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.

To preface this discussion: this is not for whining about whether x, y or z is overpowered. This topic is for discussing certain niche rules/mechanics that make the game less enjoyable overall, and hence simply exist. The idea is that posters name rules/wargear/whatever, and discuss them.

1. Warp Quake. I honestly have no idea why this was included in the book. It does not fulfill a niche or somehow protect the otherwise deepstrike-weak GK codex from utter destruction, it just allows people who feel like tailoring to utterly gimp Daemons. Yeah, yeah, fluffy or whatever, but you know it's a bad game mechanic when one player can simply make it impossible for the opponent to deploy. Silly, silly rule.

2. Infinites. I feel that everything in 40k should have some kind of cap, and hence I am somewhat opposed to Blood Talon Dreads, Celestine and Tervigons. Let it be understood that I do not think that these units are overpowered, however I don't like making a luck-centric game even more reliant on luck. Particularly at lower-points games where a little luck can push an entire battle over the edge, a good/bad tervigon spawn or a lucky round of Furioso attacks can end a game a little before it's due. Not OP, just silly, personally I'd cap the blood talons like Obyron from the Necron dex, and say the tervi always goes constipated after spawning 30 gants. Celestine's "I get back up a potentially infinite number of times" is covered here as well: not OP, just really annoyingly luck-based.

3. Jaws of the World Wolf. I really just think this shouldn't exist. It doesn't really hurt other top-end books at all, just distributes a real kick to the teeth for some of the more subpar armies out there. Just in general, it's not like the SW book is weak to MC-heavy lists (thanks to missiles), but Jaws just turns battles from "difficult matchup" to unwinnable situation.

4. Seizing the initiative. I know, I know, it's supposed to be some kind of balancer, but luck-based balancers are just always so unreliable. I really feel like 40k should operate on more of an "equal benefits" system: maybe the player who doesn't get to go first always gets to choose his deployment zone/place objectives, or something like that. I dunno, I just don't like seeing people's entire game plans dumped on their heads just because the opponent got that lucky

I am quite happy to be told I'm wrong, but remember this is all just personal opinion and I do not want this thread to degenerate into a discussion over what is/isn't OP. Just remember, this is a discussion about bad mechanics...

Am I clever if I say "Threads like this"?

I jest, I jest.

I truly can't think of anything that just irks me to the point where I wish it didn't exist. Granted, 40k as a whole is a uniquely flawed game, but that's partly why I like it.

*Shrug* I dunno, can I select an apathy option?

Fair enough, but I'm a little surprised that there isn't anything at all, even remote that you'd like to change?

What about silly stuff, like tau drones counting toward combat resolution, or how their deaths can force morale checks, or how they give up kill-points if detached from devilfish?

I think the only thing that bugs me is things that can pick out models in a squad. I know that things like that are few and far between (Boon, Jaws of the World Wolf, etc.) but still, I hate having something that gets rid of a specific advantage I have, which is having my squad leaders protected by a bubble wrap of 29 wounds.

Although that's probably just because I just played a game where one Nob out of four managed to survive being Booned.

Sure, I guess. I don't know, to be honest. Nothing jumps out really. I wouldn't mind if some stuff got fixed, but I'm not entirely bothered by it either.

Sorry, probably not the kind of poster you're looking for for such a thread.

Wild hair with power armor. Seriously-we have sleek, smooth armor that just screams "power" (no pun intended), then you have dumbass furries running around with wild hair in this sleek armor-it's a total oxymoron. Emphasis on the second part of the word. If they kept their helmets on and wolf icons, sure-that works. But wild, unkempt, MANGY hair is a stupid idea. Should not exist. I like the SW fluff. I LOVE Norse mythology. The appearance sucks.

Also, actual gods shouldn't have existed-I'll applaud Ward for removing the star gods and making them avatars instead, same as for Eldar and Daemons. Of course, first he made Warp Quake and screwed my main army. Yay....I'm gonna Draigo this thread-Ward shouldn't exist in 40k Hahaha, I don't really care, I just wanted to be the first to say it

Tervigons are what make Tyranids at all competitive, and they're not really infinite. They can roll doubles turn 1 and never spit out another bug for the rest of the game.

In before a bunch of mouthbreathers say variant Space Marine codices, meltavets, Nob Bikers, lash, Jokaero, Tau, and Mat Ward shouldn't be in the game.

Mouthbreathers? Harsh.. Thats like the stereotype of only neck beards playing sw. Im not sure if anything should be taken out but it would be cool if the codexes overall were a bit more balanced and you didnt have things like mandrakes thatd never see the light of day in more even semi competitve armies. Another thing thats kinda gripes me is when they remove past models in new codexes like cypher, etc.

At least you weren't being serious and had the same line of thought I did

Wound allocation.

I think that if a model gets hit by a blast, or the only model visible from a squad (the heavy weapon) gets shot the wound should happen to THAT model, not mook 19, while the heavy weapon guy and the sarge just keep ticking. I know it CAN happen to lose the sarge and the heavy weapon guy, while the rest of the squad lives, but they're usually the last 2 standing.


Disparity between codexes for points value.

An example would be the cost of transports, between codecii.

SM get an AV 11 Tank that can self-repair, with a BS of 4 for the same price as Orks get an AV 10 non-tanks (admittedly fast) open topped, with a BS of 2, that can't self-repair without upgrades. Not complaining, but you have to admit that the Rhino is a superior bit of kit

A bit of playtesting and discussion of the intent of new rules from the codex writer would be nice too. A little snippet on how the rule is supposed to work, after playtesting it against all the other armies special abilities..


*shrug*

Losing the Blanche art-style would be good too. It does nothing for me, and hasn't for 20+ years. Not likely, that one..

Ascalam wrote:Wound allocation.

I think that if a model gets hit by a blast, or the only model visible from a squad (the heavy weapon) gets shot the wound should happen to THAT model, not mook 19, while the heavy weapon guy and the sarge just keep ticking. I know it CAN happen to lose the sarge and the heavy weapon guy, while the rest of the squad lives, but they're usually the last 2 standing.

That'd kinda be rough for orks who hide the klaw in boyz etc.

Only if the Nob is the one standing in the way of the rocket, or sticking his head up

I play orks, and i'd still be ok with it, If you're aiming a missile at an oncoming horde it'd make sense to target the biggest, ugliest mutha there. There's a fair chance the missile might scatter, after all.

It would make trukk-rider boyz more common also, as the vehicle would be soaking the hits instead, for a while.

I think in the grand scheme of things that type of rule would hurt hordes more then elite armies since its easy to hide sm in a rhino or small pieces of cover. Gaunts, Boyz etc don't have that luxury.

True,

It just bugs me to land a blast on something and see the other end of the unit, behind a fortified wall, take the casualties.

That rule bends my suspension of disbelief a bit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It wouldn't bother gaunts much, as they are all the same, beyond the firer having a bit more option on where the hole in the unit appears.

Well it could affect whether he can assault, be assaulted, multi assault, cover 2 objectives, etc Things I think are benfits of the big squads.

On the wound allocation bit...

I have no idea how they'd implement this in the rules, maybe something similar to a Look Out Sir! roll that gets better as the squad gets bigger, but maybe make it that individual models are harder to "snipe" as they get closer to the middle of the squad? That would reward taking larger horde units, whilst penalizing the whole "min/max special weapons" thing as the valuable troopers would be far easier to snipe.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Brother SRM wrote:Tervigons are what make Tyranids at all competitive, and they're not really infinite. They can roll doubles turn 1 and never spit out another bug for the rest of the game.

In before a bunch of mouthbreathers say variant Space Marine codices, meltavets, Nob Bikers, lash, Jokaero, Tau, and Mat Ward shouldn't be in the game.

Believe me: I play Tyranids and I know Tervis are good. However, I really don't think capping them at 30 models will hurt them particularly much, and it really is more of a "dislike infinites on principle"-thing, as getting lucky with a Tervi can really unbalance the game at smaller points values...

Ascalam wrote:True,

It just bugs me to land a blast on something and see the other end of the unit, behind a fortified wall, take the casualties.

That rule bends my suspension of disbelief a bit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It wouldn't bother gaunts much, as they are all the same, beyond the firer having a bit more option on where the hole in the unit appears.

I'll keep it; sniping with ordinance is ridiculous. There was also some gimmicky 4th ed sniping by standing just so, in a way where all your guns were just in range of the models you wanted dead specifically. It was wonky and slowed the game down.

Icons of Chaos. It makes absolutely no sense- the bearer goes down and the unit just goes
"Hey, who do we worship again?"
"Dunno."

The generic daemons. It's canon that only the Furies are Undivided and that Greater Daemons have to be aligned to a god.

I agree with everything that's been said here apart from the seize the initiative rule.

I think it's a funny little rule and represents one army just going in for a preemptive strike before their enemy was completely ready. Not to mention it's fun rolling sixes to take the initiative.

You bring up some good points OP. I could see why you think those things shouldn't exist, but I think everyone's list of things will be different. I'm personally ok with the Furioso/Tervigon thing as well as pretty much everything else you mentioned. What really irks me though is Orbital Bombardments from Grey Knight Grand Masters. Normally this wouldn't be overpowered, but everytime I play Apoc one of my friends takes 3 Grand Masters just so he can do this 3 times a turn. Its really annoying and it sucks the fun out of the Apoc game.

Red Comet wrote:You bring up some good points OP. I could see why you think those things shouldn't exist, but I think everyone's list of things will be different. I'm personally ok with the Furioso/Tervigon thing as well as pretty much everything else you mentioned. What really irks me though is Orbital Bombardments from Grey Knight Grand Masters. Normally this wouldn't be overpowered, but everytime I play Apoc one of my friends takes 3 Grand Masters just so he can do this 3 times a turn. Its really annoying and it sucks the fun out of the Apoc game.

See, I'm really glad you posted this. To me, this really highlights the wide array of preferences involved in 40k, and the wide spectrum of reasons people enjoy it. I get the impression that you like these things because they are a little wacky, which is completely reasonable, and that you dislike the GM apocalypse thing because it's annoying: again reasonable.

What I find really interesting is the reason many players like apocalypse (large-scale, chaotic games) is precisely the reasons I detest it: I find 40k without strategy that is reliant upon a series of chance-centric gambits and colossal explosions to be exceptionally un-fun. Frankly, I just hate apocalypse in general.

However: I think it's fantastic that people enjoy the hobby for different reasons, and I fully understand your stance: continue to enjoy the hobby the way you do. For me, this entire topic is just a means of seeing alternative perspectives: I find it interesting to see what it is people would change about the game, and what it is that irks certain players. Hats off to all the posters so far: I'm glad to see this hasn't descended into a generic OP/NOT OP discussion.

I may get some flak for this one but here it goes: Cover Saves.

I find that everything, and I do mean everything, is about getting cover saves. I suppose it goes back to the OP's dislike of luck based things. Yes cover and the use of it is more along the lines of tactics, but it just seems to me that there is too much emphasis on getting cover.

Maybe its also the tables I play on, but I'd rather have more LOS blocking terrain than cover save granting area terrain. And I don't play assaulty armies.

I can't think of a better way to work out how I think cover should work other than by decreasing the protection that cover saves currently provide by 1, i.e. ruins and most area terrain gives a 5+, High Grass, Crops, Bushes, Hedges, and Fences a 6+, etc. But I still don't think that solves the problem I have with cover saves.

For me, it's WAAC's D-bags. You know the type;
- The guy who shows up to a 1000pts game vs a new players (who typically have marines of some flavour) with 3 russes + min/maxed chimera meltavets.

- The jerk who keeps a Quake-Shunt list in his back pocket to use on any Daemon players, and then asks when they're going to stop sucking so bad at playing 40k!

- Rules lawyers.

- Bandwagon abusers who troll the local scene curbstomping everyone with the latest net-list filth, and then proclaiming their greatness and utter supieriority over everyone else. (insert orkmoticon flipping the bird here)



Alot of the more obnoxious abilties are problematic and lead to these situations. For example, I wouldn't complain about warp quake nearly as much if it only had a 6" radius! That right away knocks the alpha-strikers like flamers on the head, but it won't screw over an entire army and prevent them even hitting the table!

Same deal with the likes of SW's. Grey hunters are slightly under costed because they don't have nearly the flexability and utility of their codex brethren, while long fangs have 0 ablaitive wounds and provide almost all of the army's big guns.
Within reason, these units are fine. When they're ruthlessly spamed to the point you're facing 4-6 min/maxed 'hunter squads in transports + 3x missile fangs, the game gets boring pretty damn fast.

So while certain games desingers tend to mess up alot more than others and allow more of the broken crap to happen, the real problem are the people who go out of their way to abuse the feth out of these imbalances and look at a game of toy soldiers as some kind of professional life & death competition.

Ascalam wrote:Wound allocation.

I think that if a model gets hit by a blast, or the only model visible from a squad (the heavy weapon) gets shot the wound should happen to THAT model, not mook 19, while the heavy weapon guy and the sarge just keep ticking. I know it CAN happen to lose the sarge and the heavy weapon guy, while the rest of the squad lives, but they're usually the last 2 standing.


Disparity between codexes for points value.

An example would be the cost of transports, between codecii.

SM get an AV 11 Tank that can self-repair, with a BS of 4 for the same price as Orks get an AV 10 non-tanks (admittedly fast) open topped, with a BS of 2, that can't self-repair without upgrades. Not complaining, but you have to admit that the Rhino is a superior bit of kit

On wound allocation: the easiest way to think about it, is Missile Launcher guy is the one who dies, but mook 19 picks up the missile launcher because it's a lot better than his flashlight.

As for the cost of transports: orks can assault out of a truck. I would say that the truck is better for orks than a rhino is for marines.

To the OP:
I don't want to sound like a d-bag, but some of the marine codices. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy marines, and I do see the point of the different books. I don't think you could just shove them all into the same codex and have anything worthwhile. But, having as many marine books as they do, it slows down the overall development cycle. If the additional 4 loyal marine books were dissolved, that's 4 fewer armies that need to be updated.

I don't like seize initiative at all. Those units that you deployed to storm forward and strike the enemy are now sitting ducks.
Can't think of a single time I had initiative stolen from me when I didn't lose several of my best units, similarly when I steal I usually manage to wipe out about a quarter of his army thanks to less cover saves.

I don't like HQ's that change the FOC, they are simply ridiculus.
Some are alright, But I don't want to be staring down an army of terminators.

Blacksails wrote:Am I clever if I say "Threads like this"?

First response nailed it.

Look a hate thread!

Pyrovores.

Any kind of AoE "Save or Suck" attacks, like Jaws. It was a bad mechanic in DnD and it's bad here too. I don't mind instant death, because there's ways to protect against that. But these are stupid, not just because they can kill any unit with a 1/6 or more chance of auto-fail, but they can rip a good portion out of a unit or even a whole army.

I agree on the cover thing, too many saves, too little cover. The cover should be more in the have-or-have-not region, not the 50%-if-have.

Shrike: unless the guy with the rocket launcher is the one who actually dies, in which case Mook19 can't pick it up. Third edition used to function like so, though, that any model could pick up the gear of someone who died (except Eldar grav platforms, which had separate crew, but they nearly never died).