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.

Not Online!!! wrote:
TBF as a chaos player, can we talk how mainline CSM clone tanks are just baseline worse then SM ones, because of the unequal trait system?

Could we please remedy that?

Also whoever thought a leman russ should be cheaper then an AC predator with sponsons should seriously consider just stop writing rules period.

Then there's that odd thing where all that old Heresy-Era relic wargear...

..Somehow a warband of 21st Founding Loyalists is more likely to have more Heresy Era relics than one of the original 9 Traitor legions that were wearing/using the stuff when fleeing Terra.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Or pay points for traits. Or give them downsides to balance the upsides like in hh.

Heck even IA 13 realised that if you give trait like abilities you gotta pay for that with points and additional restrictions or demmands.

Guard: Yes oh yes command squads attached to their officer... And Platoons! 25 model for a single troop choice! Ah! The memories...
And on that note can we have Carapace back for Veterans? My Vostroyans are feeling let down by this flack thing.

Sisters: Bring back Eviscarators and storm bolters on Sister superiors and Canonneses...

And get rid of the silly bolter drill rule. More dice is does not a better game make.

i miss platoons aswell.

Or customizability via doctrines.

Adeptus Doritos wrote:Then there's that odd thing where all that old Heresy-Era relic wargear...

..Somehow a warband of 21st Founding Loyalists is more likely to have more Heresy Era relics than one of the original 9 Traitor legions that were wearing/using the stuff when fleeing Terra.

Obviously the legions threw all that old stuff away to make room for their totally awesome new dinobots!

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Or pay points for traits. Or give them downsides to balance the upsides like in hh.

Heck even IA 13 realised that if you give trait like abilities you gotta pay for that with points and additional restrictions or demmands.

Yeah, I love that book.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
For Grinding Advance to be vurned out of existence so we actually get some fixes to weapons instead of everyone else just being given a giant middle finger to balance as a Russ outshoots vehicals paying twice the points for the same weapons with half the shots

I agree. I'd like a general fix to tank guns rather that patching the faction's "main tank" with a fire better for moving slow rule.

TBF as a chaos player, can we talk how mainline CSM clone tanks are just baseline worse then SM ones, because of the unequal trait system?

Could we please remedy that?

Also whoever thought a leman russ should be cheaper then an AC predator with sponsons should seriously consider just stop writing rules period.

Because a Leman Russ is considered "core" to the IG faction and is thus looked at for buffs when it sucks [The Leman Russ has received 2 cost reductions and a major buff since the edition dropped], while the Predator just kind of exists [having received 0 direct buffs since the edition dropped]. At the edition drop, they probably were about right relative to each other and both sucked really bad. The Leman Russ was looked at and buffed because the IG are about tanks and the LRBT is core to the IG identity, the Predator was ignored because it's not. It's also worth mention that the Leman Russ Battle Tank itself even at it's very low cost isn't great.

And obviously, it's not like GW were ignoring Space Marine plight or anything [given the continuous cycles of buffs for Intercessors and then finally culminating in the supplements], they just focus on balancing factions around a small selection of "core" units while leaving the rest as basically fluff, and the Predator fell into the "fluff" category. And the SM line is so large that it's not really poorer in capability for the Predator not being great, nobody will notice unless you, like me like Predators.
Note how they addressed the infiltrating assault centurion [which were really, really bad before Raven Guard could infiltrate them] problem by just going "nah, can't do that anymore" rather than actually attempting to balance the ability of the unit.

Unfortunately while everything your saying is true it doesn't make it more easy to hand wave away paying similar points for way less effective units, vinicators get D6 shots but a demolisher commander gets 2x 2d6 pick highest, thats 3.5 shots vrs an avarage of 8.5.
Batlle cannons are similar 2d6 for a rapid fire battle cannon at 100 points or 22 for 2x2d6 pick highest.
Ir even worse a Hammer head railgun yeah that thing is a joke and costs more than a battle cannon and doesn't get to double shoot.

As a greedy Drukhari I'd wish for:

Archon
- Needs mobility options (wings/skyboard/bike).
- Shadowfield rules need overhaul.

Succubus
- Needs mobility options (wings/skyboard/bike).
- Close combat ability really needs a buff.

Court of the Archon
- Complete rules overhaul. It's a cool concept that needs a reason to exist other than dying in place of your Archon when their transport blows up.

Incubi
- Need some reliable way to get into combat.

Mandrakes
- Need a plastic kit.

Beastmaster
- Need a complete rules overhaul together with the various beasties, which are cool in concept but never used.

Grotesques
- Need a plastic kit.

Hellions
- Need much better survivability.

Scourges
- If they are intended to be a suicide unit, their damage needs a big bump. If they are not, they need more survivability.

 Argive wrote:
See the AOS daughters of khaine set for a plastic avatar. honestly. I don't understand why they just don't release that sprue on its own for 40k... Its good enuff aqnd heaps better than the current version.

Mr. T-Pose? He's far from "good enough". Not when the GD kits got so much love.

The Avatar is an ancient miniature that needs a proper replacement, and giving it the same love and attention as the GDs would be the least they could do.

But you could assert dominance via mr T -pose

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Drukhari easy

1) Let us mix and match Wych/Kabal/Coven again
2) Bring back a few of the characters, Vect, Baron, Duke
3) Don't take away anymore units/gear

I literally don't care about anything else for DE, those 2 changes from 5th to 8th were the worst 2.

They could implement the new mechanic where you start with fixed CP and detachments cost CP, but leave in the Raiding Party rule that causes patrols to give you CP for Drukhari, thus making them effectively "free". That'd be a nicely elegant way to accomplish this while just rewriting the core rules.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Drukhari easy

1) Let us mix and match Wych/Kabal/Coven again
2) Bring back a few of the characters, Vect, Baron, Duke
3) Don't take away anymore units/gear

I literally don't care about anything else for DE, those 2 changes from 5th to 8th were the worst 2.

They could implement the new mechanic where you start with fixed CP and detachments cost CP, but leave in the Raiding Party rule that causes patrols to give you CP for Drukhari, thus making them effectively "free". That'd be a nicely elegant way to accomplish this while just rewriting the core rules.

That is a good, elegant solution.

My wish is for the next Dark Eldar codex to be written by an actual human being who plays the army, as opposed to a haddock flobbering about on a keyboard.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
TBF as a chaos player, can we talk how mainline CSM clone tanks are just baseline worse then SM ones, because of the unequal trait system?

Could we please remedy that?

Also whoever thought a leman russ should be cheaper then an AC predator with sponsons should seriously consider just stop writing rules period.

Then there's that odd thing where all that old Heresy-Era relic wargear...

..Somehow a warband of 21st Founding Loyalists is more likely to have more Heresy Era relics than one of the original 9 Traitor legions that were wearing/using the stuff when fleeing Terra.

That honestly annoys me so much. Just give the traitor legions the crappy terminators and other Horus Heresy stuff for the sake of cool conversions/kitbashes that have their own rules. Also being able to use Horus Heresy weapons would be good too.

 vipoid wrote:
My wish is for the next Dark Eldar codex to be written by an actual human being who plays the army, as opposed to a haddock flobbering about on a keyboard.

I felt like it was written by someone who really cared about the Dark Eldar, but had a highly specific vision of what they are and how they operate that wasn't really based on the way people had played them for ages. i.e., that carefully-limited single subfaction only armies were the only TRUE way to play dark eldar, despite the entire background of the faction being that they're this patchwork of different mercenary groups and pretty much any army on the table is a big hodgepodge of different mercenary contracts coming together for a raid.

Kind of like if they came out with a new imperial guard codex and you didn't get any subfaction bonuses unless you took a detachment of ONLY infantry or ONLY auxiliaries or ONLY tanks or ONLY artillery, because THATS THE FLUFF DUHHHHHHHH!

I highly suspect that same individual wrote the daemons codex.

Kind of a Zac Snyder "I have a highly specific interpretation of superman that almost nobody shares but I'm a-writing this movie so you're getting MY edgy broody boi" codex.

I mean, the Guard stuff was stupidly broad for what it gave. Better example would be if they started doing 'Regiments of Renown' and the Cadian 8th only got subfaction bonuses if taken as infantry+Chimera, Cadian 98th got subfaction bonuses if tanks, etc.

And auxiliaries didn't get bonuses. Scions can't even frigging take orders from standard Officers.

the_scotsman wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
My wish is for the next Dark Eldar codex to be written by an actual human being who plays the army, as opposed to a haddock flobbering about on a keyboard.

I felt like it was written by someone who really cared about the Dark Eldar, but had a highly specific vision of what they are and how they operate that wasn't really based on the way people had played them for ages. i.e., that carefully-limited single subfaction only armies were the only TRUE way to play dark eldar, despite the entire background of the faction being that they're this patchwork of different mercenary groups and pretty much any army on the table is a big hodgepodge of different mercenary contracts coming together for a raid.

Kind of like if they came out with a new imperial guard codex and you didn't get any subfaction bonuses unless you took a detachment of ONLY infantry or ONLY auxiliaries or ONLY tanks or ONLY artillery, because THATS THE FLUFF DUHHHHHHHH!

I highly suspect that same individual wrote the daemons codex.

Kind of a Zac Snyder "I have a highly specific interpretation of superman that almost nobody shares but I'm a-writing this movie so you're getting MY edgy broody boi" codex.

I mean, I can at least understand the mentality behind splitting the army. I think it was bloody stupid in practise, but I get why someone might want to do that.

However, my issue is more with the codex being filled with lazy, uninspired mechanics and barely any options.

I mean, I'm assuming that whoever wrote it is at least capable of counting to 6 (notwithstanding my aforementioned haddock-theory). Hence, they would be aware that we had barely any HQs to begin with, and just 1 generic HQ per subfaction. With that in mind, surely they could have done something to make them less boring? I can't help but look with envy at the options given to Harlequins in the most recent White Dwarf, which give their tiny number of characters vastly more flexibility and allow them to cover different roles. Meanwhile, our HQs seem to have been written with the assumption that Warlord Traits and Artefacts are both free and available to every single HQ in an army.

Moreover, I fear any charity I was prepared to give for the writer of the DE rules petered away when Phoenix Rising rolled around. GW could have released a video of their employees queuing up to widdle on every page of the 5th edition DE codex and it would still have been less of an insult than Phoenix Rising.

 vipoid wrote:

However, my issue is more with the codex being filled with lazy, uninspired mechanics and barely any options.

I mean, I'm assuming that whoever wrote it is at least capable of counting to 6 (notwithstanding my aforementioned haddock-theory). Hence, they would be aware that we had barely any HQs to begin with, and just 1 generic HQ per subfaction. With that in mind, surely they could have done something to make them less boring? I can't help but look with envy at the options given to Harlequins in the most recent White Dwarf, which give their tiny number of characters vastly more flexibility and allow them to cover different roles. Meanwhile, our HQs seem to have been written with the assumption that Warlord Traits and Artefacts are both free and available to every single HQ in an army.

Moreover, I fear any charity I was prepared to give for the writer of the DE rules petered away when Phoenix Rising rolled around. GW could have released a video of their employees queuing up to widdle on every page of the 5th edition DE codex and it would still have been less of an insult than Phoenix Rising.

I couldn't agree more with all of this.

The Harlequin update in WD shows that GW are capable of identifying problems within codexes, and adressing them imaginatively, when they feel so inclined. It makes me even more angry at the Drukhari PA rubbish, that they were expecting players to pay for.

 vipoid wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
My wish is for the next Dark Eldar codex to be written by an actual human being who plays the army, as opposed to a haddock flobbering about on a keyboard.

I felt like it was written by someone who really cared about the Dark Eldar, but had a highly specific vision of what they are and how they operate that wasn't really based on the way people had played them for ages. i.e., that carefully-limited single subfaction only armies were the only TRUE way to play dark eldar, despite the entire background of the faction being that they're this patchwork of different mercenary groups and pretty much any army on the table is a big hodgepodge of different mercenary contracts coming together for a raid.

Kind of like if they came out with a new imperial guard codex and you didn't get any subfaction bonuses unless you took a detachment of ONLY infantry or ONLY auxiliaries or ONLY tanks or ONLY artillery, because THATS THE FLUFF DUHHHHHHHH!

I highly suspect that same individual wrote the daemons codex.

Kind of a Zac Snyder "I have a highly specific interpretation of superman that almost nobody shares but I'm a-writing this movie so you're getting MY edgy broody boi" codex.

I mean, I can at least understand the mentality behind splitting the army. I think it was bloody stupid in practise, but I get why someone might want to do that.

However, my issue is more with the codex being filled with lazy, uninspired mechanics and barely any options.

I mean, I'm assuming that whoever wrote it is at least capable of counting to 6 (notwithstanding my aforementioned haddock-theory). Hence, they would be aware that we had barely any HQs to begin with, and just 1 generic HQ per subfaction. With that in mind, surely they could have done something to make them less boring? I can't help but look with envy at the options given to Harlequins in the most recent White Dwarf, which give their tiny number of characters vastly more flexibility and allow them to cover different roles. Meanwhile, our HQs seem to have been written with the assumption that Warlord Traits and Artefacts are both free and available to every single HQ in an army.

Moreover, I fear any charity I was prepared to give for the writer of the DE rules petered away when Phoenix Rising rolled around. GW could have released a video of their employees queuing up to widdle on every page of the 5th edition DE codex and it would still have been less of an insult than Phoenix Rising.

Yeah the new 6/7th and 8th went from Ok, to worst, to a rough draft of what they used to be.

The fluff and flavor of that army is all but gone.

Reavers used to deal damage on Fly By's for its main rule, its not a Stratagem that sucks (lots of basic attack isn't the same as 1-2 MW's), it was changed to be HoW which was fine, but that is completely gone now and their "fun" way to play is now just a basic Str 4 -1ap weapon. WTF happened?

WWP were token on the table and character could drop them. Making your reserves more flavorful and pinpoint where you needed them, this got around DSing restrictions and was very fluffy

Archons were able to take a huge amounts of options, which they are supposed to be able to do

12 HQ's ere taken away, including a lot of loved named characters. Importantly our most important one that EVERY other army gets

Beast and Master no longer being in large and mixed units isn't helping them at all and just made them worst in every way

Lots of gear taken away, this is true for many armies but they took some away to give us a Stratagem for it only b.c their "new model" took away those options...

Took away our elite version of units, while this really isn't that big of a deal. They were very popular and every DE player did actually played them, they were in almost everyones army

After all that AND MORE then they Split the army up on 3 sub armies that ALWAYS worked well together and in the fluff/old rules shared gear. With so much taken away it heavily limits what you can do with them and takes away anything fun or flavorful from the army.

I know we will never get back 90% what was taken away, but at least mix us back together again.

Guard:

That Lasguns are at least an option for Infantry Squad Sergeants.

A more structured command system. The orders thing is cool and all, but an officer orders 2 units near him to move, then he himself is standing in the open as they all leave... just feels wonky. The order should apply to the officer and 1 (or 2) selected nearby units all at the same time. Obviously some orders may need to be changed, but that's how I'd like to see it work.

Veterans need a rework: allow them to be troops if all troops units are Veterans. Give them more options so they are at least a bit more interesting.

Autoguns could do with being more than just a slightly worse Lasgun.

Put some sort of limit on the number of Strats you're allowed to use in a game, especially since were supposedly all going to have more CP to work with.*

My mono-god Slannesh army currrently has 12 strats TOTAL, including the three that are built into the base rules, meanwhile my White Scars have six pages of strats. Even of all the daemon strats were great (and they're not) that would still be a strategic disadvantage. If you were limited to, say, ten strats then including a Veteran Sergeant with a relic means burning a precious Strat slot for Marines, while Daemons can just discard their two worst strats and not be losing much.

* Half a peach says "you'll all have more CP" winds up meaning armies that can build cheap battalions will drown elite armies in cp/strats even worse than they do now.

Fix terminators, and if GW can't do that, then remove termintors and make paladins troop choice.

Fix terminators, and if GW can't do that, then remove termintors and make paladins troop choice.

Careful what you wish for. My bet is that GW's idea of "fixing" Terminators is going to be "LOOK! Your Aggressors can all teleport in by default now!"

Okay, I'll bite:
Dark Angels:
Make Deathwing Terminators (all types including Knights) have a rule that reduces all damage taken by 1 to a minimum of 1. This isn't something just Dark Angels need; every terminator in the game (including Wolf Guard, GK, Custodes, all the Chaos variants, etc.) needs this to keep them from being punked out too easily by D2 weapons.
Bring back our awesome overwatch from 7th edition. Might be a tad OP, but then they gave it to T'au Sept and those guys can overwatch for other units because they're Tau!
When those new Primaris Bikers are added, give DA ones the RAVENWING keyword, because they could probably use the stratagem support.
Sisters of Battle:
Let us use an Act of Faith for number of shots. It's frustrating when we roll triple 1's for an Exorcist's shots. That's like about the only thing we can't use Miracle Dice for.
Maybe add some more generic HQ characters. Right now we have the Canoness and the Missionary and that's it. Some kind of Lieutenant equivalent would be nice.
Some kind of flyer that isn't Forge World would be cool as well, but I won't be super bummed if we never get one.
Imperial Knights:
Give Knights ObSec, and have them count as 5 models or something. Might make it where pure Knights can play objectives a little.
Seriously, anything to make a pure Knights list competitively viable.
Space Wolves:
Can't really think of anything, except possibly Primaris versions of other characters besides Ragnar. Or maybe...PRIMARIS THUNDERWOLVES!!!
Inquisition:
Either make Acolytes much cheaper, or give them much better stats. As it stands, they are worse than useless.
Give Inquisition their own Dedicated Transport option(s), to move those improved Acolytes around without having to bum a ride from other Imperial forces.
Assassinorum:
Make it so Assassins are like Inquisitors are currently where they don't negate your army's special rules (keep the CP cost for bringing one though).
New types of Assassin? Not sure about fluff but I think I've heard of other Assassin temples besides the big four.
Astra Militarum:
Make it worthwhile to actually take regular Leman Russ tanks instead of just Tank Commanders. Maybe allowing TC's to give more than one order per turn would help this. Otherwise I'm not sure what else could be done.
New stratagem idea: Integrated Forces. For some number of CP, an Auxilla unit can benefit from Regimental Doctrines for the game (to represent that unit being attached to this Guard force for a long time such that they've learned their ways of war).
Space Marines:
Something, anything, to make it actually useful to take the non-Primaris units. Probably won't happen as GW seems to be slowly killing off the little guys, but until they do it'd be nice to have them able to actually do work in lists. This should apply to all MiniMarines (BA, DA, SW, DW) too. At least keep them gainfully employed until they get squatted.

For 1ksons id like to see more/better/easier to cast powers. We are supposed to be masters of psykers and the fact many 1ksons lists boil down to LOLsmite! after key buffs are cast is pretty terrible. We have some of the highest WC values on our powers and its for way subpar stuff.

Another problem 1ksons have is very very weak anti armor outside of FW. A squad of rubric havocs would be nice. In the fluff we are masters of movement with warp portals and access to the eldar webway (limited). And while that is in the game rules wise I think id like to see a few more tricksy deployment/deep strike options. A psyker Hel Brute is also very wanted (by me at least). Less Tzaangor focus more Rubric focus. Adding AoS stuff was a easy inclusion to the codex and way to sell those models but that time is done. Lets make rubrics the focus once more.

For Red Corsairs.....a renegade space marine codex.

For my soon to be Word Bearers id like a chapter trait worth a damn and a Legions codex.

Ice_can wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
For Grinding Advance to be vurned out of existence so we actually get some fixes to weapons instead of everyone else just being given a giant middle finger to balance as a Russ outshoots vehicals paying twice the points for the same weapons with half the shots

I agree. I'd like a general fix to tank guns rather that patching the faction's "main tank" with a fire better for moving slow rule.

TBF as a chaos player, can we talk how mainline CSM clone tanks are just baseline worse then SM ones, because of the unequal trait system?

Could we please remedy that?

Also whoever thought a leman russ should be cheaper then an AC predator with sponsons should seriously consider just stop writing rules period.

Because a Leman Russ is considered "core" to the IG faction and is thus looked at for buffs when it sucks [The Leman Russ has received 2 cost reductions and a major buff since the edition dropped], while the Predator just kind of exists [having received 0 direct buffs since the edition dropped]. At the edition drop, they probably were about right relative to each other and both sucked really bad. The Leman Russ was looked at and buffed because the IG are about tanks and the LRBT is core to the IG identity, the Predator was ignored because it's not. It's also worth mention that the Leman Russ Battle Tank itself even at it's very low cost isn't great.

And obviously, it's not like GW were ignoring Space Marine plight or anything [given the continuous cycles of buffs for Intercessors and then finally culminating in the supplements], they just focus on balancing factions around a small selection of "core" units while leaving the rest as basically fluff, and the Predator fell into the "fluff" category. And the SM line is so large that it's not really poorer in capability for the Predator not being great, nobody will notice unless you, like me like Predators.
Note how they addressed the infiltrating assault centurion [which were really, really bad before Raven Guard could infiltrate them] problem by just going "nah, can't do that anymore" rather than actually attempting to balance the ability of the unit.

Unfortunately while everything your saying is true it doesn't make it more easy to hand wave away paying similar points for way less effective units, vinicators get D6 shots but a demolisher commander gets 2x 2d6 pick highest, thats 3.5 shots vrs an avarage of 8.5.
Batlle cannons are similar 2d6 for a rapid fire battle cannon at 100 points or 22 for 2x2d6 pick highest.
Ir even worse a Hammer head railgun yeah that thing is a joke and costs more than a battle cannon and doesn't get to double shoot.

That's because GA (and Periscope, and the Fire Prism, and Weapons Beast) are literally the worst possible patch they give, and the demolisher issue shows why.

It was terrible on all platforms, so they buffed it. It looks fine for the Vindicator and Baneblade, but even in the same codex theres a unit that gets to use it twice.

Hammerhead railgun and Vanquisher gun have had a long fall from their days of glory. Shooting twice doesn't help the Vanquisher, it won't help the Railgun. Both need increased one-hit damage because they're single fire weapons. GW is afraid for anything to do more than D6 per shot, despite the fact that you can shoot d6 shots (or even 3d3 shots) for 1d6 damage. Even a 2d6 profile wouldn't make the Vanquisher on par with the battle cannon.


Tanks have so many problems this edition with their implementation. Its systematic for all vehicles problems, not one vehicle creating them.


Another thing is the fact that vehicles all are basically T7/8 Sv3+. The problem with previous editions was that vehicles had 1 chance to live (penetrate) while infantry had 2 chances to live (wounds, save). Well, with 3+ saves, vehicles get 6+ or no save against the majority of AT weapons, so they just kind of exist to keep infantry out, but then SM infantry has like Ap2 D3 boltguns now. And then for some reason the distinction between heavy and light tanks is where infantry battled rifles can hurt them more (almost like most even light armored vehicles are bulletproof) and not how resistant they are to medium AT weapons like Lascannons. This of course also leave high power weapons completely screwed, since S10 is basically useless to pay for and has no improvement over S9.


Imo tank guns should be powerful, medium tanks should be T8 and heavy tanks T9 (which would pretty conveniently add the definition required to both the tank hulls and AT weapons), and vehicle saves should move into the realm of 2+, 1+, and 0+ which would allow them to have similar numbers on the die to infantry at a different place in the scale.

Orks:

Largely, just more choices. Perfect example: As a warboss, I can choose to take a Big Choppa or a Power Klaw. Can't even take a Kill saw, or a power stabba... or like bigger, crumpier versions of these weapons. Thank god I can off hand a shoota or kombi weapon as the only other choice I can take. Woof.

A lot of the kits just need a rework so more options can be added again, as they apparently have decided that kitbashing is unacceptable if something doesn't exist.

Along with that note, please bring back an official Mega Armour Warboss that's not Ghaz. Doesn't even matter if it's not the greatest character ever, it's iconic and deserves a place.

I know that some form of Beastmen are around these days (Tzaangors or whatever), but they should bring them back in the manner of the earliest editions: usable by Chaos and Imperium, a la Ogryns, carrying guns, etc.

I'm also going to jump on the: "Fix terminators" bandwagon.

Heck, back in 2nd edition (when I was FIRST introduced to the game) they were almost impossible to kill. Now? Well........

leerm02 wrote:
I'm also going to jump on the: "Fix terminators" bandwagon.

Heck, back in 2nd edition (when I was FIRST introduced to the game) they were almost impossible to kill. Now? Well........

3+save on 2 d6! They were too hard to kill by I agree they are a shadow of what they once were

Tycho wrote:

Fix terminators, and if GW can't do that, then remove termintors and make paladins troop choice.

Careful what you wish for. My bet is that GW's idea of "fixing" Terminators is going to be "LOOK! Your Aggressors can all teleport in by default now!"

GK don't have primaris access. I wouldn't mind having paladins as troops. Am not even sure if interceptors instead of strikes wouldn't be better either.