For me it was the vehicle damage table with the addition of HP.

When I first started the game one of the things I loved best about 40k was the vehicle damage. I played orks against my friends IG, and I loved playing the "how destroyed is destroyed enough" game with his tanks. I also loved my old Ramshackle rule with my trukks, which led to me creating an entire Trukk boyz army, as the Kareen result never failed to make me laugh.

The addition of hull points made my mechanized guard army sad

When they nerfed Entropic Strike so it didn't work on Super-Heavies.

Random charge range. Nothing has damaged my fun with the game more than "lol your space marine captain, veteran of over 1000 battles, tripped over his shoelaces."

Lolrandom traits/powers are a very close second.
"This is Timeus, my chapter's lead librarian, known for using powerful psychic buffs and jumping into combat."
"Oh? So he knows iron arm, or warp speed, or endurance?"
"...no. Apparently he has smite enfeeble and hemorrhage today. >.>"
"And this is my captain, Roberticus of the 2nd company, who specializes in infiltration tactics."
"Oh so he has that infiltrate trait?"
"...no, today he is really good at fighting in ruins instead."
"So...that pair of aegis defense line pieces we put over in that corner?"
"...yeah."

All of 5th ed into 6th ed (and beyond).

Not being able to assault out of a rhino that remains stationary.

Pretty much anything that has to do with assault. Assault armies are how I loved to play the game. Now it is just a joke.

The change of ork's mob rule removed fearless boy hordes from my regular army lists. That made me sad.

Coming in a close second would be hull points because everything glances my trukks to death now (except basic IG infantry, they're cool).

These two together eliminated most of my army.

There is soo much i find to be dumb about the rules change, and most of them has been changed for no good reasons.

Assault related rules meanly.

Also how DtW works, if you're not someone who plays lots or at all with psykers, you're basically screwed.

After trying to give the new Power From Pain a fair shake, I think I really prefer the old one. Sure, you don't have to worry about your opponent focus firing your pain tokens off the board, but you also don't get the visceral reward of killing a unit to earn pain tokens. My Cronos also misses tossing pain tokens to his friends, though he's found a new purpose as a super FNP generator. Wyches were reasonably durable back when you could take a cheap-as-dirt haemonculus with them that gave them 4+ FNP right off the bat. Putting multiple haemonculi (usually with one being an ancient kitted out with off-beat weapons) into a squad to start them off with stronger buffs was fun.

So Power From Pain and the old versions of the rules associated with it.

I was saddest to lose assault after infiltrating and going second in addition to losing assault after outflank

Cannot charge from a stationary transport.

I miss being able to sweeping advance straight into another enemy unit after a successful combat. My old World Eaters army was nasty back then.

Pretty much every change from 5th to 6th edition. For that is when I stopped playing the game. I just couldn't stand the direction that the game was going.

More random does not equal more fun.

Quite a few I tried to order them

-Losing the point cost for Formations -> you used to have to pay for the upgrades formations gave.
-The The losses in the ork codex.
-No more guessing ranges ( I really liked this it felt like an art) & Random charge ranges, this I hate. There is almost noting as stupid as rolling a 3 for your charge.
-Losing effective Tank shock
-Losing almost all terrain rules ( from 6th to 7th )
-Losing Focus fire.
-The introduction of a lot of re roll saves
-The poorly balanced Mealstorm missions cards :(
-The buffs eldar got
-Losing easy to make psy power checks and gaining horrible OP powers.
-The losses in the dark eldar codex
-No more assaulting after outflanking
-Losing the we will be back rule and replacing it with something dull but op.
-Losing the +1 I on furious charge

Taking away Zagstruk's whole schtick of being able to assault from Deepstrike and his commissar-esque executions for morale and reducing him to a dinky shadow of his former self. It stings all that much seeing all the recent space marine formations that allow charging after deep-strike. First the Shield of Baal BA formation, then the Skyhammer formation, and now the Raven Guard one. *sigh*

Wound allocation.

Assaulting out of a transport.

Terrain rules

Random psychic powers, random charge distances, random traits... Pretty much any random BS...

Loads of assault changes. Can't assault half the time for arbitrary reasons and in a game with very few turns that eats away at the damage output and survival rate for assault units. Yet their price hasn't gone down... Hits harder on armies that rely on close combat, especially now with the slap in the face that is Assault out of Deep Strike formations for loyalist scum only. If Assaulting was that big of a deal, they could have gone the Dark Angels route and make overwatch stronger.

Change from area terrain to TLOS

Wound allocation. Multiple times (back and forth) My favorite was when the person getting shot chose who died. Sure, the special guys lived the longest, but it was quick, generated zero arguments, and easy. My least favorite was the musical wounds of 5th. Some armys with multiple wound squads (GKs, Orcs) could abuse the holly tar out of it. Others just ate it. I like the idea of directional wounds, but I don’t think the overhead of actually allocating things with all the LOS! checks, seeing who’s the closest, etc, are worth the effort.

the_scotsman wrote:
For me it was the vehicle damage table with the addition of HP.

When I first started the game one of the things I loved best about 40k was the vehicle damage. I played orks against my friends IG, and I loved playing the "how destroyed is destroyed enough" game with his tanks. I also loved my old Ramshackle rule with my trukks, which led to me creating an entire Trukk boyz army, as the Kareen result never failed to make me laugh.

The Furious charge rule probably. Some units get furious chrge and hammer of wrath and for them no problem but some units really needed that init boost.

 Jancoran wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
For me it was the vehicle damage table with the addition of HP.

When I first started the game one of the things I loved best about 40k was the vehicle damage. I played orks against my friends IG, and I loved playing the "how destroyed is destroyed enough" game with his tanks. I also loved my old Ramshackle rule with my trukks, which led to me creating an entire Trukk boyz army, as the Kareen result never failed to make me laugh.

The Furious charge rule probably. Some units get furious chrge and hammer of wrath and for them no problem but some units really needed that init boost.

The loss of the bonus init when furious charge was changed, IMO something GW did right. When the rule first came out it was broken as all get out. Two bonus stats for no points increase. I've always felt that it should have just been a bonus to Strength, or if you really wanted to keep the bonus to Init. Then you should have lost a point to WS for that first round. Just to keep things balanced.

The whole of new IG codex. Maelstrom missions. But escalation was probably worse, almost killed the community here dividing in to those that can buy a recast titan and those that can't.

Makumba wrote:
The whole of new IG codex. Maelstrom missions. But escalation was probably worse, almost killed the community here dividing in to those that can buy a recast titan and those that can't.

The name killed it for me.

 Jayden63 wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
For me it was the vehicle damage table with the addition of HP.

When I first started the game one of the things I loved best about 40k was the vehicle damage. I played orks against my friends IG, and I loved playing the "how destroyed is destroyed enough" game with his tanks. I also loved my old Ramshackle rule with my trukks, which led to me creating an entire Trukk boyz army, as the Kareen result never failed to make me laugh.

The Furious charge rule probably. Some units get furious chrge and hammer of wrath and for them no problem but some units really needed that init boost.

The loss of the bonus init when furious charge was changed, IMO something GW did right. When the rule first came out it was broken as all get out. Two bonus stats for no points increase. I've always felt that it should have just been a bonus to Strength, or if you really wanted to keep the bonus to Init. Then you should have lost a point to WS for that first round. Just to keep things balanced.

I don't think it was brken. i think the codex it was most characteristically attached to broke it. To be fair.

I think adding a SECOND ability for +1 init on charges could have been another answer. But after 6E came out and De-fangd the Blood Angels fairly thoroughly, I then felt like they actually needed something to compete. The standings by and large reflected that.

It's not a rule I actually have much of in my lists so this is more of a dispassionate observation on my part but some units like for example the Penitent Engine badly need an init boost on the charge and not having one makes them nigh unplayable and badly limits the targets that it makes sense for them to charge. The old Furious charge on them would be great because while the sTR bonus would do nothing for them, the INIT bonus would.

There's other units i could get into also but the INIT issue is a biggee in many forces and It's just the only rule I kind of thought got nerfed TOO hard.

I don't like maelstrom missions. The actual scoring events seem largely irrelevant to the overall outcome of a battle and just serve to make it more like a board game. 'Pass GO this turn, collect D3 victory points!'

Maelstrom is way fun. I prefer those. i think it rewards the more flexible mind.

Ignoring the more faction specific problems like Mob Rule (which is horrible) the thing I hate the most was the absolute lack of detail on terrain rules. 6th edition terrain worked well enough and all they had to do was copy + paste them in 7th. Instead they removed large portions of the terrain rules for no real reason which just leaves a lot of room for issues and doesn't even help streamline the game.

 Jancoran wrote:
Maelstrom is way fun. I prefer those. I think it rewards the more flexible mind.

Maelstrom is really fun but the book rules for them shows a lack of play testing. Make a few house rules (such as the nearly universally agreed upon "discard and redraw impossible to achieve cards") and you have sometime really fun. That being said the game mode where you start off with 6 cards and reduce your hand size by 1 per turn snowballs so hard that the game is often decided by the end of turn 2 purely from card draw.

I only witnessed the change from 6th to 7th, so the biggest loss for me was... erm, not much. terrain levels, maybe. 6th to 7th was an improvement in almost all fronts, so not much to complain.

The loss of vehicle multitrackers in the 6th edition Tau codex. Because the idiot GW put in charge of writing the rules had no clue how the Tau worked they got turned into a one-dimensional giant anime robots with laser pointers army and the tanks were nerfed into useless paperweights.

 Peregrine wrote:
The loss of vehicle multitrackers in the 6th edition Tau codex. Because the idiot GW put in charge of writing the rules had no clue how the Tau worked they got turned into a one-dimensional giant anime robots with laser pointers army and the tanks were nerfed into useless paperweights.

This too... I always liked my Tau Tanks with a side of robots. Not robots with a sprinking of tanks. I still have no real desire to get back into Tau until they fix the tank/vehicle issues it currently has.

 Grimtuff wrote:
All of 5th ed into 6th ed (and beyond).

This.

Wyldhunt wrote:
After trying to give the new Power From Pain a fair shake, I think I really prefer the old one. Sure, you don't have to worry about your opponent focus firing your pain tokens off the board, but you also don't get the visceral reward of killing a unit to earn pain tokens. My Cronos also misses tossing pain tokens to his friends, though he's found a new purpose as a super FNP generator. Wyches were reasonably durable back when you could take a cheap-as-dirt haemonculus with them that gave them 4+ FNP right off the bat. Putting multiple haemonculi (usually with one being an ancient kitted out with off-beat weapons) into a squad to start them off with stronger buffs was fun.

So Power From Pain and the old versions of the rules associated with it.

A while ago my friend joked that the new PfP chart is basically DE having their special rules withheld until the end of the game.

It's rather depressing how accurate that is.

Losing pinning on anything Barrage, GG pinning tests :(

I will forgive maelstrom for a lot, because at the very least it eradicated the more slowed missions from the game (Who brought the biggest Death Star, The Emperors Tie) and made the game more dynamic right from the start.

Every time I'm forced to choose between the "best" move for points and the "best" move for damage, I smile.

At the same time though I wish they'd just designed one tight mission than 6 that vary wildly in balance and fun. Something built from Contact Lost, which rewards objective holding even when you're not lucky enough to draw the card for it, would be best. Also, what's wrong with just scoring two freaking points GW? Can we have ONE THING in the game not be random? Maybe? Why D3??

I actually like Maelstrom a lot. It has the case of Harvey Dent logic to it: Chance is fair. So at least I can't get mad at the design

Though I haven't played anything but 6th and 7th, I can safely say that the design of the game overall was a lot better off back in 5th. It had its own problems sure, but really, how bad was it, compared to what we see today?

The Ramshackle rule is one I'd love to get back, and some simpler rules for Terrain would've been cool. Also, why the hell would Sniper and Barrage lose Pinning? That's the point behind those weapons!

 Grimtuff wrote:
All of 5th ed into 6th ed (and beyond).

This. Killed a good game.

as a Daemons player the changes to how FMC's can assault and the changes to the psychic powers system irritate me to no end.

Battle brothers rules from 6th to 7th (aside Taudar) + FA/HS Transports.

Vehicle damage mechanic sucks.

Ruins clarification would be nice.

Blast/template vs multi-level?

addition of D weapons to standard games sucks.





But overall.... Stomp being able to go out of the original combat is the single dumbest rule in the game right now.

Random assault
red ones don't go faster
Deff roller
Ram shackle
Mod rule
Inv saves in cyborg
Nurf of dakka jet
Pretty much the new ork codex there is to much to keep naming

The nerfing of the D

The introduction of the new stupid Vehicle Damage mechanics

Rofldar

Super Heavies and their ilk becoming part of the regular game

Maelstrom

Some more for me:

- DE Huskblade changed to AP3, leaving the Archon without a single AP2 weapon to his name. Well, at least he has all hsi support abilities to fall ba... HAHAHAHAHA.

- Removal of Aerial Assault from Ravager. It was a simple, fair and fluffy rule that captured the feel of DE. But, I guess fluff is only allowed on GW's favourite races.

- Change to Necron RPs. The new rule is really strong, but also really boring and flavourless. I know that the old one had rule issues, but I feel those could have been easily resolved with either a few changes to the mechanic, or just old fashioned good writing.

Gets hot on the executioner. That was a hard hit, now not so much of a rule issue but I hate when they create special characters and remove them. Marbo, chenekov, Nazdreg, the list goes on.

The changes to assault. Especially charging and fleet.

That Deathwing (aside from the DW Knights, who are now pretty damn good) got arguably worse.

One that always bugged me was specialist weapons being changed so that using a pair gave you an extra attack.

So, you have this weapon that's hard to use, even if your other hand is free and you can give it your full attention. But, if you then divide your attention between two different weapons that are both hard to use, you can use either more efficiently.

Just... what... ?

As a Tau player, I did morn the loss of Broadside Railguns and Vehicle Multi-trackers when the 6th edition codex dropped, but then again, I think we made up for that with the rest of what was in that codex and it's recent successor.

As a Daemons player, anything to do with random rolls pisses me off and makes me want to torch my models. They can be completely useless at 350+ points per model (Daemon Prince)

It's bad enough Daemons as a whole don't have EW lumped into their USR, Daemon Princes only having their high WS and I as a buffer between them and a well timed smash attack from a riptide. And it's happened more than once, as I'm sure we've all seen.

We have house rules in place to use which ever abilities we want from the psychic phase we have access to (up to your ML of Course) simply to bypass the god awful rolling of random gak.

Chaos boon table is another terrible design. Though I thoroughly enjoy having my 10k year veteran of the immetirium who fought in the warp slaughtering thousands of souls over and over again to rise to the top of his ranks in power, getting turned into a chaos spawn, at least gift of mutation should allow us to choose what we get.

I especially love the Warp Storm table, which guarantees that 5 minutes will be wasted each turn doing absolutely sod-all.

With regard to EW, it was a bit weird that GKs used Force Weapons when daemons were immune to them. But, I'd much rather have seen GKs lose ID than have daemons lose EW.

On the account of CSM - I'm really sad that Chaos Lords haven't got S/T 5 anymore :/ They'd be so menacing! The stats of a Warboss, with the gear of a Marine!

Because then you'd have T7 biker lords and we can't have that

the_scotsman wrote:
For me it was the vehicle damage table with the addition of HP.

This would probably be it for me with respect to 6E/7E, along with the 7E "detachment" rule changes in going from one standard FoC to "as many of anything of whatever you want!".

Mindshackle Scarabs.

Dakka banner and PFG going the way of the dodo made me a bit sad. Granted that those could take RW to about the same powerlevel as those damn elves but we can't have that because elves are special.

 Bobthehero wrote:
Because then you'd have T7 biker lords and we can't have that

We already have that. Sorcerer + Biomancy + Bike = T8 biker -- heck AdMech have robots that are T7.

He's gotta roll to get Biomancy, and I doubt the robots are either as scary as the lord or as easy to hide from Isntant Death Vanquisher shells.

Adding Hull points. Loss of psybolt ammo. Loss of ANY hq's for any arrmy. Looking at wazdakka, creed, kyrinov, all the hq's that moved to lords of war, putting them in the same slot as a bane blade and titans. Loss of troop shuffling like sammael making bikes troops and similar hq's for their armies. Digital only codex. This completely made my army unplayable at my local club because "I heard they are easy to modify and cheat with"

 Bobthehero wrote:
He's gotta roll to get Biomancy, and I doubt the robots are either as scary as the lord or as easy to hide from Isntant Death Vanquisher shells.

Bikes/horses/etc shouldn't give +1T to begin with.

And if he hides in a unit then majority Toughness makes him T6 or less anyway, so...

Furious Charge, muh berzerkers are sad.

And the loss of infiltrate on chosen, I enjoyed nothing more than ruining any tank near a board edges day with melta chosen. Then makinh them harder to shift thanks to MoN.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
He's gotta roll to get Biomancy, and I doubt the robots are either as scary as the lord or as easy to hide from Isntant Death Vanquisher shells.

Bikes/horses/etc shouldn't give +1T to begin with.

And if he hides in a unit then majority Toughness makes him T6 or less anyway, so...

Hey, we agree on something, is it the end of the world

 niv-mizzet wrote:
Random charge range. Nothing has damaged my fun with the game more than "lol your space marine captain, veteran of over 1000 battles, tripped over his shoelaces."
Lolrandom traits/powers are a very close second.

Second that. Running and difficult terrain in particular irks me for the same reason.

And yeah I hate the general transition to D6 randomess, traits and powers being a prime example. If the randomness is because some are more powerful that others, then the rule writers and playesters should do their flaming jobs and balance them!

Defensive fire from vehicles. Seriously, it is the 41M and we have no idea how to fire heavy bolters or stubbers at the guys running right at the tank. This is the reason why tanks have machine guns on top of them.

 Mozzyfuzzy wrote:
Furious Charge, muh berzerkers are sad.

And the loss of infiltrate on chosen, I enjoyed nothing more than ruining any tank near a board edges day with melta chosen. Then makinh them harder to shift thanks to MoN.

I always enjoyed the 5 Flamer outflanking MoK ones. Ruined so much infantry with them.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Mozzyfuzzy wrote:
Furious Charge, muh berzerkers are sad.

And the loss of infiltrate on chosen, I enjoyed nothing more than ruining any tank near a board edges day with melta chosen. Then makinh them harder to shift thanks to MoN.

I always enjoyed the 5 Flamer outflanking MoK ones. Ruined so much infantry with them.

Can't have CSM turning up out of nowhere, it ruins them lining up to run into loyalist guns en masse like good bad guys

Shadow in the warp. In 5th edition, the psykers had to take the test on 3 dice, and you would almost always fail (at least, with Tigurius). Now it's just a -3 penalty to leadership if they have the Psyker, Psyker pilot or Brotherhood of Psykers rules.

 Bobthehero wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
He's gotta roll to get Biomancy, and I doubt the robots are either as scary as the lord or as easy to hide from Isntant Death Vanquisher shells.

Bikes/horses/etc shouldn't give +1T to begin with.

And if he hides in a unit then majority Toughness makes him T6 or less anyway, so...

Hey, we agree on something, is it the end of the world

I think it's fair to assume that the bikes make you resistant to enemy fire. From the front, pretty much only your head is exposed, and the bike is a heavily armored piece of kit.

I also think it's fair to assume that said resistance is too small to justify a +1 T increase in a D6 system.

Getting rid of armor modifiers and replacing them with the AP system. What a crappy non-accurate system.

Getting rid of point values made me sad.

Oh wait, what year is this? Great scott! Back to the Delorean! See you all in a year!

 KaptinBadrukk wrote:
Shadow in the warp. In 5th edition, the psykers had to take the test on 3 dice, and you would almost always fail (at least, with Tigurius). Now it's just a -3 penalty to leadership if they have the Psyker, Psyker pilot or Brotherhood of Psykers rules.

What is a leadership penalty supposed to do when they're casting powers? That has a whole other psyker test.

Isn't psyker pilot only for fearless vehicles?

I'm so confused.

 the Signless wrote:

 KaptinBadrukk wrote:
Shadow in the warp. In 5th edition, the psykers had to take the test on 3 dice, and you would almost always fail (at least, with Tigurius). Now it's just a -3 penalty to leadership if they have the Psyker, Psyker pilot or Brotherhood of Psykers rules.

What is a leadership penalty supposed to do when they're casting powers? That has a whole other psyker test.

Isn't psyker pilot only for fearless vehicles?

I'm so confused.

Exactly. It's absolutely worthless. Unless the psyker is within 12" of a synapse creature (and why isn't shadow in the warp the same range as synapse?), perils, and rolls a certain result, THEN it can work.

Psychic tests are mine. Mixed with how flyrants cannot switch to gliding and assault. It completely removed the melee build from the scene and left us with the hated dakka flyrant.

In addition to the loss of the dakka banner and the pfg for dark angels, the change to the RWGL. The grenade launcher's old rad would cause -1 toughness, which would put meq into ID range of their plasma talons. More specifically, it was great for reducing the necrons reanimation by 1. It also made it so you needed 2s to wound in the ensuing assault against anything that was t4 before you shot it.

Now it is just a str 3 blast that causes 2 wounds on a 6 to wound. Effectively guts a lot of the usefulness out of the RWGL

Shuriken Catapult +1 to hit 24" range -2 Save Mod Sustained Fire 1

to
Shuriken Catapult 12" range

 Glitcha wrote:
Defensive fire from vehicles. Seriously, it is the 41M and we have no idea how to fire heavy bolters or stubbers at the guys running right at the tank. This is the reason why tanks have machine guns on top of them.

This so damn much. I have those hull mounted HB's for a reason OTHER than looking pretty you know.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
When they nerfed Entropic Strike so it didn't work on Super-Heavies.

Actually, upon further consideration, I retract this statement.

The rule that made me saddest was when they got rid of We'll Be Back and replaced it with Resurrection Protocols.

Sure, RP is more powerful, but WBB was a lot more flavourful and fun to play, rather than just being an extra die.

I hated seeing seeker missiles changed for the Tau. It used to not force the vehicle that it launches from to fire the rest of its weapons at that target as well.

Wasn't the most useful rule, or the one that hurt orks the most, but I really, really hated to see Mobbing Up go away. I LOVED it that the orks ran towards MORE ORKS. If you didn't run them down or pick them off piecemeal, then you sometimes ended up with one huge blob of orks with about 20 special weapons. It was both useful, and so, so characterful and funny. Sigh.

I also really hated losing Looters and Looted Wagons that were actually USING looted weapons or vehicles from another army. Such win. Such cool conversions. Double sigh.

Lumbering Behemoth for Imperial Guard. It's removal made my Leman Russ dang near unusable thanks to the way Ordinance works now.

Outflank losing on-turn assault

I miss getting charge bonuses against swept And They Shall Know No Fear units.

It makes no sense to me that you can beat them off some ground, pursue them down as they attempt a fighting retreat, but there is no advantage to doing so compared to them passing their morale check and not retreating to begin with.

Edit: Oh and not being able to use special weapons, such as melta, in combat against vehicles. IMHO these weapons should be able to make unwieldy, grenade style attacks... Not that Vehicles need nerfing any further! Perhaps vehicles could be allowed to overwatch with flame template weapons?

nareik wrote:
I miss getting charge bonuses against swept And They Shall Know No Fear units.

It makes no sense to me that you can beat them off some ground, pursue them down as they attempt a fighting retreat, but there is no advantage to doing so compared to them passing their morale check and not retreating to begin with.

I think those penalties were removed because they mainly affected Fearless units.

There was a rather well-known occurrence, whereby Nids would end up with a MC and a lot of gaunts in the same combat. Due to gaunt losses, they'd lose combat, and then the wounds from Fearless would cause the MC to explode.

So Daemonic Instability now?

Here's another one I thought off, Night Fighting and by extension, Night Shields.

Before it was tactical thinking to make sure you were out of range, now it's all 'Everybody gets Stealth!! Oh, are units not dying fast enough? Only certain armies get Ignore Cover!!!'

5th ed to 6th ed was bad, then to 7th ed to make it worse.

THE ENTIRE CHAOS SPACE MARINE CODEX

 DarknessEternal wrote:
Shuriken Catapult +1 to hit 24" range -2 Save Mod Sustained Fire 1

to
Shuriken Catapult 12" range

I try to not think about a lot of the changes from 2nd to 3rd, but will agree that this was one of the worst offenders.

“Hey, we are a ultra high-tech dying race, let’s give our militia SMGs and shove them into the meat grinder of war” Particularly since they spent a lot of time as ablative wounds for the weapon platforms. Assault was also a lot more viable back then, so 12” was not a place you really wanted to be.

 vipoid wrote:

nareik wrote:
I miss getting charge bonuses against swept And They Shall Know No Fear units.

It makes no sense to me that you can beat them off some ground, pursue them down as they attempt a fighting retreat, but there is no advantage to doing so compared to them passing their morale check and not retreating to begin with.

I think those penalties were removed because they mainly affected Fearless units.

There was a rather well-known occurrence, whereby Nids would end up with a MC and a lot of gaunts in the same combat. Due to gaunt losses, they'd lose combat, and then the wounds from Fearless would cause the MC to explode.

I'm not talking about fearless units taking wounds when losing combat. Given the example you have used I can see why that changed.

I'm talking about space marines losing combat, failing their morale check then rolling lower for their initiative test than the opponent. In a previous edition (third?) the opponent would count as having charged in the next assault phase.

nareik wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

nareik wrote:
I miss getting charge bonuses against swept And They Shall Know No Fear units.

It makes no sense to me that you can beat them off some ground, pursue them down as they attempt a fighting retreat, but there is no advantage to doing so compared to them passing their morale check and not retreating to begin with.

I think those penalties were removed because they mainly affected Fearless units.

There was a rather well-known occurrence, whereby Nids would end up with a MC and a lot of gaunts in the same combat. Due to gaunt losses, they'd lose combat, and then the wounds from Fearless would cause the MC to explode.

I'm not talking about fearless units taking wounds when losing combat. Given the example you have used I can see why that changed.

I'm talking about space marines losing combat, failing their morale check then rolling lower for their initiative test than the opponent. In a previous edition (third?) the opponent would count as having charged in the next assault phase.

Ah, sorry, I thought you were talking about the 5th edition rules. SMs that fled and got caught would count as Fearless, and suffer wounds as Fearless models.

Ah, well the 5th edition method kind of makes sense, but I think the 3rd ed solution of the winners regaining the vigour of a fresh assault was the best solution.

I bet it got removed due to arguments over whether or not hatred would count :p

Yeah, that does sound like a logical rule. At the very least, it does seem a bit silly that they can run but suffer no penalty if caught.

7th doesn't have any logic, because all the smart people who could think with logic left GW years ago...

Miss darn Andy Chambers and Pete Haines...

Not being able to assault from out flanking or from being hidden in terrain, makes no sense to me.
Scout movers and infiltrators not being able to assault on turn one i believe is also cruddy.
From deepstrike? i think more things should be able to, but i can kinda see how some/most units maybe kinda sorta could justify not assaulting out of deepstrike, but still, a lot more things should be able to.

Also not so much rule change but losses i guess. negative to Ld with markerlights, and more importantly, the +1BS wargear choice they used to have. BS4 stealth suits were no joke lol

Was looking through the old 2nd ed ork codex for something some time ago and discovered that the original meganobz had something akin to FNP. They quickly lost it, but I think having FNP built into meganobz would make them almost worth buying now.

Yes! MANz having medisquig cages built into their armour! Hillarious!

Not being able to assault from a stationary vehicle or from table edge reserves.

Armour save modifiers to ap system. If they brought that back with the new edition it would really help the game out. Suddenly bolters would be worth a damn and terminator armour with 3+ on 2D6 actually feels powerful!

Remember when blast templates halved their strength if they didnt direct hit on vehicles or when you had to mentally try and calculate range because shooting went like, "Pick a target, now measure to see if you are within range"

I can't remember how they worked in older editions, but something about the current blast rules never sat right with me.

Yeah, an artillery she'll has a lethal radius of 75 meters, meanwhile, in game, you'll struggle to hit 3 guys that are spaced out

Orks:

- Having Cybork turn from a 5++ for 5pts per model to a 6+ FNP
- Ramshackle TTuTT I had a list that was praying to drive into the enemy and blow up. Give me back my fun!!


Imperial Guard:

- Give me back all the special characters...
- Give me back send in the next waaave!~

Rules in general:

- I actually liked that fact that there was no measure before shoot. Gave the game more of a risk factore.
- I also liked how charging use to be 6inches if I remember correctly. I know weird sense my orks rely on the new way so much, but I prefer having the ability to set up a plan and know you wont fail because jo blow tripped on a rock.
- Charging from outflank


Conclusion:

If its not broken GW then don't fix it. I believe the rules and units i'v named off were never really broken. Send in the next wave was just a lot of conscripts that you can stop by killing the Special officer. Ramshackle is a wild card which everyone thought was fun at my stores. Taking away the orks only way to have a 5++ in melee is just cold in a world full of armor shredding melee weapons.

I guess I just miss a lot of the older things that I played with when I started this hobby. A time when my orks were a fun silly army that one a game here and there.