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.

whatwhat wrote:

chaplaingrabthar wrote:I'll be honest, the only one of those fleets I've ever played against is Tyranids, and they didn't seem to screw up the balance/metagame. Not sure on the other 2.

Well I and many people in the online bfg community must be playing the wrong game then.

Not at all, I just send in the experience of the community I play with (which is mostly Orks, Imperial & Chaos, plus my Tau that we haven't had those problems, mostly because we just don't happen to play those fleets. I truly wasn't aware that there was much of an on-line BFG community. So what's the big issues with the newer fleets then? Are Necron Harvesters the Nob Bikers of BFG?

Yeh like Inquisitor, mordheim etc. theres still a few players around just hidden in unfound corners of the web. portmaw.com is a fairly busy BFG forum for example.

Out of those three I gave you the necrons are probs the worst yeh. About your only hope is taking out their lead ships and banking on their crazy victory conditions, kind of makes things less fun though.

whatwhat wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:

whatwhat wrote:The game which is in dire need of a redo is BFG. That imo has the worse rules of any GW game atm.

BFG is fine. It plays nicely and smoothly. The mechanics are clean. The only issue is having sufficient Orders Dice for large games. It doesn't need a redo as much as a compilation of the Armada updates and additions into the base rulebook.

No. The rules were good, untill the Dark Eldar, Tyranids, and Necrons came out, now they're more screwed a level far beyond anything orks have done to 40k.

Then, worst case, the DE, Nid, and Necron lists need to be tweaked. The game iteself is fine.

\Well yeh, but that's more than just a simple fix isn't it. Hence why I brought it up. Rather than "BFG is fine."

1. More support for Epic. I love the current rules, but we need more Chaos stuff, some Tyranids, and Necrons, at the very least.

2. Man O' War. This was the best GW game I ever played, I think. Unfortunately, I never had a copy; I always played with my friend's set using my own miniatures.

That's about it, really. I don't understand why people are clamoring for things that are readily available from GW's website, like Necromunda and Mordheim. I mean, can't you just order them whenever you want?

Pariah Press wrote:1. More support for Epic. I love the current rules, but we need more Chaos stuff, some Tyranids, and Necrons, at the very least..

Yeah, this. I know I'm lucky in that IA3 has an official Epic Tau list, but a proper armies/minis supplement for Epic would be the coolest GW surprise ever.

@What: I don't think it's that difficult - a few simplifying and balancing tweaks to the army-specific rules in question would seem to be sufficient. I don't think the entire game needs to be redone just for those changes.

Besides, wouldn't you be more afraid of GW screwing up the basics in a 2nd Edition?