If you could only change one aspect of 40k (be it fluff, rules, models,etc...) what would it be? Try and keep it specific and only one thing.

Man, that is a tough thing to do....there is so much....
Actual SoB codex with new sculpts.
Or
An Astra Militarum Penal Legion supplement with Schaefer and Kage and the original last chances as model up gradea. Include bomb collars and a variety of equine options similar to the 3rd/4th ed dex.

I'd give close combat armies a bone.

Overwatch exists. I'd bring back the old rule from 3rd(?) for the consolidation move that said If a unit rolls a high enough move and can reach an enemy unit it counts as a charge.

Only one aspect eh?
Lower prices.

StevetheDestroyeOfWorlds wrote:
Only one aspect eh?
Lower prices.

Amen to that lol

Ordo Chronos needs love.

rewind back to 4th edition, before the Black Templars codex.

Yup rewind to 4th or 5th.

One big, expensive BRB with all codices. Everyone would know the rules for all the armies, games would go much more smoothly, and people would buy more armies since they already know the rules.

They could have a multi-volumed version with hardbacks and book holders with stylized drawings, painting tutorials, pictures, and rules for $250-$400 while also having a paperback with nothing but rules for $90.

Please make this happen!

Maj.Lee Scrude wrote:
Man, that is a tough thing to do....there is so much....
Actual SoB codex with new sculpts.
Or
An Astra Militarum Penal Legion supplement with Schaefer and Kage and the original last chances as model up gradea. Include bomb collars and a variety of equine options similar to the 3rd/4th ed dex.

Definitely this, new SoB.

I'd like the game to be mainstream, more so than video games for example. Then there would be a lot more people to play with and all the other things would probably fall into place.

Hey it's a wish--- might as well go big.

Mainstream would be good.
I'd like to see a Gaming table in every home and half a dozen pubs in each city.

More Cities of Death terrain. I like the current sprues but it'd be nice to get more designs. And please make it compatible with the old ones!

Does a viable Chaos faction count as one thing?

You know, with CSM having a Renegades and Legions codex, along with there being Lost and the Damned, Dark Mechanicus and Daemons?

I mean, that's only as many books as the Imperium has dedicated to guys in different coloured power armour, right?

Opening up the back catalogue of minis, even if it's web-only.

I wish we didn't have this kind of thread every week.

 Buttery Commissar wrote:
Opening up the back catalogue of minis, even if it's web-only.

Its funny that you bring that up because I just went to a hobby store that was still carrying models from the Inquisitor game...

Get rid of the whole 'Forgeworld is not legal' BS.

Focus again on 40k lore, not this 30k and the new Ork whatever series. I'm not huge on the models and now, for a while now really, the books are either NOT 40k or are worthless Battle Novels with a pittance of plot. I miss real books like Ravenor, Necromunda, Fifteen Hours, Lord of the Night and so on.

For Games Workshop to produce a balanced rule set. Where 90% of the game isnt won in list building with broken codexs and "exclusive" rule sets.

Return Duke Sliscus to the Dark Eldar codex.

That players would stop being jerks.

Lower prices

Bring back Sly Marbo!!!
And the other characters from 5th ed Imperial Guard Codex... And Combat Doctrines (or whatever they were called)... (And maybe some legion rules for CSM)

Make all digital format codices free.

Repeal and replace 40K with a tabletop version of Betrayal at Calth. Those are better rules, with much better game play.

Remove all the wolf crap and replace it with a rule saying you can slap anyone bringing it up.

No D Weapons of any kind in non Apoc size (4000 points +) games

Cheaper Prices for everything.

Keep the Quality but make it all cheaper!



That is all.

Get rid of IGOUGO.

 Alex Kolodotschko wrote:
Mainstream would be good.
I'd like to see a Gaming table in every home and half a dozen pubs in each city.

This would be nice, I imagine it like pool tables at bars. A few drinks and playing with your friends is one thing but I'd like to be able to do like a quick pick-up game without having to have strangers in my house.

 cox.dan2 wrote:

 Alex Kolodotschko wrote:
Mainstream would be good.
I'd like to see a Gaming table in every home and half a dozen pubs in each city.

This would be nice, I imagine it like pool tables at bars. A few drinks and playing with your friends is one thing but I'd like to be able to do like a quick pick-up game without having to have strangers in my house.

We have that in my city now. Have coffee and play games, be it MtG, 40K or even board games. Come in and play. Great place. I buy most of my 40K stuff there now. He doesn't carry much but orders me what ever I want.

Remove the Vehicle Damage Table completely. This would be a good first step to make Vehicles playable.

 Phydox wrote:
I'd give close combat armies a bone.

Overwatch exists. I'd bring back the old rule from 3rd(?) for the consolidation move that said If a unit rolls a high enough move and can reach an enemy unit it counts as a charge.

I'm going to +1 this. I 100% agree. As someone who played ..about 70% of my games were played in third edition, the loss of "consolidating into close combat" is sorely missed. I don't believe it counted as charging. Just that a new combat was initiated. And that would go a long way to fix what happens now.. being rewarded for taking out a squad in close combat...by getting shot to hell by neighboring squads.

Plus, it would throw jump pack units a bone with 2d6 consolidation.

Orks get a new Codex and a court order is put in place barring the souls responsible for the last one from contributing or interfering with the making of the new one in any way under threat of being publicly beaten with a carp of questionable freshness.

Put all relevant codices into one book (e.g: all SM chapters in one big codex). Makes things easier.

OR

Like someone else said. Make one HUGE BRB with all the rules, fluff, and codices altogether in one.

Oh and make the game balanced... Don't want to forget that one lol.

My one wish would that consolidating into combat never becomes a thing again

Rule set as a living document.

I'd bring back the atmosphere/environment of 2nd edition.

Assault is, except for a few fast moving units, dead in 40k. The rules that limit assault need to be removed or modified.

For example, remove the rules that limit the ability to assault from reserves.

Stop limiting the ability to turn 1 assault.

Allow assaults after disembarking from all vehicles, though if the vehicle in question is not an assault vehicle, the unit strikes at initiative 1 no matter what.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Also, if I had a second wish, it would be to remove the "if you have no units on the board at the end of a game turn, you lose" rule. It's just stupid in a game that has random arrival from reserves.

 btgrimaldus wrote:
If you could only change one aspect of 40k (be it fluff, rules, models,etc...) what would it be? Try and keep it specific and only one thing.

I would make it so that GW does not systematically gak on particular factions. Eldar have never been sub par, and chaos in this edition is getting actively screwed over by GW (as seen with their supplement rehash at the same time as the SM one), and for some reason every single release GW makes for 40k has a Space Marine component.
Even when they are releasing no new SM models, they still add stuff.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/689382.page

Hey try this OTHER PAGE OF MINE Age of the Imedium, it a rework of AOS for 40k and it may be a fun test play and is still in development I want the game to be balanced fun and exciting let me know what yang think other then the "omg AOS 40k lame".

I have 2 wishes. Make 40K like AoS.

By that, I mean tell us how to move, how to shoot, how to have close combat. Very basic rules.

Then have all the data slates for free on the net like AoS has and have all the special rules on them. . Then do what PP does or what they are doing now in AoS (in the new boxset) and put all the special rules on the cards that come with the minis and data scrolls.

This should make the game so much less flipping through pages. You playing with minis have the cards with the rules on them so quick insta find when looking to show your opponent that special rule.

Davor wrote:
I have 2 wishes. Make 40K like AoS.

By that, I mean tell us how to move, how to shoot, how to have close combat. Very basic rules.

Then have all the data slates for free on the net like AoS has and have all the special rules on them. . Then do what PP does or what they are doing now in AoS (in the new boxset) and put all the special rules on the cards that come with the minis and data scrolls.

This should make the game so much less flipping through pages. You playing with minis have the cards with the rules on them so quick insta find when looking to show your opponent that special rule.

Agreed you might like my rework then lol

Every codex released and to be released will be balanced.

If I can have a second, stop Martel complaining about BA.

Or, failing that, have him stop telling people that the fluff should always be discounted.

On a slightly more realistic scale than most the suggestions in here, even if they are much better than mine; I'd get rid of "double strength is instadeath."

If a weapon has the special rule, fair enough. But as I play Skitarii mainly as a pure Skitarii army, that rule is the one keeping me from enjoying my games. Basically anything has S6, which is enough to kill off any of my multi wound models, and AP4, which is enough to tear through my armour.

Even geared out, you can take my warlord down 50% of the time with one S6 wound of any AP (as he would have a 4++.)

Same here with IG and I'd rather have more instant death

 Bobthehero wrote:
Same here with IG and I'd rather have more instant death

My Sicarian Infiltrator Warlord is meant to get into combat. He doesn't huddle behind the rest, throwing out combat orders.

 Purifier wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
Same here with IG and I'd rather have more instant death

My Sicarian Infiltrator Warlord is meant to get into combat. He doesn't huddle behind the rest, throwing out combat orders.

So Skitarii are like all Eldar, Dark Eldar, Harlequin etc leaders then? They die to S6.

pm713 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
Same here with IG and I'd rather have more instant death

My Sicarian Infiltrator Warlord is meant to get into combat. He doesn't huddle behind the rest, throwing out combat orders.

So Skitarii are like all Eldar, Dark Eldar, Harlequin etc leaders then? They die to S6.

Well, no. We don't have jetbikes to get it up to T4, and we don't have anything like Maugan Ra or Baharroth.

 Purifier wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
Same here with IG and I'd rather have more instant death

My Sicarian Infiltrator Warlord is meant to get into combat. He doesn't huddle behind the rest, throwing out combat orders.

So Skitarii are like all Eldar, Dark Eldar, Harlequin etc leaders then? They die to S6.

Well, no. We don't have jetbikes to get it up to T4, and we don't have anything like Maugan Ra or Baharroth.

Dark Eldar don't have those either. Or Harlequins.

Less emphasis on Space Marines.

pm713 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
Same here with IG and I'd rather have more instant death

My Sicarian Infiltrator Warlord is meant to get into combat. He doesn't huddle behind the rest, throwing out combat orders.

So Skitarii are like all Eldar, Dark Eldar, Harlequin etc leaders then? They die to S6.

Well, no. We don't have jetbikes to get it up to T4, and we don't have anything like Maugan Ra or Baharroth.

Dark Eldar don't have those either. Or Harlequins.

I honestly have no idea what Dark Eldar have, but since you're wrong about Harlequins (Skyweavers,) that makes it 2 out of 3 of the ones you mentioned that I *know* you're wrong about, so I'm not gonna take your word for it.

Edit: I looked it up.

T4: Haemonculus, Drazhar, Wracks, Khymera
T5: Sslyth, Urien Rakarth, Grotesques, Clawed Fiend

Jesus, man. Could you be more wrong?

Bobthehero, Why is consolidating into combat so bad as to use your wish to simply block it?

You can't consolidate into combat. Not since 4E.

And it's bad because any unit that can wipe out an enemy unit in one assault phase without really taking damage can, in theory, take out an entire army in one turn. Imagine a unit built to have I6, 2-4 attacks per model on the charge, Ap 2/3 weapons and the strength/kit to bust tanks.

 Selym wrote:
You can't consolidate into combat. Not since 4E.

And it's bad because any unit that can wipe out an enemy unit in one assault phase without really taking damage can, in theory, take out an entire army in one turn. Imagine a unit built to have I6, 2-4 attacks per model on the charge, Ap 2/3 weapons and the strength/kit to bust tanks.

And this is a large part of why the Wolves were considered OP.

Move everything back to 5th edition, the last time the game had even a thin veil of balance and a grasp of the scale it's meant to be played at, and where there were far less issues with MCs vs Tanks, Skimmers vs Other Vehicles, better CC functionality, etc

Failing that? Return to the old single CAD FOC army construction system.

Sell forgeworld via GW and/ or retailers.

 Purifier wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
Same here with IG and I'd rather have more instant death

My Sicarian Infiltrator Warlord is meant to get into combat. He doesn't huddle behind the rest, throwing out combat orders.

So Skitarii are like all Eldar, Dark Eldar, Harlequin etc leaders then? They die to S6.

Well, no. We don't have jetbikes to get it up to T4, and we don't have anything like Maugan Ra or Baharroth.

Dark Eldar don't have those either. Or Harlequins.

I honestly have no idea what Dark Eldar have, but since you're wrong about Harlequins (Skyweavers,) that makes it 2 out of 3 of the ones you mentioned that I *know* you're wrong about, so I'm not gonna take your word for it.

Edit: I looked it up.

T4: Haemonculus, Drazhar, Wracks, Khymera
T5: Sslyth, Urien Rakarth, Grotesques, Clawed Fiend

Jesus, man. Could you be more wrong?

I said Eldar, Dark Eldar and Harlequins can be ID'd by S6.

Autarchs, Archons, Farseers, Warlocks, Yriel, Illic, Succubus, Troupe Master, 6 (assuming I haven't forgotten any) Aspect Warrior units, Kabalites, Wyches. Do you want me to go on?

Ban Taus

I'd like to see the imbalance of shooting vs combat be addressed. I'd almost be ok with the terrible Ork codex if I wasn't completely hammered by the end of turn 1 (why can shooting nuke me turn 1 but I can't do the same with close combat turn 1?).

I'd be happy to go back to 3rd/4th though, I guess!

 Selym wrote:
You can't consolidate into combat. Not since 4E.

And it's bad because any unit that can wipe out an enemy unit in one assault phase without really taking damage can, in theory, take out an entire army in one turn. Imagine a unit built to have I6, 2-4 attacks per model on the charge, Ap 2/3 weapons and the strength/kit to bust tanks.

That is quite an exaggeration. The opponent whose squad got gakked should have seen the writing on the wall and positioned his army for a counter attack. You. Ant take out an army in one turn. This game is won in the shooting phase as cc has been eroded away slowly over editions. Probably because it's easier for new players to understand the shooting phase and brings in more money.

As a Krieg player what do I counter attack with?

 Sal4m4nd3r wrote:

 Selym wrote:
You can't consolidate into combat. Not since 4E.

And it's bad because any unit that can wipe out an enemy unit in one assault phase without really taking damage can, in theory, take out an entire army in one turn. Imagine a unit built to have I6, 2-4 attacks per model on the charge, Ap 2/3 weapons and the strength/kit to bust tanks.

That is quite an exaggeration. The opponent whose squad got gakked should have seen the writing on the wall and positioned his army for a counter attack. You. Ant take out an army in one turn. This game is won in the shooting phase as cc has been eroded away slowly over editions. Probably because it's easier for new players to understand the shooting phase and brings in more money.

for a lot of armies there never were real answers to CC consolidations, especially with the way terrai worked to block LoS. 5E probably had the best overall balance, allowing assaults from reserve and stationary transports, but I remember watching 4E games where, between LoS and consolidations, one player would lose without almost ever firing a shot.

Alternatively, we could allow consolidations again but allow shooting into CC

 Bobthehero wrote:
As a Krieg player what do I counter attack with?

I don't know.. The rest of your army..

Nice joke, WS4 guardsmen are fancy, but that's all they got

He didn't say "counter attack" meaning an assault...

 Elbows wrote:
He didn't say "counter attack" meaning an assault...

Well, ostensibly if we're discussing things consolidating into new combats, assault would be the only way one could do so as you cannot shoot into CC.

I'm quite surprised no one else has mentioned the price of models or price of everything in general. Such as how much models cost $ wise, or books, and so on.

I agree the other things mentioned would be a nice change, but a reduction in $ would probably help a lot.

I lile the idea of shooting into combat.

I've always thought it was dumb. Hey let's slaughter our troops to kill a few enemies.

What if consolidating into combat was just that, a consolidation? As in you wouldn't have a second fight sub-phase, but would be locked in combat and fight in your opponents phase, probably gaining no extra attacks/other benefits from charging. Note that you can't consolidate after destroying a vehicle in CC.

 Engine of War wrote:
I'm quite surprised no one else has mentioned the price of models or price of everything in general. Such as how much models cost $ wise, or books, and so on.

I agree the other things mentioned would be a nice change, but a reduction in $ would probably help a lot.

They did... Top half of page 1.

pm713 wrote:
I've always thought it was dumb. Hey let's slaughter our troops to kill a few enemies.

There are plenty of armies that just wouldn't care in the least if they killed some enemies. Isn't it an Ork thing that "if it dies, it's an enemy, if it lives, it's friendly"?

 reiner wrote:
Rule set as a living document.

If anything is learned from Age of Sigmar, as well as the historical Specialist Games, I hope it's this - that free basic rules will inspire people to try out the game and inspire model purchases, but a £50 hardback book is a hurdle too far for a beginner who already has to buy a Get Started box and paints.

If I had a wish I'd want 40Ks basic rules and codices to be available for free as bare bones PDFs. I'd still have pretty hardbacks with full colour illustrations available, big fluff sections and perhaps some more details on special missions but the free download would be just enough to get going.

 Silverthorne wrote:
I'd like the game to be mainstream, more so than video games for example. Then there would be a lot more people to play with and all the other things would probably fall into place.

Hey it's a wish--- might as well go big.

I second that. More video games, more comics and a Netflix tv series about an inquisitorial warband. It could be done and would help the hobby a lot.

 Engine of War wrote:
I'm quite surprised no one else has mentioned the price of models or price of everything in general. Such as how much models cost $ wise, or books, and so on.

I agree the other things mentioned would be a nice change, but a reduction in $ would probably help a lot.

It's reply number 3.

StevetheDestroyeOfWorlds wrote:
Only one aspect eh?
Lower prices.

Ne_Streets wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I've always thought it was dumb. Hey let's slaughter our troops to kill a few enemies.

There are plenty of armies that just wouldn't care in the least if they killed some enemies. Isn't it an Ork thing that "if it dies, it's an enemy, if it lives, it's friendly"?

There's more who care a great deal.

pm713 wrote:


Autarchs, Archons, Farseers, Warlocks, Yriel, Illic, Succubus, Troupe Master, 6 (assuming I haven't forgotten any) Aspect Warrior units, Kabalites, Wyches. Do you want me to go on?

Nope, that wasn't the discussion. It was about the Warlord, and every one of those armies have models that can be T4. Skitarii doesn't. There isn't one model in the army that can allow you to have a Warlord with over T3.

you even said the word "Leaders" yourself. Don't start moving the goal posts to win an argument.

 Purifier wrote:

pm713 wrote:


Autarchs, Archons, Farseers, Warlocks, Yriel, Illic, Succubus, Troupe Master, 6 (assuming I haven't forgotten any) Aspect Warrior units, Kabalites, Wyches. Do you want me to go on?

Nope, that wasn't the discussion. It was about the Warlord, and every one of those armies have models that can be T4. Skitarii doesn't. There isn't one model in the army that can allow you to have a Warlord with over T3.

you even said the word "Leaders" yourself. Don't start moving the goal posts to win an argument.

I don't need to move any goal posts.

My point was the armies mentioned also have T3 warlords.

Autarch, Farseer, Archon, Succubus, Troupe Master, Death Jester, Shadowseer, Illic and Yriel. All of these are T3. Therefore they can also be ID'd by S6.

pm713 wrote:


Autarch, Farseer, Archon, Succubus, Troupe Master, Death Jester, Shadowseer, Illic and Yriel. All of these are T3. Therefore they can also be ID'd by S6.

So they are "just like Skitarii in that" even though they have perfectly fine T4 and even T5 choices as well which is what I was saying about Skitarii that they haven't? Not to mention that most of those T3 aren't melee units.

You can sort of just pick in what way you are wrong about them being "just like Skitarii."

I mean gak, most armies have *something* that's T3, so I guess *every* army is just like Skitarii.

 Purifier wrote:

pm713 wrote:


Autarch, Farseer, Archon, Succubus, Troupe Master, Death Jester, Shadowseer, Illic and Yriel. All of these are T3. Therefore they can also be ID'd by S6.

So they are "just like Skitarii in that" even though they have perfectly fine T4 and even T5 choices as well which is what I was saying about Skitarii that they haven't? Not to mention that most of those T3 aren't melee units.

You can sort of just pick in what way you are wrong about them being "just like Skitarii."

I mean gak, most armies have *something* that's T3, so I guess *every* army is just like Skitarii.

I'd say half at least are melee.

You seem to be deliberately dodging the point.

pm713 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

pm713 wrote:


Autarch, Farseer, Archon, Succubus, Troupe Master, Death Jester, Shadowseer, Illic and Yriel. All of these are T3. Therefore they can also be ID'd by S6.

So they are "just like Skitarii in that" even though they have perfectly fine T4 and even T5 choices as well which is what I was saying about Skitarii that they haven't? Not to mention that most of those T3 aren't melee units.

You can sort of just pick in what way you are wrong about them being "just like Skitarii."

I mean gak, most armies have *something* that's T3, so I guess *every* army is just like Skitarii.

I'd say half at least are melee.

You seem to be deliberately dodging the point.

In what way? The point is "Skitarii has no option to having a T3 Warlord, so I don't like Instant Death."
That was the argument, that was the point.

All of the armies you mentioned *do* have options to getting higher toughness Warlords, so picking one with lower is a conscious choice for them. One that they most certainly do not need to make.

The question is, what is your point? Because you're either trying to move the goal posts again, or you jumped into something without checking that you were talking about the same thing as the people talking about it.

And then you're like "oh yeah, these armies are just the same as Skitarii!" In what way? They have the options I was saying we don't have! So they are literally the opposite of just like them!

This is getting away from the topic an is pretty petty back and forth stuff.
Take it to another thread if it's important or even better take it to PM.

Krieg and Scions don't have T4 options, while they're shooty army, there's no lack of Str 6 shooting and so their warlords will die just as quick.

 Alex Kolodotschko wrote:
This is getting away from the topic an is pretty petty back and forth stuff.
Take it to another thread if it's important or even better take it to PM.

Thanks for your opinion, it's very on topic. If you feel we're derailing, report it. Don't throw fire on the fuel.

I already did, just saving the Mods some keyboard work.

 Bobthehero wrote:
Krieg and Scions don't have T4 options, while they're shooty army, there's no lack of Str 6 shooting and so their warlords will die just as quick.

Scions are actually a good shout. They have around the same model count and inability to keep back behind pure weight of fire in an easy way and they're forced to take a HQ of which none can really take a melee fight any better than the Skitarii ones. Krieg, I have never faced, but I sort of imagine them to be as evasive as the IG and it's not really a huge problem for the IG. But like I said. Never faced them, never played as them.

But Scions, you've definitely got a point there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Alex Kolodotschko wrote:
I already did, just saving the Mods some keyboard work.

You're a true hero.

There comes a point when certain things just need to be dropped, as you're going nowhere with them.

Or at the very least alter the way in which the discussion is being carried out.

No need for the hostility on display here.

My one wish? Free rules.

pm713 wrote:

Ne_Streets wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I've always thought it was dumb. Hey let's slaughter our troops to kill a few enemies.

There are plenty of armies that just wouldn't care in the least if they killed some enemies. Isn't it an Ork thing that "if it dies, it's an enemy, if it lives, it's friendly"?

There's more who care a great deal.

Not that I'm advocating for either side, but being able to shoot into combat, if allowed, would be an OPTION. So...armies that "care a great deal" could just choose to not do so.

I guess I am advocating for a side, but that side is MORE OPTIONS to do what I want. I hate it when options are legislated out of the rules because of "reasons."

 Voidwraith wrote:

pm713 wrote:

Ne_Streets wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I've always thought it was dumb. Hey let's slaughter our troops to kill a few enemies.

There are plenty of armies that just wouldn't care in the least if they killed some enemies. Isn't it an Ork thing that "if it dies, it's an enemy, if it lives, it's friendly"?

There's more who care a great deal.

Not that I'm advocating for either side, but being able to shoot into combat, if allowed, would be an OPTION. So...armies that "care a great deal" could just choose to not do so.

I guess I am advocating for a side, but that side is MORE OPTIONS to do what I want. I hate it when options are legislated out of the rules because of "reasons."

Except that what will happen is you'll make shooting even more powerful unbalancing the game even further. Sometimes more options is a very bad thing.

 Lukash_ wrote:
What if consolidating into combat was just that, a consolidation? As in you wouldn't have a second fight sub-phase, but would be locked in combat and fight in your opponents phase, probably gaining no extra attacks/other benefits from charging. Note that you can't consolidate after destroying a vehicle in CC.

That's exactly what it was. No charge bonus, but just a new combat was initiated. Gun line players hated it because it needed strategy to counter it. You couldn't simply wait for your shooting phase to blast them. You needed to *gasp* maneuver troops around and *gulp* think ahead.

Oh yeah, snark, that'll help prove your point accross. And no you can't blast them because you can't shoot in combat. Krieg also does not have the possibility to move around easily, without paying absurd amount of points.

 Sal4m4nd3r wrote:

 Lukash_ wrote:
What if consolidating into combat was just that, a consolidation? As in you wouldn't have a second fight sub-phase, but would be locked in combat and fight in your opponents phase, probably gaining no extra attacks/other benefits from charging. Note that you can't consolidate after destroying a vehicle in CC.

That's exactly what it was. No charge bonus, but just a new combat was initiated. Gun line players hated it because it needed strategy to counter it. You couldn't simply wait for your shooting phase to blast them. You needed to *gasp* maneuver troops around and *gulp* think ahead.

except that wasnt really it at all, it was "your flying DP or harlequin filled Holofalcon zips up behind LoS blocking Area Terrain turn 1, gets stuck in turn 2, and then proceeds to eat something every turn and never gets to be shot until the game is basically over in turn 6".

Having been on both sides of that, it was a good change to make. The problem for assault units was 6E cutting the legs out on assaulting from reserves and stationary transports.

That's very much true.
Just one or two outflanking units was enough to put the scares on and allow the close combat army to control the shooty army's deployment just enough to have the half chance that they needed.
It was a big loss to cc armies.

pm713 wrote:

 Voidwraith wrote:

pm713 wrote:

Ne_Streets wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I've always thought it was dumb. Hey let's slaughter our troops to kill a few enemies.

There are plenty of armies that just wouldn't care in the least if they killed some enemies. Isn't it an Ork thing that "if it dies, it's an enemy, if it lives, it's friendly"?

There's more who care a great deal.

Not that I'm advocating for either side, but being able to shoot into combat, if allowed, would be an OPTION. So...armies that "care a great deal" could just choose to not do so.

I guess I am advocating for a side, but that side is MORE OPTIONS to do what I want. I hate it when options are legislated out of the rules because of "reasons."

Except that what will happen is you'll make shooting even more powerful unbalancing the game even further. Sometimes more options is a very bad thing.

Well, if you sift back and find my one wish, it was to make assault move viable....so...it's not as if this game is going to be perfectly fixed by altering one single thing.

 Alex Kolodotschko wrote:
That's very much true.
Just one or two outflanking units was enough to put the scares on and allow the close combat army to control the shooty army's deployment just enough to have the half chance that they needed.
It was a big loss to cc armies.

Agreed. Back in 5th I played Tau. When I played against my friend's 100+ genestealer list, I avoided the board edges like the plague!