Peregrine wrote:IMO there are two problems with "small Apocalypse" instead of normal
40k:
1) Apocalypse has serious
RNG issues. Some of the stratagems are obscenely powerful but balanced by the fact that buffing a single detachment might only be 10% of your army. In a normal
40k game, where a detachment is your whole army, if you
RNG that card you can likely win the game in one turn. Effects like "shoot twice with this entire detachment" can't exist in normal
40k.
2) Apocalypse is prone to slap fights where nobody can hurt each other. Having units that only wound 10% of the time is ok when you have thousands of points worth of stuff focusing fire, in a normal game you're going to have a lot of failure to accomplish anything. Put two tactical squads in combat with each other and there likely won't be a winner before the game ends. And because unit damage is all or nothing you can't even have the satisfaction of wearing down the enemy by removing a model or two each turn, you either kill the whole unit by rolling that 10+ or you waste your entire turn doing nothing.
And obviously there are some absolutely

ing inexcusable balance issues with the unit datasheets, to the point that you have to think that
GW wrote the whole thing in a day or two and never playtested anything, but those may end up being fixed and are a lot easier to house rule than issues with the core mechanics.