Switch Theme:

What has GW done right?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




I think a lot of GW's ideas are often very good. Their execution often sucks.

Formations were a good idea, ruined by terrible execution.

I like how 8th changed vehicles to use the same general rules as everyone else, but I think GW fumbled massively by sticking to too narrow a range of T and S values for vehicles and anti-tank weapons.

In general, GW are good at providing a sandbox to use your models in but the most effective way to use those models, IME, is somewhere in the middle of "complete free-for-all" and "cut-throat tournament play". I think that's how GW tend to play the game too, but not how a lot of people in the real world play. I think the background is interesting and they've done a good job fleshing it out, but went a little too far in some cases - specifically the Horus Heresy stuff and the more recent advancing storyline style of background.

The one thing GW do better than any other gaming company is creating a single all-encompassing eco-system tied to their games. From the models and rules to the paints and hobby tools to the magazines and novels, GW are the best in their field at providing everything their customers want to explore their hobby in one convenient place.
   
Made in pl
Regular Dakkanaut




 Banzaimash wrote:
what parts of the ruleset and game mechanics have GW done right


Hmm, I kind of missed that, but I guess that was the whole point (otherwise you'll get a thousand "cool models, great fluff" answers).

I have to be honest, I feel as if there must hav been something like this in my more-than-2-decade-long history of playing GW games, but I have to think long and hard...and still get nothing. Especially from the perspective of someone who knows something about modern game design, because some of their solutions surely felt like works of a genius when Monopoly and Snakes and Ladders were main competitors.

Still thinking and still can't zero in on one idea that was realised perfectly, without some problems marring the image. I liked static CR in Wahammer Fantasy and how you could play not caring about attack rolls ... but the underlying idea of a single Break Test deciding the fate of an entire unit was pretty bad, and all too soon static CR of early 6th has become laughable with power creep and, say Brets, having both static CR AND killer lances or more and more units becoming Unbreakable.

Still thinking then...

Managing the dice pool for magic in WFB was kind of a fun idea, although the resulting decision tree was in most cases pretty straighforward and the entire process quickly became formulaic. Maybe mages should have had more spells, so that there would be more possibilities ?

In wh40K I don't think there has ever been anything that feels "outstanding game design!".

Hmmm...
   
Made in ca
Mysterious Techpriest






Karol wrote:
 Banzaimash wrote:
A simple question; across all editions of the game and all codexes, what parts of the ruleset and game mechanics have GW done right and why? What stands out to you as something you remember as good, not merely passable?


killed Inari in 8th, nerfed tau in 9th. People that play specific AoS armies feel very good about what GW has done with them. I don't think eldar players ever hated a new codex they got.

There terrain rules in 9th are much better then they were in 8th.

Some of the 2ed and 3ed wave primaris units, and the fix to 1st wave units seemed to have been viewed as a good change by people that play marines, and because it was at the same hated by people who don't play primaris it was clearly good too.


God damn youre getting more and more toxic.
Ynnari is a cool concept and they overcorrected when they redid them.
Tau isnt just nerfed, its unplayable in 9th.
And are you really evaluating the success of the primaris fix based on the hared that people have for them?

You're a hypocrite thats 100% into schadenfreude, i remember you crying about your GK being bad for all of 8th, and now youre glad that 2 codexes got effectively nixed.... smh

Admech 5000
Drukhari 4000
2500
500
Imperial knights 1200

 
   
Made in ca
Crafty Goblin





Canada

I like a lot of what GW does. Especially the boxed games.

I absolutely love warhammer Underworlds, and think that is an fantastic competitive miniatures game.

Warcry is a great skirmish game, with a great fast-placed game style and easy-to-manage campaign system.

I do think AOS is a more polished game than 40k, and I love the rules for army allegiances and grand alliances. I also think the mission pack for AOS is the best of all GW games.

I love 40k too, I do like the changes from 7->8th and 8->9th. Crusade is one of the best things GW has added to the game, hands down. CP based on game size was a fantastic move too.

   
Made in ca
Mysterious Techpriest






I've only played since 8th edition but :

I feel like GW supporting various scales of battle is a nice thing they did (killteam, 40k, apocalypse).
The fact that they also give missions for various pts value is a good thing they have added imo.
The way that listbuilding got changed in 9th to allow more freedom (no more CP batteries) is also a good move in my mind.

Admech 5000
Drukhari 4000
2500
500
Imperial knights 1200

 
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut




 VladimirHerzog wrote:


God damn youre getting more and more toxic.
Ynnari is a cool concept and they overcorrected when they redid them.
Tau isnt just nerfed, its unplayable in 9th.
And are you really evaluating the success of the primaris fix based on the hared that people have for them?

You're a hypocrite thats 100% into schadenfreude, i remember you crying about your GK being bad for all of 8th, and now youre glad that 2 codexes got effectively nixed.... smh


Well you will be glad to hear that thanks to abhore the witch GK aren't great in 9th either. But they are better then in 8th, largely thanks to the PA book.

But to be more on topic. You want to tell me that the design idea of GW, which we are talking about here, of 8th ed Inari and Tau were a good idea to transport in to 9th ed? doing shoting and melee twice, double dipping on stratagems for eldar soups and walls of shield drones clogging up objectives would have been something good for the game design wise .

And I am evaluating success of everything based on other people reactions. When Hussein Bolt is hated by every male runner in his distance, then you know that the mr Bolt is doing something wrong. If casual xeno players who dunked on marines, suddenly demande the nerfing of everything marine starting with factions and ending with specific units and even gear, and those threads go on and on, and on. Then GW has clearly created a codex which is good and fun to play with. It maybe not fun to play against, but that is a separate matter.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in ca
Mysterious Techpriest






Karol wrote:


But to be more on topic. You want to tell me that the design idea of GW, which we are talking about here, of 8th ed Inari and Tau were a good idea to transport in to 9th ed? doing shoting and melee twice, double dipping on stratagems for eldar soups and walls of shield drones clogging up objectives would have been something good for the game design wise .


Ynnari as you describe it was rightfully nerfed, but they overdid it. They shouldve made it so a detachment could take any Eldar unit if they were ynnari but they would be forced to use the revenant discipline and ynnari stratagems/relics/warlord traits. That way no double dipping in buffs and you keep the "combined forces" thematic of Ynnari.

As for tau, i don't get the hate about them. Sure its annoying getting blasted from across the map (hmm, i wonder what marines do...) but i'd never say i'm happy to see any army destroyed. I have compassion for the people that are playing these armies that are super bad now, just like i had compassion for people playing GK at the start of 8th.

Karol wrote:

And I am evaluating success of everything based on other people reactions. When Hussein Bolt is hated by every male runner in his distance, then you know that the mr Bolt is doing something wrong. If casual xeno players who dunked on marines, suddenly demande the nerfing of everything marine starting with factions and ending with specific units and even gear, and those threads go on and on, and on. Then GW has clearly created a codex which is good and fun to play with. It maybe not fun to play against, but that is a separate matter.


I'm pretty sure Bolt isnt "hated" by every other male runner. And not all marine complaints come from purely xenos player, many of these complains come from marines players that dislike it when the game is on easy mode. And no, it isnt a separate matter that the army isnt fun to play against, 40k for the majority of players is a GAME, games are meant to be enjoyed by both sides.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/13 17:14:00


Admech 5000
Drukhari 4000
2500
500
Imperial knights 1200

 
   
Made in us
Charging Dragon Prince





West Lafayette, IN

 Banzaimash wrote:
A simple question; across all editions of the game and all codexes, what parts of the ruleset and game mechanics have GW done right and why? What stands out to you as something you remember as good, not merely passable?


With the exception of some codex creep? 3rd Edition...

www.classichammer.com

For 4-6th WFB, 2-5th 40k, and similar timeframe gaming

Looking for dice from the new AOS boxed set and Dark Imperium on the cheap. Let me know if you can help.
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Its AoS, it doesn't have to make sense.
 
   
Made in ca
Crafty Goblin





Canada

I have never (beyond a bit of nostalgia), wanted to play 3rd edition again. What's 3rd edition improve on the game now?
   
Made in us
[MOD]
Imperial Guard Landspeeder Pilot




On moon miranda.

From my perspective?

As others have said, GW often has great ideas that they then seem to go out of their way to execute in the worst manner possible. However, they don't always muck it up.

With regards to current era stuff, I think the Imperial Guard codex is actually a masterful template in how GW should handle varied subfactions and army types. They're able to use Doctrines to portray an array of different worlds and cultures, have a modified ObSec rule and Tank HQ to accommodate Armored Company lists without needing a separate supplement, and used keywords to effectively fold Stormtroopers/Scions seamlessly into the larger army while still allowing them to be played as their own unique subfaction if desired, all without losing anything from the previous codex iterations. The book has some genuinely great design thought put into it and should be the template by which more factions should be handled.

What GW does do, above and beyond anything else, with regards to ruleset and game mechanics, is offer a sandbox for people to use their plastic space monsters and toy soldiers in, where every model that's been lovingly assembled and painted gets dice to roll and special rules to use and unique wargear to have a statline to fawn over, and they make everything feel unique and special for the investment the player has put into them. That's not always a great thing for the gameplay experience, but for the hobby experience as a whole and making people feel attached to their army dudes, GW knows what its about.

IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.

New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights!
The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.  
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




The lore is great and despite all of its flaws the game is fun.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Falls Church, VA

GW has done a lot of things right over the years, but almost always throws any gains in the trash.

Streamlining (yay) is usually countered by bloat (boo) within just a few years.

Army identity is typically well-reflected in its rules (yay) until GW gives another army the same rules - or a better variant (boo).

Design paradigms are oftentimes well thought-out and coherent (yay) but are changed right in the middle of a gamewide update, causing a disjunction (boo).
   
Made in gb
Perfect Shot Black Templar Predator Pilot






 Just Tony wrote:
 Banzaimash wrote:
A simple question; across all editions of the game and all codexes, what parts of the ruleset and game mechanics have GW done right and why? What stands out to you as something you remember as good, not merely passable?


With the exception of some codex creep? 3rd Edition...


What was it about 3rd you liked specifically?

Black Templars Kantor's Fists Cortez's Fists Calgar's Ultramarines Cassius' Ultramarines Dark Angels Marines Malevolent Astartes Coalition Ordo Malleus Ordo Hereticus Ordo Xenos Vostroyan Firstborn Meres Regiment and Rubble Rats Ork Hunters Steel Legion Ork Tribe Eldar Tau Jungle Cadre Sons of the Jackal

 
   
Made in au
Dakka Veteran





Blood Bowl
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut




I'm pretty sure Bolt isnt "hated" by every other male runner. And not all marine complaints come from purely xenos player, many of these complains come from marines players that dislike it when the game is on easy mode. And no, it isnt a separate matter that the army isnt fun to play against, 40k for the majority of players is a GAME, games are meant to be enjoyed by both sides.


How much do you know about professional sports? Just read about any failed transfer drama in any sports, or when suddenly whole second line ups change nationality, just to enter the olympics. Or what happens when one person takes another persons add slot, or if you are part of the team and they want just the 2-3 people in the add and not the whole team.etc

The enjoyed by both side is a nice thing to say. But after 3 years in the game, I now know it is just a thing that people say, because it looks nice. Like saying that if you found a bag with 100k $ you would totaly waltz with it to the nearest police station.


As the rest goes. There is no too much or too little as far as GW goes. GW doesn't fix things, they either nerf stuff in to the ground or they make fake fixs that don't fix a thing. So within GW design policy ,in my opinion, the Inari changes in 8th were good. Because we could have had another wave of fixs that didn't change a thing or maybe changed it in a such a way that instead of 5-7 flyers we would see some other unit getting spamed. Same with tau. Both armies were in generaly not fun to play against, to a point where I would even claim they were not very interactive as far as opponents go for most factions.






If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in nl
Nurgle Predator Driver with an Infestation





I'm generally given to negativity and pessimism but truth is, I keep coming back to GW games for one reason or another. Now sure the fact that 40k is the easiest game to find actual matches for plays into this, but the whole background they build up over the years, the many varied armies and ways to play them, it all draws me in. I still haven't forgiven them for nuking the Old World to make an extremely shallow and dumbed down game like AoS but 40k is enjoyable even as I disagree with a lot of the simplified mechanics we have now.
But all this negativity isn't in the spirit of this thread so what I do like about them is for one the fact that they still produce in the UK despite probably getting bigger margins if they just outsource production to a country with less strict labour laws. Secondly as mentioned, I despise most modern fluff but the old fluff I DO like was also made by GW so there's that. Thirdly while personally do not like over designed models with lots of details because I do not like painting that much, I just have to admit that in general GW knocks it out of the park with their models.
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Making Stuff






Under the couch

Karol wrote:

The enjoyed by both side is a nice thing to say. But after 3 years in the game, I now know it is just a thing that people say, because it looks nice. Like saying that if you found a bag with 100k $ you would totaly waltz with it to the nearest police station.

I honestly can't tell anymore if you actually believe this nonsense, or if you're just trolling.

It's absolutely not just a 'thing people say'. Games are meant to be fun. And unless you're completely lacking in empathy, a shared experience tends to be less enjoyable when any of the participants are not enjoying it.


If you take a game that was designed as a fun excuse to throw some dice around with friends and keep playing it as a competitive challenge and not having fun doing it, at some point it's worth stopping and asking yourself if maybe the problem is your approach to the game, and the mindset of the people you are playing it with, rather than the game itself.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/14 04:19:19


 
   
Made in us
Mutilatin' Mad Dok




Sedona, Arizona

 jaredb wrote:
I have never (beyond a bit of nostalgia), wanted to play 3rd edition again. What's 3rd edition improve on the game now?


Army scaling.

My 3rd edition marine army was.. Two tactical squads, two commanders, a kitted out veteran squad (with infiltrators), a dreadnaught, and some land speeders. I'd bring a predator if I was feeling spicy. 32 marine bodies, 3-6 speeders, one tank / dreadnaught. Less than 40 models in ALL instances.

Having an army which wasn't closer to 100 models strong was nice. Even the horde armies, like Orks and Nids, would generally be below 100 models all told.

Armies also felt more unique back then. IG were the only army who could take multiple tanks in a single slot. Tyranids were pretty much the only army with Monstrous Creatures. Demons weren't their own codex, they were something you paid for and could then summon in (a specific type of deepstrike) with your CSM army. Orks were easy to kill and easy to make run, but their Mob Up meant that their army was incredibly durable despite their units being fragile. Tau, and their suits, were the only non-vehicle based source of heavy weapons that could move + shoot.

And while I realize I'll get flak for saying this, I preferred 3rd edition melee. It was too strong in comparison to shooting, but melee armies have been a joke for numerous editions now. They've paid their dues, and it's time to get some decent melee rules on the field again.

 welshhoppo wrote:

I like my Orks how I like my Emperor, dead.
 
   
Made in ca
Mysterious Techpriest






 insaniak wrote:
Karol wrote:

The enjoyed by both side is a nice thing to say. But after 3 years in the game, I now know it is just a thing that people say, because it looks nice. Like saying that if you found a bag with 100k $ you would totaly waltz with it to the nearest police station.

I honestly can't tell anymore if you actually believe this nonsense, or if you're just trolling.

It's absolutely not just a 'thing people say'. Games are meant to be fun. And unless you're completely lacking in empathy, a shared experience tends to be less enjoyable when any of the participants are not enjoying it.


If you take a game that was designed as a fun excuse to throw some dice around with friends and keep playing it as a competitive challenge and not having fun doing it, at some point it's worth stopping and asking yourself if maybe the problem is your approach to the game, and the mindset of the people you are playing it with, rather than the game itself.


At this point i'm pretty confident that the people they play with have significantly stunted their social development. Not just the people they play 40k with but also the people they do sport with. Assuming that everyone is selfish and seeks only personal victories over everything else is a behavior that throws many red flags in my eyes. i really do hope theyre only trolling

Admech 5000
Drukhari 4000
2500
500
Imperial knights 1200

 
   
Made in ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





 VladimirHerzog wrote:
 insaniak wrote:
Karol wrote:

The enjoyed by both side is a nice thing to say. But after 3 years in the game, I now know it is just a thing that people say, because it looks nice. Like saying that if you found a bag with 100k $ you would totaly waltz with it to the nearest police station.

I honestly can't tell anymore if you actually believe this nonsense, or if you're just trolling.

It's absolutely not just a 'thing people say'. Games are meant to be fun. And unless you're completely lacking in empathy, a shared experience tends to be less enjoyable when any of the participants are not enjoying it.


If you take a game that was designed as a fun excuse to throw some dice around with friends and keep playing it as a competitive challenge and not having fun doing it, at some point it's worth stopping and asking yourself if maybe the problem is your approach to the game, and the mindset of the people you are playing it with, rather than the game itself.


At this point i'm pretty confident that the people they play with have significantly stunted their social development. Not just the people they play 40k with but also the people they do sport with. Assuming that everyone is selfish and seeks only personal victories over everything else is a behavior that throws many red flags in my eyes. i really do hope theyre only trolling


yeah me too. if Karol isn't trolling he plays with, hands down, the worst human beings in the world

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in pl
Regular Dakkanaut




Most people still don't answer the original question:

"what parts of the ruleset and game mechanics have GW done right "

instead talking about fluff and coolness of miniatures. Which is kind of telling too.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/14 09:05:15


 
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Making Stuff






Under the couch

Cyel wrote:
Most people still don't answer the original question:

"what parts of the ruleset and game mechanics have GW done right "

instead talking about fluff and coolness of miniatures. Which is kind of telling too.

Most people have answered the question. You're just focusing on those who didn't.

 
   
Made in it
Death-Dealing Dark Angels Devastator





Sesto San Giovanni, Italy

In 40k, nothing really exceptional. Whfb had good rules to differentiate between rank and file and skirmishers, but more of less that's it.

Specialist games had a lot of good stuff going on: Blood Bowl mixed the rigid gameplay style of chess with random roll and and engaging fail-pass turn sequence, Necromunda had a wonderful campaigns wounds nd experience structure (and also the territory management wasn't bad), Battlefleet Gothic has an interesting inertia in movement that causes turns to bleed together...

GW has done good things, but often seems they're not themselves aware of that.
   
Made in au
Dakka Veteran





 VladimirHerzog wrote:
 insaniak wrote:
Karol wrote:

The enjoyed by both side is a nice thing to say. But after 3 years in the game, I now know it is just a thing that people say, because it looks nice. Like saying that if you found a bag with 100k $ you would totaly waltz with it to the nearest police station.

I honestly can't tell anymore if you actually believe this nonsense, or if you're just trolling.

It's absolutely not just a 'thing people say'. Games are meant to be fun. And unless you're completely lacking in empathy, a shared experience tends to be less enjoyable when any of the participants are not enjoying it.


If you take a game that was designed as a fun excuse to throw some dice around with friends and keep playing it as a competitive challenge and not having fun doing it, at some point it's worth stopping and asking yourself if maybe the problem is your approach to the game, and the mindset of the people you are playing it with, rather than the game itself.


At this point i'm pretty confident that the people they play with have significantly stunted their social development. Not just the people they play 40k with but also the people they do sport with. Assuming that everyone is selfish and seeks only personal victories over everything else is a behavior that throws many red flags in my eyes. i really do hope theyre only trolling

when someone claims literally everyone else is awful and uses it to justify themselves behaving in a similar way, the problem is generally not actually everyone else.
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




Ruleset wise I would say the AV mechanic.

It made antitank relevant. People were always trying to bring las canons or meltas just in case they need to deal with AV 14 or AV 13 which couldn't be touched by strength lower than 6.

Also, it made feels like the big tanks as they should be, an immovable fortress invulnerable to everything but the biggest gun's. But at the same time vulnerable to a sneaky heroe enemy guy with melta bombs or a power klaw.

This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2020/11/14 12:33:43


 
   
Made in gb
Twisted Trueborn with Blaster




Ruleset done well.... LOTR

Bio build your own Tyranid back in edition... whatever it was - that was VERY characterful.

Orcs rules in WHFB: animosity, fanatics, doom divers.
   
Made in us
Heroic Senior Officer






 Banzaimash wrote:
A simple question; across all editions of the game and all codexes, what parts of the ruleset and game mechanics have GW done right and why? What stands out to you as something you remember as good, not merely passable?

I feel like they're really good at little rules that tell you the character of the army. For example, commissars have a rule "It's for your own good". If a pysker perils, he shoots them before the perils can go off and kill half your command cadre. It doesn't come up much, but when it does it feels very appropriate and is handy in a pinch. Little things like that help make armies memorable and games have that dramatic flare. Some are annoying but ultimately make sense, like "don't touch dat" that looted wagons used to have, but overall I think GW's weird little rules like that help make 40k stand out.

Those are the ones that bystanders see when they've never played the game before and makes them want to learn more. "Wait why did your guy just shoot your own men?", "Why did that Ork just teleport across the board? (Old shokk attack gun rules ) etc. Etc. I would suspect those little rules were part of why we stuck around even in the dark days of 7th.

Other than that, I would say not many games do quite the same mix of melee and ranged combat that 40k does, and that helps it stand out in my opinion. Yeah a lot of other games do it, but not many have Templar knights running across an open field to stab some orks while tanks and artillery trade fire over their heads. Yes usually one is superior to the other each edition and it can suck to be the one in the bad spot, but it's still cool to see. I play a lot of WWII games and melee in them tends to be a single turn no prisoners affair. Whereas 40k can have epic duels, lone survivors holding out against the odds to control an objective, or even something like a lucky guardsman getting a 1 in a million hit on a chaos lord. Between that and the shooting it adds some variety to how the game plays, as you may face a purely melee horde one day, an artillery park backed up by cheap infantry the next, and giant mechs that are happy to do both afterwards. Forces you to be flexible in your approach and create lists that fight a wider array of threats than most games can dream of when it works.

Finally, I miss the customization everyone but marines seems to be losing. My priests can't take eviscerators anymore, their signature weapon. My sarges can't take lasguns anymore, even though IG is a shooting army and every other army can take their basic rifle on Sarges. My tanks lost a ton of equipment options that still have modeling options. Veterans were absolutely gutted for equipment, etc. It's especially heartbreaking when they start really cutting options from units you can tell they don't want to support anymore, like rough riders. We already know you're going to screw us over and remove the unit, at least let us enjoy it while we still have it

The problem is these cool core things the game is known for can really be let down by shoddy rules writing. But at their core they're still what draws people to this game. No other game quite scratches the itch 40k does. It's not the most tactical or balanced or polished, but it is memorable and unique in the bizarre way it seems to steal every sci fi and fantasy trope under the sun and smash it into one bizarre heavy metal album cover of a universe.

'I've played Guard for years, and the best piece of advice is to always utilize the Guard's best special rule: "we roll more dice than you" ' - stormleader

"Sector Imperialis: 25mm and 40mm Round Bases (40+20) 26€ (Including 32 skulls for basing) " GW design philosophy in a nutshell  
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




Well, the detachment/CP fix is pretty good.
   
Made in au
Dakka Veteran





AV mechanic was good and I think the old Armor saves were too. Which probably means we can’t say it’s something GW does right since they removed them
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




 Nitro Zeus wrote:
AV mechanic was good and I think the old Armor saves were too. Which probably means we can’t say it’s something GW does right since they removed them


The glaring disparities between monsters and vehicles was too large. Also, vehicle shaken was too small of a penalty for a penetrations and explodes was too large of a reward.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: