Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner

1 - 20 of 109 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,376 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
No edition has gotten anything perfect and people have their favorite editions. I think most players will agree that 5th edition is a pretty fun game. However, there are rules in this edition that don't make sense or are difficult to understand or really have no place in the game.

So what are the rules you hate the most. The ones you hope are changed in the next edition. These can be anything simple from you want cover saves to go back to being more than 4+ everywhere. To more important rules in the game.

For me I hate wound allocation and how it creates a thinking. It is my biggest issue with 5th edition.
I just want it to go back to you apply all wounds to one model until it is dead then move to the next one.

So what is your most hated rule?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,736 Posts
monsterous creatures needing 50% cover for a cover save as i play nids and chaos its not fair :p also that means i hjave alot of monsterous creatures
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,115 Posts
Kill points - (I play mech IG, but even if i didn't...killpoints)
 

·
WFB Moderator
Joined
·
8,248 Posts
I would have to say the FoC. I wish it was something more along the lines of a total of 9 units from elite, fast attack and heavy support, but anything over the first 3 from any 1 section counts double.
My tyranid army has loads of cool elite options, but nothing at all in the fast attack or heavy support that I care about. My necrons need to have pairs of units to make WBB work, so destroyers and wraiths are basically mutually exclusive (same with flayed ones and immortals... if I could afford the models). The option to have 6 slots of a single type at the cost of other 'support' type units would be cool.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
941 Posts
force orginization, definetly!:biggrin:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,736 Posts
foc is balancing imagine what it would do to the i.g with 9 hs
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,559 Posts
Kill points - (I play mech IG, but even if i didn't...killpoints)
Also Kill Points... because my best friend collects Imperial Guard and we had just coaxed him back into playing with the release of the new codex when GW took his army out back shot it in the head.

Second to that is True Line of Sight: if my models cannot change posture then what anyone can see is modelling not rules!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
257 Posts
Second to that is True Line of Sight: if my models cannot change posture then what anyone can see is modelling not rules!
I agree, whole heartedly. I placed Eldrad behind a big walled building away from the single window, but my opponent moved his tank so he could get an angle where he saw eldrad. It looks like I'm going to start modelling all of my units in the prone position for games where I go up against retarded power gamers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,934 Posts
I would have to say the FoC. I wish it was something more along the lines of a total of 9 units from elite, fast attack and heavy support, but anything over the first 3 from any 1 section counts double.
My tyranid army has loads of cool elite options, but nothing at all in the fast attack or heavy support that I care about. My necrons need to have pairs of units to make WBB work, so destroyers and wraiths are basically mutually exclusive (same with flayed ones and immortals... if I could afford the models). The option to have 6 slots of a single type at the cost of other 'support' type units would be cool.
force orginization, definetly!:biggrin:
It's hardly a 5th Edition rule though, it's been that way since 3rd Edition.

I'm not a big fan of the way 5th encourages over use of mech forces, it's like the game hasn't reached that happy balance where infantry, partial mech, and full mech can all be equally valid army choices.
 

·
WFB Moderator
Joined
·
8,248 Posts
foc is balancing imagine what it would do to the i.g with 9 hs
Thats why I suggested downsides to multiple choices from a single FoC type. So if facing a IG army with 6 HS but that couldnt take any elite or fast attack that would be fine- an IG army that sacrificed marbo, valks, vendettas, ogryns, ratlings, hellhounds and the rest to have a few more leman russ, basilisks and manticore would be a pretty bad army.


While Im not saying my 10s idea is perfect, it is certainly a different way of looking at force organisation... and many ways to balance forces. Having 1 FoC and forcing all the armies to the same structure is very confusing to me... if nothing else I dont understand why the FoC is the same for every army out there. Doing something like giving Eldar more fast attacks slots, Tau more heavy support and nids more elite would be fluffy and wouldnt unbalance the game... especially since those FoC changes would be included in the codex, so balancing would be done as part of the re-write (ok, we all know thats a fallacy).
... all said and done, I just dont like the current FoC rulles/structure- it could be worse, but it could be a hell of a lot better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,359 Posts
It's hardly a 5th Edition rule though, it's been that way since 3rd Edition.

I'm not a big fan of the way 5th encourages over use of mech forces, it's like the game hasn't reached that happy balance where infantry, partial mech, and full mech can all be equally valid army choices.
As much as I dislike KP and TLoS this is something I cannot agree more on.
Vehicles generally seem too unreliable, no matter who's using them or fighting them. 1 lucky shot and will get blown to scrap on the first turn, other times they are blessed with godlike survivability. I wish they were more like MCs. You pretty much know what you have to do to get rid of them and how much yours can take before they go down. The damage table makes the survivability of vehicles much more unpredictable, which I feel makes them a bit annoying. But that is just me I guess.
 

·
WFB Moderator
Joined
·
8,248 Posts
Yeah, that does annoy me about vehicles- I tended not to use land raiders just because that 1 lucky lascannon shot will hit you some games and blow you up first turn... before you even get in range of the melta... while in other games a simple rhino can survive everything the enemy army can fire at it.
Non-mech armies just dont work in 5th: anytime I take my nids out (I dont mean them) and face a non-mech army I know I'll steam roller it, but if there are tanks then its a hard fight. Same thing is true of my daemons... mech is hard to beat, infantry is easy. I guess there must be armies that are the other way round, finding mech armies easy and infantry hard but I havent played them yet (even my most A-T based lists have been able to cope with everything other then total hoard infantry, while not totally rolling mech lists).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
51 Posts
the 4+ cover everywhere does seem a little over generous, 5+ would seem more sensible.

also i agree with people about the mech thing, i think the baron had it right when he said all the builds should be viable, its just that transports are too cheap for what they do compaired to the few men you could get instead with the points.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
324 Posts
Kill points and TLOS are horrible enough, but the "no consolidating/sweeping advance into HtH" is just as bad. I really hate it when my wyches wipe out a squad a game then get massacred by 2 squads 2' away from the first one. It really sucks when you are penalized for being too good. It just seems stupid for you to be rooting for your opponent to make just one save on your turn (and then pass his LD test) so you can kill him on HIS turn and then assault into another unit. Hey, if you're gonna pack your army so tightly together, YOU should pay the price not me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
148 Posts
I agree with the "no HTH after conslidation" is a stupid rule. It's really stupid that i run units so i can hurt you enough not to kill you, just wound you enough so i can kill you next turn. It limits the strategic play of the game to "ill sacrifice this unit so i can destory yours next game" ...oh i didn't know we were playing checkers...not chess...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
460 Posts
Kill Points are the bane of my Guard army. I lost my last game (a three way 1000) against two SM armies, I reduced one army to 3 models, and the other to 10. However, I ended up in third place because I lost 5 squads to one opponent, and 3 to the other. It seems like the only way for a IG army to win an annihilation game is to completely wipe out all other armies.

As for the loss of consolidation, imagine if every unit in my guard army got to have another round of shooting every time it killed one of your units.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
230 Posts
I'm not a big fan of the way 5th encourages over use of mech forces, it's like the game hasn't reached that happy balance where infantry, partial mech, and full mech can all be equally valid army choices.
Except it has. Certain armies are more prone to mech hybrid or foot bulds than others but Hybrid/Foot/Mech built right are all very competitive lists but you can't just take any book and willy nilly try and make a foot list. Most of the older books for example can't do this due to inapporpriate point costing but do make excellent mech lists (only exception jumping to mind would be Hybrid Tau). Again harking back to my armies I've got 3 foot (Blood Rodeo/BA Jumper/Tyranids), 2 Mech (SM/Eldar), and 3 Hybrid (Fast'N'Slow/Thunderbubble/Tau) armies and the only one I'd say is consistently better than the rest is Tau. Looks like a fair balance to me.

For example, Vanilla SM is very mech oriented they still have non-mech armies & hybrids such as Thunderbubble, Fast'n'Slow variants & Pure Biker; IG/SW/BA are very hybrid oriented but SW & BA have some excellent foot builds like Loganwing, TWC, Blood Rodeo & Jumper variants.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,559 Posts
...something like giving Eldar more fast attacks slots, Tau more heavy support and nids more elite would be fluffy and wouldnt unbalance the game....
They have already tried this with 3rd Edition Chaos Space Marines, or the Space Marine codex variations, then gone back again.

I have not heard any horror stories about those armies eating the planet, so I am not sure if it was a balance issue or a ease of codex issue.
 
1 - 20 of 109 Posts
Top