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.

 BryllCream wrote:

How is it fair that a unit relying on shooting, still has to hit and miss, whereas an assault force is guarenteed the kill if it can close the difference? Random charge range rectifies that disparity, and the increased pile-in move and +1 attack for the entire squad, compensate for this.

We may be playing different games, because in 40k you roll to hit and wound in close combat as well...

Assaulting within your move distance should be an ld test, outside should be an ld test then a d6 on top of move distance

Ailaros wrote: but you don't get a free close combat attack against people shooting you.

How, um, exactly, would that work?

I mean, I'd love to hear the explanation for this one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Nevelon wrote:
RT was a RPG
2nd was a skirmish game.
3rd was the first time I felt that the game was about two armies fighting it out. Not just herohammer where troops were just mooks to be cashed in rolls by the uber-heros that was 2nd.
4-6th are just refinements of 3rd. Some things get fixed, others broken in each revision. I do think that 6th is the best overall, but it is not a perfect system by any means.

I think the best part about 2nd was that the Special Characters were "opponent's permission" only. I mean, sure, some codex books had the ability to make ridiculous stock characters (looking at you Codex: Chaos, lol), but it was hardly herohammer, or perhaps you just weren't very good at it. I distinctly remember the Incredible Vanishing Eldar Avatar who managed to stray into the line of fire of an assault cannon. Shooting and overwatch were so burly in 2nd, that characters were quite crunchable if you weren't smart with them. Plus, hey, if that special character got into close combat with your troops, screw it, just open fire on the melee.

Besides, 40K was always meant to be a skirmish game. There was a game for large battles between armies, and it was called Epic. 3rd+ doesn't even do that good of a job of replicating large battles. It just puts maybe 40% more models on the table and lets you roll more dice. Really, the difference in scale between 2nd and 3rd was chopping the points values in half. It wasn't like someone would come and physically restrain you from playing 3500 points of 2nd Edition and fielding about the same amount of models as a 2000 point 3rd Edition game.

And heck, since 2nd had so much more detailed of a ruleset, you might actually end up with something resembling a battle, instead of a jumble of models moving towards eachother (lol 12 inch shooting ranges) and getting pulled off the table.

Wolfnid420 wrote:
Assault moves 3D3+ initiative

I love that idea, so so much, but it won't happen because they want to go away from "move speed"

Edition wise, 6th has absolutely the best framework of rules.

I'd want to run my 2nd edition army, somehow updated to 6th though, since it no longer exists.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:

Ailaros wrote: but you don't get a free close combat attack against people shooting you.

How, um, exactly, would that work?

I mean, I'd love to hear the explanation for this one.

Well it doesn't have to be a close combat attack, does it? May be something like what the BT got, you get shot at, you roll your Ld test, then you get to move some inches closer.

On topic: I started in 5th, preferred 5th over 6th for pretty much the same reason as most people here: the lack of randomness was so much better. I'm glad that DE is considered one of the last few codex for them to renew, I'd hate to have to roll on a table to see what weapon my grotesques are packing, whether it's a liquifier gauntlet that can destroy universe several times over or a trucking spoon. DE is fickle(too!).

Though from the sound of it, I also really like that older edition where they weren't using TLOS, TLOS never quite made sense to me, and I hate hugging table(they don't hug me back).

Codexes were full of character and there were minidexes!

Codex: Craftworld Eldar, Codex: Armeggedon, Codex: Chaos 3.5!!!!!!(greatest codex ever written).

Terminators got their first invul save! Vehicle Design rules! Scarabs weren't swarms and could explode!

No Tau!!!! Sisters had rules in the main book! Tyranids got sexy! DIAZ DAEMONETTES!

Gamesday had events and stuff worth traveling to see! FW had like 4 items for sale!

Plastic Dreadnoughts?!!! NO FETHING WAY!!!!

As mentioned already, Tau were introduced about mid third. Also, Scarabs were swarms and did NOT explode (you're thinking of the original 2nd ed. rules) and the Tyranids, well, they just kind of got more silly in some ways and less silly in others. As for the 3rd ed codexes - Even people on the studio team like Gav Thorpe have said that they felt they went too far in cutting the fun/fluff from the dexes and 3rd is almost universally considered the most bland edition when it comes to that. Plus, the "golden era" for Games Day events was also during 2nd ed. I'm actually wondering if you were playing a mash-up of third and second ed.

For me, 2nd ed all the way unless we're playing 5th. lol RT was pretty difficult to play but the second ed rule set smoothed out a lot of that while keeping an insane amount of character and flavor to the game. Yes, it took longer in some cases and the games were way smaller, but oh the detail! Imagine being able to do things like use your sword to parry a blow in cc. I also miss the secret missions. You and your opponent each picked mission cards and did not reveal what your mission was until the end of the game. The other nice thing about 2nd ed was that you didn't need the huge table spaces we often need now.

All that being said, I also really liked 5th. It had it's flaws certainly, but I felt like it was a very fun and fast playing rule set that was fairly straight forward and somewhat well suited to competitions. 6th isn't bad - I feel like it's a bit of a throw back to 2nd, but there's just so much that doesn't seem thought out. It's fun, but kind of awkward for my tastes. I feel like it almost forces you to make house rules to fix a lot of things which then means that if I play at club "A" today, and club "B" tomorrow, I could be playing with two almost completely different systems.

 Ailaros wrote:
Actually, it's the disparity that bothers me with 6th.
...40k was already imbalanced against assault...

Umm...yeah. No. Just no. You cannot POSSIBLY pass the straight face test and tell ME that assaults were on the short end of the stick... EVER before. I will cite the rules STRAIGHT from the books if you need me to. There is no WAY that's a correct statement. Codex's? Two words: Blood Angels. Two more? Grey Knights... Two More? Chaos Daemons. Just Blood Crushers, throw in some flamers. Two more?... No I think the point is made. Nuff said.

Now if you want to claim that the pindulum has swung slightly too far, i would engage you on THAT point. But there is ZERO to engage on as far as some sense that assault was "not fair" to assaulters before this point. 'Cause thats bull. No offense but...come on man.

Here's just my take: the pendulum HAS swung. No one should be disingenuous and say otherwise. It has swung. But all that means...actually... Is that you NEED to take Baal Predators and the like and INCLUDE some shooting instead of just taking it for two round and then wrecking everything that stands against you as was the previous truth.

In other words, like with every edition, new units are necessary. Shooting units just ARE necessary and YES you will not be able to take an ENTIRELY assault army of SIXTY Blood Angels and Terminators and their priests with no guns really, and ram them down enemy throats while opponents helplessly watch it happen and choke on their own blood, having no fun in the process. Assault was so powerful against almost EVERY xeno that some units were utterly abandoned STRICTLY on the basis of this dynamic. Many Imperial Guardsman took it in the face from Space Wolves in a BIG way from outflanking crazy units that could end them in a turn. Hell I DID thi kind of thing to people!

So what REALLY happened here is, you have to have a balanced force even moe than in 5th Edition. You can STILL take 60 Marines and ram them down my throat and it will still work...you just have to give up some points or upgrades or termies and such to make room for the whittlers who can soften the targets first. And I think thats okay. relying on nothing but hammers is...pretty unrealistic in a 41st Millennium.

 amanita wrote:

Wut? Since when does an assault GUARANTEE a kill? Still have to hit and miss I'm pretty sure. Unlike shooting, assault always puts the attacker into harm's way. Even lopsided victories tend to whittle down assaulting forces even if a slight amount. Random charges ARE stupid. If you don't think attackers should get a bonus attack then fix that, not create a system where the charging unit has a variable range of SIX TIMES from low to high.

Well any space marine squad bar scouts can wreck any of my vehicles in a single turn, and any dedicated assault unit will destroy anything that's not a blob in a single turn.

Whereas a specialised shooting unit would struggle to be this effective. Sternguard won't kill as many guardsmen as khorne beserkers, my Russes certainly can't obliterate enemy units with the same certainty that a squad of terminators with lightening claws could.

You also keep ignoring the extra attack that is now given without the precondition of being in assault range to begin with. This can make a *huge* difference, even more so with the new random charge range.

The biggest offender for the problems with balance was 3rd Edition, which was the first edition that tried to streamline Assault and make the game end in massive, decisive melees. In fact, the designers admitted that was part of their goal at the time. They cut shooting ranges down drastically (none worse than the poor shuriken catapult which became 12" max).

The problem is that what 3rd did, was introduce an era of armies that were themed around close combat, in a back storied environment that has effective rapid fire guns, lol.

In 2nd Edition, even Tyranids could shoot effectively. The melee troops like Hormogaunts and Genestealers weren't even that prolific (possibly because hormogaunts were ridiculously expensive to buy at the time, lol). Assault-focused troops were specialists. They weren't supposed to be the core of your army, and an army with no shooting was probably going to be in a bad way.

All 6th did was put the game's emphasis back on shooting where it should be. Some armies suffer from this because they've spent the last ten years being focused entirely on assault. Hopefully what this means is that upcoming codex army lists for those armies shift back to giving them the ability to combat effectively in a game where shooting has a legitimate level of power for normal armies, not just gunline armies.

I can empathize with the players whose model collections have been made partially obsolete by this change. But ultimately it's good for the game. They've been talking about getting away from "Fantasy Innnnn Spaaaaaaaaaace" for years. It's good to see a ruleset that's actually at least trying to do that.

If GW are really trying to get away from 'Fantasy in Space!'
Perhaps they should stop using WHFB game mechanics , and resolution methods!

3rd edition but only because of the csm codex, otherwise 6th is one of the best editions. Much better than say warhammer fantasy 8th edition.

I have been playing since 4th edition, but I have an understanding of how 3rd edition worked and it seems to me every edition since then has only made the game better. Perhaps with a few exceptions in the rules or codexes here and there I suppose. So, I picked 6th edition.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
The biggest offender for the problems with balance was 3rd Edition, which was the first edition that tried to streamline Assault and make the game end in massive, decisive melees. In fact, the designers admitted that was part of their goal at the time. They cut shooting ranges down drastically (none worse than the poor shuriken catapult which became 12" max).

The problem is that what 3rd did, was introduce an era of armies that were themed around close combat, in a back storied environment that has effective rapid fire guns, lol.

In 2nd Edition, even Tyranids could shoot effectively. The melee troops like Hormogaunts and Genestealers weren't even that prolific (possibly because hormogaunts were ridiculously expensive to buy at the time, lol). Assault-focused troops were specialists. They weren't supposed to be the core of your army, and an army with no shooting was probably going to be in a bad way.

All 6th did was put the game's emphasis back on shooting where it should be. Some armies suffer from this because they've spent the last ten years being focused entirely on assault. Hopefully what this means is that upcoming codex army lists for those armies shift back to giving them the ability to combat effectively in a game where shooting has a legitimate level of power for normal armies, not just gunline armies.

I can empathize with the players whose model collections have been made partially obsolete by this change. But ultimately it's good for the game. They've been talking about getting away from "Fantasy Innnnn Spaaaaaaaaaace" for years. It's good to see a ruleset that's actually at least trying to do that.

Shurikens were probably nerfed because of just how stupidly powerful they were in 2nd. There's also the fact that 2nd edition had plenty of horrible OP shooting, not to mention the power of Eldar in both Assault and Shooting was pretty damn powerful.

Shooting should be PART, not EVERYTHING. Chaos has such nerfed assault that it's rather pointless in the long run due to how they screwed up the transport rules.

4th Edition Gunlines are not good for the game, it's bland, boring, and makes for games where the only objective is how well you shoot (See 5th edition IG, 5th edition GK, 4th edition Tau/eldar Skimmerspam). If assault has no purpose, what's the point of having it in then.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
They've been talking about getting away from "Fantasy Innnnn Spaaaaaaaaaace" for years. It's good to see a ruleset that's actually at least trying to do that.

Did someone forget to tell GW about that?

Mr. Merrett's testimony was hours in length, initially focused on explaining Games Workshop's business to the jury. Some highlights from his testimony:
Warhammer 40,000 was described to the jury as "Warhammer Fantasy in space"

I couldn't resist.

What I don't understand when people say "WH40k is all about shooting" "assault has no place in WH40k" or "WH40k's emphasis should be shooting" is that... Are they mixing up what they want with what GW actually want? Because from what I can see, from the fact that most HQs having only CC upgrades, to CSM having an entire rule that only matters in CC, to various amazing CC units, USRs or special rules that are CC only, I think GW does want assault and shooting to play an equal part in their game, but they're just doing an absolutely horrible job at bringing that balance!

 Jancoran wrote:

 Ailaros wrote:
Actually, it's the disparity that bothers me with 6th.
...40k was already imbalanced against assault...

Umm...yeah. No. Just no. You cannot POSSIBLY pass the straight face test and tell ME that assaults were on the short end of the stick... EVER before. I will cite the rules STRAIGHT from the books if you need me to. There is no WAY that's a correct statement. Codex's? Two words: Blood Angels. Two more? Grey Knights... Two More? Chaos Daemons. Just Blood Crushers, throw in some flamers. Two more?... No I think the point is made. Nuff said.

Now if you want to claim that the pindulum has swung slightly too far, i would engage you on THAT point. But there is ZERO to engage on as far as some sense that assault was "not fair" to assaulters before this point. 'Cause thats bull. No offense but...come on man.

Here's just my take: the pendulum HAS swung. No one should be disingenuous and say otherwise. It has swung. But all that means...actually... Is that you NEED to take Baal Predators and the like and INCLUDE some shooting instead of just taking it for two round and then wrecking everything that stands against you as was the previous truth.

In other words, like with every edition, new units are necessary. Shooting units just ARE necessary and YES you will not be able to take an ENTIRELY assault army of SIXTY Blood Angels and Terminators and their priests with no guns really, and ram them down enemy throats while opponents helplessly watch it happen and choke on their own blood, having no fun in the process. Assault was so powerful against almost EVERY xeno that some units were utterly abandoned STRICTLY on the basis of this dynamic. Many Imperial Guardsman took it in the face from Space Wolves in a BIG way from outflanking crazy units that could end them in a turn. Hell I DID thi kind of thing to people!

So what REALLY happened here is, you have to have a balanced force even moe than in 5th Edition. You can STILL take 60 Marines and ram them down my throat and it will still work...you just have to give up some points or upgrades or termies and such to make room for the whittlers who can soften the targets first. And I think thats okay. relying on nothing but hammers is...pretty unrealistic in a 41st Millennium.

So please tell me how my Chaos Daemon army can get guns when our most reliable ranged weaponry is a chariot that doesn't work, psykers, soulgrinder, and a skull cannon (not to mention a random table that might or might not feth either player over)

On GK. I always thought they were more close/mid range shooty actually. Bar the specific draigo list. The most popular lists I've seen have been IG, Space Wolves with range, GK with range, and the sorts. What of orks? Where did greentide go? Well now we have dakka orks. If we are going on the argument list.... you listed 3 armies. One which was largely considered broken and another that had a 30% chance of auto-losing and only became broken when White Dwarf came out (and then promptly got the tzeentch models nerfed dramatically and t4 bloodcrushers)

Now I would like to go on and say, what I assume he meant was that 5th edition favoured shooting. Not drastically. But as more and more tanks came into the battlefield, the less useful cc seemed to become (from my meta at least). Then the new edition came out and the pendulum made CC way too underpowered. Granted, I will concur 3rd or 4th (do not remember which) favoured CC disgustingly

Also if we go the route of curses all those people playing CC only armies! Well what about armies like Tau and IG which are SHOOTING ONLY! Also even when you get into assault, it is likely to lsoe units. Shooting units don't have to worry (or worry from guns usually inferior to theirs)

Eeeeh.... personally I cannot say I like any of the editions that much.... If I must pick one though.... 6th edition. Although some of their rules (allies etc) really don't work properly in my opinion, they were implimented and I cannot wait for them to improve.

It's a hard choice. I grew up on 2nd Edition and still play a game or two of it every year at this point. Rogue Trader is huge fun but a lot more like proto-Necromunda or original D&D (with lazors!) where it was more of a hybrid RPG/wargame than a full-on wargame. But it is huge fun to just get a game going of it (Deadzone actually gives me a crazy Rogue Trader vibe, especially with the feel of the space-fantasy expy races).

3rd was a big disappointment for me. I was hoping for a 2nd Edition with the bad bits excised and fixed, instead I got a totally new game with a completely new scale and focus to it. I played it, but never really enjoyed it. And the balance issues and shaky codex quality really shot down any chance of enjoyment.

From there, 4th and 5th were a haze of flip-flopping design philosophies that resulted in (for me at least) really sub-par game play that was neither fun nor engaging. The narrative elements of 2nd/RT that got me in to the game were gone and there wasn't any in-depth tactical gameplay there to make up for it. It managed to be a simplistic game that was paradoxically too complex to be worth the trouble. And of course, codex quality, while improved from 2nd and 3rd, was still crap which screwed up any chance of a fun meta.

6th is, for me, more of a return to 2nd Edition and RT. It brings back some of the gonzo fun of the 40k-verse that had been missing. Still not really deep, it is at least enjoyable on its own merits again (at least in my mind) and can generate the same raconteur-friendly stories of 2nd and RT which were the main draws for me in earlier editions. The other positive point is it, thus far, has some of the best codices written for it in terms of both background and gameplay. This makes it pretty easy for me to love it.

If you had a gun to my head I'd probably say stick with 6th and clean up the bad bits. 2nd and RT have more warts than 6th, and 3rd-5th are just too bland and unappealing to me. 6th manages a nice balance while still fumbling a bit in areas (internal balance of the psychic powers and flyers may need a second pass though ever since the Helldrake most new ones have been damn reasonable). But army balance within the edition is quite good and the basics of the rules are quite solid. As a framework, it is better than it has been in over a decade. If they continue writing codices as they are, then it may well be one of the best editions to date (so long as it doesn't have a GK/IG/Space Wolf/Necron or WFB Daemon-like fumble in it that borks the meta). If they can fix the current bad codices when the time comes, it should smooth the current wrinkles in the meta and let the system really shine. Right now, their backwards compatibility allowing use of the worst examples of last edition (and the fact that the updates have made old-school skimmer-flyers kind of broken in some lists) is the largest culprit for messing with the games. The more codices designed to work in 6th, the better it gets. Sadly, unless this is the first edition to ever get a codex out for every race/faction, we will end up being disappointed on that end. Though at the current rate, it may actually manage it; I certainly hope it does; having a fully self-contained edition would be nice for once (especially if 7th ends up doing something horrible).

 DeffDred wrote:
Vehicle Design rules!

I remember these. You could totally make a completely free gun turret vehicle with them. I used to imagine spamming my side of the board with them, before I found out about the FoC

The narrative elements of 2nd/RT that got me in to the game were gone and there wasn't any in-depth tactical gameplay there to make up for it

Ok I definitely need to go check 2nd ed out. I'm dead keen on the narrative aspect, but it's hard to build that up when every game is some variation of "helldrake helldrake helldrake manticore manticore manticore..."

 Dakkamite wrote:

 DeffDred wrote:
Vehicle Design rules!

I remember these. You could totally make a completely free gun turret vehicle with them. I used to imagine spamming my side of the board with them, before I found out about the FoC

The narrative elements of 2nd/RT that got me in to the game were gone and there wasn't any in-depth tactical gameplay there to make up for it

Ok I definitely need to go check 2nd ed out. I'm dead keen on the narrative aspect, but it's hard to build that up when every game is some variation of "helldrake helldrake helldrake manticore manticore manticore..."

In 2nd it used to be "Jetpacking eldar, jetpacking eldar, jetpacking eldar, Virus bomb, Virus Bomb, Virus Bomb, Nid fething Cards, Nid Cards, Nid Cards, NID CARDS, 5 assault cannon space wolf terminators."

I like 2nd, honestly, but it's balance was worse then anything within the past fourth editions! (6th, 5th, 4th, and third!). With so much that could cause hell in a bad way, less manticore wounds your army, and more "Oh, your psykers are fighting my nids? Well Psychic scream, every turn they gotta roll 2D6 and if they under their toughness, they are stunned, over it, they die"

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:


In 2nd it used to be "Jetpacking eldar, jetpacking eldar, jetpacking eldar, Virus bomb, Virus Bomb, Virus Bomb, Nid fething Cards, Nid Cards, Nid Cards, NID CARDS, 5 assault cannon space wolf terminators."

I like 2nd, honestly, but it's balance was worse then anything within the past fourth editions! (6th, 5th, 4th, and third!). With so much that could cause hell in a bad way, less manticore wounds your army, and more "Oh, your psykers are fighting my nids? Well Psychic scream, every turn they gotta roll 2D6 and if they under their toughness, they are stunned, over it, they die"

This. Nobody even bothered to take an expensive unit or character, because pretty much everyone was running an Assassin using Polymorphine, or a Swooping Hawk Exarch, with a Vortex Grenade.

It was only balanced insomuch as everyone had a unit that could alt-control-delete one opposing player's unit off of the table on T1, nearly guaranteed.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:


In 2nd it used to be "Jetpacking eldar, jetpacking eldar, jetpacking eldar, Virus bomb, Virus Bomb, Virus Bomb, Nid fething Cards, Nid Cards, Nid Cards, NID CARDS, 5 assault cannon space wolf terminators."

I like 2nd, honestly, but it's balance was worse then anything within the past fourth editions! (6th, 5th, 4th, and third!). With so much that could cause hell in a bad way, less manticore wounds your army, and more "Oh, your psykers are fighting my nids? Well Psychic scream, every turn they gotta roll 2D6 and if they under their toughness, they are stunned, over it, they die"

This. Nobody even bothered to take an expensive unit or character, because pretty much everyone was running an Assassin using Polymorphine, or a Swooping Hawk Exarch, with a Vortex Grenade.

It was only balanced insomuch as everyone had a unit that could alt-control-delete one opposing player's unit off of the table on T1, nearly guaranteed.

Remember when you could take a Polymorphined Assassin with Terminator armor on a bike and still 'pose' as the enemy?

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
I think the best part about 2nd was that the Special Characters were "opponent's permission" only.

Actually, it was 3rd edition that added in the requirement for permission to use special characters. There was no such requirement in 2nd ed, although a lot of gaming groups and tournaments had their own 'No Special Characters' rules.

...but it was hardly herohammer,

You're one of maybe 3 people on the planet who thinks this. The 'take a bare minimum of troops and pile as much wargear onto your characters as you have points for' approach was the standard for most of 2nd edition. And it wasn't just Chaos that had insane characters. My Marine army included a 4th Level Psyker Inquisitor Lord in Terminatro Armour, and a 4th Level Chief Librarian with a power field (so between the two of them a guarantee of getting the Vortex psychic power, and the other Inquisition psychic powers didn't suck either) and a Terminator Captain with a DIsplacer Field and a Vortex Grenade (at least until GW ruled that Terminators couldn't throw grenades). The rest of the army was generally superfluous.

 insaniak wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
I think the best part about 2nd was that the Special Characters were "opponent's permission" only.

Actually, it was 3rd edition that added in the requirement for permission to use special characters. There was no such requirement in 2nd ed, although a lot of gaming groups and tournaments had their own 'No Special Characters' rules.

2nd edition did, however, have points limitations on characters. For example, Ghazkull could only be used in 2000pt games.

 -Loki- wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
I think the best part about 2nd was that the Special Characters were "opponent's permission" only.

Actually, it was 3rd edition that added in the requirement for permission to use special characters. There was no such requirement in 2nd ed, although a lot of gaming groups and tournaments had their own 'No Special Characters' rules.

2nd edition did, however, have points limitations on characters. For example, Ghazkull could only be used in 2000pt games.

And like in Fantasy, you only used SC's because they have special rules, because you could make bull combo's 20X more effective then they were.

 Ailaros wrote:
Actually, it's the disparity that bothers me with 6th.

You have random charge range, but you don't have random shooting range. You have an entire class of targets that can't be targeted with close combat (fliers), but you don't have an entire class of targets that can't be targeted with shooting. You get a free shooting attack against someone charging you, but you don't get a free close combat attack against people shooting you.

40k was already imbalanced against assault, and the things they did to it in 6th ed seem to go beyond balancing, beyond punitive, all the way past just idiotic (especially with fliers- who can't be targetted by close combat - getting to use close combat attacks on stuff... without even getting into close combat), to rules made by throwing darts at a dartboard.

Perhaps that's why there's so much randomness in the game... perhaps the rules themselves were determined randomly...

Beautiful, this sums 90% of my position nicely. Better believe I exalted that gak.

The other 10% is cutting out outflanking (etc) assaults and sweeping advances of any kind, GtG being ridiculously poor (troops gone to ground should be nigh-on invincible, as any FoW player will tell you), and most of all barrage weapons. I only recently learned they don't need LoS, a spotter, or anything. Not only has GW removed Assault from the game but they are looking to take Movement out as well. Seriously, the barrage weapons rules are the worst rules I've ever seen, I just can't even articulate how broken this gak is.

Wolfnid420 wrote:
Assault moves 3D3+ initiative

Dunno about 3d6 but by god +INT seems like a great idea. Maybe INT affects run distance and/or difficult terrain as well? Certainly a good way to make that stat more useful. Also, perhaps no more random charge against targets that cannot overwatch? The 'hail of fire' thing makes sense to a degree but 'oh damn I slipped on the way to that tank's rear armour' is bogus

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:


In 2nd it used to be "Jetpacking eldar, jetpacking eldar, jetpacking eldar, Virus bomb, Virus Bomb, Virus Bomb, Nid fething Cards, Nid Cards, Nid Cards, NID CARDS, 5 assault cannon space wolf terminators."

I like 2nd, honestly, but it's balance was worse then anything within the past fourth editions! (6th, 5th, 4th, and third!). With so much that could cause hell in a bad way, less manticore wounds your army, and more "Oh, your psykers are fighting my nids? Well Psychic scream, every turn they gotta roll 2D6 and if they under their toughness, they are stunned, over it, they die"

This. Nobody even bothered to take an expensive unit or character, because pretty much everyone was running an Assassin using Polymorphine, or a Swooping Hawk Exarch, with a Vortex Grenade.

It was only balanced insomuch as everyone had a unit that could alt-control-delete one opposing player's unit off of the table on T1, nearly guaranteed.

You guys played with awful people, lol.

I literally never played in any games where all the broken stuff like Vortex Grenades, or Virus Grenades, etc, were used. No tournaments or events allowed any of that stuff. Not even the friendly games had them. Why would you want the virus bomb? What fun is it to either do absolutely nothing, or table the whole army with one piece of gear?

It's starting to sound like a failure of individual character and values, not a failure of the rule system of 2nd.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:


In 2nd it used to be "Jetpacking eldar, jetpacking eldar, jetpacking eldar, Virus bomb, Virus Bomb, Virus Bomb, Nid fething Cards, Nid Cards, Nid Cards, NID CARDS, 5 assault cannon space wolf terminators."

I like 2nd, honestly, but it's balance was worse then anything within the past fourth editions! (6th, 5th, 4th, and third!). With so much that could cause hell in a bad way, less manticore wounds your army, and more "Oh, your psykers are fighting my nids? Well Psychic scream, every turn they gotta roll 2D6 and if they under their toughness, they are stunned, over it, they die"

This. Nobody even bothered to take an expensive unit or character, because pretty much everyone was running an Assassin using Polymorphine, or a Swooping Hawk Exarch, with a Vortex Grenade.

It was only balanced insomuch as everyone had a unit that could alt-control-delete one opposing player's unit off of the table on T1, nearly guaranteed.

You guys played with awful people, lol.

I literally never played in any games where all the broken stuff like Vortex Grenades, or Virus Grenades, etc, were used. No tournaments or events allowed any of that stuff. Not even the friendly games had them. Why would you want the virus bomb? What fun is it to either do absolutely nothing, or table the whole army with one piece of gear?

It's starting to sound like a failure of individual character and values, not a failure of the rule system of 2nd.

And that's the problem with how 2nd was designed. It was very much based on a 'gentlemans agreement', even if not said, on how hard you'd bring it. It wasn't structured for a game where you didn't hash this gak out before the game, or played people with wildly different ideas of how to build an army.

Later editions, while still not very balanced, curbed the ridiculous unit and even army delete abilities that were in 2nd edition.

So, basically, you're saying that the problem with 2nd Edition is that the 40K hobby is too fully of mealy mouthed, slack-jawed pimply cretins who need a virtual minder to keep them in check?



Fair enough. Having posted on Dakka long enough, I buy it.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
So, basically, you're saying that the problem with 2nd Edition is that the 40K hobby is too fully of mealy mouthed, slack-jawed pimply cretins who need a virtual minder to keep them in check?

More that the 40K hobby includes people who feel that the game rules outline what is allowed in the game, and it shouldn't be just taken for granted that players will all impose the same artificial limitations on those rules.

I played plenty of games in 2nd edition without Psykers, or without special characters because opponents requested it. I also played plenty of games where we designed the hardest lists we could, because that's the sort of game that the two of us wanted to play.

Insulting people just because they want to play a different type of game to you is ridiculous. The key to having fun in this (and pretty much any game is just to find like-minded opponents.