Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner

Dumb Rules

6K views 43 replies 23 participants last post by  uberschveinen 
#1 ·
Ok guys i've been thinking about the game recently wondering what's pathetic about it.

My main major gripe is the rediculous Tank Shock rules. How and why the hell can't you ram the shit out of people like in 2nd edition?

So what annoys you the most about the current rules set.

What would you like to be 'developed/changed' by GW to make the game more fun and realistic?
 
#27 ·
My problem is that each and every house rule plays with how much certain models are worth, more so depending on the scale of the changes they introduce. Changing the turn sequence would screw around dramatically with the value of units, for little appreciable gain. At the end of the day, all you've gained from the switch is a less systematic and more luck-based turn sequence. As it is, the system is set, allowing players to make strategic decisions on their deployment and playing knowing that they or their opponent will get one movement, shooting, and assault phase before they can react. Changing the system would take the irritating uncertainty of the deployment phase, and jam it into every single part of the game. If you can present to me a reason why this is worth this cost, I'll listen. As of yet, though, I've yet to see a single positive advantage to the game itself other than shutting up the people who're too hyperactive to sit around for the unbearably long half an hour of an average turn.


As for overwatch, that's a horrible idea. This addition would make close-combat armies, quite simply, unplayable. Overwatch especially would break any game with a reasonable amount of terrain in half, and turn it into a match of 'sit and wait', oir against combat armies, 'total slaughter'. Again, like the turn sequence, it is only an advantage for those people who cannot think of time as being anything other than perfectly linear. These people, obviously, must have never touched a book, movie, or game plot in their lives.
 
#28 ·
The tank shock rules are pretty good, but I think more carnage should happen to unit that gets hit by one. True, units don't stand there and take it, but in a massive battle, you might not see it until it's running you over through the fog and constant vibration of war. Fast vehicles even moreso. The style of turns and movement create tank shock in this way, as tanks do not launch across a battlefield without you responding though. Tank shocking other vehicles is a nice touch our old gaming club had, as well titans getting stomp attacks. I don't care how fast you are, because if a titan manages to get his foot in the middle of your unit, some unlucky bloke is gonna be pudding.

I agree that the back-and-forth movement could massively hurt some people's armies. Of course, it will also improve others. With necessary changes it could work well, but I feel it would become a game of firing at the squad that just moved or will move next.

On Overwatch, only certain squads should get them. Only few armies should be able to use it at all, as most units aren't calm and collected enough to sit there and wait. I'd say only units with 5 men or less, as most units would be participating in the battle leaving the minor ones to guard flanks, gaps, etc. I'd also say only units led by some veteran-type character or an independent character can use it. It might seem to limit overwatch, but if it isn't done like this, you'll have a Starcannon army overwatched all game, same with lascannon armies. Small units w/ someone of character leading them in almost an in-game subplot seems to fit the bill of overwatch.

-Khaine-
 
#30 ·
I think the drop pod assault rules are a little on the dumb side. A landing drop pod just sort of bumps intervening terrain and models out of the way. Now, it seems to me like if a 100-ton capsule fired from orbit were to hit you, even if it's bled off most of its velocity, it'd still crush whatever it landed on top of, not just sort of bump them aside. Sometimes, there's nowhere to go, even if you do see the thing coming. They're supposed to hit the ground quite hard despite slowing down after entry anyway... seems to me like if they doubled (or heck, even tripled) the cost of a drop pod and made it so that if it lands on a vehicle it causes a penetrating hit, and on infantry it'd be S8 AP2 for any model that fits under the drop pod model itself, just as if the drop pod were an ordinance template.
 
#31 ·
Jezlad said:
A Challenger 2 travels just under 37 miles per hour.

If you can dodge that you probably shouldn't be in the army...
You show me the military assault where a Challenger, in the middle of a bombed-out city with rubble strewn around the streets, enemy forces in every building, and friendlies on each side, is moving at that speed. Again, it doesn't happen. You can't talk about what it can do if it won't do it.

As for overwatch, I do think some special units should be able to do it. Perhaps it could be a veteran ability, given to specialised units, such as Marine scouts, Stormtroopers, Dire Avengers, and anything with the discipline, control, and tactical nous to realise shooting in a few seconds may be better than shooting now. It'd have to be a rare ability, cost a fair few points, and not be able to cause pinning for it to be balanced, though


As for droppodboy there, your idea is, while somewhat sensible in terms of universe mechanics, ridiculous under game mechanics. s8 ap2 is better than a Battlecannon shell, and if any orbitally-launched vehicle hit at that velocity, it'd explode and kill everyone on board. Even at something more reasonable, say s5 ap5 and a blast template (the size of the drop pod itself), it's just too good. That you could drop a high-power unit (and don't forget, every unit that can use these is high-powered) into a squad, hit it and kill half of them, then jump out and kill the rest, is just too much. Then, you have a real-world mechanics problem. It's very hard to miss a giant flaming meter flying through the sky at hypersonic speeds, and if it's even close to where you are, you'd probably move out of the way. I don't know about you, but I certainly would. The day you manage not to notice a half-ton of screaming metal doom falling out of the sky and making a horrific noise on the way until it's too late to avoid is the day you win the point.
 
#32 ·
uberschveinen said:
You show me the military assault where a Challenger, in the middle of a bombed-out city with rubble strewn around the streets, enemy forces in every building, and friendlies on each side, is moving at that speed. Again, it doesn't happen. You can't talk about what it can do if it won't do it.
How can you say it doesn't happen?

Say for argument sake the turret was blown clean off by a flukey RPG. The secondary armnament - 7.62 chaingun is also gone. The driver is the only person left, the only weapon he has is the vehicle itself - suddenly it does happen it does do it...

I've driven an AS90 through war torn Bosnia, they do it mate. :D
 
#34 ·
Jezlad - When your vehicle has taken two Armanent Destroyed results, then yes, you will probably flee, or try to ram people. People who have noticed the huge lump of metal, people who are already in cover, and people who are heading there. The 40K battlefield is about as convoluted as a modern city combat scenario, and would you try ramming someone at full speed there? Hell, could you be successful without having your tank embedded in a wall afterwards? You'd have to be outright obvlivious not to notice the tank until it's too late to get to a place it doesn't want to go.

That and 40K tanks are slower, most likely since they're a hell of a lot heavier.


While a lot of people think that there should be close and distant range bonuses, the problem with a 2" one is that at that range, you're usually trying too hard not to get stabbed to kneel, aim and fire. That somewhat makes up for the closeness.
 
#39 ·
uberschveinen said:
That would just add unneccesary complexities to the game. Rolling for awareness, distractedness, hunger, skill, vision, and all that before you even fire your gun would make this game unplayable.
You kind of rebuked your own arguement.

These factors would ake the game more lengthy, possibly boring and dull, yet these are factors in reality.

I realize most things woud run the hell away from a tank, but say you are in some extremed, focused, stressful situation. You might not notice the tank until its a bit close when you hear the rumble and droning it mkes.
 
#41 ·
I don't like the "Open topped vehicles don't count as open topped anymore when crewed by Marines" rule.
 
#42 ·
Tahaal said:
How did he rebuke himself? That whole post was about how adding such things would make it to complicated.
Im aware of that.

But the way he did so showed points that are very relevant to the "I might/might not see the tank coming at me" arguement that support the opposing view of "I might not see the tank comming at me."
 
#43 ·
Tanks shock rules are crap, the fact u could possible avoid a tank knowing it was driving at you is besides the point. Maybe a mechanic in place that made it likely that a model would get away would therefore make more sense. However that doesn't mean tank shock rules are good as they stand.
 
#44 ·
What I'm trying to get across, seemingly spectacularly unsuccessfully, is that the current Tank Shock rules are the best combination of simplicity and realism I have yet to see, out of all its suggested modifications and outright replacements.

And Twisted, I agree. It seems somewhat... odd... that wearing enourmously protective armour somehow makes what you're riding in tougher than usual.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top