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.

Every 40k player has an opinion about how their favorite army could use a boost (even if it just to fix a broken unit). But it is an army's weakness as much as its strengths that make the game. The game would be no fun if every troop in your army had a S10 Assault 12 gun with a 72 inch range . With the avalanche or new codexes and data slates it feels 40k is really in a state of flux.

With all the change what weaknesses/vulnerabilities do you think your army should be given/retain to give it proper character?

Edit: For this discussion I am trying to avoid "X unit needs a nerf" I was thinking more thematically. For example "Tyranids should have weak anti air" or "Space Marines should have expensive vehicles so they can't be fielded in large numbers."

Not having turret weapons on the Heldrake

My army should have no weaknesses. Grey Knights are the best spess mahrinez ever!!!!111


Automatically Appended Next Post:
LOL

 Guitarquero wrote:
Not having turret weapons on the Heldrake

Sorry I was not clear in the original post. I edited it to clarify but what I meant was more thematically. How should the overall army play more so than individual units.

Templars should have worse/more expensive fire support units, to emphasize the CC specialization of the Chapter. Of course, that'd also require some sort of melee rules that aren't bonkers.

I think that Tyranids should struggle to take out vehicles at range (but eat them up in CC) and I think that Tyranids should be vulnerable to attacks (both shooting and CC) in the open but be much more deadly in cover.

I think tyranids shouldn't have anny low AP guns.

Beat themm with quantity not quality

Amoras wrote:
I think tyranids shouldn't have anny low AP guns.

Beat themm with quantity not quality

I agree. maybe some short range acid template, but just stuff like that.

Zookie wrote:
Every 40k player has an opinion about how their favorite army could use a boost (even if it just to fix a broken unit). But it is an army's weakness as much as its strengths that make the game. The game would be no fun if every troop in your army had a S10 Assault 12 gun with a 72 inch range . With the avalanche or new codexes and data slates it feels 40k is really in a state of flux.

With all the change what weaknesses/vulnerabilities do you think your army should be given/retain to give it proper character?

Edit: For this discussion I am trying to avoid "X unit needs a nerf" I was thinking more thematically. For example "Tyranids should have weak anti air" or "Space Marines should have expensive vehicles so they can't be fielded in large numbers."

Generaly the kind of weaknesses eldar have . Vunerable , but no one plays with the vunerable stuff. Low stats , but guns have rending , stuff twin links itself and your melee units are indestructible with invs , re-rolls and hit and run . I could do with weaknesses like that. Killed by everything in melee , but no on can reach your trenches with more then 2-3 models and you can tarpit finish those off with ally . Would make it a lot more fun to play .

Chaos Marines are basically two armies in one, so yea.

Low numbers (Marines+ Chosen + Cult troops etc)

Low individual model stats (Cultist horde)

Eldar - tough and mobile vehicles, glass canon short range infantry. Depend on positioning and HQ support.

Guard have enough already and they are fluffy.

I liked the old system of Necron phase-out. I feel that, lacking a "synaptic" Canoptek unit, C'Tan, or HQ - most units should be "at risk" for returning back to their base of operations.

It's perfectly fluffy - why allow automatons to wander aimlessly from the tomb without some sort of oversight by an "officer" of sorts, or rather, without a dedicated "intelligence" to govern them. I assume a race as advanced as the Necrons has other means of surveillance, so unless they literally just wanted to mind-feth with some guys, there's no reason to send a random unit of Warriors out for no reason, for instance.

Initiative is also good, insofar as unit stats, though I feel that at times it is *the* army detriment no matter how much sense it makes in fluff or Codex balance (Why do "war constructs" such as IA12 units, Praetorians, and Lords all move at the same speed as a basic mindless warrior?)
This was one of the conundrums that had me build a "rampant" Necron HQ in the PR forum.

Is it close to Tyranids? Ish.
But to be honest, they're also Tyranid-like in many ways. It could be done appropriately, with enough rule differences to make a clear difference, and it would allow foot-sloggers to be more than scoring units and a liability while making their extremely cost-efficient vehicles more balanced as they detract from "nodal" units to keep troops from poofing.

Or something. I'm quite tired.

I primarily play Thousand Sons, and the themed army has it's inherent weaknesses.

They excel at taking out helmets.

They lack anti-tank, terminator, and horde killing. They also lack anything over a 24" range, outside of vehicles. Also, their "heavy" weapons are in the form of psychic powers. That can off the only cc support and anti-tank in the unit with bad rolls, and can be stopped by a lucky deny the witch roll. Low model count is also a major issue, as every casualty hurts.

Love playing them, though. The challenge makes them fun.

Those artillery carriages probably shouldn't be T7, or at least not their crew, even agaisnt shooting only.

I'm thinking DA should have to always take a interrogator when they fight against chaos forces to deal with any fallen.

For BT they shouldn't be able to take Whirlwinds or Devs. Too shooty.

I play Blood Angels most of the time.

I feel that any BA unit that wipes an enemy unit in close combat should take a Black rage roll like they do at the start of the game.

Of course....I'd like my initiative boost back too.....but I digress....

Necrons shouldn't have the entire croissant-fleet gizmoz....

 Elindiel wrote:
I play Blood Angels most of the time.

I feel that any BA unit that wipes an enemy unit in close combat should take a Black rage roll like they do at the start of the game.

Of course....I'd like my initiative boost back too.....but I digress....

And whole army auto rages , if corbulo or any other priest with a chalice of sanguinius blood dies , just like in the fluff.