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.

 Eldarain wrote:
Leaving the Word Bearers trash rules as is when you know the insane never ending special snowflake Marine release is around the corner.

Extrapolate this backwards with countless horrendous decisions over the years. This thread is painful to read reliving this nonsense.

I feel you.
I belive all csm Players feel you.
But if you dare point it out you are Automatically.

5th edition tank shock rules.

Drive in a straight line through any number of non-vehicle units - up to 36" for some eldar tanks
Force a moral test on all those units
All units are unharmed, even if a land raider ran over them
Land on top of a unit, forcing it to move away, no rules to handle that movement, game broke down when the unit could not move
Death or glory response for a single model which had to destroy the tank or the model was gone. Not hit, not damage, not immobilize, DESTROY
You could also ram a vehicle and did more damage the more distance you covered. It also was a tankshock and you could destroy your own vehicle that way

Which meant that an eldar hovertank army could shock your army into a huge pile, force 6-10 moral tests and then put flamers and templates on them. You also auto-lost any game with more than 3 wave serpents alive because they could just tank-shock onto objectives, pushing your units off them.

Best thing to leave the game ever.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
Grenades.

It's been eight editions now, and only in 2nd edition did a grenade act like a grenade.

We're sort of half way there now, but for some strange reason I have to be a very smart imperial guardsmen to throw more than one.

Do they make you go first? Do they make you attack less? Are they 1d6 lasgun shots? Do they reduce your charge distance?!? Who knows.

Do you want krak grenades on top of your krakgreanades but still can only throw one?
Welcome to the R&H index where that is a equipment option on a unit that allready has them.
One wonders indeed how gw percives the standard human guardsmen and all other equivalents in intelligence when only one in 10 /20 knows how to pull the Pin and throw them.

I'll vote for Overwatch.

It has no strategy, no depth and most of the time it doesn't even do anything. But before every combat you have to roll a pile of dice (or sit around while your opponent rolls a pile of dice) and see if anyone gets lucky.

It's nothing but a shallow, time-killing mechanic that adds absolutely nothing to a game already bloated with pointless rolling.

And the reason I've picked Overwatch over Invisibility or random Warlord Tables or any of the other garbage 6th/7th brought with them is that Overwatch is still with us. For as horrendous as Invisibility was, at least GW learned their lesson and removed the bloody thing. Meanwhile, Overwatch is not only still with us but has apparently been breeding with something and has given birth to a raft of time-killing, bastard children (such as that rascal Random Number of Shots).

Surpression. /Pinning

95% of the time, never came into play.
5% completely crippled a unit.

It would have been a good rule if it where not so Binary and not 95 % of the time completely useless..


Also bonus round, the lack of usr, now instead we get what feels like 200 special rules slightly diffrent written in codices all over doing often the same but sometimes just do it better or worse then others?!?

Instead of forward operatives etc could have had common infiltration rules?
No seriously.

5th dangerous terrain rules. A roll of 1 kills a X wound model when going over a fence. I;d seen 200pt models die b.c they tripped and rolled their ankle.

Or 5th hitting skimmers vehicles in melee, always a 6 to hit if i remember correctly.

 Saber wrote:
True Line of Sight is an awful, unworkable mess. It's impossible to implement correctly and, played strictly, makes most terrain either pointless or unusable. 4th Edition was much better.

4th used TLOS, just like every other edition of 40k that came before or after it. The sole exception to this was area terrain which had size categories and its own rules. All other terrain used TLOS.

Easy call here, old character challenges.

I can't properly say how pointless I found challenges and how some armies would never ever do them and they led to some absolutely dumb encounters. Like the platoon command squad where you could charge a character MC, issue a challenge feed them your junior officer, and still tie combat because the banner counted as one combat res, and your junior officer was one would locking down the combat in a tie just to be sure you free it up to kill your squad just in time to shoot it all up in the face on your next turn.

Lets not forget also all the look out sirs that led to characters in squads just counting the squad as a huge block of extra wounds.

I know it was for the wrong system but I still want to nominate the 8th edition WHFB FAQ. Sadly, it's no longer on the site but I believe the wording was along the lines of:

Q: When I shoot my cannon at an enemy unit is that unit removed from play?
A: Yes.

Suddenly Empire gained Antimatter Cannons that could delete a unit of any size and strength without having to roll a single dice.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Removal of templates.

2 reasons, A: conga lines are stupid as is a parking lot and stacking of so many units on such a small scale.

B: it just is really, and I mean really immersion breaking and makes me wish back for artillery strikes.
Just to punish it.
It's also leading to auras beeing way to strong.

THIS, THIS, THIS, A GORILLION TIMES THIS

When I see my opponent packing their units around a character with aura into a big blob, I'd be delighted to drop a juicy template of S10 AP-2 on top of it, blasting half of it away, but instead, I just roll 2d6 and kill a couple of dudes somewhere in the middle.

Also,
Invulnerable saves. Invulnerable saves on everything.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
5th dangerous terrain rules. A roll of 1 kills a X wound model when going over a fence. I;d seen 200pt models die b.c they tripped and rolled their ankle.

Or 5th hitting skimmers vehicles in melee, always a 6 to hit if i remember correctly.

In one of my first games in fifth, we had a little cobblestone wall and my opponent rolled 3 leman russ tanks over it, immobilizing all three.

Later in the battle, my opponent landed 5 stormtroopers via deep strike, then scattered a basilisk shot onto them and blew them all up.

Ironically, that kind of madcap chaos was why I decided I liked 40k in the first place. I know the old "Vehicles have no hit points but just random bad stuff happens to them and they can be completely crippled without being destroyed" rules were broken, because there was always a 1/6 chance of just "whoops, instantly dead." but they were kind of fun.

combination of things but I am not a fan of how 8th edition has changes characters and moved things to Auras.

I would prefer the old independent character where the squad could take the wounds first but it was still possible to take down the squad and then destroy the character. Now its jus oh look there in the middle a space maring captain and LT, better shoot all the normal marines in front first while they buff the hack out of them.

speaking of which... related to the above I hate auras. I think the independant character should buff a squad they are part of, but auras make the game really hard to balance and result in stacking buffs that throw balance out the window sometimes s some armies get them and others do not.

The independent character rules are very close to one of the worst rules though. Any character without that rule was just useless by default, and most of the criticism about the new character rule also applies to independent character shenanigans. Plus all the rule nightmares about leaving/joining, conferring and not conferring rule and rule combinations

I'm glad that something like a daemon prince or a SAG mek can actually do something without get blown to bits before moving, and that and apothecary can just move to where he is needed and doesn't ignore the tactical marine dying next to him because he isn't part of the honor guard.

The only thing that should change is the often requested limitation to character protection actually needing things protecting the character nearby, otherwise the character rules are the best ones so far.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

I'd argue they should be target-able but able to shunt the wounds onto a unit within 3" unless the shooting unit has the Sniper keyword.

Then again I also for arguing for shooting through enemy units needing a BS modifier or having the misses roll to hit the unit in the way, so take my thoughts with a grain of salt.

But then you're forcing characters to always be in balls aren't you?

7th Ed.
Invisibility makes attacks hit the target on a 6, but if the attack would ordinarily auto-hit, it cannot hit an invisible target. This means flamers and blasts (the logical choices) cannot hit invisible targets.
One side effect is some screwy stuff in melee. Two squads beating on an invisible tank in melee. First squad damages and immobilizes the tank. Now the tank is invulnerable and the second squad cannot hurt it, as melee attacks auto-hit an immobile vehicle but invisibility makes that impossible.
Need to block off an objective vs melee army? Drop a drop pod on it then cast invisibility. Now it cannot be removed.

8th in general reeks of minimum effort meh it's good enough "game design" I mean not as bad as 1st ed AoS but it does feel like it was designed based on the assumption nobody would play it.

Saying that the "bespoke rules" thing that was trumpeted before launch that resulted in everything just being some variation of re rolls and/or +/-1 is bad and the targeting/cover and scenery rules stand out as both lazy and bad.

Talinsin wrote:
7th Ed.
Invisibility makes attacks hit the target on a 6, but if the attack would ordinarily auto-hit, it cannot hit an invisible target. This means flamers and blasts (the logical choices) cannot hit invisible targets.
One side effect is some screwy stuff in melee. Two squads beating on an invisible tank in melee. First squad damages and immobilizes the tank. Now the tank is invulnerable and the second squad cannot hurt it, as melee attacks auto-hit an immobile vehicle but invisibility makes that impossible.
Need to block off an objective vs melee army? Drop a drop pod on it then cast invisibility. Now it cannot be removed.

Ahhh, you are missing a key distinction! Auto-hitting attacks couldn't *TARGET* invisible enemies! They could HIT invisible enemies, but only if they were standing close enough to a non-invisible target and you targeted those guys.

The current line of suit rule

"I can see the bayonet on that rifle, I want fire all my army at that 30 man cultist squad now"

the_scotsman wrote:

Talinsin wrote:
7th Ed.
Invisibility makes attacks hit the target on a 6, but if the attack would ordinarily auto-hit, it cannot hit an invisible target. This means flamers and blasts (the logical choices) cannot hit invisible targets.
One side effect is some screwy stuff in melee. Two squads beating on an invisible tank in melee. First squad damages and immobilizes the tank. Now the tank is invulnerable and the second squad cannot hurt it, as melee attacks auto-hit an immobile vehicle but invisibility makes that impossible.
Need to block off an objective vs melee army? Drop a drop pod on it then cast invisibility. Now it cannot be removed.

Ahhh, you are missing a key distinction! Auto-hitting attacks couldn't *TARGET* invisible enemies! They could HIT invisible enemies, but only if they were standing close enough to a non-invisible target and you targeted those guys.

If I knew the enemy was an invis gakhead i brought the arty tyrant purge formation.
And thudd guns, lots of them.

Tank shock.
Someone mentioned the 5th Edition Version, but the versions in 6th and 7th were hardly better. For me the archetype of rules bloat. It's great that 8th made it work straight forward and simple, every other game it even kills a model...

Also 7th Edition psiphase. Everything around Psi in 7th sucked, invisibility has been mentioned, but the whole phase was a mess, every psyker was reduced to a battery for the strongest one on the board and I can't recall a single time in the Edition when deny the witch actually worked. Also rolling for random psychic powers making your psyker worth 50 or 300 points... The Psiphase from 8th alone makes me never want to look back

Kaiyanwang wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 oni wrote:
Invisibility was very bad yes. Worse however was Shifting Worldscape.

Ugh... I'm having nightmarish flash backs of Matt Ward and how everything associated with him was a complete dumpster fire.

For those who don't know the name he was GW's pariah. He literally (no exaggeration) nearly put the whole company in ruin.

He wrote some of the more internally balanced rulesets, and strangely did really well writing the lore for the WD Sisters codex (Cruddace apparently writing the rules).

I feel some of the things he was blamed for were design by executive mandate issues since there was a big push for new stuff to be better than old stuff at the time as well.

And at least he didn't write the Warpstorm table.

Ward almost single-handedly destroyed WHFB.

Almost??? I don't see any WHFB product being sold anymore.

Hawky wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Removal of templates.

2 reasons, A: conga lines are stupid as is a parking lot and stacking of so many units on such a small scale.

B: it just is really, and I mean really immersion breaking and makes me wish back for artillery strikes.
Just to punish it.
It's also leading to auras beeing way to strong.

THIS, THIS, THIS, A GORILLION TIMES THIS

When I see my opponent packing their units around a character with aura into a big blob, I'd be delighted to drop a juicy template of S10 AP-2 on top of it, blasting half of it away, but instead, I just roll 2d6 and kill a couple of dudes somewhere in the middle.

You know what absolutely no one misses about templates and blast markers? The arguments about scatter direction. The arguments about what is vs. is not under it. The arguments about infinite columns. The arguments about how they interact with levels and ruins.

Us vets will have a lot of fond memories of them, but removing blast markers and templates has been a great thing.

From my point of view, it is a tie between not being able to deep strike turn 1, and having to deploy same number of points in deep strike and on the table.

Handful of issues from playing 3rd to 6th, skipping 7th and being a noob at 8th

- Lash of Submission - terribly awkward interactions and cheesy
- Jaws of the World Wolf - brutal for newer players and dumb on bikes/5th edition Razorwolf
- Nob Biker Wound Allocation + Wound Allocation from 5th to 6th
- Fish of Fury/Devil Fish Shooting Under Transports
- Dark Eldar Combat Drugs + Fabius Bile - I simply thought these were poorly designed
- FOC with Multiple Flying Hive Tyrants - this shouldn't have been a feature
- 5th Tank Shock vs. 4th or any other edition
- MATT WARD besides writing LOTR - his entire concept of how to write fluff/rules/interactions didnt work

Ah look, more people throwing hate at Matt Ward without actual specific examples.

You know what absolutely no one misses about templates and blast markers? The arguments about scatter direction. The arguments about what is vs. is not under it. The arguments about infinite columns. The arguments about how they interact with levels and ruins.

Us vets will have a lot of fond memories of them, but removing blast markers and templates has been a great thing.

Excuse me but WTF:
The removal of Templates has lead to the whole game beeing now how you can stack behind cover or around 1 HQ with aura / Relic aura.

HURR DURR MAXIMUM SKILLZ .

Sure template removal did make it easier, you know however this is still a wargame. Stacking around a HQ model should be something done in a 1400-1900 Wargame, not in 40k .

Next time Roboute is donning a fething Shako and his soldiers grenadier caps and sings god save the Emperor whilest marching in a line at me or what?

IT's bullshite, it leads to massive balance problems thanks to AURA's TM and in general is just plain not needed.

Especially if someone goes just LOL SPAM (chaff unit of your choice) win by objective not by playing smart. (because scuse me but winning at the list level by taking a pure skew listis not skill.)

It removed actuall punishment of such moves. It removed depth of the game and most importantly it just is atm outright stupidly easy to build a gunline.
(it also put Melee armies that can't first turn charge via movement shenanigans in a spot where they might aswell just stop playing because they lack the tools to propperly break and punish such castles often)

 oni wrote:

Kaiyanwang wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 oni wrote:
Invisibility was very bad yes. Worse however was Shifting Worldscape.

Ugh... I'm having nightmarish flash backs of Matt Ward and how everything associated with him was a complete dumpster fire.

For those who don't know the name he was GW's pariah. He literally (no exaggeration) nearly put the whole company in ruin.

He wrote some of the more internally balanced rulesets, and strangely did really well writing the lore for the WD Sisters codex (Cruddace apparently writing the rules).

I feel some of the things he was blamed for were design by executive mandate issues since there was a big push for new stuff to be better than old stuff at the time as well.

And at least he didn't write the Warpstorm table.

Ward almost single-handedly destroyed WHFB.

Almost??? I don't see any WHFB product being sold anymore.

Hawky wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Removal of templates.

2 reasons, A: conga lines are stupid as is a parking lot and stacking of so many units on such a small scale.

B: it just is really, and I mean really immersion breaking and makes me wish back for artillery strikes.
Just to punish it.
It's also leading to auras beeing way to strong.

THIS, THIS, THIS, A GORILLION TIMES THIS

When I see my opponent packing their units around a character with aura into a big blob, I'd be delighted to drop a juicy template of S10 AP-2 on top of it, blasting half of it away, but instead, I just roll 2d6 and kill a couple of dudes somewhere in the middle.

You know what absolutely no one misses about templates and blast markers? The arguments about scatter direction. The arguments about what is vs. is not under it. The arguments about infinite columns. The arguments about how they interact with levels and ruins.

Us vets will have a lot of fond memories of them, but removing blast markers and templates has been a great thing.

Oh please, Fantasy died WAY before Ward joined. They pulled the life support off a vegetable of a game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:

You know what absolutely no one misses about templates and blast markers? The arguments about scatter direction. The arguments about what is vs. is not under it. The arguments about infinite columns. The arguments about how they interact with levels and ruins.

Us vets will have a lot of fond memories of them, but removing blast markers and templates has been a great thing.

Excuse me but WTF:
The removal of Templates has lead to the whole game beeing now how you can stack behind cover or around 1 HQ with aura / Relic aura.

HURR DURR MAXIMUM SKILLZ .

Sure template removal did make it easier, you know however this is still a wargame. Stacking around a HQ model should be something done in a 1400-1900 Wargame, not in 40k .

Next time Roboute is donning a fething Shako and his soldiers grenadier caps and sings god save the Emperor whilest marching in a line at me or what?

IT's bullshite, it leads to massive balance problems thanks to AURA's TM and in general is just plain not needed.

Especially if someone goes just LOL SPAM (chaff unit of your choice) win by objective not by playing smart. (because scuse me but winning at the list level by taking a pure skew listis not skill.)

It removed actuall punishment of such moves. It removed depth of the game and most importantly it just is atm outright stupidly easy to build a gunline.
(it also put Melee armies that can't first turn charge via movement shenanigans in a spot where they might aswell just stop playing because they lack the tools to propperly break and punish such castles often)

Blasts sucked and only certain Large Blasts were good. Why are people remembering differently?

Blasts sucked and only certain Large Blasts were good. Why are people remembering differently?

Tell that to a 7th ed Arty tyrant line.
I am sure you would stop laughing the minute that is set up.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Ah look, more people throwing hate at Matt Ward without actual specific examples.

I stated that his LOTR rules were well written. He also wrote Dark Elves and Wood Elves and my friends that still played during End Times mentioned I would have enjoyed those rule sets if I didnt abandon my WHFB armies

Matt Ward's poorly written yet overpowered and game destroying rules without mentioning the Grey Knights or his additions to pispoor fluff

- War of the Ring was terrible coming from the previous incarnation of LOTR and made me jump the boat and quit LOTR since the local GW switched over to WotR only. Have you played it? It's not that it's the worst rules, its just poorly designed all around. The game doesnt work and was short lived.
- SOB Codex in White Dwarf during 5th edition was terrible and didnt fit in correctly. Our local SOB raged out hard and complained endlessly. It was paper thin and was all they had for years.
- Friends attending the Throne of Skulls/GTs for 7th edition and getting STOMPED by DoC WHFB. Daemons had multiple INSANE builds. As someone who played Empire/Dwarves this wasn't even the same game. Without max cannons I couldn't even play a normal game. Effectively Ward ended 7th ed WHFB.
- Blood Angel Codex having a lot of copy paste from the Spacewolf codex - Bloodlance / Jaws / Razorspam / Badly designed characters during the finecast launch / librarian dreadnought.
- Deleting old school 4th Necrons / Ctan / Necron Airforce invention and creating 6th edition which was easily the most unpopular 40k edition where everyone just waited around for 7th to release (much to their horror)

It's not the "worst 40k rule ever" it's more "Man this dude just can't balance and create solid rules.... as the majority of his coworkers make passable/great books"

Not Online!!! wrote:

You know what absolutely no one misses about templates and blast markers? The arguments about scatter direction. The arguments about what is vs. is not under it. The arguments about infinite columns. The arguments about how they interact with levels and ruins.

Us vets will have a lot of fond memories of them, but removing blast markers and templates has been a great thing.

Excuse me but WTF:
The removal of Templates has lead to the whole game beeing now how you can stack behind cover or around 1 HQ with aura / Relic aura.

HURR DURR MAXIMUM SKILLZ .

Sure template removal did make it easier, you know however this is still a wargame. Stacking around a HQ model should be something done in a 1400-1900 Wargame, not in 40k .

Next time Roboute is donning a fething Shako and his soldiers grenadier caps and sings god save the Emperor whilest marching in a line at me or what?

IT's bullshite, it leads to massive balance problems thanks to AURA's TM and in general is just plain not needed.

Especially if someone goes just LOL SPAM (chaff unit of your choice) win by objective not by playing smart. (because scuse me but winning at the list level by taking a pure skew listis not skill.)

It removed actuall punishment of such moves. It removed depth of the game and most importantly it just is atm outright stupidly easy to build a gunline.
(it also put Melee armies that can't first turn charge via movement shenanigans in a spot where they might aswell just stop playing because they lack the tools to propperly break and punish such castles often)

The arguments about blasts (scatter etc.) existed, but outside of the most competitive games, were not really all that common in my experience. The thing I hated the most about blast markers was not even the use of the blast marker. It was playing the ork or guard player who had 150 models and every move phase had to make sure there was 1' between each model because god for bid I got an extra model or two under a blast. I agree that blasts are cool, and "castling" is really a problem in 8th, but the trade off is just not worth it and I am glad blasts are gone. Just my opinion

*raises head above the parapet*

As an opponent, the v3.5 Chaos Codex.

*ducks down behind the parapet again*