 Psienesis wrote:
Why not keep a Quick Reference Sheet for any Codex-specific rules that come with the army you're fielding, so you don't have to keep flipping through books?
You could even laminate it, and have one each for your various lists.


Just an idea.

GW ought to organise rulebooks properly in the first place. Why should players pay £30 for a book that requires them to rewrite and rebind it for it to make sense?

Too many damned rules, with ever more being added and all of them with daft names.

Lots of rules is fine for skirmishy 12-13 models per side, but the average army fills a deployment zone no problem nowadays!

If only that Inquisition game had come to pass........

Allies, the USR system, and the power of shooting.

 Thokt wrote:
...the power of shooting.

I never quite got this. It's a futuristic game, of course guns are going to be powerful.

 Thokt wrote:
Allies, the USR system, and the power of shooting.

USRs...why if I may ask?

1: Endless whining.
2: Still no plastic Sisters models.
3-5: Variants of one and two.

5. The massive amount of little rules to remember that have little to no effect but you still have to remember them (like soul blaze)

4. Overwatch/random charge distances, pick one or the other, but both is OTT for assault reliant armies that are rather squishy (orks boyz, nid griblies, deldar wyches)

3. Wound allocation, this doesnt really affect my armies as much as others since I play crons who have almost 0 special weapons in their units, and FMC daemons so charge distance isnt really affected much from the "remove from the front" thing but it tends to ruin some of the fun when I play against assault armies when I kill enough to make the ground they are gaining a moot point since they will either be too weak by the time they get to me or they wont even get to me at all whether it be from kiting, forcing them to lose ground from casualties or a combo of both. Also it can render some units useless if you just get a lucky precision shot or can somehow snipe out the special weapons in a unit (like marines or guard).

2. Snapshots/fliers, the huge amount of debates that have popped up because of these new rules have led to 25 page long threads regarding the simplest of things (like imotekhs lightning hitting fliers)

1. The fact that some of the new rules purely dont work and can break the game (like for example if I put the relic in a NS what happens? There was I think a huge 25 page thread about this that ended with no solution since it just breaks the game since it forces the relic into reserves but it does not say what happens when the relic goes into reserves. Or the vengance batteries with battlecannons being forced to shoot at fliers even though they cannot shoot at fliers or if they have to shoot into a CC even though they cant shoot into CC)

Too much book keeping.

Roll and take note of your warlord trait.
Roll and take note of your psychic powers. Gets very tedious as soo as you have more than one psyker.
Roll and take note of your objectives.
Roll and take note of your mysterious terrain.
Chaos - Roll and take note of your mutations.
Daemons - Roll and take note of your gifts.
Oh wait better pause the game and let me roll on this random table that I need to look up to see what takes affect.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Thokt wrote:
...the power of shooting.

I never quite got this. It's a futuristic game, of course guns are going to be powerful.

I've said this time, and time again. What would "make sense" should have no bearing on how gameplay actually works. This is a setting where space travel is achieved by flying through a literal deamon infested hell and all technology uses a generous helping of Plebtonium to not break the laws of physics.

1. Battle brother allies
2. Data slate's ignoring the FOC chart
3. Being on here too often
4. GW not modifying the "broken" thing's within a codex

I think if they released updated PDF's of a codex to remove the thing's which people whinge about we will be better off..

They did it with the Dark Elves codex a long time ago? I remember having to cut out unit stat's and paste them into the book.

1- Total lack of Internal Balance. Useless units together with overpowered units in the same Codex. Easy choices when building a "competitive" army.
2- Total lack of External Balance. If you do not get the best of your Codex and your Codex is not particularly good, forget to get a proper game. Unless a lot of fixes are applied by the players.
3- Total lack of "Faction Balance". Marines and marines and marines and marines and marines and marines and marines and marines and marines and marines and marines and marines and marines and marines and marines and marines and marines. Being victorious even in the background of other armies, taking possession of the cover of the Rulebook. No time to get a good Codex for most of the other factions. No time for new factions. Some old factions showed nearly zero love. Only marines and marines and marines and marines and marines and marines.
4- Money-grabbing poorly implementent concepts: Flyers (good concept, poorly implemented, completely unfair for most lists from most armies), Fortifications (senseless), Dataslates and Formations (buy rules to win your friends!!), Allies (great concept, stupid chart). Rising prices everywhere while the quality drops. No play-testing, not even proofreading, "cheap" copy-pasted Codex that are not cheap at all.
5- Total senseless retcons. Big factor. Not as big as in 5th Edition (Grey Knights & Necrons), but still the thing I dislike the most. So the Black Templars has forgotten the Edict of Nikaea? And the Undivided Daemon Princes like Perturabo, Lorgar and many others are no more? Why do they do this?

 Madcat87 wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Thokt wrote:
...the power of shooting.

I never quite got this. It's a futuristic game, of course guns are going to be powerful.

I've said this time, and time again. What would "make sense" should have no bearing on how gameplay actually works. This is a setting where space travel is achieved by flying through a literal deamon infested hell and all technology uses a generous helping of Plebtonium to not break the laws of physics.

No, I mean, why complain that shooting is to powerful. Ranged weaponry is the core of the game. If you want a game in which CC is the core than WHFB is always available.

5. $50 Hardback Codices-- I used to collect them so I knew what my opponent was doing. Not at that price range.
4. The plethora of USR-- Some are cool, but they seem to be never ending and get added to when a new codex comes out
3. Random Anything-- I'd gladly pay 25 points to take a single warlord trait of my choice. Same with psychic powers. Or just remove the tables altogether and put it on the stat line of the model.
2. Wound allocation-- Isn't it obvious the captain is going to throw bodies in front of him to stop bullets? Or maybe the meltagun guy is smart enough to get out of the way?
1. Power weapons-- Used to kill you outright, now there are how many different versions with different stats? And then there is poor Dante...

The continual changes to rules that are supposed to make the game easier and faster, but just make it more convoluted and slower.
Lets get rid of all the modifiers because math is hard, and replace it with complicated systems such as ap and cover saves that make no sense!
You can only have one save because multiple saves take too much time.........but then you can reroll them all!

Tables... endless tables... I conpletely forgot how much fething book keeping is required to play a basic daemons army

Roll for rewards on model one.
Roll for psy powers on model one.
rinse and repeat 4+ times then roll for warlord trait, oh and you better be sure you made each model distinctly different since you and your opponent will have to be able to tell that daemon with curly horn is different from daemon with curlyer horn and make sure you brought a notepad and pen to make write down all of the things they have.

Then we get to gameplay.

Roll for mysterious objective.
Roll for mysterious forest.
Roll for mysterious river.
Roll for mysterious etc.
Roll for whatever the stranger artifact things are called that use 2d6 to determine.
Cast hallucinate and roll on table to see what happens.

Then its the shooting phase.
Roll on table for warpstorm

Assault phase (assuming you have CSM allies)
Roll on table for what mutations spawn get
Roll on table for what possessed get
Roll on table for what gift they get from winning challenge

As you can see there are just so many bloody fething tables that it can get pretty rediculous at times and I'm almost positive I missed some more tables that could have been used (like a hellbrute getting shot at has to roll on a table to see how crazy he goes) lucky for me though I can play necrons if I dont want as nearly many tables and only have to roll for warlord trait and all the mysterious garbage (thanks matt ward for not giving me half a books worth of tables )
Roll


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and better hope your not orks because then you have to roll on a table every time you do something

Roll for wierdboy psy test
Roll on table for wierdboy power
Deep strike and probly misshap with your 30 boyz
Roll on table for misshap result

Roll on table for SAG and pray you dont get doubles

 Madness! wrote:
5. High volume of flyers
4. Ignores cover
3. 2++ Re-rollable saves
2. D Weapons
1. [MOD EDIT - Please don't try to 'workaround' the expletive filter - thanks! - Alpharius] who forgot the first rule

Agree with most of these...

1. Nerfed assault
2. D Weapons
3. 2++ Re-rollable saves
4. Ignores Cover
5. Allies (as they are written)


Only point 1 is really a *core* part of the ruleset that you couldn't change without going back to 5th.

Opponents! they always try to win!

The current GW trend of buy the latest expensive model to win.

1. People complaining about allies.
2. People complaining that assault is broken.
3. People complaining that the latest codex is overpowered and their codex isn't.
4. E-codexes.
5. D weapons.

5) The IGOUGO turn structure, where you can go get lunch while your opponent takes a turn and not miss anything.
4) The absence of a consistent idea of what GW wants 40k to be, which leads to a bloated mess of rules that try to pull the game in opposing directions.
3) The use of random tables as a substitute for player decisions (warlord traits, psychic powers, etc).
2) The poor balance, both internal and external, that reduces the fun of list building to "identify the worst balance mistakes" and requires a major effort to ensure that both players are bringing lists of similar power to have a fun game.
1) GW's complete and inexcusable failure to make even the slightest effort to do anything about fixing those problems.

5) Strength D weapons
4) 2++ rerolls, come on, just stupid
3) Randomness in game (some = fine, but this is ridiculous)
2) Lack of true continuing support, and poor point cost balancing both between codices and internally within the same codex
1) Too much before the game rolling (tables, etc., just let us play a list for crying out loud)

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Madcat87 wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Thokt wrote:
...the power of shooting.

I never quite got this. It's a futuristic game, of course guns are going to be powerful.

I've said this time, and time again. What would "make sense" should have no bearing on how gameplay actually works. This is a setting where space travel is achieved by flying through a literal deamon infested hell and all technology uses a generous helping of Plebtonium to not break the laws of physics.

No, I mean, why complain that shooting is to powerful. Ranged weaponry is the core of the game. If you want a game in which CC is the core than WHFB is always available.

Because there are many armies in this game whose iconic style is melee combat.

40K IS WHFB, just in space. In 40K, heroically charging down the center with your sword makes just as much "tactical" sense as rolling up in a mechanized gunline and laying waste to everything in a hundred meter range.

Since this is the image the games PROMOTES, it should therefore have the rules reflect it.

5) ANY stacked invul saves.
4) Assaulting out of vehicles nerf. I miss being able to charge if the vehicle didn't move, and I thought that was perfectly balanced
3) Allies - that's what apoc is for. You play Eldar? Play Eldar.
2) formations not taking force org slots - they really should, and in fact in my opinion would be more balanced if they cost FEWER points than they normally would, but took up ADDITIONAL slots. Like the tau broadside formation - for preferred enemy space marines, your formation takes up an elite [for the riptide] and ALL your heavy support slots. But make it only cost 550 points or so.

1) Casualties from the front. Yes this actually makes the top of my list. I hate having to bubble wrap special weapons that some other trooper could just pick up. I hate that my leaders can't lead. I hate that by snaking a model around to stand an inch away from a special weapon, it can be sniped out.

1.1) Effect of vehicle damage to passengers. You stunned my tank so I don't GET to shoot at ALL? You shook it, so I can only snap fire, and my flamer can't be used? No frickin' way!

 A GumyBear wrote:
Tables... endless tables... I conpletely forgot how much fething book keeping is required to play a basic daemons army

Roll for rewards on model one.
Roll for psy powers on model one.
rinse and repeat 4+ times then roll for warlord trait, oh and you better be sure you made each model distinctly different since you and your opponent will have to be able to tell that daemon with curly horn is different from daemon with curlyer horn and make sure you brought a notepad and pen to make write down all of the things they have.

Then we get to gameplay.

Roll for mysterious objective.
Roll for mysterious forest.
Roll for mysterious river.
Roll for mysterious etc.
Roll for whatever the stranger artifact things are called that use 2d6 to determine.
Cast hallucinate and roll on table to see what happens.

Then its the shooting phase.
Roll on table for warpstorm

Assault phase (assuming you have CSM allies)
Roll on table for what mutations spawn get
Roll on table for what possessed get
Roll on table for what gift they get from winning challenge

As you can see there are just so many bloody fething tables that it can get pretty rediculous at times and I'm almost positive I missed some more tables that could have been used (like a hellbrute getting shot at has to roll on a table to see how crazy he goes) lucky for me though I can play necrons if I dont want as nearly many tables and only have to roll for warlord trait and all the mysterious garbage (thanks matt ward for not giving me half a books worth of tables )
Roll


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and better hope your not orks because then you have to roll on a table every time you do something

Roll for wierdboy psy test
Roll on table for wierdboy power
Deep strike and probly misshap with your 30 boyz
Roll on table for misshap result

Roll on table for SAG and pray you dont get doubles

Yep. This is why I completely ignore the "don't photocopy our stuff, even for your own use. Becauz stealin' (consequently, would you like to buy our psychic cards? Valid for up to 4 years, guaranteed)" part of the legal page.

1. No plastic Sisters of Battle.
2. Fliers (as implemented)
3. Units in codex that are pants
4. Units in codex that are OP
5. Ward fluff.

5) Premeasuring
4) Random charges
3) Flyers (poorly implemented rules, and really shouldn't be in battles this scale)
2) Formations/data slates
1) Allies

madd_leeroy wrote:
Sorry guys i am fairly new here, What units have a 2++ rerollable save? and what does IGOUGO mean?

2+ invulnerable save with rules allowing you to reroll 1s
I Go U Go


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The main rule that bugs me is that you should get a cover save and an armour save or a negative BS effect for cover. Also the weapon strength of some weapons doesn't seem fair, rather than having so much str 8,9 or 10 out there weapons should have more shots.

1. Assault nerfs (random charge, no assault from deepstrike)
2. AP 3 or better everywhere and cheap as chips
3. Battle Brothers/Allies Matrix. (Smurfs backing up IG I'm cool with, but BA and Necrons? Seriously? )
4. The Tau codex. Yes I hate it that much as do most folks I've talked to, including Tau players who feel like they have an easy button or can't find games because nobody likes playing against that army.
5. Interceptor against ground targets

1. ignores cover
2. allies that are totally against their own fluff
3. warlord traits (as orks don't have their own atm)
4. the wound allocation with templates. (if i'm correct, casualties are the closest to the template gun that just fired, not the ones under)
5. intercept (finally, your flyer gets out of reserves and surprise, intercepted.)

BaalSNAFU wrote:

...
3. Battle Brothers/Allies Matrix. (Smurfs backing up IG I'm cool with, but BA and Necrons? Seriously? )
...

What about SM and tau, but not Tau and IG (SM are "Kill the xeno scum!" and Tau have gue'vessa).

1. Assault changes - I can see some of these being okay, but taken all together and the buff to shooting, assault armies really got the shaft.
2. Allies - I thought everyone was xenophobes in 40K, heck if you look at the Allies chart 40K just doesn't seem as dangerous anymore. Nearly everyone can be friends!
3. Formations
4. All the "ignores cover" rules - I believe there should be no cover at all in 6th edition. As soon as an army saw how effective ignores cover weaponry is, that is all they would use, ever. So either cover works or it wouldn't at all.
5. Tables, oh the tables.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Madcat87 wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Thokt wrote:
...the power of shooting.

I never quite got this. It's a futuristic game, of course guns are going to be powerful.

I've said this time, and time again. What would "make sense" should have no bearing on how gameplay actually works. This is a setting where space travel is achieved by flying through a literal deamon infested hell and all technology uses a generous helping of Plebtonium to not break the laws of physics.

No, I mean, why complain that shooting is to powerful. Ranged weaponry is the core of the game. If you want a game in which CC is the core than WHFB is always available.

Because there are many armies in this game whose iconic style is melee combat.

40K IS WHFB, just in space. In 40K, heroically charging down the center with your sword makes just as much "tactical" sense as rolling up in a mechanized gunline and laying waste to everything in a hundred meter range.

Since this is the image the games PROMOTES, it should therefore have the rules reflect it.

I agree, I've never understood this. Yes, it's a futuristic game but don't forget, this is WHFB in space. It isn't sci-fi, it's sci fantasy. Daemons are almost entirely close combat oriented (seriously you can count on your hands the shooting attacks and its even worse if you don't count psyker spells), Orks, whilst they have lots of dakka, are built to assault the enemy, tyranids swarm with hordes firing dozens of shots before charging into an assault... Dark Eldar lean towards Close combat, CSM are an assault army with a slight preference for close combat in many ways, Blood Angels are built for quick assaults firing guns and then assaulting, etc. Heck, there are guardsman regiments that assault in fluff! This is a world where heroes lead from the front and commanders often stand front helmetless to inspire their men. Should Calgar, Tu'Shan, etc really be in the front? No they should be in a ship planning battle tactics if we were opting for a real sci-fi sense but instead the can be taken to leave massive battles. We have a guardsman commissar that fought a warboss and ended up yanking off a power klaw before dawning it as his own. This is a world where we have flying churches in the form of ships that act as though they are battleships from the navy that sail into a daemon infested alternate dimension of souls and emotions. And as mentioned, one army is entirely dependent on it, three heavily rely on it, and three prefer it (I'm adding SW. In reality they should be here even if their codex doesn't represent it very well). Finally, I also would like to point out armies have a strength stat and an initiative, these two are almost entirely only worth anything in close combat and there's a smattering of weapons along with the fact that most commanders are geared for close combat in the game. Even Tau have a few commanders that have an odd specialty in close combat I believe and, until kroot were changed to really only be worth being ambush shooters or snipers, even Tau had a CC unit. 40k isn't about shooting each other. It's about shooting each other all the while advancing upon one another for glorious close combat!

Anyways my own:
5. Strength D weapons
4. 2++ re-rollable invuln saves (and I play tzeentch daemons!)
3. Wound allocation (Illogical, adds to petty arguments, makes things take longer because now we actually have to complain. Also can add TLOS in here. I like how it makes it so you can't shoot everybody off if you only see one person, but then you have custom models crouching to snipe... that can't cause they are beneath a wall *faaail*
2. The allies chart (Seriously what were they going for here? It's not fluffy nor is it competitive. I get the attempt but casual players could always just ask their opponent yo can I play my marines with my guardsman? Yeah sure. But what does it represent? Well Nids get no allies so I guess they are trying to be fluffy. Imperial factions 90% of the time get to be BB with eachother... no shock there. Wait why do SoB and GK have so many problems allying with imperial factions you mean GK are just as eager to ally with Necrons as guardsman da huh? Okay then SPACE MARINES BB WITH TAU!? Huh? Okay then guardsman must be BB to represent Gue'vesa... allies of convenience. Oh maybe I can play a mock version of the lost and the damned with my CSM and daemons? Allies of Convenience and Desperate allies. Huh? Seriously, in the end it doesn't really please fluff bunnies or competitive players. For competitive players, it brings out more complicated broken units that can shore up your codex weaknesses and reveal extra cheap combos further thrusting up good armies to even better. And fluffy bunnies? Well they can rage about the illogical allies in this. If tau get SM bb then just give Nids BB or AoC with guardsman. It's not really fully representative of genestealer cults but its something rather than giving them no allies at all. Its unbalancing and an absolute mess. And the biggest problem is BB. It just brings so many broken combos. Even if GW tried to balance their codices this would inevitably bring some stupidly broken things)
1. The nerfs to the assault and CC. Now, I'll say this. I don't like overwatch. It doesn't do much except against Tau where it gets silly, but lets think about it. So what my assaulters just stand there? Why are the guys always lost from the front? The guys are shooting aimlessly not at the first guy. Also this is supposed to represent seconds per turn, not a large span of time. If you've already shot me on your turn isn't that close enough to overwatch and when you get charged and you shot at a different target possibly not having time to respond? But this would be okay on its own. But its a laundry list of things that punished assault armies to the point where the only army that can really do it are Daemons (and really the only ones that can do that well and are assault units, aka not pink horrors, are Fleshounds, Lord of Change, Seekers, daemonettes, and screamerstar), one or two things in CSM (spawn or bikers with a lord either juggerlord or nurgle biker), and then the seerstar.

Honorable Mention:
-The bloody randomness. Seriously, this game has so much randomness going on from the start of the game. What type of deployment? *rolls* Terrain for each piece of the table? *rolls rolls rolls rolls* Warlord Traits? *rolls* Any psykers? Well roll the dice for them! Hope you aren't playing a psyker oriented army *rolls rolls rolls rolls rolls rolls* Playing Daemons? Good good, well it is time for you to roll for every item you give your characters *rolls rolls rolls rolls* Oh what's that it's the shooting phase? Well I guess its time to roll some dice again! *rolls 2 dice* Or maybe you are playing CSM? Hurray! You won a challenge time to roll on the random table of bad!
-Challenges: Cool, I get the concept. Space Marines fighting against Chaos Space marines leader to leader. Except one problem, it doesn't work that way. Tau have few hqs that are good in cc, MC are characters meaning that if they deny, they can't do anything at all meaning that they can be tarpitted by a single sergeant, then you have guardsman whose sergeants probably won't be able to win in a challenge meaning you can't really even make a list like that. Oh, and here's a perfect example of an irritating situation. His Hive Tyrant smashes down before my units, I have a huge horde of CSM (around 17) the sergeant still alive with my chaos lord in. That's it, that is his last unit, and I have my last as well. We set loose a volley of bolter fire before charging in to close combat (he would have gotten too us first if not). Oh feth I forgot Chaos rules. Quick send the sergeant! Sergeant dies. Next turn oh yay I have to challenge again. *sends chaos lord* he managed to roll all his invuln saves (even re-rolling them). The game ended and seriously, if I could at least have denied it I could have just krakked him to death.
-The clunky old rules that need to be torn apart and rebuilt

5. Pay to win DLC
4. Allies chart
3. Challenges
2. Wound allocation / look out sir
1. TLOS

 Blacksails wrote:

madd_leeroy wrote:
Sorry guys i am fairly new here, What units have a 2++ rerollable save? and what does IGOUGO mean?

Screamers plus Heralds with a certain wargear item grant it a boost to its unvuln save (from 4++ to 2++) and the nature of Tzeentch daemons allows them re-roll ones, meaning they're effectively re-rollable 2++'s. Eldar can do very similar with Dark Eldar and some bikes with farseers and whatnot.

IGOUGO is exactly what it sounds like. I go, then you go. I go, you go. Its a turn system where each player does their entire turn, then the other player does their entire turn and so on. As opposed to, say, alternating activations, like the entirety of the Spartan Games line.

Thanks thats helped me

Pretty much 1-4 being the battle brothers of allies
5 being the fact that you should be able to deny the with on ALL psychic powers even ones that dont target you (buffs).
pretty much everything else is golden.

I just realized what really took the fun out of 40K for me last time I gave it a chance.

1) Dakkadakka. Specifically the gakloads of negative attitude about any possible aspect of the game expressed on DakkaDakka. All the fething time.
2) See above.
3) See above.
4) See above.
5) See above.

This time, I'll not let that happen again. So without further ado, I bid thee farewell.

1 D weapons
2 E codex
3 taudar
4 screamerstar
5 not true TLoS

In no particular order.

Dataslate Formations.
Escalation.
Void Shield Generators
Aquila Strongpoint.
ALLIES.

#5 New wound allocation "system"
#4 Randomness increase (charge, psychic powers specifically)
#3 Challenges
#2 Piecemeal E-releases
#1 Balance? What's that?

Every single person I know or see that plays 40k has no problem with 6th ed. Or if they do they deal with it and still manage to play/enjoy the game. This is a couple dozen or more people covering 2 FLGS and a GW. As far as I can tell, the internet is the only place where 40k is unanimously hated and broken beyond playability.

1. Players who complains that the opponent plays cheese when they are the ones who fail to have any strategies in the first place.
2. People whining about broken rules simply because it "feels" wrong.
3. Fortifications and Escalation...It's definitely fun in non-competitive ways, but not really in competitive play.
4. Tau. Even though I'm a Tau player I feel that they can be too strong.
5. "Casual" gamers who get pissed off after losing a game. Well maybe your "built to be fluffy" and "I don't care about winning" army just isn't the thing for you buddy...if you really wanna win, don't do absolutely ridiculous things...

sand.zzz wrote:
Every single person I know or see that plays 40k has no problem with 6th ed. Or if they do they deal with it and still manage to play/enjoy the game. This is a couple dozen or more people covering 2 FLGS and a GW. As far as I can tell, the internet is the only place where 40k is unanimously hated and broken beyond playability.

I would like you to come and play here. We have 5 stores , even 1 GW . over 100+players , 1/3 of them playing eldar/tau or taudar , 11 screamer star lists and everyone else has play against them or armies that are build to beat those eldar/tau/demons . And FW is illegal here . Nothing beats seeing a noob with his 1500pts , come and see that he wasted 1000+zlotys and that play what you want is a lie and that now he has to buy a proper army .

1. The antiquated patched together rules.
2. People complaining about allies.
3. People complaining that assault is broken.
4. People complaining that the latest codex is overpowered and their codex isn't.
5. E-codexes.

To answer those who asked about my listing of:

1) The power of shooting
2) The USR system

1) I realize in a sci-fi/sci-fantasy setting that whilst shooting may be the most common means to deal with the enemy for MOST armies, not all - the power level of shooting has really ratcheted up, such that it's far easier to remove models of all sorts from the board. Thus, I listed the POWER of shooting.

2) The USR system to me is a tangled mess. How many USR's unlock a list of other USR's? I understand this was an effort to clean up special rules, but unfortunately, it would be easier to reference just a codex with a wacky name for a special rule, than it is to reference the codex and then the rulebook, and then the rulebook again if the USR has a tree of USRs connected to it. I don't have a problem with USR's per se, just the SYSTEM.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
5. Pay to win DLC
4. Allies chart
3. Challenges
2. Wound allocation / look out sir
1. TLOS

This.

/thread.

All the other silliness (such as random charge distances) I can put up with. The above 5 (though the last one not so much, as I loved 5th which also had TLOS) are just dealbreakers which make 40k the craptastic fustercluck it is right now.

5. People complaining about complaints in a thread about complaints
4. Playing 40k by the book. Its great in a casual setting where you just re-rule as necessary to take out anything *stupid*, its just awful if you don't
3. Battle Brothers, allies in general but especially this gak
2. The massive power of shooting in a game with a very melee orientated setting
1. Buffs. Buffs turn the game into combohammer. No buffs means you have to actually use strategy. If you think about it, its really that simple.

Dakkamite wrote: The massive power of shooting in a game with a very melee orientated setting

Wat?

The God-Emperor of Mankind wrote: They shall be my finest warriors, these men who give of themselves to me. Like clay I shall mould them, and in the furnace of war forge them. They will be of iron will and steely muscle. In great armour shall I clad them and with the mightiest guns will they be armed. They will be untouched by plague or disease, no sickness will blight them. They will have tactics, strategies and machines so that no foe can best them in battle. They are my bulwark against the Terror. They are the Defenders of Humanity. They are my Space Marines and they shall know no fear.
– on the Creation of the Space Marines.

 Psienesis wrote:

Dakkamite wrote: The massive power of shooting in a game with a very melee orientated setting

Wat?

The God-Emperor of Mankind wrote: They shall be my finest warriors, these men who give of themselves to me. Like clay I shall mould them, and in the furnace of war forge them. They will be of iron will and steely muscle. In great armour shall I clad them and with the mightiest guns will they be armed. They will be untouched by plague or disease, no sickness will blight them. They will have tactics, strategies and machines so that no foe can best them in battle. They are my bulwark against the Terror. They are the Defenders of Humanity. They are my Space Marines and they shall know no fear.
– on the Creation of the Space Marines.

Yeah, the idea that Wh40k is a melee setting is a great misconception.
Just because some guys specialize in melee combat does not mean that the setting's focus is on swords and axes. If that were the cause, then soldiers with guns would not be so ubiquitous.

 Dakkamite wrote:
1. Buffs. Buffs turn the game into combohammer. No buffs means you have to actually use strategy. If you think about it, its really that simple.

I think people who play Warmachine would disagree on that point. I'm not sure if you're meaning buffs in general or their execution in 40k. I think the first point is incorrect, pretty ambivalent about the second one.

Random charge distance needs to be taken out of the game

 dementedwombat wrote:

 Dakkamite wrote:
1. Buffs. Buffs turn the game into combohammer. No buffs means you have to actually use strategy. If you think about it, its really that simple.

I think people who play Warmachine would disagree on that point. I'm not sure if you're meaning buffs in general or their execution in 40k. I think the first point is incorrect, pretty ambivalent about the second one.

I agree . no buffs means army with the highest stats per point is the best one .

Cover is an issue in my mind, simply because I can't believe trees are a better defence against a las cannon than power armour. I'd like to think the increasing amount of ignores cover is to counteract that, but it doesn't 'feel' right

ahzek wrote:
Cover is an issue in my mind, simply because I can't believe trees are a better defence against a las cannon than power armour. I'd like to think the increasing amount of ignores cover is to counteract that, but it doesn't 'feel' right

Think of it not absorbing the shot, but obstructing the firer's view just enough that he shot past the target instead of hitting it.

Ever tried to shoot someone through a bush in an FPS? It's a bit like that. You know the target is behind the bush, but you can barely see him so you just fire full auto and hope some bullets hit.

Granted, a to-hit modifier would have required less of an abstraction, but they had to differentiate the mechanics from WHFB some how.

1) The increased randomness (and random tables). Also, the horrible layout of the rulebook, and the ton of basically pointless rules - such as including Fear and Challenges, yet managing to make both even worse than they are in Fantasy. That's an impressive feat.'
2) Allies. Otherwise known as 'balance, what's that?'.
3) Wound allocation. I'd rather have the 5th edition system - at least that was generally only abusable in a few cases. Now we have idiocy like a character with a 2+ save standing at the front of a squad and absorbing an entire Battle Cannon blast or flamer template.
4) The unnecessary nerfs to close combat. Shooting was dominating in 5th... so we'll make combat even worse. Also, CC is no more unrealistic than Draigo showing up for a dozen different minor skirmishes every day.
5) Flyers

 vipoid wrote:

3) Wound allocation. I'd rather have the 5th edition system - at least that was generally only abusable in a few cases. Now we have idiocy like a character with a 2+ save standing at the front of a squad and absorbing an entire Battle Cannon blast or flamer template.

I'm willing to put up with pretty much any system that doesn't include 10 ridiculously fast and tough Nob bikers who somehow remain at full strength until the squad suffers 11 wounds.

1 - Jerks
2 - gw not understanding the game
3 - jerks
4 - not enough time to play
5 - gw not understanding that people actually want a good game, and not just cool models.

 Melissia wrote:
1: Endless whining.
2: Still no plastic Sisters models.
3-5: Variants of one and two.

This , my two cents here

 TheCustomLime wrote:


2) Raaaandomn taaaaaables. Or random rules in general. They slow down the game so much. Just price whatever benefit you can get and let players agree on what rules the terrain will follow. Night fighting is dumb because it also slows down the game.

This, a thousand times this. Psychic powers have become largely a joke. You either win because you rolled the really stupid broken OP ones or you wasted 25 points (or more) on upgrading your psyker because all your powers ended up being crap. Oh, your warlord who's been leading your army for centuries? He has no f***ing clue how he wants to command today, or how he likes to lead his troops.

I agree with a lot of things said in this thread, but this one I just wanted to doubly agree with.

I'm okay with "Ignores Cover," just not with the prevalence of it and how easily Tau specifically can do it. I also think the prevalence of better-than-AP4 shooting weapons is a little on the crazy side. It used to just be weapons that had potential downsides (imperial plasma) or things you paid through the nose for (Tau Rail rifles) but now it's just on everything, it seems like, all the time.

I would also like to add "SUPER EFFING SLOW RESPONSE TIMES FROM GAMES WORKSHOP." The Dark Angels FAQ hasn't been updated since April of last year, not even when Codex: Space Marines dropped. There are still several glaring errors in the book, or errata that need to be brought in line with Codex: Space Marines rules changes, but nothing. Nada. They haven't issued any major FAQ/Errata pretty much since April. Everything else that's post April has basically been errata'd/FAQ'd since the day the 'dex dropped because it was a typo they realized was in the book before it went to print, rather than something confusing that needed real clarification.

My list of despise:

1. Precision shots can be LOS'd... WHY EVEN BOTHER THEN?
2. First Blood.
3. As anyone else has mentioned: Ignores Cover is cool, but it's everywhere.
4. Monstrous Creatures. I'm drowning in them already.
5. AP3 and fewer is shared like it's candy.
6. Pre-measuring - somewhat. It's good to have a better idea how far you can fire/move, but boy, some people just abuse this feature to a point when it's not fun anymore (the games where the quarter of a millimetre decides the fate of worlds).

The crapton of flyers and rerollable 2++s are my only real complaints about 6th ed. And first blood I guess (it just carries too much weight).

Invuls should be maxed at 3++ if you ask me, with the only possible exception being the dark eldar thingy which goes away with a fail. But even that shouldn't be allowed a re-roll.

1)Rules that are not written focusing on game play, but focused on trying to sell you product.
2)As above.
3)As above.
4)As above
5)As above

 dementedwombat wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

3) Wound allocation. I'd rather have the 5th edition system - at least that was generally only abusable in a few cases. Now we have idiocy like a character with a 2+ save standing at the front of a squad and absorbing an entire Battle Cannon blast or flamer template.

I'm willing to put up with pretty much any system that doesn't include 10 ridiculously fast and tough Nob bikers who somehow remain at full strength until the squad suffers 11 wounds.

Bolded just for you!

Out of a game featuring literally hundreds of units where it is only abusable by a handful of them is a ratio I'm willing to put up with.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 dementedwombat wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

3) Wound allocation. I'd rather have the 5th edition system - at least that was generally only abusable in a few cases. Now we have idiocy like a character with a 2+ save standing at the front of a squad and absorbing an entire Battle Cannon blast or flamer template.

I'm willing to put up with pretty much any system that doesn't include 10 ridiculously fast and tough Nob bikers who somehow remain at full strength until the squad suffers 11 wounds.

Bolded just for you!

Out of a game featuring literally hundreds of units where it is only abusable by a handful of them is a ratio I'm willing to put up with.

The funny thing is, it really isn't any more ridiculous than the current system. I mean, each and every guy shooting putting exactly enough rounds into each guy to kill him, with no overkill, and everyone firing at exactly the next closes guy when he dies. Should probably be something like, closest visible model, then each model closest to the one that died. Or wounds are assigned by the shooter pre-saves, with LOS as an option. Any overkill is lost.

EDIT: Whoops, clicked the wrong thread...

1. Tons of USRs and special wording for it.

I hate to remember that the sword of slaying gives bloodfrenzy which is a combination of rage and fury or whatever. Just increase the damn WS or A-Rating or whatever to make the unit killier. I'm no mathematician, but I bet there are a couple of rules that give you chance-wise almost the same benefit while having very different mechanics.

2. Allies.

What is the unit size we're talking about? As long as you don't play Apocalypse, there are maybe 2-3 platoons on the field. 1/4th of a SM company. A single (and pretty small at that) ork tribe. As long as you're not putting every unit in the codex on the table, there is really no need or sense for allies.

3. No assault when deep-striking, coming from reserves, exiting vehicles etc.

What's the point of deep-striking when you can't immediately get stuck in with the boyz?

4. Random Run/Charge distance.

What is this nonsense? Either you run, or you don't run. But when you move on a battlefield, those legs form rotating circles and contrails form at your helmet's edges. I can't think of a situation where a unit can't or won't run as fast as they can unless they are pinned in which case they have gone to ground anyways.

5. Tons of random rollwork.

Warlord trait, psychic powers, mysterious terrain, objectives, chaos boons, mutations, warpstorms...

 dementedwombat wrote:
I'm willing to put up with pretty much any system that doesn't include 10 ridiculously fast and tough Nob bikers who somehow remain at full strength until the squad suffers 11 wounds.

Thing is, even with wound allocation, Nob Bikers just didn't seem that tough to me in 5th - especially when you consider the cost of the squad (and mandatory warboss). Whilst they could certainly be irritating to face, they never seemed particularly OP.

I mean, a full squad with warboss is about 800pts. Personally, I have little objection to 800pts of models being tanky.

Furthermore, whilst it had a bit of shooting, it was really a dedicated-CC unit. And, in my experience, 800pt CC units aren't hard to beat - especially since the name of the game in 5th was MSU and Transports. "Oh no - your 800pt unit reached my lines and killed a 35pt transport. The Horror!" And, for as resilient as those squads are, I find they're rarely resilient enough - especially when they have to get close to do anything. Yes, the Warboss can absorb some S8 weapons, but he's only got 3 wounds and a 4+/5+ save (4++ with cover, I believe) - and, when he's down to one wound, the ork player will have to start allocating those S8 hits to nobz. Similarly, if you hit the unit with multiple S8 shots, the Warboss can only take 1 of them on himself - any others have good odds of insta-killing nobz. And, by coming close, the unit opens itself up to meltaguns, blasters, rapid-fire plasmaguns etc.

To put it another way, I can easily have 800pts spread out over 8-10 units (including transports). All of those can move around and either target different units, or concentrate their fire on one a big unit. On the other hand, my opponent has 800pts invested in a single unit that can, realistically, only kill one unit per turn. Can it survive to reach my lines and kill some stuff? Sure. Can it survive long enough to devastate my army and make its points back? In my experience, the answer is a resounding 'no'. Hell, I'm not even certain there are enough assault phases in the game to make that practical.

 Kosake wrote:

3. No assault when deep-striking, coming from reserves, exiting vehicles etc.

I can get behind no assaulting from deep-strike (somewhat), but the others bug me.

- Is walking out of a stationary vehicle so stressful that its crew requires a relaxing cup of tea and biscuit, before they can work up the strength to charge something?
- Why do outflanking genestealers obligingly wait around for the enemy to notice and shoot them before attacking? Has the Hive Mind developed a misguided sense of honour now?
- Are Dark Eldar unaccustomed to travelling through their own webways now? You'd think wyches and the like might have learned that charging towards the enemy, even while a bit dizzy, tended to result in surviving. On the other hand, standing outside the webway like a lemon tended to result in them turning into paste. Really, I'd have thought 'survival of the fittest' would have cured this oddity some time ago.

Also, if all of the above are so disorienting, then why do they all allow you to fire your guns without the slightest drop in accuracy? A squad or marines can fall to earth in a drop pod, disembark with their full movement speed (in perfect formation, naturally) and easily obliterate a vehicle with meltaguns. On the other hand, getting out and moving a little bit further is out of the question?

I can only assume that some kind of Space Union is to blame.

 vipoid wrote:
- Why do outflanking genestealers obligingly wait around for the enemy to notice and shoot them before attacking? Has the Hive Mind developed a misguided sense of honour now?

Hey, the Hive Mind accepts challenges. Because that makes sense. The big bad hive tyrant is going to only attack the guy yelling at him, instead of kicking him and all his friends. The hive mind doesn't even have the option of having a gribbly accept the challenge, which I think would make much more sense as an option, any model in synapse could accept (but not issue) a challenge in place of the character.

JPong wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
- Why do outflanking genestealers obligingly wait around for the enemy to notice and shoot them before attacking? Has the Hive Mind developed a misguided sense of honour now?

Hey, the Hive Mind accepts challenges. Because that makes sense. The big bad hive tyrant is going to only attack the guy yelling at him, instead of kicking him and all his friends. The hive mind doesn't even have the option of having a gribbly accept the challenge, which I think would make much more sense as an option, any model in synapse could accept (but not issue) a challenge in place of the character.

I'm more surprised that it doesn't get the option "throw 3 carnifexes at the challenger" - that one has basis in the fluff.

Hull points. I just hate hull points. Everything in 6th edition would be better without them.

I am saying this as a CSM player.

 vipoid wrote:


quotequotequote

I'm more surprised that it doesn't get the option "throw 3 carnifexes at the challenger" - that one has basis in the fluff.

Yeah, I'd love that Really, losing morale bonus or whatever because the hive tyrant doesn't bother slicing open that one particular sarge with a chainsword doesn't seem to make sense for nids. Or necrons, for that matter.

 techsoldaten wrote:
Hull points. I just hate hull points. Everything in 6th edition would be better without them.

I am saying this as a CSM player.

My feelings on Hull Points are somewhat mixed.

I think that sort of system could work, and a lot of vehicles were too durable in 5th... but it was implemented badly. For a start, did we really need vehicles with just 2 HPs? I mean, aren't those vehicles already soft in terms of being AV10? Why did they need an extra layer of fragility? In fact, did we even need varying HPs for vehicles - I thought that was the whole point of varying AV?

Similarly, 4 HPs seems pretty low for vehicles like the land raider and monolith. Aren't both of those already of dubious cost effectiveness, without also giving them poor long-term survivability?

 Kosake wrote:
Yeah, I'd love that Really, losing morale bonus or whatever because the hive tyrant doesn't bother slicing open that one particular sarge with a chainsword doesn't seem to make sense for nids. Or necrons, for that matter.

I'd like DE to get a rule along the lines of:

(to challenger) "Yes, of course I'll accept your challenge."
(to squad) "The minute he turns his back, you know what to do."

All unengaged squad members can fire their weapons at the enemy challenger in their initiative step.

Oh please no. I already have a rule that forces me to fight in CC and its not like I can deny challenges in CC on my MCs either.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To be honest challenges just really don't work. IG? You really want to solo that? Along with that, its like why is the daemon prince so obsessed with killing the... sergeant that declared a challenge? Why not laugh, stomp, sneer and kill more. CSM? Why are they all crazy and want to challenge? We aren't just individuals opting for individual glory. We are the slaves of chaos, the unbound warriors, the lost, the renegade, the damned. Why does the sorcerer declare a challenge? Why does the sergeant declare a challenge instead of the big bad? Honestly I'd rather it be some special rule. Slaanesh duelists, some Khornate champions being honor bound (but not all! No cultist declaring challenge against swarmy), the SC of DE (the incubi guy), incubi, maybe striking scorpions, assassin unit? Etc.

Generating Psyker powers is too random.

Currently, my GUO gets Iron Arm pretty much every game. I don't particularly have a problem with this, but the fact he usually ends up with Life Leech or Warp Speed, is pretty disgusting.

If for each additional Mastery level there was an increase in points, (usually from what I'm seeing its 25 points per mastery level) If it were increased to 35, and then 45 for instance. Randomly generating the tables is too boring. Winning because of luck already favors the Dice. We shouldnt have to win / lose to pure luck when we out maneuver and out play our opponents. Choosing your Abilities, and paying according to them should exist to that extent. Hell, we could always say a Psykers Mastery Level is definite (Not having to pay for lvl 3s for instance) But have to pay for the Powers instead.

Make Iron Arm cost 50 Points.
Make Warp Speed cost 30
Make Life Leech and the likes 25

1. Rolling for powers
2. Flimsiness of Vehicles in general
3. D weapons
4. Allies
5. Overabundance of Low AP weapons

GoliothOnline wrote:
Generating Psyker powers is too random.

Currently, my GUO gets Iron Arm pretty much every game. I don't particularly have a problem with this, but the fact he usually ends up with Life Leech or Warp Speed, is pretty disgusting.

If for each additional Mastery level there was an increase in points, (usually from what I'm seeing its 25 points per mastery level) If it were increased to 35, and then 45 for instance. Randomly generating the tables is too boring. Winning because of luck already favors the Dice. We shouldnt have to win / lose to pure luck when we out maneuver and out play our opponents. Choosing your Abilities, and paying according to them should exist to that extent. Hell, we could always say a Psykers Mastery Level is definite (Not having to pay for lvl 3s for instance) But have to pay for the Powers instead.

Make Iron Arm cost 50 Points.
Make Warp Speed cost 30
Make Life Leech and the likes 25

The issue is that you would need to cost psychic abilities differently for each model that can get them.

Just take Biomancy for instance

Iron Arm on a MC is amazing...on a librarian or sorcerer...meh its ok...decent if he is in an assaulty unit...worthless if he is sitting back as a buffing character...i.e. not worth 50 points to him.
Warp Speed same deal...great if you are running for combat...meh otherwise
Enfeeble is good on pretty much every model...but probably not 50 points good.
Same with Endurance.

Not saying that random is good...but just that paying for powers is not an easy thing to do.

1. Battle brother allies. Seriously, it cause most of the problems with bad list abuse and is almost always unfluffy. I love allies, but it should just be the 2 lower levels of alliance.
2-5. See above.

Breng77 wrote:
The issue is that you would need to cost psychic abilities differently for each model that can get them.

Just take Biomancy for instance

Iron Arm on a MC is amazing...on a librarian or sorcerer...meh its ok...decent if he is in an assaulty unit...worthless if he is sitting back as a buffing character...i.e. not worth 50 points to him.
Warp Speed same deal...great if you are running for combat...meh otherwise
Enfeeble is good on pretty much every model...but probably not 50 points good.
Same with Endurance.

That's part of the point though, surely - why did we need to have rulebook psychic powers? It seems it would have been easier to just let each race pick from their own list (can even cost them differently, if necessary).

I actually like the common powers. I never liked that in old editions where one book got amazing broken powers, and another got absolute garbage. I would rather see the core list and allow psykers to buy powers from there in addition to their own book. It just needs to be priced based on the character Vs just a standard price.

1-5: lists like this.

-random psychic powers
-casualty removal (closest first, I prefer to just remove what you want)
-abundance of low ap weapons
-charges <4 inches
-battle brothers

Breng77 wrote:
I actually like the common powers. I never liked that in old editions where one book got amazing broken powers, and another got absolute garbage.

I honestly see no real difference.

Just in this edition whether or not you get a broken power is determined randomly.

 vipoid wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
I actually like the common powers. I never liked that in old editions where one book got amazing broken powers, and another got absolute garbage.

I honestly see no real difference.

Just in this edition whether or not you get a broken power is determined randomly.

And also what tables you get to roll on (ig primaris psyker get garbage for possible brb powers)

I like a lot of it but:

1. Narrative game that does the opposite in important areas like the Ally Matrix - getting the fluff wrong
2. Points errors and unit mistakes/massively OP units - Riptides, Wave Serpents
3. Lack of FAQs / army updates
4. Creeping expansion of Psychic powers - really don't want it like magic in WFB
5. reduction of importance of assault
6. Battle Brothers - not only is it two good, but they got the allies wrong.
7. New models - Centurions are prime culprit
8. Supplemetns that do companies rather than Chapters
9. No full printed Codex for Sisters
10. no Adeptus Mechanicus codex

On ther other hand loads of good stuff
1 Premeasuring
2. Some of the new models - WraithKnight for one
3. Challenges
4. Speed of Codex updates
5. Sisters finally got an update

 vipoid wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
I actually like the common powers. I never liked that in old editions where one book got amazing broken powers, and another got absolute garbage.

I honestly see no real difference.

Just in this edition whether or not you get a broken power is determined randomly.

What I was saying is that I would prefer non-random BRB powers, as well as book powers. Let me point out the difference in a couple way. Compare the last DA codex to say the Space Wolf Codex. DA got 2 powers (3 with a special Character) both of which were meh. Wolves got what 7 powers several of which are completely awesome and one which is arguably broken.

Look at the 6th Ed books take CSM or Daemons with their Codex powers and compair them to say Eldar...complete garbage by comparison (CSM book powers by and large are terrible, Daemons are so so but mostly bad). Having overlap to the book powers allows those books access to some good powers.

Essentially it becomes a scenario where some codices get lots of good stuff...and others get nothing comparatively.

vipoid wrote:

And also what tables you get to roll on (ig primaris psyker get garbage for possible brb powers)

I agree that BRB tables should be more balanced. 3 of the Tables are fairly significantly better than others. But all of the tables (except maybe pyromancy) have some good spells, and if you could purchase those spells they would be more balanced. Divination is lauded because it is consistently good, but even Telekinesis would be decent if you reliably take things like Gate of Infinity.
That said doesn't the Primaris get Biomancy? Which is not horrible? And aren't the powers he gets still better than the IG codex powers he had? Let me put it this way. I've seen players use Primaris psykers with book powers this edition...last edition I never saw them at all.

Sure the ig primaris gets biomancy but about 2 of the powers are useful on him and the others are largely pointless