PDA

View Full Version : The one thing GW will never "fix" in any ed...



Egge
02-06-2008, 09:30
Remove Fearless as it is now.

Right now there are way to many fearless units out there. In my opinion it's only in one circumstance that Ld value shouldn't be used - when you can't control your units. DC without a character and such sort.

The new ed gives fearless even more boost as LD 10 can be reduced rather heavy when something fights a hard tyrant or prince. Thus giving fearless units a even larger upper hand compared to LD-based units.

I would like to see fearless units getting a LD value of ten and always that regardless of modifiers, perhaps a maximum of -1 or -2 could also work, and if they succeed with the test - get wounds, if not, flee. This would represent the fact that they are capable of making a tactical sound decision; fall back from a suicidal combat or movement, regroup and counter-attack.

LD ten should be a great Ld value! It isn't. A great value right now is fearless which ignore LD-value totally. LD 10 is considered "not good enough". In my opinion the game would be more fun if LD-value always had a meaning for a unit.

Or am I alone with this opinion? :eyebrows:

Plebian
02-06-2008, 09:38
Well, fearless units will be taking lots of wounds if they lose combat, so I would say it is balanced. Too many u nits may have fearless, but according to the fluff, they have it for good reasons. What units were you targeting?

EarlGrey
02-06-2008, 11:00
Tyranids in synapse, Grey Knights, large Ork mobs, Deathwing and Ravenwing, Chaos cult units... err... what else is there other than various HQ and a few Elite units that are Fearless? :)

I think if anything, the new Ld modifiers make Fearless more unique.

dwnhmcntryboy
02-06-2008, 11:09
Getting rid of something a lot of armies have for fluff reasons doesn't make much sense because those armies are usually brainless or are so used to the horrors they see everyday that nothing else will phase them. Same reason getting rid of something only a few armies had, LIKE TRUE GRIT, doesn't make sense. God I love this game =)

esk34
02-06-2008, 11:57
I think GW are kind of reducing fearless in armies anyway.
If you look at most of the newer codex's you will find that there are fewer fearless units, or special conditions.
An example of this would be the new chaos codex, only true cult specific units are fearless now.
Some other armies have fearless with special conditions like...
Eldar are fearless within 12" of avtar.
Orks are only fearless at over 10 models.
Tyranid synapse.
However all of these can be beaten by simply killing certain models, or forcing the enemy to move out of range.

I think the amount of units that reive fearless now is not to bad, and with 5th edition it could work against you, as when you are hit in HTH you will want to lose sometimes as you will be able to conter attack more effeciently.

I would be more concerned about ATSNKF as it is a little bit of both, but all marines get it.

HiveFleetEzekial
02-06-2008, 12:15
Side note: Tyranids in Synapse are *not* "fearless"! Fearless would be a downgrade for them. (they actually get it better, and that put theirs on a whole other level)

Odin
02-06-2008, 12:58
There are definitely far too many fearless units around. Tyranids I can understand - they are expendable troops controlled by the Hive Mind. Grey Knights should surely be able to make a tactical withdrawal just like other marines -they're not stupid. Ditto with the Dark Angels special units - Fearless seems a bit odd.

I agree with the OP that it needs to have a very good fluff reason. Being very brave is not enough - even the bravest Grey Knight isn't going to throw his life away needlessly if there is a better way to defeat his opponent.

TheRockit
02-06-2008, 14:20
Side note: Tyranids in Synapse are *not* "fearless"! Fearless would be a downgrade for them. (they actually get it better, and that put theirs on a whole other level)

So since Tyranids in synapse are not fearless but auto-pass their leadership to avoid running if they lose combat... they would not be subject to the extra automatic wounds in CC as I understand it.

Anyone else have a different observation from the new rulebook?

x-esiv-4c
02-06-2008, 14:36
Lets bring back the "CL" stat :)

Meriwether
02-06-2008, 14:42
I think that psychology in general is tremendously underutilized in 40K. While I understand some of the rationale for grouping it all into one 'Leadership' stat, I think that having Discipline, Cool, and Leadership was a much more interesting system.

Edit: And yeah, I agree with the OP. **NOTHING** should be completely fearless in this game.

Meri

EarlGrey
02-06-2008, 14:55
I think the "No Retreat" rule makes for some epic scenes, final stands and such. A heroic fearless unit being dragged down by hordes of lesser creatures is a pretty cool image.
Such rules need to be interpreted less by their "tactical value" and more by what they do to create an interesting and vivid battle. :)

brassangel
02-06-2008, 15:05
I find that game goes much more smoothly without all of the psychology garbage that is in WFB. In that game, a complete CC monster can run into a squad, deal a zillion wounds, still lose combat from all of the ridiculous modifiers, and then run like a sissy and get wiped out. Half of the units can't charge others 50% of the time, and the rest will just flee in the sight of some units. It makes for a very long, low-action game most of the time, full of lots of back and forth tar-pitting or running away.

In 40k, it's a galaxy full of war, where genetically enhanced super-beings (SM) travel through warp-space and encounter demons almost daily, and mankind faces the threat of being wiped out at every turn. Many of these people are literally hundreds of years old and have seen everything. Everyone else is either mindlessly controlled by some greater force (Demons, Hive Mind, or C'Tan), or life is simply too short to worry about anything besides fighting for a cause (Tau, IG, Orks).

Squallish
02-06-2008, 15:55
I find that game goes much more smoothly without all of the psychology garbage that is in WFB. In that game, a complete CC monster can run into a squad, deal a zillion wounds, still lose combat from all of the ridiculous modifiers, and then run like a sissy and get wiped out. Half of the units can't charge others 50% of the time, and the rest will just flee in the sight of some units. It makes for a very long, low-action game most of the time, full of lots of back and forth tar-pitting or running away.

I agree.. in the bleak future, you're trained and battle-ready armies are not going to run at the first sign of trouble.. they're going to fight long and hard to ensure an orbital strike takes out the objective.. they're going to fight against all odds. Fearless is a very expensive modifier, but it has negative side effects (extra wounds in combat, sometimes you would rather run).

Psychology has its place in Fantasy.. but it's Leadership in 40k.. and I think it works much better.

Also to whomever was listing Fearless units, you forgot Eldar Wraith constructs and Phoenix Lords.

Dras
02-06-2008, 16:09
Random fact semi-related to fluff aspects of present discussion:

In Tokyo a scientest was recently able to create mice that do not have an inate fear of cats by shutting down some of parts of their brain that are involved in processing smells thatinvolved their natural fear fear of cats. The new mice would actually sniff and play with the cats.

I don't know about game mechanics, but from the fluff standpoint something like this strongly suggests that tampering with a creature's genetic code (such as a space marine's) could have a profound affect upon its experience of fear, likely only to grow more powerful as technology improves.

Partisan Rimmo
02-06-2008, 17:15
The problem is that GW give units Fearless based on whether it suits them according to the background. Now that's fine, but...

97% of units in 40K are hardcore elites, in background terms. Therefore, it's too easy to give lots of people Fearless.

I think GW have to start looking for reasons TO make units fearful. Does everyone really hate life that much?

Norsehawk
02-06-2008, 17:27
Some armies in 40k are by their very nature not subject to things like fear. The Tyranid Hive mind for example. It is a creature that is so huge, that has many bodies that show its will. Losing individual creatures would be like unplugging a single computer from an office's network that is connected to the internet. Now, when you start taking out the network nodes (synapse creatures) or cutting off the hard line into the building (the ship in orbit) that is when it starts to take notice. The other problem is that the tyranid organism is so big, that an individual creature is of as much significance as a mote of dust to a large city. Do you mourn for the dust when you clean your house? (since dust is mostly dead skin)

Other forces equally have no psychology that could be applied to them, humans who have been modified to be close to walking tanks, psychologically conditioned (or in berserker rages) just aren't going to worry about small details.

Egge
02-06-2008, 18:14
I believe that falling back isn't a "run for your lives"-move. It's a "we'll die here, let's fall back and counter-attack instead!"- move. It feels strange that a Space marine decide that he can tactically move, tactically choose the correct targets and tactically choose his close combat but not decide it's no point in dying in vain? A falling back is a tactical movement, it's a movement meant to try to disengage from the enemy in an hopeless (loosing situation).

It's the same from shooting. "Look! Half of my 500 year old buddies died from this fire-line. I know! Let's not move!"

A Marine is better than that. It should be: "Look! Half of my buddies died from this fire-lane. Let's fall back and flank 'em instead!"

That feels more like a veteran soldier's mind.

Hellebore
02-06-2008, 18:23
And yet some armies ARE fearless backgroundwise but aren't in the game. Necrons being the main example.

They are just as mindless and driven as the tyranids, but were not made fearless to balance the rest of the list out.

Which makes them look stupid on the table top.

Hellebore

Meriwether
02-06-2008, 18:25
My biggest problem with fearlessness in 40K has nothing to do with fluff *or* realism. Troop morale is a big part of most wargames, and should be a bigger part of 40K. Sometimes, your troops don't behave exactly the way you want them to. I think the game should reflect that.

Meri

dariusorleans
02-06-2008, 18:54
Morale Ruins games. End of story.

Meriwether
02-06-2008, 19:12
Morale Ruins games. End of story.

LOL. I think we disagree rather greatly on what constitutes a wargame.

Meri

IJW
02-06-2008, 20:06
LOL. I think we disagree rather greatly on what constitutes a wargame.
Yeah, me too...

This is a small example of how GW can never win with the fanbase - loads of players call out for years for morale to have a greater effect in the game like it did in 1st & 2nd, then, at the slightest hint of this happening, we get people complaining about there being any morale rules... :rolleyes:

x-esiv-4c
02-06-2008, 20:09
Morale Ruins games. End of story.

Because fearless conscripts makes a lot of sense :eyebrows:

neophryte
02-06-2008, 20:22
They have explosive collars on so the choice is maybe die or definitely die. ;-)

I do miss the old penal troopers.

The_Outsider
02-06-2008, 20:35
Yeah and adding a second entirely fearless army was the way to go?

GW are trying to make LD matter but instead end up punishing a lot of armies that cannot flat out ignore LD when it comes to fight or flight situations.

Daemons and nids flatout ignore ld all round which is ******** there within itself (tyranids should be hard to break but fearless? Game balance anyone?) and chaos can quite easily build a list that is entirely fearless with no effort.

Literally DE are about the only army that can't easily ignore LD/ get super high LD across amny units. At best they get a +1 but that requires a CC kill for it to come into effect.

The only LD boosting rule I actually endorse is the IG command LD bubble - it suits the list and fluff well. The rest (including rites of battle) could've been done so much better.

Azzy
02-06-2008, 20:41
Does everyone really hate life that much?

In the Grim Darkness of the Far Future?

Yes, yes they do. :D

sushicaddy
02-06-2008, 23:41
They have explosive collars on so the choice is maybe die or definitely die. ;-)

I do miss the old penal troopers.

Fearless sucks in 5th ed

Seriously.

I used to bitch and moan about everyone being fearless, and my sniper rifles not doing a damn thing to 1/5 the models out there (I use hyperbole here, don't call me out).

Then I saw an 30 model Ork mob FOLD to Striking scorpion charge+doom, due to the new fearless rules. The ork mob lost the combat by 13, made one armor save, and got knocked down to a nob and a boy in one turn. the next turn, the nob and boy were no more, and the Striking Scorpions charged into another mob, winning that one by ten, and the mob failed all armor saves for fearless. then next round was mopping up.

one striking scorpion squad killed 60 models losing only 6 in three turns. thats a ten to one model ratio, or around a 4:1 points ratio.

that is the new fearless. you don't make tests, but don't you dare lose combat if you have a low save.

fearless is only good for models a high armor save. it's pretty good for CSM, and wraithguard, but for orks and demons it means that you are losing twice as many guys if you lose the combat. ouch.

I'd much rather be stubborn.

Dictator
03-06-2008, 00:02
sushi candy, could you elaborate more on the new fearless? what you said interests me, since I often am now facing mindlessly large ork hordes with fearless in their profiles!!
Typically 30 ork mobs

ehlijen
03-06-2008, 00:15
Sounds lilke the fearless rules will become like the warhammer undead crumbling rules...

If I understand sushicandy's post fearless loosing combat means roll a save for every point you lost by...

However, that doesn't mesh with the rumours I've heard about fearless. I thought it was still going to be based on outnumbering but happen regardless of who won? Meh, what do I know.

Azzy
03-06-2008, 00:23
sushi candy, could you elaborate more on the new fearless? what you said interests me, since I often am now facing mindlessly large ork hordes with fearless in their profiles!!
Typically 30 ork mobs

No sushi here (or first-hand knowledge), but from what others who have seen the book have been saying:

No Retreat (like close combat Leadership Tests) is no longer affected by outnumbering. Instead it is now affected by how many wounds you lost combat by. So, if you inflicted 5 wounds and your opponent inflicted 7 wounds, you'd take 2 additional wounds.

Thus large, Fearless units (like boyz mobz) that lose close combat will now have to take additional wounds even if they are outnumbering the enemy.

Sucks for us.

azimaith
03-06-2008, 00:29
I've had a look at 5th ed rules but I didn't look at those ones in particular, but i'll be looking on Wednesday when I have a 5th ed game coming up (with a 5th ed rule book)

I'll have to look that up. At the moment alot of the rules make current armies complete jokes. Case in point, when you lose combat you suffer as many negative modifiers to your leadership as you lost by wounds. Thus necrons squads are going to evaporate if they're charged by something like a daemon prince or hive tyrant while units like space marines still benefit from And they shall know no fear.

sushicaddy
03-06-2008, 01:38
sushi candy, could you elaborate more on the new fearless? what you said interests me, since I often am now facing mindlessly large ork hordes with fearless in their profiles!!
Typically 30 ork mobs

fearless units take a wound (armor save allowed) for every point they lost the combat by.

So a unit of berzerkers (10) shoot first for 6 hits, 3 wounds, and one save for 2 wounds. then hitting on 3+ wounding on 3+(first turn) orks saving on 6+ would result in an average of 26 hits 17 wounds, and 3 saves for 14 wounds.

13 orks + nob with powerfist strike back, hitting on 4+ wounding on 5+ saving on 3+. 6 hits, 2 wounds, 1 unsaved wound (should be no unsaved wounds as I am rounding down, but i I will give them one wound for lucks sake). 3 klaw swings 1 claw hit. 1 claw unsaved wound.

berzerkers win the combat by 12. orks make 12 armor saves, leaving 10 unsaved wounds.

orks are left with 2 boyz and a nob, which are killed on I4 during the ork turn.

or if you take the scorpion example.


10 scorpions fire 10 shots into doomed orks.
6 hits, 4 wounds.

36 scorpion attacks hitting on 4+, 5 exarch (chain sabres re roll to hit and t wound)

18 regular hits, 13 wounds, orks save two for 11 wounds
5 exacrh hits, 4 exarch wounds, orks save one for 3 wounds.

orks take 14 wounds (18 dead)

11 orks swing back 33 attacks, 16 hits, 8 wounds, 2 unsaved wounds.

claw swings 3 attacks, 1 wound.

scorpions win by 11, orks save, make 2 saves, take 9 wounds.

total ork dead- 27, 2 boys and a nob left.

next turn.

6 scorpions make 16 attacks, hitting 8 wounding 6, orks save 1.
exarch makes 4 attack, hitting all 4, wounding on 3, orks save 0

massacre, d6 move.

the scorpions are even better if you fortune them. then they should be losing 1-2 a turn rather than 2-4


'ard boyz will be much harder to kill, but they also cost much more than regular orks, so it makes for less ork bricks.

oh, and it's Caddy. like the car. or the guy who carries your golf clubs.

Ravenous
03-06-2008, 01:47
Wow if you hate fearless then you're going to hate the new marines with stubborn.

Draconian77
03-06-2008, 05:49
Armies in 4th that Ld actually effects: DE/Tau/Guard?

So 1 army that is so rare most players don't know what they are and 2 gunlines, super.

Seriously, I really agree that the majority of units should not be Fearless and not the other way round. The only armies I would make completely fearless from a fluff point of view would surely be Tyranids and Necrons?

Ravenous
03-06-2008, 05:53
Just wait, in 5th when you roll on a 5 (or a wrecked result) on a transport the unit inside gets out unharmed with only a pin check to make.... a check fearless units ignore.

Its only when you get a vehicle explodes result that the unit will take damage. Rhino rush is back in fashion. Shooting will almost be pointless in 40 as it is in fantasy.

sushicaddy
03-06-2008, 06:47
Just wait, in 5th when you roll on a 5 (or a wrecked result) on a transport the unit inside gets out unharmed with only a pin check to make.... a check fearless units ignore.

Its only when you get a vehicle explodes result that the unit will take damage. Rhino rush is back in fashion. Shooting will almost be pointless in 40 as it is in fantasy.

except you can't consolidate into my line. so ok, great, you get out when I destroy your vehicle, and you kill my squad of five scouts(assuming you are within 12"). then everything turns it's guns on you and your tricked out rush unit dies horribly.

just because battle taxis are now worth something does not mean that people will be moving transports 18", exit 2" move 6" charge 6" first turn. well, other than DE, but that is what they do, so I can't begrudge them.

but if DE players leave their wyches unsupported, I will gun them down.

and if your entire strategy lies with me not rolling a 6 (or a 5+ with AP 1 weapons) you are in for a lot of disappointment when you play the game.

seriously, calm down and play a few games. I like 5th a lot more than I did 4th. even when I lost the games.

Wrath
04-06-2008, 05:25
seriously, calm down and play a few games. I like 5th a lot more than I did 4th. even when I lost the games.

Oh yeah?! well I will take that challenge buddy!!


hey sushi..... let me borrow your book for a sec. I promise not to steal it like last time..... :p :angel: