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.

...ie the saving throw modifier of minus whatever.

No. I keep seeing people advocate for saving throw modifiers as a way to "fix" the current AP system. The *ONLY* way that works is if they scale the game way back. It would need to go back down to a true skirmish level game for that to be effective. Anyone who played 2nd. Ed knows what I'm talking about ... "So you have a 3+ save with a +1 modifier because of your artifact and you're in hard cover so that's another +2 but my gun has a -2 modifier and also I cast misfortune so that's another -2 and .......". At the current scale the game that just doesn't work.

I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with the AP system itself. I think they just went overboard on the higher AP weapons. If they rebalanced things so that the high AP weapons were more rare I don't think there would be an issue.

I'd like to see the following:

1. Rebalance the # of high AP weapons available to each army such that they are not nearly so common

2. Either make all "walker" type units into MCs and eliminate the "walker" unit from the game OR put the two on par with one another. Make it so that they have different strengths and weaknesses but are essentially on par. As it stands there's not much reason to ever tale a walker when you can get a MC.

3. Streamline the psychic phase. Maybe even prune it back to what it was in 5th. It's too time consuming as it is IMO

4. A new mission system along with a proper campaign system IN THE BRB. There was a basic system in one of the BRBs for a fantasy edition that allowed you to play an escalation league style campaign and capture different territories that would give you different advantages. IIRC, it even kept track of your casualties and that had an effect on what you could field in future games.

5. Streamline the special rules. No more individual special rules that exist for no other reason than to bestow several other special rules.

6. More rules that reward fluffy list building. A good example is the Gladius Strike Force for the marines. I realize it can be considered OP, but it IS a really good example of how a marine army would actually look on the field.

7. I like formations and I like multiple detachment armies, but if we're going to have them, (like Kronk said), let's make sure everyone has a similar opportunity

8. Basic vs Advanced rules. Split the BRB into two halves so that the first maybe 10 pages are a streamlined super simple rule set that I can explain in a few minutes and quickly start an intro game with, and have the rest of the rules in the "advanced" section. The advanced section uses all the rules form the basic section but really goes into the nitty gritty.

9. New mission system:

I'd like to see some of the more fun missions like the "patrol" mission form previous versions (where a player had sentries posted that moved randomly around the board) as well as some new more standard missions. Maelstrom is .... not great

10. Eliminate almost ALL of the randomness. Like 98% of it.

11. Push each and every codex to 11. Make them ALL off-the-wall, bat gak INSANE.

12. A return of just a little bit of the old sense of humor.

 Vaktathi wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Why the troop requirement?

I have a question for people removing allies. What about books like Harlequins? Do they get a HQ, do they get rolled into other books or something else?

really, factions like Harlequins arent really their own armies. Harlequins arent going to get in 40k style battles with Orks or Imperial Guard or a Tyranid invasion without the presence of other Eldar, thats just not something theyd really do. They make more sense as a unique faction in an RPG or skirmish game, but for 40k, they really should just be a bolt-on to CWE/DE and not their own army.

They do seeing as the Codex specifically has mentions of battles against both Guard and Orks.

I dont have the book one me, are these pitched open battles or like small commando raids, and are they done without any other Eldar present? It would appear to be rather nonsensical for a Harlequin Troupe to engage something like a mechanized/armored IG column in a pitched firefight or a Green Tide is a direct mass melee.

The Orks were hit and run attacks. The Guard it really didn't say much about anything outside one Harlequin. It didn't mention other Eldar.

I'd rather GW didn't touch the fluff, but at this point I wish they would tear down the ruleset to the foundation and build it back up again into a more stable game.

What I'd really like is for the game to be split into three rulesets. First would be a kill team/necromunda game. Small groups where its not uncommon to see bikes, speeders and a single transport. MC's and vehicles would likely be "take down the beast" scenarios. This would encourage quick games with only a small portion of a collection that feeds well into campaign or random unit allocation.

Second would be a skirmish ruleset, pretty much designed for the old FOC, but where vehicles are limited to 1 per slot - you'd get some on the board but they wouldn't be the majority of your force; hopefully that would make infantry still worthwhile to take and heavy weapon spam wouldn't be as pervasive as it has become. Something akin to army size in 4th-5th edition.

Last would be an Epic-like scale. Infantry are handled with movement trays (because they die cheap/have little impact individually) but the game otherwise looks like what we have now - though it should play a little faster (combine some of those 20-50 dice rolls of single attacks into 1-3 attacks and such).

Tycho wrote:

1. Rebalance the # of high AP weapons available to each army such that they are not nearly so common


3. Streamline the psychic phase. Maybe even prune it back to what it was in 5th. It's too time consuming as it is IMO

8. Basic vs Advanced rules. Split the BRB into two halves so that the first maybe 10 pages are a streamlined super simple rule set that I can explain in a few minutes and quickly start an intro game with, and have the rest of the rules in the "advanced" section. The advanced section uses all the rules form the basic section but really goes into the nitty gritty.

9. New mission system:

I'd like to see some of the more fun missions like the "patrol" mission form previous versions (where a player had sentries posted that moved randomly around the board) as well as some new more standard missions. Maelstrom is .... not great


12. A return of just a little bit of the old sense of humor.

#1.... do you mean "high AP" as in AP 1 and 2, or high as in 4 and 5?

#3, I agree on dealing with the psychic phase. My first full edition of playing was 5th ed, so maybe it's just a soft spot for me, but I rather liked the "this character can cast X # of spells per turn" and then each spell listed when it was carried out. It makes no sense to me why a character like Njall Stormcaller should have a psychic attack and, say, a bolt pistol and get to use both.

8. Agreed. While it may be *TOO* simplistic, I think that for things like stat lines, I'd much rather see an AoS style line. "Space Marine shooting attack: Range 24, 3+, 3+, rapid fire" Space marine combat weapons: Hit on 4+, wound on 4+.... that sort of thing. I hate having to look up, much less memorize all those bloody charts on the to hit and to wound.... I think it'd be a slightly fluffier way of dealing with things, because units like howling banshees or harlequins or gaunts that are supposed to be really good in combat could have stats that reflect that.

9. While I personally think that Maelstrom isn't the worst thing, and the cards are cool, ish, I'd probably keep that, or something similar in a new edition... But, I'd also add in official rules for those super small games... ya know, like where each side only has 250 points to spend, and have a bunch of restrictions, but a 10 man squad of space marines doesn't need coherency and all that.

#12.... Most definitely, while a lot of the humor found in older editions and older codices was cringe, or face-palm worthy, it was still better than All Grim-Dark, All the Time!! that we have now.

I would welcome an AoS style reset for 40k. As it stands it's a horrendously overcomplicated mess that takes far to much time, money and effort to play.
The way GW is heading, I have genuine hopes that they may take the current rules and codexs, bin them and start fresh.

 r_squared wrote:
I would welcome an AoS style reset for 40k. As it stands it's a horrendously overcomplicated mess that takes far to much time, money and effort to play.
The way GW is heading, I have genuine hopes that they may take the current rules and codexs, bin them and start fresh.

Obviously, my comment welcoming an AoS style does not extend to having no points costs though


And I don't think that 40k will ever become quite as simplified as fantasy went, simply for the fact that you have so many different types of units, and so many different fluff elements to attempt to uphold. I mean, really, pretty much the only "vehicles" in AoS are chariots, which I suppose in 40k would be some sort of DE style, AV 10, open topped weak little thing.

One big fear I have with respect to this AOS idea is the wide variety of wargear. I want to keep all of those different options. Some tactical squads have lascannons. Others have plasma cannons. Some have missile launchers.

I want to keep my options.

 Vaktathi wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Why the troop requirement?

I have a question for people removing allies. What about books like Harlequins? Do they get a HQ, do they get rolled into other books or something else?

really, factions like Harlequins arent really their own armies. Harlequins arent going to get in 40k style battles with Orks or Imperial Guard or a Tyranid invasion without the presence of other Eldar, thats just not something theyd really do. They make more sense as a unique faction in an RPG or skirmish game, but for 40k, they really should just be a bolt-on to CWE/DE and not their own army.

They do seeing as the Codex specifically has mentions of battles against both Guard and Orks.

I dont have the book one me, are these pitched open battles or like small commando raids, and are they done without any other Eldar present? It would appear to be rather nonsensical for a Harlequin Troupe to engage something like a mechanized/armored IG column in a pitched firefight or a Green Tide is a direct mass melee.

The Cull (988.M40) - Imperial forces attempt to plunder forbidden archeotech on the dying world of Karadox. The Midnight Sorrow strike without warning, orchestrating a blistering campaign of hit-and-run attacks. Eventually the terrified humans flee, abandoning their tainted prize without ever learning the horrors it would have unleashed.
Giant Slayers (056.M41) - Knights of House Terryn claim the maiden world of Velos for the Imperium. In response, the Frozen Stars deploy swarms of Voidweavers in the saedath known as the Giants' Lament. Though the cost is high, the invaders are finally wiped out.
The Maedrax Encore (785.M41) - The Masque of the Dreaming Shadow begin a decade-long campaign against the tomb worlds of Maedrax, fighting to stem the rising Necron tide after craftworld Ulthwé's failure to do so.
A Promise Kept (992.M41) - While battling Tyranids on Deshil, Ultramarines Strike Force Apollon find their senses clouded by visions. The swarm is driven back by spectral figures, even as the Astartes slump into unconsciousness. Upon awakening, they are horrified to find themselves strapped to the surgical tables of the Haemonculi. Of their captors there is no sign, but the Haemonculi croon delightedly of a debt settled in blood.
Faolchú's Wrath (993.M41) - Several masques combine their forces into a grand masque in order to topple the Echospire on the Shrine World of Baedros. In the process, they earn the undying enmity of the Space Wolves, whose honour is besmirched by this bloody disaster.
Cegorach's War (995.M41) - Across the Galaxy, Harlequins go to war in unprecedented numbers.

 Blitzen the Solitaire wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Why the troop requirement?

I have a question for people removing allies. What about books like Harlequins? Do they get a HQ, do they get rolled into other books or something else?

really, factions like Harlequins arent really their own armies. Harlequins arent going to get in 40k style battles with Orks or Imperial Guard or a Tyranid invasion without the presence of other Eldar, thats just not something theyd really do. They make more sense as a unique faction in an RPG or skirmish game, but for 40k, they really should just be a bolt-on to CWE/DE and not their own army.

They do seeing as the Codex specifically has mentions of battles against both Guard and Orks.

I dont have the book one me, are these pitched open battles or like small commando raids, and are they done without any other Eldar present? It would appear to be rather nonsensical for a Harlequin Troupe to engage something like a mechanized/armored IG column in a pitched firefight or a Green Tide is a direct mass melee.

In the fluff of the Quins book, it's less a pitched battle, and more a "highly orchestrated ballet of death" where the Harlies show up, slaughter everything and vanish before the ground turns red. So, it's not really a pitched battle per se, because fluff writers gonna fluff...

Pictures came out at the wrong angle lol had to go copy paste the text


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Anyways my point is there's more Harlequins then people give them credit for. As well as ruling them out because they are not an "army" is ridiculous. You could take that same logic and apply it to every space marine 'chapter'. They are not legions anymore.

#1.... do you mean "high AP" as in AP 1 and 2, or high as in 4 and 5? 

Actually, now that you mention it, I think I mean both. Ap 4-5 should be the standard for almost all infantry weapons. Ap1-3 weapons should get increasingly more expensive and rare as you get closer to AP1. Ap 3 could be the most common and cojld be found on infantry models in the form of "1 per squad" weapons and/or grenades. AP1-2 would be very rare and largely vehicle mounted type things or emplacements or the occasional relic on a special character.

As the game stands now it jusy seems like its way too easy to get AP 2/3 weapons in silly quantities. It not only makes AP4/5 weapons pointless, it also makes most of the armor in the game pointless.

Tycho wrote:

#1.... do you mean "high AP" as in AP 1 and 2, or high as in 4 and 5? 

Actually, now that you mention it, I think I mean both. Ap 4-5 should be the standard for almost all infantry weapons.

Lasguns shouldn't have a significant AP value.

Ap1-3 weapons should get increasingly more expensive and rare as you get closer to AP1. Ap 3 could be the most common and cojld be found on infantry models in the form of "1 per squad" weapons and/or grenades. AP1-2 would be very rare and largely vehicle mounted type things or emplacements or the occasional relic on a special character.

As the game stands now it jusy seems like its way too easy to get AP 2/3 weapons in silly quantities. It not only makes AP4/5 weapons pointless, it also makes most of the armor in the game pointless.

Space marines should be able to keep their AP 1 and AP 2 weapons as is. They're space marines.

Tycho wrote:

As the game stands now it jusy seems like its way too easy to get AP 2/3 weapons in silly quantities. It not only makes AP4/5 weapons pointless, it also makes most of the armor in the game pointless.

I see what you mean, but I think that some armies absolutely need to keep their AP weapons in the availability that they currently have. I mean, when people face my guard army, it isn't the 80+ flashlights that people are worried about, it's the 3-4 AP3 battle cannon pie plates they are worried about, or the 2-3 STR 6 AP 4, Ignores Cover blasts that they have to deal with each turn. On the flip side of that, without having the "protection" if inordinate amounts of ordnance, my 5+ save owning guardsmen are generally paste to be wiped off of the underside of a boot, or cleaned off of a sword blade.

Lasguns shouldn't have a significant AP value. 

I said most. I did not say ALL.

As for SM keeping AP1/2 weapons - i never sakd they couldn't. What I said was that those weapons should be much more rare than they are. Plus, firepoeer is not what traditionally has made Space Marines who they are. It was always about toughness and survivability. A 3+ save would actually mean something again under my suggestion.

Tycho wrote:

Lasguns shouldn't have a significant AP value. 

I said most. I did not say ALL.

As for SM keeping AP1/2 weapons - i never sakd they couldn't. What I said was that those weapons should be much more rare than they are. Plus, firepoeer is not what traditionally has made Space Marines who they are. It was always about toughness and survivability. A 3+ save would actually mean something again under my suggestion.

It's more complicated than that. The only low AP shooting attack my marines are getting crushed by are grav cannons and ion accelerators. That's it. Everything else is death of a million wounds. Also, MCs getting AP 2 universally has killed a huge number of marines. Lascannons and meltaguns don't even matter anymore.

MC's have always ignored armor saves however, at least since the 3E reboot (and IIRC in 2E the few MC's that existed basically ignored armor through ASM's except on things like Termi's who functionally saved on similar odds to their 5++ now)

Traditio wrote:

Tycho wrote:

#1.... do you mean "high AP" as in AP 1 and 2, or high as in 4 and 5?

Actually, now that you mention it, I think I mean both. Ap 4-5 should be the standard for almost all infantry weapons.

Lasguns shouldn't have a significant AP value.

While I'm not necessarily saying I disagree, lets also not forget that for about half the game's lifespan, Lasguns had the same AP value as bolters

 Vaktathi wrote:
MC's have always ignored armor saves however, at least since the 3E reboot.

Yeah, and they used to have 4 wounds and no invulns, too.

The point is that low AP shooting is only a small issue. No one is running scared from fusion blasters or bright lances. It's the scatterlasers and HYMPs that are the killers.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
And I don't think that 40k will ever become quite as simplified as fantasy went, simply for the fact that you have so many different types of units, and so many different fluff elements to attempt to uphold. I mean, really, pretty much the only "vehicles" in AoS are chariots, which I suppose in 40k would be some sort of DE style, AV 10, open topped weak little thing.

Daemons have chariots; yea open topped and AV10. Not so little though, just try deepstriking one.

Tycho wrote:

Lasguns shouldn't have a significant AP value. 

I said most. I did not say ALL.

As for SM keeping AP1/2 weapons - i never sakd they couldn't. What I said was that those weapons should be much more rare than they are. Plus, firepoeer is not what traditionally has made Space Marines who they are. It was always about toughness and survivability. A 3+ save would actually mean something again under my suggestion.

Do you view it problematic that 5 man tactical squads can bring a multimelta, meltagun, plasma gun or plasma cannon?

Traditio wrote:

Tycho wrote:

#1.... do you mean "high AP" as in AP 1 and 2, or high as in 4 and 5? 

Actually, now that you mention it, I think I mean both. Ap 4-5 should be the standard for almost all infantry weapons.

Lasguns shouldn't have a significant AP value.

Considering that we have Lascannons that are AP2, I think it kinda follows that they should. Lasguns and Lascannons definitely should not have the same Strength or AP value, but it's definitely not a stretch to say that a Lasgun should have a half-decent value for both of those characteristics.

 Vaktathi wrote:
MC's have always ignored armor saves however, at least since the 3E reboot.

Riptides haven't existed since 3rd edition.

Please explain to me why a riptide should have AP 2 attacks.

Traditio wrote:
One big fear I have with respect to this AOS idea is the wide variety of wargear. I want to keep all of those different options. Some tactical squads have lascannons. Others have plasma cannons. Some have missile launchers.

I want to keep my options.

In AoS everything has options and unique abilities.

Traditio wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
MC's have always ignored armor saves however, at least since the 3E reboot.

Riptides haven't existed since 3rd edition.

Please explain to me why a riptide should have AP 2 attacks.

Because it's gigantic and certainly able to exert a tremendous amount of force through its limbs? It having AP2 isn't an issue, the Riptide's problem is that it's absurdly survivable and way too mobile for the firepower and range it sports. AP2 on CC attacks is just tiny window dressing, and the MC rules shouldn't be re-written just for one problem unit, that's how we got the crappy vehicle rules we have today.

I don't care if it punches at AP 2 if it dies like a Tyranid MC.

IllumiNini wrote:Considering that we have Lascannons that are AP2, I think it kinda follows that they should. Lasguns and Lascannons definitely should not have the same Strength or AP value, but it's definitely not a stretch to say that a Lasgun should have a half-decent value for both of those characteristics.

This is a non-sequitur. I can only assume that a musket ball and a cannon ball are both basically fired according to the same principles. I wouldn't use a musket to knock down walls.

At any rate:

5+ and 6+ armor saves exist.

Those armor saves should actually mean something.

The way to make them mean something is to assume that the most common infantry weapons can't simply ignore them.

Boltguns should ignore the most common forms of armor because they are taken by the most elite forces of the imperium, and they are a suitably elite weapon for a highly elite force.

Again, boltguns are AP 5. This is an elite weapon. Lasguns should be nowhere near as good as boltguns.

Therefore, S 3, AP null.

Martel732 wrote:
I don't care if it punches at AP 2 if it dies like a Tyranid MC.

Exactly, the big issue is it's ability to shrug off an enormous amount of damage while being able to hit targets from across the board and utilize Jet movement to avoid assault threats, on top of the Tau combined overwatch rule. AP2 CC attacks are a very minor thing with it.

"Boltguns should ignore the most common forms of armor "

Boltguns have never been good. Ever. Not in 2nd, not in 3rd, not in 5th. Never.

Martel732 wrote:
"Boltguns should ignore the most common forms of armor "

Boltguns have never been good. Ever. Not in 2nd, not in 3rd, not in 5th. Never.

Boltguns ignore what is, fluffwise, the most common forms of armor (5+ armor and worse).

So? That only matter against Orks and guardsmen in the open. And even then, Orks and guardsmen are so cheap that you still aren't doing that much damage after rolling to hit and wound. If they have cover, forget it.

Martel732 wrote:
"Boltguns should ignore the most common forms of armor "

Boltguns have never been good. Ever. Not in 2nd, not in 3rd, not in 5th. Never.

But at the same time, since I've been playing (tail end of 4th, early 5th) they haven't been bad.