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.

Shouldn't this be in proposed rules?

 StarTrotter wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
If I'm reading the general gist of most people's complaints correctly, which isn't always easy when you have layers of outrage, indignation, hyperbole and ranting to remove to get to the heart of the complaint (not saying all do this, but some definitely do) then something to prevent recursive daemon summoning and something to prevent 2++ rerolling or to bypass it somehow would remove the majority of gameplay issues now the FAQs have been produced and updated. (Assuming things like SW losing their powers will self correct with a new book, but that's not really an issue with the game, that's players unhappy with the way their army has been altered)

I'd also like Eldar and Tau to be looked at. Waveserpents still need adjusting down in power or up in points, I personally favour reducing the range of the Shield as the easiest way of doing that, Battle Focus should be Snap Shots, not at full BS and Bladestorm needs toning down, perhaps retaining the wounds in 6s regardless, but lose the AP2? Wraithknights could use a small increase in points.

Tau need less IMO, but I'm not as experienced playing against them, and my one local opponent deliberately runs unorthodox lists that don't capitalise on all their advantages, so can't comment as much. Perhaps something to mitigate the way so many units can overwatch at high BS? A LD test for the unit not being charged? Markerlight tokens cannot be used? Not sure.

Somebody once brought up an interesting request. Swap Falcons with Wavesperents. Does anybody have an opinion on that?

In 6th, probably, but it is easy in 7th to make two CA Detachments and have 6 HS slots for WS and WK, heck, prolly 9 within still relatively low points values.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 pretre wrote:
Shouldn't this be in proposed rules?

We're not proposing rules, we're proposing things to propose to the Devs. Some of which are rules.

 azreal13 wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Shouldn't this be in proposed rules?

We're not proposing rules, we're proposing things to propose to the Devs. Some of which are rules.

Same thing. You are proposing changes to 40k. That's kind of what the Proposed Rules forum is for. Whether you're going to send it to the devs or not is kind of irrelevant.

Pretre (again) has it right, the action is the same, regardless of the recipient, moving over -

 StarTrotter wrote:
Somebody once brought up an interesting request. Swap Falcons with Wavesperents. Does anybody have an opinion on that?

Falcons don't have the same transport capacity, making the idea not unlike replacing the Rhino with a Razorback (in terms of transport capacity). They'd have to reverse the transport capacity on the two to make it work.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:
Somebody once brought up an interesting request. Swap Falcons with Wavesperents. Does anybody have an opinion on that?

Falcons don't have the same transport capacity, making the idea not unlike replacing the Rhino with a Razorback (in terms of transport capacity). They'd have to reverse the transport capacity on the two to make it work.

A much better solution would be to cut the Serpent Shield's range or Ignores Cover, or prohibit Wave Serpents from taking holofields since they have the serpent shield like the 4e book did.

The thing I'm most worried about being abused right now is massively spammabe no-risk Malefic Daemonology on Chaos Daemons armies; restricting the number of summoned models that can be on the table at a time would go a long way towards making that more balanced and turning the game into something a little broader than a Daemons versus GK slugfest.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:
Somebody once brought up an interesting request. Swap Falcons with Wavesperents. Does anybody have an opinion on that?

Falcons don't have the same transport capacity, making the idea not unlike replacing the Rhino with a Razorback (in terms of transport capacity). They'd have to reverse the transport capacity on the two to make it work.

A much better solution would be to cut the Serpent Shield's range or Ignores Cover, or prohibit Wave Serpents from taking holofields since they have the serpent shield like the 4e book did.

Oh I agree, it basically needs some kind of nerf, but proposing that got me yelled at earlier.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
The thing I'm most worried about being abused right now is massively spammabe no-risk Malefic Daemonology on Chaos Daemons armies; restricting the number of summoned models that can be on the table at a time would go a long way towards making that more balanced and turning the game into something a little broader than a Daemons versus GK slugfest.

Yeah, Daemonfactory is on the list. It's one of the few things that NEEDS to be addressed in some manner because I don't think it's working like intended.

First things first, I would like to express my support for this initiative. It may helps, and it is a great idea. Good luck, ClockworkZion.

That being said, I think a lot of people here are aiming at the impossible: asking the developers to balance the game. Powerful armies sell far better, and while some people could point out that a balanced game would boost the quality and get more players and sales in the long-term, it should be pretty obvious at this point that GW is currently aiming for the short-term.

And I seriously doubt Kelly has any real option of changing the company policies. I would like to think he is concerned by the matter. Perhaps I am naive, but I think the developers, or at least some of them, have already expressed their thoughts about how damaged is the image of the company, and talked about the need to keep a quality standard. Because there is no way they can ignore that there is a problem, and I don´t think they imagine themselves in another company in X years.

So what about focusing on changes that would make the game better, yet give GW an immediate boost in sales?
1 Some form of Chaos Legion proper work would sell like painkillers in hell. Chaos players love the Chaos Legions, and they are mostly marines, so it wouldn´t be that complicated. The Black Legion Supplement is an example of how this will not work if it is reduced to a couple of rules and some fluff-butchering.
2 Which brings me to another thing: what about the changes in the fluff? What´s the point? The 7th rulebook butchers its way through the Timeline, giving the "dark millenium" a brighter look, by taking away most of the old fluff and changing it with "some enemy attack, some marines went and won the day". In this case it will take them no effort at all to stop changing things many customers like. This game is played mostly because of the background: they should stop doing significant changes to it that do not attrack new players yet make old players quit.
3 New armies. Imperial Knights is a good sign of a boost in sales (a lot of people got some Knights) with a small effort. People is craving for new stuff. When was the last time a full army was released? Necron and Tau in 3rd?
4 Two armies that could be (re)introduced with nearly zero effort yet be a massive success are The Lost and the Damned and Genestealer Cults. There is always people asking for them, and they are mostly ready to be released, at least in a simplified form. Another obvious one is the Mechanicus, but that would be complicated.
5 What about giving some rules to customize the Sisters of Battle and move them to 7th? Even if there are no new models, a revision will help the army a lot. They do not even have anti-flyer viable options, or flyers, and only a Troop choice.
6 A personal one: what about Chaos Undivided? How it comes we moved from 4 C´tan to many yet we moved from many Chaos Gods to only four? According to the fluff (from Rogue Trader to current days) they are emotions turned sentient. How it comes there are only four emotions in 40k?

If we are talking about balance, the complains are just too many. Re-rollable invul saves and the lack of limits to the psy pool are the most glaring ones, but there are many more things, and it is difficult to reach an agreement about what is really broken.

Also, another vote for making it short and concise. I think you should add a link to this topic to show that it is not one single voice, apologizing in advance for the unnecessary rudeness of some of the people here (sometimes including me).

I know everyone is petrified of daemons right now, but I sincerely believe that a few units could use a tweak, so for no reason than I play the big D and would like to see this..

Give Bloodthirsters Eternal Warrior

Enhance the whole Elite section, nobody even takes Bloodcrushers any more, give them their 3+ or T5 back, Fiends, Beasts and Flamers could all use a small boost - Fiends -1 LD to all units, give Flamers Shred, dunno about Beasts? The Elite section is the weakest in the book, and nothing really got a back door boost from 7th (other than potentially being free)

Let us buy gifts! Make them expensive, nerf their abilities, but let us choose!

I think the randomness thing can be taken further and turned into a discussion about player agency, or at least pitched to GW that way.

Further as in tattooing "random =\= fun" on to the insides of JJ's eyelids?

 azreal13 wrote:
Further as in tattooing "random =\= fun" on to the insides of JJ's eyelids?

To be fair not all random is bad but too much random is.

You can get real responses from the devs?





But in all seriousness please tell them to change the glancing rule, as people do not look for penetrating hits but go for glancing now and change the random charge distance rule back to fixed distance's, please

Also you seem to have CSM all covered, but tell them to make all the cult troops cheaper and put the CCW back onto the CSM for free to make everything unique again

 happygolucky wrote:
You can get real responses from the devs?

Well anyone can write GW, it just seems most people don't really want to take the time to do so for one of any number of reasons. So it's not too surprising I've gotten responses back.

 happygolucky wrote:
But in all seriousness please tell them to change the glancing rule, as people do not look for penetrating hits but go for glancing now and change the random charge distance rule back to fixed distance's, please

I'll bring up the durability thing, and the random charge range thing (as well as assaulting out of transports).

 happygolucky wrote:
Also you seem to have CSM all covered, but tell them to make all the cult troops cheaper and put the CCW back onto the CSM for free to make everything unique again

Plague Marines don't need to be cheaper hoenstly. They're already at a points cost that makes people take them over standard troopers. Noise Marines aren't bad off at the moment, but could use a tweak. The other two definitely need some work.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Further as in tattooing "random =\= fun" on to the insides of JJ's eyelids?

To be fair not all random is bad but too much random is.

Random is fine to represent an uncertain sequence of events, like how many bullets actually connect sufficiently well to cause casualties when two groups exchange fire, it works less well when a Daemon Prince puts on a suit of armour before the battle, then randomly generates another suit of identical armour on top of it just as the battle starts. (for the record, I've always re rolled it, but in the absence of an FAQ addressing it, RAW a CD DP has to take 2x3+ Armour saves if you roll poorly on the Greater Gift table and have already purchased armour.)

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 happygolucky wrote:
You can get real responses from the devs?

Well anyone can write GW, it just seems most people don't really want to take the time to do so for one of any number of reasons. So it's not too surprising I've gotten responses back.

 happygolucky wrote:
But in all seriousness please tell them to change the glancing rule, as people do not look for penetrating hits but go for glancing now and change the random charge distance rule back to fixed distance's, please

I'll bring up the durability thing, and the random charge range thing (as well as assaulting out of transports).

 happygolucky wrote:
Also you seem to have CSM all covered, but tell them to make all the cult troops cheaper and put the CCW back onto the CSM for free to make everything unique again

Plague Marines don't need to be cheaper hoenstly. They're already at a points cost that makes people take them over standard troopers. Noise Marines aren't bad off at the moment, but could use a tweak. The other two definitely need some work.

Honestly I would like to write to the dev's but I don't know of any addresses they have and all I have heard is that when you do give them an e-mail they don't respond and delete your e-mail, so I found that surprising

Also could you ask them very, very nicely in the next CSM release to add Dreadclaw drop pods? I have been waiting for them since the 4th ed. Codex and that was the edition I started with

Also a suggestion to make glancing hits back to -2 on the chart I find will make vehicles more durable imo

Also let us know what the dev's response is, I think we all may want to find out about that one

Thanks for asking the community and I hope the best of absolute luck to you and your e-mail

The old chart made vehicles too invincible. We need some kind of balance between what we had and what we're currentl getting.

And I doubt we'll see any more FW stuff added in (and FW just redid the Dreadclaw making it unlikely GW will knick it).

Glances only remove a HP on 3+?

Okay clockwork here is my two cents, take what you will and leave the rest.

I would like all the things you said +1'd
all the old formations and units datasheets re released with a new coat of 7th ed paint. My silver tower of slaanesh has dust on it.
doomrider dataslate
Options for khorne zerkers.
sonic everything just like in the emperor's children warband formation.
a named chaos dreadnought like bjorn but with more rape



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and marks for vehicles
and fix epidemius even if you make him like the last book but 100 points more

So because I don't like just sending in a list of grievances, but also offer solutions to things here are some things I've cooked up so far (without getting too much into re-costing territory yet):

Assaulting from Transports:
Regular Transports: Only if it was stationary before the unit disembarked
Assault Transports: Even if the transport moved 6" or less unit may disembark and then assault that turn

The logic behind this is pretty simple: It buffs assault units in a very small way that helps rebalance how they work in the game: namely they can actually rely on their transports more in attempting to get across the board without punishing them for it.

Khorne Berserkers: Give them Heavy Chainswords standard that they can trade for Chainaxes for a very small points cost

Thousand Sons: Relentless if the Sorceror is alive, S&P if he isn't. For every 5 models in the unit, one Thousand Sons model may be upgraded to carry a Heavy Bolter that fires at AP3.

Flesh Tearers: Known for being one of the only Imperial armies to use the Chain Axe, let them swap Bolters or Chainswords for Chain Axes on their models (2-3 pts/model)

Warband Tactics (CSM):
World Eaters: Basically give them the BT CT(It's choppy and gives Adamantium Will which is fitting)

Thousand Sons: Rerolls Perils Results (I don't have a second effect for them yet)

Death Guard: Unyielding Advance: Models have a 6+ FnP (Does not improve/replace existing FnP) Characters have IWND; Corrosive Gas: Template Weapons do not count as Flamer type weapons for determining if they're effected by rules that effect flamers. In addition they gain the Shred and Gets Hot special rules.

Emperor's Children: Perfection in All Things: Re-roll to-hit rolls of 1; Perfection Marred: Characters or units that are suffer their first wound or casualty gain Hatred and Preferred Enemy for the Faction that dealt them that first wound/casualty.

Iron Warriors: Imperial Fist CT

Word Bearers: Deamonlogists: Word Bearers only suffer Perils of the Warp on a roll of a double-6 when manifesting powers from Santic or Malefic Daemonolgy Powers; Daemon Bound: Word Bearers gain Daemonic Possession on their vehicles for free, and count Possessed as Troops.

Black Legion: (Not really sure what to give these guys honestly, perhaps the UM CT?)

Alpha Legion: Master Ambushers: Infantry Models have Infiltrate and Shrouded

Night Lords: Lords of Night: Game always begins with Night Fighting which continues each turn on a 4+; Lighting Strikes: Models with Jump Packs may use them in both the Movement and Assault Phase, additionally Infantry models have the Hit and Run special rule

Renegade: Has Access to Drop Pods, Assault Cannons, Razorbacks and Storm Bolters (replaces Combi-Bolter at no additional cost).

On a different note I've been rolling around Terminators in my head, and am considering recommending a 5 point drop in costs just to make them somewhat useful, and am considering bringing up them including possible rules in the future for allowing players to build their own Special Characters (it worked in IA12 and I don't see anyone really hating optional rules to do that outside of IA12).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 azreal13 wrote:
Glances only remove a HP on 3+?

Or vehicles get an armour save based on what the AV of the side you're shooting is (starts at no save for AV10 and improves by +1 for each point over 10 so AV11 = 6+, AV12 = 5+, AV13 = 4+, AV14 = 3+) and apply AP values as normal (making anti-tank weapons outright ignore the armour save).

Something like that perhaps?

I don't hate the idea in isolation, but as we're adding yet more complication to something that really doesn't need it, sticking with something simple is the way forward.

Yeah vehicles rules are fine if they get cheaper or more hull points. I agree with Az on this


Automatically Appended Next Post:
iron warriors are siege masters. The way for them would be an all machine list with some kind of barrage piece.

alpha legion are terrorists. We need cheeky traps and gotcha effects. Example: Anticipated movement. Pick a body of water, piece of terrain, or objective at the start of each of your turns. You may choose a result on the mysterious whatever it is table and apply it as though the units inside just triggered its effect.

 Quientin wrote:
Yeah vehicles rules are fine if they get cheaper or more hull points. I agree with Az on this

Cheaper is really not the way I'd go with it. Mostly because we don't need cheaper Rhinos or Wave Serpents. Adding an extra hull point or two to pretty much everything might do it though.

 Quientin wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
iron warriors are siege masters. The way for them would be an all machine list with some kind of barrage piece.

So are Imperial Fists. They're basically the good/bad version of the same concept hence why I would just give them the same exact Chapter Tactics.

 Quientin wrote:
alpha legion are terrorists. We need cheeky traps and gotcha effects. Example: Anticipated movement. Pick a body of water, piece of terrain, or objective at the start of each of your turns. You may choose a result on the mysterious whatever it is table and apply it as though the units inside just triggered its effect.

There is no Mysterious Terrain table anymore so that really doesn't work.

I do like they idea of them booby trapping terrain before the game starts though (obviously secretly by writing it on a piece of paper). The easiest way to represent that would be it being Dangerous Terrain for units inside of it.

I still think they should be able to mass Infiltrate though as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 azreal13 wrote:
I don't hate the idea in isolation, but as we're adding yet more complication to something that really doesn't need it, sticking with something simple is the way forward.

That's totally fair, it was just something that crossed my mind.

There is one last thing before I go to bed. Sonic weapons need the old profile. Extra ccw inish 5 troops are assaulty and their weapons prevent that. We need heavy 3 or assault 2 back on the table.

 Quientin wrote:
There is one last thing before I go to bed. Sonic weapons need the old profile. Extra ccw inish 5 troops are assaulty and their weapons prevent that. We need heavy 3 or assault 2 back on the table.

Honestly, and I may be unpopular for saying this, I don't think they need to go back. Salvo was clearly intended to replace the dual profiles of weapons like the old Sonic Weapons with something that was more fitting.

If anything Salvo may need a tweak or we may need to look at perhaps changing how we look at Noise Marines. After all, every single unit doesn't need to be able to do every single thing in the game well. That extra attack and the I5 might be better looked at as a counter-punch to being charged instead of charging other units.

No one has made it to assaults with my noise boys...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In 6th ed


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dontcha think mass infiltrate belongs to the night lords a bit more?

Alpha Legion terrorism table d66
Includes

Opponent -1 reserve rolls
fortification is -1 av and cover
target unit blind test -2
target vehicle d3 haywire hits
Target unit break test
hallucination grenade effects as psycho indoctrination as per their fluff
Minefield- roll like orbital bombardment but hits like frag grenade, adds concussion
redeploy a unit of yours
Perils test for target psyker if they cast a blessing on their turn
all units in target piece of terrain take a str 5 ap6 hit
smoke blast. Like 2nd ed blind grenade
Have 10 man cultist unit with autoguns deploy anywhere on board. May move shoot and assault on first turn

warlord table
Wear em down. D3 units take d6-1 wounds before start of game

I wouldn't send them a list of solutions. That's like telling them what to do. People don't like that.

Send them a list of problems, and they can try to fix them in a way they see fit. They managed to fix quite some problems in 7th rather elegantly, so I wouldn't be too worried about them finding a solution, once you convince them that your issue is a problem.

Why do people still think the game developers at GW towers have any control over game development?

PLEASE write to the GW sales department and tell them their obvious short term money grabbing policies are driving you away.
10.000 letters sent to them MAY have an effect.

Telling the game devs the direction the sales department is driving the game is detrimental, is preaching to the choir.(The fact they are gagged choir should tell you something though..)

Both Lanrak and Jidmah are hitting the nail.

This letter sounds more and more as wishlisting / proposed rules. I am not even sure this is the right forum.

 Quientin wrote:
Dontcha think mass infiltrate belongs to the night lords a bit more?

And having them attack at night and get bonuses to use of their Jump Packs isn't?

Gotta leave -something- for the Alpha Legion. It'd be easier if we didn't have two armies in the same book known for similar things.

 Quientin wrote:
Alpha Legion terrorism table d66
Includes

Opponent -1 reserve rolls
fortification is -1 av and cover
target unit blind test -2
target vehicle d3 haywire hits
Target unit break test
hallucination grenade effects as psycho indoctrination as per their fluff
Minefield- roll like orbital bombardment but hits like frag grenade, adds concussion
redeploy a unit of yours
Perils test for target psyker if they cast a blessing on their turn
all units in target piece of terrain take a str 5 ap6 hit
smoke blast. Like 2nd ed blind grenade
Have 10 man cultist unit with autoguns deploy anywhere on board. May move shoot and assault on first turn

warlord table
Wear em down. D3 units take d6-1 wounds before start of game

A D66 table for their Warband Tactic? That's excessive even for GW.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 da001 wrote:
Both Lanrak and Jidmah are hitting the nail.

This letter sounds more and more as wishlisting / proposed rules. I am not even sure this is the right forum.

It's in Proposed Rules already, so where are you trying to make it go now?

I originally put the thread in 40k General because one of the the things I started it for was also rules issues, you know the sort of things that have been ignored by FAQs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jidmah wrote:
I wouldn't send them a list of solutions. That's like telling them what to do. People don't like that.

Send them a list of problems, and they can try to fix them in a way they see fit. They managed to fix quite some problems in 7th rather elegantly, so I wouldn't be too worried about them finding a solution, once you convince them that your issue is a problem.

I'm not trying to force things in their lap, just pitch ideas to get the ball rolling. Suggesting things at worst will have them shake their heads and do something else, and more realistically give them an idea of the kind of way we're approaching the game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lanrak wrote:
Why do people still think the game developers at GW towers have any control over game development?

PLEASE write to the GW sales department and tell them their obvious short term money grabbing policies are driving you away.
10.000 letters sent to them MAY have an effect.

Telling the game devs the direction the sales department is driving the game is detrimental, is preaching to the choir.(The fact they are gagged choir should tell you something though..)

Who said anything about being driven away?

And when it comes to rules related things you REALLY can't expect Sales to have any control over it. The goal may get pushed down to make X better but how that's done is left in the hands of the Devs.

Also "money grubbing"? Are we so limited in our complaints that we can only fall back on accusing GW of following the same sort of patterns of nearly every successful company in our capitalist society? Seriously, every company, no matter how benevolent you think it is based on it's public persona, at it's core, wants to make money. Namely a lot of it. Because of that, EVERYTHING they do is all to meet that goal. To complain that GW is trying to make money is like complaining water is wet. It's not a criticism, it's a statement that just describes something we already know.

How about complaining about specific things, like the price of the Limited Edition set, or how some armies wait far too long for updates before seeing them while others get them every edition, or how Finecast was a flop, or how they don't interact with the online community and instead react like a snail to it?

I mean if you're going to gripe the least you can do is pick something that is more specific than something that businesses do as a means to survive. What's next, complaining that Kirby has to breathe?