PDA

View Full Version : What should they have done?



Mr_Rose
05-02-2008, 14:36
OK, so we've got all sorts of threads about the changes that have been made, so I want to know about the changes that haven't been made that you feel should have been.

To get the ball rolling, I'll start off with:
Heavy Infantry
Why haven't they done this yet? Just one simple rules entry that makes Heavy Infantry identical to regular Infantry, except they count as two models for the purposes of transport and outnumbering, plus they use 40mm bases.
This will beef up Terminators slightly (outnumbering bonus), and make it much easier to say that a transport can't take Meganobs or whatever.

Tangentially related, but wouldn't it also make sense for Bikes to count as two models fro outnumbering?

azoxystrobin
05-02-2008, 14:57
That's actually not a bad idea.
there are quite a few units that would fit into that category.

However, as for what I think should be done, is merely based on the leaked rulebook:

I'd like vehicles that can move and fire, faster (and with more guns) than infantry.

I'd also like to see vehicles with structure points. it's still too easy to blow them up, no wait, it's not that it's too easy, it's too random.
one fluke shot can do it, or you can spend the entire game shooting a vehicle and it will just not go down...

and I'm rather unsure of real LOS too, maybe it'll work, but I get the feeling that it'll be the return of wraithlords in foetal position, space marine torsos on bases (because they are wading in deep water, you see...)

Not very constructive reply, i know.

blackspring
05-02-2008, 14:58
No real changes have been made.

We're still in the rumor phase, remember?

chiaroscuros
05-02-2008, 15:01
Falling back units shouldn't carry an independent character off the board... I can think of all kinds of cool options to solve this.

Option A - The character can decide to walk away in the movement phase from any falling back unit (and now that independent characters can be targeted, this is not a no-brainer).

Option B - The character may wound one model in the squad in order to retake a leadership test without modifiers on himself, if successful, he may leave the squad as it continues to fall back.

Option C - Within 6" of falling back off a table edge, an independent character can make one last leadership test without modifers to leave the unit he is with (after the unit he is with fails their leadership test).

Lord Inquisitor
05-02-2008, 15:31
In the spirit of "what would I like to see in 5th edition"...

Vehicles
- Vehicles should be able to move-and-fire all weapons at 6", defensive only beyond 6".
- Defensive weapons can target a different enemy to the main weapons
- Vehicles should be able to fire ALL weapons if stationary, Ordinance and conventional! Actually make use of those Russ sponsons and defiler secondary weapons!

Ordinance and Blast weapons should scatter but involve BS in some way.

Combat should be as it is, but all models that are within 2" striking range get to fight as long as they were in combat at the start of the phase (no more removing models so low-I models can't fight).

A "perils of the warp" table with a whole host of mishaps that can befall psykers.

A proper "counts as" rule just like in Epic.

gojira316
05-02-2008, 19:45
In regards to the "crouching Wraithlords" comment above, Wraithlords are Monstrous Creatures and thus can always be shot at.

RSIxidor
05-02-2008, 20:36
In regards to the "crouching Wraithlords" comment above, Wraithlords are Monstrous Creatures and thus can always be shot at.

Not if terrain blocks Line of Sight they can't. You can't fire through a mountain (unless you've got a REALLY REALLY big gun).

Brimstone
05-02-2008, 21:13
I've deleted a couple of off-topic posts please stick to the thread topic otherwise your posts will be removed as spam.

Thank you

The Warseer Inquisition

A.S.modai
05-02-2008, 21:15
I would like to see sweeping advance go bye bye. It sucks and it can be ridiculous. I've seen one model rout a 10 model squad and Sweep them. You simply dont have enough attacks for a squad that would otherwise regroup if you weren't there. I agree the HTH's need to be decisive to keep the game going but IMHO it can be too extreme at times. Maybe If you win you run and if you lose you take 1 auto wound per enemy model (saves apply) but you're still locked.

RSIxidor
05-02-2008, 22:29
Maybe make the number of models removed equal to your Attacks, or somehow based on your Attack value.

Couch Fibers
06-02-2008, 00:30
Instead of how many wounds you take be based on Attacks, why not do it with Initiative in stead? Like, take the difference of the fighting unit's initiatives and that is how many wounds you take, minimum one of course. So let's say that some Guardsmen lose to some Genestealers, difference of three so each Genestealer inflicts 3 wounds. Or have it cumulative for the whole squad.

MarksmanCypher
06-02-2008, 02:39
What about something like each model in the winning unit inflicts an automatic hit on the enemy unit. Roll to wound and armour/invulnerable saves as normal.

This takes into account something like a unit of Banshees - if they sweeping advance a unit, they will still have their power weapons on.

Example: A unit of 10 Chaos marines (Champion with a Power weapon) defeat a unit of Firewarriors in combat. The firewarriors run away and the Chaos marines are successful in their sweeping advance - so 9 regular, 1 power weapon attacks automatically hit the Firewarriors. Rolls "to wound" are made and then the Firewarriors can save.

Monstrous creatures get D6 attacks instead or some other benefit.

This stops small, elite units taking out larger ones - for example, a 5-man tactical squad miraculously defeats a 20 ork boyz mob - instead of culling down the remaining ones, they can do a maximum of 5 casualties as they all grab one as they run away and make sure they put a bullet between the eyes.