Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I would make all vehicles able to ram, but only tanks (or vehicles counting as tanks for the purpose of tank shocking) can tank shock. And a tank shock would be a special kind of ram (not the other way around, thus solving 100% of rules debates on that subject )

There are a lot of problems with that for horde armies and the fact their own troops give cover saves, but from a fluff perspective it's absolutely sound. There has to be a way to make that work because I think it'd be the best solution and thus bring AP back to something useful.

You make cover saves 5+ across the board (other than fortified things like bunkers), and instantly AP becomes important again.

How so? Cover saves ignore AP completely...

AP means nothing (or as-good-as nothing) right now because anyone can get a 4+ cover save and shrug off 50% of anything you throw at them. You may have noticed that AP3 ain't all it was cracked up to be in 3rd and 4th because everyone and his dog just ignores half of it.

Cover Saves are too important, and have marginalised low AP weapons to the point where quantity of fire is better than quality of fire.

You change cover saves to 5+, and the shift is dramatic. You cannot rely on a 5+ cover save as much as you can a 4+ save.

Redbeard wrote:Wound allocation is insanely stupid in 5th ed.

For shooting, I'd say casualties were limited to models that you could see. Just because one guy doesn't fit behind a building doesn't mean all ten should be able to be gunned down.

It isn't great, but it's important to remember why the current system is there. In 4th ed you could only kill models you could see, and the result was numpties who would manouvre their units so the only model they could see would be heavy weapons guy, sergeant or IC. People took landspeeders purely to do this kind of sniping. It was very, very lame. The current system produces odd results, where four or five models are killed when only one guy can be seen. But at least it is an accidental, odd thing when it happens. The previous system encouraged deliberate rules abuse, and as a result happened a lot if you ran into the wrong kind of player.

Teh_K42 wrote:What if cover just resulted in a BS modifier like in necromunda? 4+ cover becomes -1 on the BS roll, except for blast weapons which keep current rules. It wouldn't work (probably) with the codices as they are because a marine would get just as much benefit as an ork, but it makes sense.

The biggest problem is the impact it would have on the to hit roll. The impact of a -1 modifier on a marine is a 25% reduction in effectiveness, but an ork has his shooting dropped by 50%. This would completely ruin any semblance of points balance - what's an ork shooter worth if he's hitting on a 6 or a 7+? It's certainly possible, but it would take a complete revision of every codex.



I'd like to see the current three rolls needed to resolve shooting dropped to two. You can do away with BS altogether, right now it's just a randomising factor. You can turn BS and weapon strength into one thing, firepower, and have models roll that firepower stat against the target's toughness. For instance, instead of a marine rolling a 3+ to hit and a 3+ to wound a guardsman, he'd just roll one die, needing (say) a 4+ to wound.

The time saved there would allow a slightly more interesting armour system. Not the problematic armour mods of old, but something without the binary nature of the current system. Probably a tiered save mechanic.

H.B.M.C. wrote:AP means nothing (or as-good-as nothing) right now because anyone can get a 4+ cover save and shrug off 50% of anything you throw at them. You may have noticed that AP3 ain't all it was cracked up to be in 3rd and 4th because everyone and his dog just ignores half of it.

Cover Saves are too important, and have marginalised low AP weapons to the point where quantity of fire is better than quality of fire.

You change cover saves to 5+, and the shift is dramatic. You cannot rely on a 5+ cover save as much as you can a 4+ save.

I like the idea of the default save being a 5+, but have more things give a 4+, like ruins and the like.

Between higher cover saves, more plentiful cover, and the end of leadership modifiers and last man standing, it's actually really hard to dislodge a dug in unit. I don't think that's a problem, as dug in infantry should be difficult to move with firepower, but "shooting across a light forest at troops that just moved" isn't exactly the same as shooting at entrenched infantry.

Oh boy, where to start...

-Drop area terrain. Do true LOS. (my gaming group has gone from using area for trees to just using individual trees as impassible...it's made the game so much more exciting)
-Either drop the wound allocation rules or fix them.
-More variety in cover saves.
-Units shouldn't provide cover, they should block LOS. (friend and foe alike)
-All models should fight in CC and multiple units in the same combat should just be merged with majority WS and T for the purposes of being attacked.
-The whole move/shoot relationship of tanks needs retooling. It should be 0"-6" fire everything, over 6" fire one weapon. Defensive weapons should be Str 5 and should get free shots at charging units.
-Make the damage chart less of a crap-shoot. I love that glancing hits can't destroy tanks anymore as that was slowed, but it's crazy to see a melta weapon get like an 18 and then roll a one for effect. You should get a + modifier for each point you beat the armor by.
-Drop KP, VP, and annihilation. It makes for very boring no-tactics games. (and no, multiple small units or maxing out on troops does not give you any real advantage)
-I know it's a long shot that will never happen, but would like the LOTR (SBG) turn sequence. It's just superior.

Though, I will have to disagree with one point many here are making, removing casualties from outside LOS/range. I know it seems silly, but it's there for two reasons. One, where the models are may not be their exact location, everything is in motion, everything is an abstration. You may not see that guy behind a wall, but who's to say he didn't run by a near by window or pop his head out real quick? Who's to say the shot didn't pierce the wall?

The other reason is a game mechanic reason...it prevents sniping. Too often in 4th and 3rd ed I lost a sarg or gunner because my opponent line up their model just perfectly so that was the only guy they could see.

Polonius wrote:I like the idea of the default save being a 5+, but have more things give a 4+, like ruins and the like.

Ruins 5+. Really, the more 5+ and the less 4+, the better 40K works. I don't mind there being things that give 4+, but it better be something substantial like a force field generator (eg. Kustom Force Field) or a big bunker (like a Bastion). If it's just 'ruins'... well most people I see (and most of the games we play) are on 'ruins' terrain, be it simple small pieces to grand Cities of Death monstrosities. Changing the default cover save type to 5+ but keeping what is easily the most common type of terrain at 4+ defeats the purpose of the change.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Big-Squig wrote:You should get a + modifier for each point you beat the armor by.

Now isn't that an interesting idea...

Hmm...

The best way to fix the cover save bonanza would be for GW to figure out the difference between cover and concealment. Concealment should modify the to-hit score. Cover can continue modifying the wound score. Simple.

Also perhaps in addition would be a penetration rule to make AP more relevant. Its ridiculous that a guardsman in the open that sucks a railgun round is hopelessly torn limb from limb but put him in front of a tank and his uber-adamantium armor magically deflects half the shots thrown his way. Sand bags shouldn't deflect a heavy bolter round as big as your fist or superheated plasma bolt.

If the 10in of sloped steel armor on the front of a Leman Russ isn't stopping a railgun round nothing short of a reinforced bunker should grant a cover save. Make another one of those stupid charts GW

I cant stand 5th edition, i feel it removed a lot of the tactics from the game, and turned it into a game focused on bumrushing the enemy.

Get rid of true line of sight, i love 4th editions system, it was simpler. And meant you could actually hide stuff, terrain had an effect on the game.

Reduce cover back to 5+. Ap2 guns are largely useless against a majority of armies.

Go back to the old deployment system. The new one holds little tactical importance, with the random turn length going last makes little difference, where as going first is a huge advantage.

Stop the stupid everything ever has to die in hand to hand. This is probably the worst rule change, its why i refer to 5th edition as horde hammer 40k. So i charge a squad of orks with something at higher initiative. Back in 4th i had to kill everyone within the 2 inches, now i have to kill everyone. There is little punishment for armies with low initiative, while armies with high initiative die in droves in hand to hand.

I do like the faster hand to hand morale system. I got sick of charging 5 terminators into 30 guard conscripts, killing 6 or 7, losing nobody, and the guard player going "hurp dupr i still have lots of dudes so you dont outnumber me, no modifier". What they should do is go back to the old if you can attack you can die system, but make the negative morale for every 2 models you lost by, instead of one.

Same for shooting. Often my whole marine squad but the plasma cannon and plasma gun guy hide behind a building out of sight, and they are the only people i remove. If its all that can be seen is all that can die.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Defensive weapons need to be raised to S6 six, this rule absolutely boned eldar in the ass. They need to write use a new codex or something, but i feel our tanks are way overcosted. In addition moving 18+ for the cover save is dumb. I do feel the old invulnerable gunships were overpowered, but GW has a habit of turning something broken like falcons into something practically useless and overcosted.

Troops only scoring is garbage. This is another thing that benefits certain armies more then others. A lot of armies are reliant on their troops to carry the day and win the battle. Other armies like nids, eldar, necrons, and the like need other units to win. Something like chaos, IG, and especially orks are armies designed around the troops, with everything else to buff them up. The other armies are reliant on the troops to act as filler for the elites and heavy support. Change it back to the old days.

Being able to use abilities inside transports on stuff outside. I think my farseer should be able to fortune/guide the tank he is in and the squad he is in it with. i do not feel i should be able to park eldrad in a falcon and have it sit next to my war walkers, guiding them. Same for marine armies. Put a librarian with null zone inside a land raider, and cast null zone while just leaving him inside of it. Watch demon players hate you forever. Or grey knights and inquisitor lords sitting inside raiders in the back of the map psychic hooding/mysticing everything to death.

razorlead wrote:The best way to fix the cover save bonanza would be for GW to figure out the difference between cover and concealment.

The Cover save is an abstraction that both represents the cover physically getting in the way of the shot, and the cover making you harder to hit. As a mechanic it works fine, it's just too effective.

@eidolon: I think you'd do better to simply play 4th.

Another helpful suggestion as usual John...

Yeah, i really liked fourth. But nobody plays it, no tournaments run it, so i deal.

yeah i would let everything else slide by if the 4+ cover got changed to 5+. maybe then my lazy arse would finally move from cover with my guard and be forced to actually play

and then IG, tau and most fragile shooty armys would be hugging cover like it was their mother. NOT the spehss marhines, as they should not be sitting back, afraid to leave to safty of their precious 4+ invl.

Why hasn't anyone mentioned the troops only objective holding restriction? What your Elite Terminators too good to hold an objective for a tiny while? What about the Commander and his Command Squad? Too busy commanding to hold something? Big 10 man devastator squad too busy shooting to 'hold' the piece of real estate they're standing on?

Agree on all counts with HBMC, with special mention for Cover Saves and Vehicle rules.

Defensive weapons on vehicles need to be S6 to allow Tau to have any defensive weapons. Otherwise agree with H.B.M.C.

Kilkrazy wrote:Defensive weapons on vehicles need to be S6 to allow Tau to have any defensive weapons. Otherwise agree with H.B.M.C.

Gun Drones?

Out of all the crummy rules...jeez.

Probably nerf cover or remove running or nerf running to +d3.

Defensive weapons needs to be changed.

Damage Charts need to be reworked. A roll of 1 should mean that nothing happens.

@Teh_K42, the problem with your idea is that it makes too much sense. We can't have any of that now, can we?

Kilkrazy wrote:Defensive weapons on vehicles need to be S6 to allow Tau to have any defensive weapons.

Gun Drones, as above.

Also, I advocate allowing all Assault weapons to count as Defensive, so that would pick up the Burst Cannon & Fusion Gun.

I'd like cover to change to 5+ as well, but give a +1 bonus to a squads cover save if they didn't move last turn. The guardsmen dug in to a position would remain just as protected as they are currently, but the orks running full speed across the battlefield wouldn't gain as much benefit as they aren't actively trying to use the cover as much.

JourneyPsycheOut wrote:...but give a +1 bonus to a squads cover save if they didn't move last turn.

That defeats the purpose of reducing the cover save. Armies that would stay in cover anyway will still stay in cover and benefit from it.

RustyKnight wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Defensive weapons on vehicles need to be S6 to allow Tau to have any defensive weapons. Otherwise agree with H.B.M.C.

Gun Drones?

Gun drones are equipped with carbines which as S5. Nearly all the Tau weapons are S5 or more, except for the flamer and the Vespid gun if I remember correctly.

5<6

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Defensive weapons on vehicles need to be S6 to allow Tau to have any defensive weapons.

Gun Drones, as above.

Also, I advocate allowing all Assault weapons to count as Defensive, so that would pick up the Burst Cannon & Fusion Gun.

Would also pick up the heavy Ion cannon, which is the main gun on the Ionhead. and therefore can shoot as the single weapon (plus defensive weapons) allowed to shoot when moving

I don't want to advocate any particular way of dealing with the issue because it is more complicated than it looks at first sight. But it does need a tweak, because Tau vehicles became expensive compared to the 5e codexes and also lost firepower because of the rules changes. (Speaking as a Tau army owner.)

Assault would also pick up the Assault Cannon and nearly every Eldar gun. I think that's fine, given how expensive the particular weapons are. Assault Cannon got crazy expensive, look at the Razorback option. Making it Defensive makes it worth the points. Eldar are way down, but making them nastier at move & shoot also works wonders to justify their points.

If you're advocating S5+ or S6+ instead of S4+, then it's not really that different from me suggesting S4+ / Assault. Quite frankly, Imperials *should* be slow and more limited at move & fire compared to Xenos. It's why Xenos pay more to get more.

Platuan4th wrote:

Shaman wrote:HBMC I like those changes go take over GW and implement them.

I swear I'd have a massive orgasm if Yak and Lego somehow bought GW, put H.B.M.C. and a few others here in charge of rules for 40K, put Therion and ManfreddvonDrakken(as well as a few others) in charge of Fantasy, put derflaM and Kyoto-sama in charge of Black Library, and had GWAR! and a few other YMDC-ers as proof readers for the rules.

Oh, and GreyDeath and Migsula would have to be in charge of 'Eavy Metal.

Maybe have Frazzled as the WD Editor.

Are you sure? The Black Library would be filled with grim stories of sexual innuendo and
dark conspiracies...

Oh wait.

The main group i game with has stuck with fourth. Fifth does not play as well on the table top as it feels closer to refined second edition (which none of us truly liked) then a better fourth edition.