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.

In reguard to 15mm minatures in 40k.

Having played 40k with 6mm minatures ,(Epic.)THIS is a much more intuitive and in synergy with the background 'battle game'.And so for 'Epic Battles' in the 41st millenium this would be my rule set of choice.
FAR more game play , far more interaction and ALL the information in 138 pages...(Including the army lists.)

However , I think that using the current 28mm heroic scale minatures is a major draw to current 40k players.As the artistry and the IDEA of what 40k could be is very appealing.
And the inspiration to aspire to this theoretical ideal is very strong.(So strong 40k players go above and beyond to try to get it despite the poor products GW sell them.)

The game of 40k can and should work well with current scale 40k minatures.
But this would need a major re-write to make targeting enemy units with ranged weapons less cut and dried.(Its in range Ill hit it on a 3+ no matter what!)
And probably a simple and intuitive suppression mechanic.
Along with a more interactive game turn, unified damage resolution,etc.

In a recent poll only 'taking turns and rolling D6' seemed to be the basic requirments the average 40k player wanted to keep hold of.
So the whole rule set could be re-written for 40k intended game play , rather than written for WHFB, then bodged up to sort of represent 40k in a round about way.

Lanrak wrote:
I am a bit clueless why anyone would pay over the odds for substandard product , just so they can 'enjoy fixing it themselves!'

You realize your talking about people who buy kits and put even the freakin' game pieces together themselves right? I mean, think about that. If they want to fiddle with the design of the individiual pieces and even the playing surface, why wouldn't they want rules that need a little 'putting together'? This game wasn't geared toward an age group at all! It was aimed at people who wanted to be more creative with their gaming experience, if it was aimed at all mind you. The same way DnD is. Which BTW doesn't have perfect rules either but they are still amazingly polished rules. These are two very immersive games, and I think that's what draw's many to it. Even magic is enjoying some of the creative input factor lately with the higher influx of players/artists 'Full-Arting' cards they like or sending them away for specific artists to do for them. Check some out, they are pretty sweet! (example below, yes those are magic cards with altered art)

Not even are the Flyers more armored then Rhinos as Rumbleguts points out, they often have more firepower than Predators! I'm like...lol wut da f?

As someone who plays mostly with 6mm and 15mm sci-fi, I can tell ya'll that yes, they are both way, way more affordable. However, the 15mm miniatures available are only really dead on proxies for Orks and IG; most 15mm minitures are simply a different flavour of sci-fi, few having melee weapons of any kind. 6mm has almost everything you need, and would be lauphebly cheap, but the true advantages of that scale would only come into its own with Apoc battles. honestly, I like many elements of the rules and lore; I would love to see the community marshalling togather to take all the elements in rules and lore that they like and put it into a Warhammer 40k: Fan edition. indeed, I would be wiling to head up such a project myself if I were more qoulified.

 Captain Avatar wrote:

Lanrak wrote:
Most people still play 40k because of the artistry and background.

DESPITE the poor rules and codex books, which they pay a fortune for.(Even the GW dev team don't know how the rules are supposed to work according to Jervis. )
And then try to fix all the problems them selves!

I am a bit clueless why anyone would pay over the odds for substandard product , just so they can 'enjoy fixing it themselves!'

Funny, I've come to feel that most stick to the game because of a near religious belief that things will eventually get better and a "To big to Fail" mentality. I believe that most eventually come to know that the Game rules have massive issues and that the game is way out of scale for the models it uses. Thing is, that by the time they come realize these problems, they feel like they have "too much invested" to quit and in some instances, even complain.

Or, you know, we just play it because we think it's a fun game, regardless of the faults.


But nope, we have to be insane and/or deluding ourselves, because we don't agree with you and are thus obviously wrong.

KOVAV wrote:As someone who plays mostly with 6mm and 15mm sci-fi, I can tell ya'll that yes, they are both way, way more affordable. However, the 15mm miniatures available are only really dead on proxies for Orks and IG; most 15mm minitures are simply a different flavour of sci-fi, few having melee weapons of any kind. 6mm has almost everything you need, and would be lauphebly cheap, but the true advantages of that scale would only come into its own with Apoc battles. honestly, I like many elements of the rules and lore; I would love to see the community marshalling togather to take all the elements in rules and lore that they like and put it into a Warhammer 40k: Fan edition. indeed, I would be wiling to head up such a project myself if I were more qoulified.

I have started a 15mm 40k proxy list project over here: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/514955.page

I am looking for people to contribute and help build the list(hint)(hint).

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Captain Avatar wrote:


Funny, I've come to feel that most stick to the game because of a near religious belief that things will eventually get better and a "To big to Fail" mentality. I believe that most eventually come to know that the Game rules have massive issues and that the game is way out of scale for the models it uses. Thing is, that by the time they come realize these problems, they feel like they have "too much invested" to quit and in some instances, even complain.

Or, you know, we just play it because we think it's a fun game, regardless of the faults.


But nope, we have to be insane and/or deluding ourselves, because we don't agree with you and are thus obviously wrong.

Hmm.....

@AlmightyWalrus- You do realize that nowhere in his post did Captain Avatar say or imply that anyone was insane or deluding themselves. Those are your words, not his.

The fact that you inferred such from his post and the tone of your reply could be viewed that you are the one who feels that those with differing views must be wrong.


Not trying to attack you, just stating that your reply seem to be a bit afield.




@ Captain Avatar- I agree that "some" players have a near religious attitude toward the game.

Though imo, it is not just limited to a "belief that things will eventually get better". Rather, some will be openly hostile towards any views and ideas simply because a person doesn't don't believe that 40k isomgthemostamazingbesthingevvaa.

Now I disagree about such people being in the majority. Could they not just be a very vocal minority in your area?

@KnuckleWolf.
My gaming group happily make our own terrain, modify convert proxy , as much as any one else I guess.
But we prefer to use FREE TO DOWNLOAD rules , if we are going to modify and change the rules to suit our tastes.(There are quite a few to pick from.)

GW charge for a PREMIUM product they do not deliver.

The best analogy I can think of is if you are setting up a car for 'banger racing',(demolition derby,) where you get your jollies speeding round a track bashing up the cars, in a fun random way.
It makes more sense to buy your cars from the scrapyard.

You do not buy them from the GW showroom and pay F1 racing car prices...for a car in a similar condition to the one found in the scrapyard...

There is NOTHING wrong with 40k game play.
It is PURELY the RULES SET that is awful, in reguards over complication , for the relative simple game play of 40k.
Compared to other rules sets.(Even GW Specialist games Blood Bowl , Epic Armageddon etc,)

In short, 40k is a fun activity, with an awful instruction manual.

Lanrak wrote:
@KnuckleWolf.
My gaming group happily make our own terrain, modify convert proxy , as much as any one else I guess.
But we prefer to use FREE TO DOWNLOAD rules , if we are going to modify and change the rules to suit our tastes.(There are quite a few to pick from.)

GW charge for a PREMIUM product they do not deliver.

The best analogy I can think of is if you are setting up a car for 'banger racing',(demolition derby,) where you get your jollies speeding round a track bashing up the cars, in a fun random way.
It makes more sense to buy your cars from the scrapyard.

You do not buy them from the GW showroom and pay F1 racing car prices...for a car in a similar condition to the one found in the scrapyard...

There is NOTHING wrong with 40k game play.
It is PURELY the RULES SET that is awful, in reguards over complication , for the relative simple game play of 40k.
Compared to other rules sets.(Even GW Specialist games Blood Bowl , Epic Armageddon etc,)

In short, 40k is a fun activity, with an awful instruction manual.

Sounds about right, this does.

focusedfire wrote:
*snip*
Now I disagree about such people being in the majority. Could they not just be a very vocal minority in your area?

Point taken, my statement was overly broad. I should have said that most of the long term players that I have known have exhibited such behavior.

Lanrak wrote:@KnuckleWolf.

There is NOTHING wrong with 40k game play.
It is PURELY the RULES SET that is awful, in reguards over complication , for the relative simple game play of 40k.
Compared to other rules sets.(Even GW Specialist games Blood Bowl , Epic Armageddon etc,)

In short, 40k is a fun activity, with an awful instruction manual.

While I agree that the rules are atrocious, I disagree about there being nothing wrong with 40k gameplay as a broad generalization.
I feel that it works "ok" in small games but as the points level go up scale issues generally limits the gameplay.

To my bro Lanrak,
I want to back up a tick and make sure we are on the same page. That was all an agreement post right? Like downloading other free rules=getting different bits to put your game together, right? We also agree that the official GW game is really flawed but stlll playable if you pay the derp-o-saurus prices? Like, we good? Lots of caps, wasn't trying to make you angry bro, sorry

@Knucklewolf.
I was not angry at you.But a bit frustrated with my self for not making my point very clear.

I do not see the point in paying a price which SHOULD deliver a well defined intuitive rule set with focus on game play.Which needs very little or no input from the players.
And then be given a very poorly defined diffuse and counter intuitive rule set full of 'typoes', and 'copy paste errors' etc. Which need lots of additional work to make the games enjoyable for the players.

I do not mind paying a premium price for fully developed and PLAY TESTED rules, that can be used in their natural state, to deliver the implied game play With a minimum amount of fuss/input from the players .(EG the Classic Battletech series.)

But with all the FREE rule sets available , you can down load and mess about with to your hearts content.Buying GW s rules at a premium price for 40k to fix yourself seems to be a very strange choice to me.

@Captain Avatar.
I meant to differentiate between the fun game experience allot of people enjoy when playing 40k.
And the way the 'instructions to play the game' get in the way of that experience.

If the instructions to play were written with 'game play focus' father than 'selling the latest releases'.Then most , if not all of the issues we encounter in larger games would be mitigated.

40k is intrinsicaly a UNIT interaction game.Individual models within the unit effect unit performance.
BUT 40k rules switch between macro managing 'army strategy', and micro managing individual models actions.
TOTALLY missing the unit level where all the interaction should take place!

Where as a rule set focused on DETAILED UNIT interaction would allow much more fun and fluid game play.But apparently the idea of deep in game decision making it not in synergy with GW plc's current prime demoghraphic.

Lanrak 505518 5434281 wrote:
@Captain Avatar.
I meant to differentiate between the fun game experience allot of people enjoy when playing 40k.
And the way the 'instructions to play the game' get in the way of that experience.

If the instructions to play were written with 'game play focus' father than 'selling the latest releases'.Then most , if not all of the issues we encounter in larger games would be mitigated.

40k is intrinsicaly a UNIT interaction game.Individual models within the unit effect unit performance.
BUT 40k rules switch between macro managing 'army strategy', and micro managing individual models actions.
TOTALLY missing the unit level where all the interaction should take place!

Where as a rule set focused on DETAILED UNIT interaction would allow much more fun and fluid game play.But apparently the idea of deep in game decision making it not in synergy with GW plc's current prime demographic.

I agree

Absolutely, 40K "was" an enjoyable "activity/game", until the rules became so intrusive that it stopped being so much "activity/game" and more "drudgery/work".

So yeah, I agree with your above ^ post, providing that the rules are re-written with the scale of the game system firmly in mind,


@ All Posters

Just an added note.

The allies matrix problem is about to get truly stupid. The Tau are about to be released and they have been given a new mission from GW. Where the Tau were originally designed as a check to the MEQ problems of 3rd & 4th, the new codex coming out next month sounds to to be the check to the current flier meta.

The reason this will be so stupid is that Tau are going to be allied to everyone for their AA capability, thus....Tau will be fighting Tau in what will "seem" every game(Not saying "every" just that it will seem that way.) Now I really like my Tau and am glad that they look to be a strong selling faction.....it is just that I don't want to be shooting my faction every game. It just doesn't seem fitting.


edit to remove doubled sentence

 Captain Avatar wrote:


The allies matrix problem is about to get truly stupid. The Tau are about to be released and they have been given a new mission from GW. Where the Tau were originally designed as a check to the MEQ problems of 3rd & 4th, the new codex coming out next month sounds to to be the check to the current flier meta.

The reason this will be so stupid is that Tau are going to be allied to everyone for their AA capability, thus....Tau will be fighting Tau in what will "seem" every game(Not saying "every" just that it will seem that way.) Now I really like my Tau and am glad that they look to be a strong selling faction.....it is just that I don't want to be shooting my faction every game. It just doesn't seem fitting.

LOL, that's funny. Maybe one of the central tenant of the greater anime fan is going murder-rage whenever you see aircraft on any kind. "Commander, the chaos space marines request our aid" "What? no. they cannot be reasoned with. they are insane, and agianst the greater good." "Their fighting an airborne force" "WOOOOOT! RUSH TO THEIR AID! FOR THE GREATER GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOD!!!!!"

ok i read about 50% of previous replies [sorry ot] and thought this is too long. i am sure there are many valid points. here are mine
1. Allies Matrix: it an inbalanced game mechanic- it is designed to create tactical situations. however, many players will find a way to exploit it to create and good example that closely resembles this is whfb 4th edition and the magic item combo's.

2.Flyers: these are also added to heighten the element of tactics, however they shouldn't always be in game, or some shouldn't be considered "Flyers" at all. the ones that should are: Fighta Bomma, the DE Fighter, and the Helspamdrake, i personally think the majority of flyers should be counted as "skimmers", read as similar function as eldar anti grav tech.

3. the rest is too early to comment on

@Orkimedes 1000.
Change 'tactical' to 'strategic' and 'tactics' to 'strategy' in your post and I agree with the first two.

And No3, its the same re hash of the same basic rule set and fluff, in the vain hope of selling more toy soldiers.(Just like every edition 'change' since 3rd..)

Was just thinking about what 6th Edition's legacy would be and then I came on this thread.

In response to the OP, I actually really like the flyers mechanic. I think it adds a new tactical element to the game - it takes me ages to work out exactly where to come on to avoid LoS from the icarus lascannon and still get my missiles off, really gets the grey matter going. The Necron flying circus was poorly thought out but that doesn't make flyers in general [usually see two max] a bad thing.

I like the introduction of overwatch, it just makes more sense. I don't think it is a game breaking as some say [although I'm a little concerned about the Tau supporting fire rule].

In regards to the allies matrix, the problem for me is how it tramples all over the fluff rather than balancing issues, although there is a clear bias towards imperial armies.

My big issue is just how slow and clunky the game is. I usually play 2v2 with a group of 3 friends and there are always loads of occasions where we have to stop and check how USRs and shooting mechanics work, then from there to the FAQs to check they haven't been changed, then a 'debate' because of ambiguous wording [wound allocations from blast templates for example]. We always end up forgetting something like nightfighting as there are just so many different rules to take into account. I don't find this is improving the more we play which leads to slow games and lots of conflict.

I also found that the game is very 1 dimensional with a huge bias towards shooting. Combat usually ends in a big tarpit that I think we'd all just rather avoid.

6th edition's legacy - slow games with too many ambiguous rules?

 lordofthegophers wrote:
- - move on to a balanced game system that was created with balance and community in mind.

I've yet to see that day when 40K is well balanced.

I've found that a "just as planned" buy in, is needed to circumvent the randomness that is my major complaint. For instance, I play Dark Angels, and take Azrael. Partially for the rites of battle, but mostly so I know I'll have a warlord trait that I can actually use. My librarian takes Prescience and Psychic Shriek, Again, so I always know what powers he has, and I don't roll at the beginning of the game and say "wow, that was 145 points wasted, as you have no use in my battle plans now"

And I think this is because the game has been on a steady track to using special characters more and more. After all, the point requirement to make them show up is almost gone (heres looking at you, templars [I think, haven't looked at that codex in a while]). The game is going away from, "do what you want with the characters you've made up in your head", to, "do what you want with the characters we've made up in our heads."

After all, in the 4th edition space marine codex, you could build a chapter to fit an entire planned back story, and then give a character you've come up with the adamantine mantel to keep them able to actually survive a round with a monstrous creature. Now if you play space marines and aren't running Calgar/Lysander, it giggles when you charge and smashes you before you can tickle it. Sure, I can just make my own lysander model, and paint him in my chapter colors, but that doesn't change the fact I'm playing "kind of Imperial Fists". I don't care for the creativity leeching thats been going on, the most.

 ADustyMan wrote:
I've found that a "just as planned" buy in, is needed to circumvent the randomness that is my major complaint. For instance, I play Dark Angels, and take Azrael. Partially for the rites of battle, but mostly so I know I'll have a warlord trait that I can actually use. My librarian takes Prescience and Psychic Shriek, Again, so I always know what powers he has, and I don't roll at the beginning of the game and say "wow, that was 145 points wasted, as you have no use in my battle plans now"

And I think this is because the game has been on a steady track to using special characters more and more. After all, the point requirement to make them show up is almost gone (heres looking at you, templars [I think, haven't looked at that codex in a while]). The game is going away from, "do what you want with the characters you've made up in your head", to, "do what you want with the characters we've made up in our heads."

After all, in the 4th edition space marine codex, you could build a chapter to fit an entire planned back story, and then give a character you've come up with the adamantine mantel to keep them able to actually survive a round with a monstrous creature. Now if you play space marines and aren't running Calgar/Lysander, it giggles when you charge and smashes you before you can tickle it. Sure, I can just make my own lysander model, and paint him in my chapter colors, but that doesn't change the fact I'm playing "kind of Imperial Fists". I don't care for the creativity leeching thats been going on, the most.

Mmm. This is one thing that saps the fun out of 40k for me. Every time I try to create a personal theme a damnable D6 roll screws it over, and I'm forced to go by GW's idea of "fun".
40k used to be a game of "here's some cool stuff to get you started, now sod of and make your own damn fun!". Now it's moved to "You're clearly too stupid to make your own fun, I guess I'll have to make it for you".

An idea for flyer balancing, which I just had as I continue to read through this thread. At the beginning of the turn, make them choose skyfire, or not. If they choose skyfire, they shoot normally. If they don't, they can fire at any unit they passed over, from the facing the point of the unit they started closest to. This represents a strafing attack, versus the way they operate now.

 ADustyMan wrote:
An idea for flyer balancing, which I just had as I continue to read through this thread. At the beginning of the turn, make them choose skyfire, or not. If they choose skyfire, they shoot normally. If they don't, they can fire at any unit they passed over, from the facing the point of the unit they started closest to. This represents a strafing attack, versus the way they operate now.

I think that's close to how fliers work in epic armageddon. Except that interceptor was incorporated into skyfire, and skyfire is the only thing that can shoot aircraft.

I'm still trying to figure out why they ditched armorbane for monstrous creatures. It's made my carnifexes very sad.

I wandered around a 40k tournament the other week in between games at the Fantasy tournament next door.

Every table had fliers (usually on both sides). Every table had an Aegis Defense Line (most had two). At least three quarters had allied detachments.

Screw that gak man, I'm gonna go try and find that 15mm 40k

 Dakkamite wrote:
I wandered around a 40k tournament the other week in between games at the Fantasy tournament next door.

Every table had fliers (usually on both sides). Every table had an Aegis Defense Line (most had two). At least three quarters had allied detachments.

Screw that gak man, I'm gonna go try and find that 15mm 40k

Considering that when you add in FW the Orks have more kinds of fliers than they know what to do with and My nids stuck with a grand total of three, one of which is apocalypse only and exactly zero surface to air options, I'm fairly certain you're in much better straits than I am.

Out of the regular fliers, only the dakkajet is any good. The others are really terrible from a competitive point of view.

No idea about those FW fliers though. I thought they were all Apoc only? But really, the only time I'll run a flier is either A) the other guy is running Hellturkeys or Vendettas or something equally terrible that deserves some Dakkajet love B) if I'm running the Blitzabomber with its hilarious crash table

 Dakkamite wrote:
Out of the regular fliers, only the dakkajet is any good. The others are really terrible from a competitive point of view.

No idea about those FW fliers though. I thought they were all Apoc only? But really, the only time I'll run a flier is either A) the other guy is running Hellturkeys or Vendettas or something equally terrible that deserves some Dakkajet love B) if I'm running the Blitzabomber with its hilarious crash table

Fightas and Fighta bommers aren't apoc only as they aren't superheavies, but Fightas are essentially more durable dakkajets with Big shootas instead of supashootas, but they can carry bombs and rokkits. Fighta bommers are fightas except with more stuff to make things explode.

As anyone can tell you, Tyranids are rather allergic to bombers. Large amounts of pieplates and templates has always been the best way to kill Tyranids en masse.

Just checked out those FW fliers. The Fighta is a Dakkajet minus the WAAAGH Plane and Fighta Ace things (aka what makes it good...), the Bomba is sort of like a more expensive Burna Bomba. Those one shot, 72" rokkits might be interesting though. The main good thing about them is that 1-3 Fightas per FA slot... could totally run a roight propa deff skwadron with them!

 Dakkamite wrote:
Just checked out those FW fliers. The Fighta is a Dakkajet minus the WAAAGH Plane and Fighta Ace things (aka what makes it good...), the Bomba is sort of like a more expensive Burna Bomba. Those one shot, 72" rokkits might be interesting though. The main good thing about them is that 1-3 Fightas per FA slot... could totally run a roight propa deff skwadron with them!

Rokkitz that hit at BS5. And always on side or rear armor. And guess where Leman Russes have such weak armor that big shootas can penetrate them? (I've seriously seen ork players kill leman russes with big shootas by firing into their craptastic rear armor, much lulz were had).

BS 5

Wot manner of heresy is this? Orks cannot shoot at BS 5, its roight unorky!

Seriously what am I missing here? Are you talking about Grot Bomms, which do hit at 2+ or some crazy gak but are fairly weak, or is there some way to hit with those S8 rokkits at BS5?

 Dakkamite wrote:

BS 5

Wot manner of heresy is this? Orks cannot shoot at BS 5, its roight unorky!

Seriously what am I missing here? Are you talking about Grot Bomms, which do hit at 2+ or some crazy gak but are fairly weak, or is there some way to hit with those S8 rokkits at BS5?

Suparokkitz have unlimited range and always hit on twos. Suck it hunter killers.

Aeronautica gives them Rokkits but no suparokkits that I can find?

Then again, even the 1d4chan tactica is talking about Suparokkits. So its more a matter of "where the hell are the rules?" rather than "do these rules even exist?"

You realize what you've done though right? I literally *just* finished nine Big Trak / Battlewagon scratch builds, and now I have to get to work making nine of these goddamn fliers so I can troll all that Mech Guard at my club...