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.

Being able to assault out of stationary transports (without Assault Vehicle rule) would go a long way to helping several types of armies without needing any new units.

With regards to the creep, I agree. As much as the OP didn't want to start a thread about Dreadknights and Riptides, that's exactly how GW seems to like dealing with problems of weaker armies.

I play Guard and Grey Knights/Inquisition. The only thing I'd like back are my fluffy Guard Special Characters that allowed people to build interesting and varied lists around a theme. I don't know if it would make things more effective, but it would be nice.

DoW

I would love to see DA have cheaper fliers, and SM have Whirlwinds fixed.

I don't think anyone cares about whirlwinds but, I fight nids and orks...

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Honestly questions like this are what lead to things like Riptides and Dreadknights and 6e-era power creep. Every Codex needs units that work too well or don't work at all fixed vastly more than they need more new units.

(That said I'd kill for a flyer that isn't fifty points too expensive in the DA book)

Would being able to take neffies or talons in a squad up to three make them more appetizing?

A 0-cost option any model could take that would reduce Serpent Sheild shooting would mostly fix my codex (Eldar).

(By how much is the subject of other threads)

Thatguyhsagun wrote:
Well for IG maybe just an order that lets them shoot into combat? fluffy and effective!

I think that should be a special rule for conscripts.

Expendable: models with this special rule do not count as friendly models when placing blast and template attacks, they may be partially or fully covered by the AOE. In addition enemy units engaged in close combat against units with this special rule may be targeted by shooting and psychic attacks as if they weren't in combat (including blast weapons and template weapons). The enemy models so engaged receive a 4+ cover save including any cover modifiers. For every successful cover save, remove one of the Expendable friendly models as a casualty. This friendly fire does not apply to successful armor saves.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr Morden wrote:
I don't think this is a good idea.

Bad units In Codexes should be made usable,
OP units should be returned to something approaching the norm.

The issues is getting the exact balance right - but it can't be much worse than the mess GW have made of it.

This is the way to go. My IG don't really need new units, even with the removal of all the artillery variants.

Most things are just a points change or minor stat change away from balance.

 TheSilo wrote:

Thatguyhsagun wrote:
Well for IG maybe just an order that lets them shoot into combat? fluffy and effective!

I think that should be a special rule for conscripts.

Expendable: models with this special rule do not count as friendly models when placing blast and template attacks, they may be partially or fully covered by the AOE. In addition enemy units engaged in close combat against units with this special rule may be targeted by shooting and psychic attacks as if they weren't in combat (including blast weapons and template weapons). The enemy models so engaged receive a 4+ cover save including any cover modifiers. For every successful cover save, remove one of the Expendable friendly models as a casualty. This friendly fire does not apply to successful armor saves.

That'dbe freaking op fpr 3 ppm fearless guyz.

 koooaei wrote:
That'dbe freaking op fpr 3 ppm fearless guyz.

To be honest, conscripts are already considered quite good if options they can be combo'ed with are kept in mind...

more dedicated mark units for chaos. I want bezerker bikers, plague terminators, noise havocs.

Orks need very little to be effective, I find. a few tweaks, like choppas always wounding anything of a 6 if they charge, painboys stacking with cybork, that sort of fun additions that would take the core of orks from meh to "can be alright, actually".

Necrons need their rules to be written by someone who actually reads the unit descriptions - flayed ones are really scary. don't cause fear though. C'tan are immune to natural law, except instant death. Gloom shards should be a thing for +1 denial dice.

 DogOfWar wrote:
Being able to assault out of stationary transports (without Assault Vehicle rule) would go a long way to helping several types of armies without needing any new units.

This, so much this.

I want all Nurgle options (except maybe DPs) to gain a point in strenght, to make up for the change to poison that removed all of our killing power. I'd trade that for an extra attack, or some more Ld to represent my Stubborn Nurgle units that JUST WON'T DIE.

Because it's kinda sad playing Nurgle and realising that your favorite Nurgle daemons are nothing but speed bumps to slow your unnemy until your allies can get to him - even the units that should have been somewhat killy against cheaper stuff (like Plague Drones or Beasts of Nurgle)