PDA

View Full Version : Why 4th edition?



efarrer
06-12-2007, 18:39
In the Other GW discussions a thread deviated from it's original course unto what peoples problems with the changes between 3rd and 4th edition.

I have a laundry list of problems with the edition change, and am starting to feel that 4th to 5th will be similar.

1. Not enough or the right changes.
Changes were made in a hphazard manner. The book seems rushed, and somehow less thought out then 3rd edition.

2. Some of the changes were unneeded
Why are special characters unshootable if there is an enemy unit that is closer?
Did transports really need to return to death trap status?
Characters can be specifically targeted by any model in the kill zone , but can't target minor characters back? Huh.
Majority save ws and other majority garbage. Too complicated to do it the old way? What are we, stupid.
Removal of Guessing. It takes skill, remove it.
Why not make it the psyker takes a wound on a 2+ or 3+ instead of making it leathal to fail for everyone other than marines and nids.
3. Typical Gw editing
nuff said.

reds8n
06-12-2007, 18:45
Removal of Guessing. It takes skill, remove it.


That's a ridiculous argument.

You don't think that maybe, even given the somewhat skewed nature of tech in the 40k universe they haven't figured out basic gunnery ranges and targetting.

Guess rang weapons didn't require skill they required knowledge of your opponents deployment zone size, the same for your own, and you watching how far people moved their figures.

big squig
06-12-2007, 19:00
1. Not enough or the right changes.
Changes were made in a hphazard manner. The book seems rushed, and somehow less thought out then 3rd edition.
Actually, I found the book easier to read and better laied out. especially the color sections.

2. Some of the changes were unneeded
Why are special characters unshootable if there is an enemy unit that is closer? I don't know...but it's not that big of a deal.

Did transports really need to return to death trap status? Death traps? don't blame GW if you can't use one of the most useful unit types in the game.

Characters can be specifically targeted by any model in the kill zone , but can't target minor characters back? Huh. I agree...needs fixing.

Majority save ws and other majority garbage. Too complicated to do it the old way? What are we, stupid. Has it ever been a problem? I hated having to split up everything based off of different stats. It added nothing ot the game, but it did slow it down. Majority rules are a convenience.

Removal of Guessing. It takes skill, remove it. Why should my army's ability to aim be based of BS, but when its a barrage weapon, it's then based off the player? Guess range makes no sense. GW was very clear that it supposed to be the models shooting, not the player. And guess range is not a tactic or a strategy. Why should my opponent's barrage weapons hit more often then mine because he perosnaly is a better estimator. It has nothing to do with his army.
[/QUOTE]

ChaosMaster
06-12-2007, 19:07
I have to agree with most of the comments made after the original post. 4th Edition 40K improved a lot of things and eliminated some things like guessing that had little to do with simulating how well the various fantasy armies fight in 40K. Hopefully, 5th edition next year will be even better and with less ambiguities and perceived loopholes.

See http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=116757 as that thread was posted just a few minutes before this one.

Ko Improbable
07-12-2007, 16:47
Removal of Guessing. It takes skill, remove it.

Scenario: I have a basilisk sitting back behind cover. I have a platoon of Guardsmen getting their rears handed to them by a small unit of Berserkers. There is a Chaos Rhino behind the melee which delivered the Berserkers. I am not allowed to shoot at those Berserkers because they're enguaged in HtH with my Guardsmen, despite the fact that those Berserkers are a major threat. So, I declare I'm firing the basilisk at the Rhino. But, this is 3rd Edition, so I get to guess the range. I happen to be good at it, and I deliberately guess wrong so that my shot will land on those Berserkers. I've just legally violated one rule by abusing another.

Now, granted, I personally think that it shouldn't be against the rules to fire into close combat. In the above situation, any Imperial Guard officer would have done so. :D However, those Berserkers would be hard pressed to be an effective unit if they weren't "safe" in close-combat. And the rules are the rules.

Bloodknight
07-12-2007, 17:29
2. Some of the changes were unneeded
Why are special characters unshootable if there is an enemy unit that is closer?

=> that is even a weakening of the 3rd edition rules. Characters there were not even shootable if a friendly unit was in 6" of them, even if they were the closest.


Did transports really need to return to death trap status?

=> nope. But the 3rd edition way made transports too good. In my eye they should have taken the middle road: no assaulting and pinning test, but no entangling (at least no entangling with glancing hits) and no forced disembarking. That rule is just stupid because it only applies to ground vehicles which can be penetrated.


Characters can be specifically targeted by any model in the kill zone , but can't target minor characters back? Huh.

=> that is because characters are good at killing stuff. If they cannot be targeted they are far too good. The minor characters kill less stuff portentially and suck horribly if they can be targeted. I saw a lot less unit chars back in the day unless they had Eldarlike initiative or 2+ saves. Power weapons were a tough choice because of their price and power fists not taken at all.

Majority save ws and other majority garbage. Too complicated to do it the old way? What are we, stupid.

=> I like it. It could have been fomulated clearer, I believe.

Removal of Guessing. It takes skill, remove it.

=> has nothing to do with skill at all. Every Guard player after a few games could guess to 1" accuracy and it only screwed up new players or people who changed armies. You just get used to it. I want to see the WFB player who cannot guess correctly with a stone thrower or cannon...

Why not make it the psyker takes a wound on a 2+ or 3+ instead of making it leathal to fail for everyone other than marines and nids.

=> Agreed. S6 hits are just unfair to Eldar and Inquisitors which get autokilled and are not cheap either.

Grazzy
07-12-2007, 17:43
Some 4th ed rules are odd, and there are many loopholes such as models with pistols not being able to fire them and charge if they have a bolter, but overall i think 4th ed solved more problems than it made. But anyway, GW stuff will never be perfect.