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.

I don't want to play an FPS. If I wanted to play an FPS, I'd play one.

I want to play 40k.

 Traditio wrote:
Really, at this point, all you are saying is: "But I like being able to win by tabling my opponent and not actually having to score objectives, even though that's what all of the Maelstrom missions are focused on doing."

Agree to disagree on this one.

First of all, I don't play 40k anymore. Secondly, I never designed my lists to table my opponents. I designed them around the idea of combined arms, and units I like. Like the game should allow me to do without disadvantaging myself.

It did disadvantage me, and being a hardcore-casual, that made me not want to play the game anymore.

Also, for those of you who dislike my idea, I wish to point out that what I am proposing is already a mainstay of FPS video games.

This isn't a new idea.

What I am proposing is essentially that we turn 40k into something more like CoD, minus the team deathmatch mode of playing.

....

What?

So because FPS games have a respawn mechanic, a TT Wargame in a completely different genre should have it too?

Oh FFS, this change makes objective-based games less interesting. Now, instead of having to protect your obsec scoring units and balance the rewards of moving out to claim an objective vs. the risk of losing the unit you just mindlessly throw everything into the meat grinder, knowing that anything you lose will just respawn right back in the fight next turn.

And no, this doesn't make interesting armies with troops and support units, it makes armies that exploit the respawn mechanic as much as possible. Why take a 350 point knight when you can spend 350 points on 700 points (or even 1000 points or more, depending on how many respawns you get!) of troops? Even if troops units are individually a bit less effective the sheer quantity that you get makes virtually every other unit irrelevant.

Despite the bloat that adding USRs inevitably causes over time, wouldn't it be much, much more succinct to have an "Expendable" USR that describes the new fresh troops from reserve effect? That way it'd only be given selectively to a few units, rather than a blanket rule to infantry with a gak ton of exceptions.

CSM/renegades get it on cultists, IG get it on infantry squads and conscripts, Orks get it on Boyz and Gretchin, Nids get it on Termagants and Hormagants, GSC gets it on Neophytes. One or two other units out there may deserve it, but it's really only one or two units per codex for a select handful of codices. Don't bother trying to do a blanket rule then say "No no wait not terminators. No no wait not crisis suits," ad infinitum.

Edit: Also by not giving it to Eldar/SM we prevent horrendous fluff murder.

Peregrine wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
Infantry being the suffix, not the prefix.

Not in 7th. Perhaps you should review how the rules have changed?

Perhaps you should review how the words are paired in most cases and how they have been used in this thread.

Sgt_Smudge wrote:Yet they are still defined by Infantry. Regardless of anything else, you can't deny that they are, essentially, Infantry.

But their Infantry aspect does not allow carte blanche to Embark on a Transport. Yes, or no?

General Annoyance wrote:Suffix, prefix - same difference here. They are still classed as Infantry - Infantry are not classed by whether they can embark in a transport or not.

They are if they also have the Jump or Jet Pack type attached to them. The basic Transport Capacity rules state this specifically.

TRANSPORT CAPACITY
...
Only Infantry models can embark upon Transports (this does not include Jump or Jet Pack Infantry), unless specifically stated otherwise.

The fact that the transort rules have to specify that jump/jet infantry are an exception means that jump/jet are still themselves infantry first and formost.

If jump/jet infantry were defaulted to entirely different unit types there would be no need for the transport rules to notate them.

 Lance845 wrote:
The fact that the transort rules have to specify that jump/jet infantry are an exception means that jump/jet are still themselves infantry first and formost.

If jump/jet infantry were defaulted to entirely different unit types there would be no need for the transport rules to notate them.

But also their Infantry type does not allow them to ignore that restriction, either.

 Charistoph wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
The fact that the transort rules have to specify that jump/jet infantry are an exception means that jump/jet are still themselves infantry first and formost.

If jump/jet infantry were defaulted to entirely different unit types there would be no need for the transport rules to notate them.

But also their Infantry type does not allow them to ignore that restriction, either.

Only because it has been specifically stated as such. If the statement was not there that specifically took those 2 unit subtypes and said these are the exception to the previously stated rule, then jump/jet infantry WOULD be able to embark in transports.

Basically jump/jet infantry are infantry and anything that applies to infantry applies to them unless otherwise noted. Just like a jump mc is still a mc. Nid drop pods allow x number of models or 1 mc. That does not mean you could fit x number of jump mc or 1 mc. The jump subtype does not negate the allowances and restrictions of thr base unit type.

 KommissarKiln wrote:
Despite the bloat that adding USRs inevitably causes over time, wouldn't it be much, much more succinct to have an "Expendable" USR that describes the new fresh troops from reserve effect? That way it'd only be given selectively to a few units, rather than a blanket rule to infantry with a gak ton of exceptions.

That seems like a pretty good implementation.

I remembered on a previous edition they had something like a meat grinder rule (Which was similar to this rule)

It wasnt liked by anyone and most people ignored or removed that mission because of the sheer stupidness of the rule.


BTW if i wanted a FPS in a TABLETOP setting, i wouldn't play a TABLETOP game

This is 40k, not COD

 Charistoph wrote:
They are if they also have the Jump or Jet Pack type attached to them. The basic Transport Capacity rules state this specifically.

IOW: Jump/Jet Pack Infantry don't have the Infantry type because some of them can't embark in transports.