PDA

View Full Version : GW Improvements...



Mad Doc Grotsnik
11-06-2007, 11:34
This is a slightly odd one folks, but please bare with me for a bit here.

In the present day, a great many people complain and bitch about their army, and how its not what it should be etc...

This thread is my attempt to see what people really wants. Essentially, the idea is your state which army you collect, and which flavour of (Chaos, Noise Marines, for example) and then tell us your ONE, (and only ONE) main bugbear with your list, and your suggestion as to how GW could improve. It could be rules, it could be models, as long as you choose your one main issue.

Well, carry on!

arkle
11-06-2007, 11:46
For Orks. If GW simply reduced the points cost across the range the army would become more viable as armies would be able to contain a better ratio of troops to vehicles.

For Tyranids. Greater options for fast synapse apart from the winger hive tyrant, and to make combat fex more viable.

ctsteel
11-06-2007, 11:50
Daemonhunters - Improve the Grey Knight Brother Captain HQ choice to be similar in abilities to other list HQ choices (only having 1 wound being the biggest issue)

Sakura
11-06-2007, 12:01
Grey knights need a lot of things, some anti tank that... points cost... erm... that maybe several bugbears by the time im finished.

Grey knights: A way to field an elite force without it consisting of next to no models and no any tank.
The ability to do everything would be nice.
All come with melta bombs would be a quick fix.
I wont go further into this.

For darkangels:
A new codex, newer than this recent trash.

For Space marines:
3 shot rending assault cannons or 4 shot no rending.

For Eldar:
+1 attack for wraith sword and 2 of the same weapon does not = twinlinked.
Cheaper phoenix lords.... thats 3.... pick one.

For Chaos:
No to be turned into Space marines with horns chapter....
clean up the current codex, not rewrite it how it appears to be.

For orks.
New stat line of a space marine with lower leadership, BS and poor armour save.
and obviously not 15 points each.

For Tyranids.
better biovore, combat fex and zoanthrope with bs4.

For Guard:
Forgeworld tank options.

Cherubael
11-06-2007, 12:03
Witchhunters - dont really have any problems with the current codex really, but more Sister models wouldnt hurt, my army is starting to look like a bunch of clones.

Dark Eldar - rules are ok once you get the hang of them, but for the love of Sigmar, give us some fluff!

Stella Cadente
11-06-2007, 12:45
Dark angels: excellent codex, brilliant new line of models..........except, I think Azrael deserved a re-sculpt, now hes a hobbit

fracas
11-06-2007, 12:53
1. SoB: more models. perhaps a new line of models for celestians

2. Tau: remove the mandatory commander to allow for an Ethereal, Kroot or even Vespid led force.

Mr_Smiley
11-06-2007, 12:55
Necrons: Pariahs, give them Feel No Pain, make them squad leaders and teleportable as part of those squads.

Bloodknight
11-06-2007, 13:53
IG: cheaper basic infantry. 5 pts instead of 6.

chaos: nothing. I am waiting for the new codex.

Dark Eldar: making the redundant stuff (mandrakes, hellions, scourges) worthwhile.

Grand Master Raziel
11-06-2007, 14:07
Space Marines
1: Give Scout bikes some sort of weapon upgrade option, flamers if nothing else.
2: Clean up the Trait system, particularly the disadvantages (get rid of We Stand Alone, make Eye To Eye a bit more disadvantageous).
3: DON'T REMOVE THE ARMORY! :mad:


Orks
I had an idea for Orks that would let GW get rid of the Heavy CCW rule without significantly effecting the performance of Orks. WS3 S4 Orks without Choppas have almost exactly the same performance as do WS4 S3 Orks with Choppas. Their performance against GEQs is exactly the same, and against MEQs they dish out the same amount of damage while absorbing slightly more return casualties. Of course, that doesn't take into account the fact that burnas would be much more effective in close combat wielded by a S4 Ork.

god octo
11-06-2007, 14:10
Witchhunters - dont really have any problems with the current codex really, but more Sister models wouldnt hurt, my army is starting to look like a bunch of clones.



1. SoB: more models. perhaps a new line of models for celestians

I have to agree. Having only 1 set of models to make up your entire army is a bit boring.

Also, please make Repentia/arco-flagellents/penitent engines usable.Now, they are almost entirely unusable, and the models are simply fantastic.

superknijn
11-06-2007, 14:15
1. Imperial Guard, Cadian, overpriced compared to other armies, especcialy powerfists.

2. Tau; standard Tau sept, not much except for useless Vespids.

Note that I'm nt really complaining, just stating what should be improved in my opinion.

gitburna
11-06-2007, 14:23
Race: Humans
Faction:40k players
Suggested fix: Decrease general bad outlook on things.

DragonPup
11-06-2007, 14:32
I have to agree. Having only 1 set of models to make up your entire army is a bit boring.

Also, please make Repentia/arco-flagellents/penitent engines usable.Now, they are almost entirely unusable, and the models are simply fantastic.

Agreed. Also, drop the Priest requirements for Pentiants and Arcos. Priests tend to go against the Sister's grain of close ranged shooting as it stands now.

MALICIOUS LOGIC
11-06-2007, 14:38
Necrons!

They need two big changes:
- Simplify the Living Metal rule. (Ex: -1 to damage tables, or re-roll on damage tables, etc.)
- Make Pariahs true "Necrons" for WBB and teleporting. (decrease stats or increase points if nessecary).

polomarko888
11-06-2007, 14:38
eldar: autarch to be a more potent combat unit (he's a eldar whos been trained in every aspect of warfare for hundreds of years) should have a slgiht edge on any astartes commander

cleansingfury
11-06-2007, 14:44
Space marines: More cow bell... Seriously though only 2 terminator choice, the command squad, and the regular fist and bolter squad with the ability to mix in CC Terminators.

MysteryGilgamesh
11-06-2007, 14:44
Tau-BS. Why the wing dang doodle the supposed premiere shooty army in Warhammer 40,000 is as bad a shot as IG while ALSO managing to be the worst CC army seems a bit OOP. Sure, ML's help, until you realize you need to shell out stupidly huge pts for droids or units that must remain static and STILL need to hit with those ML, plus the unit using it usually can't benefit from it anyway.

Marines-Landspeeders Deep Strike is suicide. Either fix it, or remove it!

the1stpip
11-06-2007, 15:13
Chaos (Slaanesh) - No real gripes, but some plastic Noise Marines would be nice.

Dark Eldar - As stated above, more choices (both new choices and make useless stuff worthwhile).

Space Marines - No real problems either.

Imperial Guard - Some new plastics again (Valhallans or Tallarns)

Some races do require work, but some seem perfectly fine.

Bunnahabhain
11-06-2007, 15:24
Imp Guard. Splitting off heavy weapons team, or off board artillery.

Captain Stuart
11-06-2007, 15:30
Tau - Pathfinder transport also has scout ability.

Brother Loki
11-06-2007, 15:31
Cadian Imperial Guard: Add light vehicles e.g. humvee/land rover.

Tau: Add more auxiliary species. (Edit - give the Pathinder fish scout USR - thanks Capt Stuart_

Black Templars: No particular changes.

Hlokk
11-06-2007, 15:57
Imperial Guard: why no doctrine for shotguns?

Tau: Fast attack battlesuit should be added so that heavy, HQ, FA and Elites can be filled with battlesuits.

Marines: Not a gripe, but I don't like the direction their taking with redux according to the rumours.

Eldar: Need a plastic Autarch releasing.

Orks: Just need doing, simple as really...

logosloki
11-06-2007, 16:17
Orks:give new codex, even if it is just like the BA WD release

Dark Eldar: some new models, rules and fluff would be great

Sisters of battle: I agree, more range of moulds so army isn't attack of the clones

Marines: more penalising disadvantages, either 3shot rend or 4shot no rend asscannon, make the asscannon on a dread the upgrade not the standard (maybe go back to starting with a dread with no arms and paying to put arms on)

Chaos:not spikey marines. don't lose Word bearers

necrons: make the minimum troop squad smaller so there can be a variety.
change living metal or at least clarify it.

imperial guard: actually I agree with the make cheaper inantry

GamesWorkshop: lower prices, find better proofreaders and/or english speaking codex writers. MOAR Fluff

colmarekblack
11-06-2007, 17:12
GW- Find nicer staff, Make more background fluff
Imp Guard- Access to Forgeworld Tanks and off-board artillery (like WH/DH torpedo strikes)
Spacemarines- Lose rending on assault cannon
Slaanesh- Remove 'Siren' psychic power or nerf it
Necrons- Simplify living metal rule
Blood Angels- Remove rending from DC
Dark Eldar- New warrior models, plastic incubi and lord boxed set, make less used models better.

Reaver83
11-06-2007, 17:16
chaos - bring on the new codex

Ravenous
11-06-2007, 17:17
Eldar:
Buying Phoenix lords at their huge and over priced point cost should let them have a retinue and/or make their aspect as a troops choice, representing the huge entourage that accompanies them.

Egaeus
11-06-2007, 17:24
This is a slightly odd one folks, but please bare with me for a bit here.

In the present day, a great many people complain and bitch about their army, and how its not what it should be etc...

This thread is my attempt to see what people really wants. Essentially, the idea is your state which army you collect, and which flavour of (Chaos, Noise Marines, for example) and then tell us your ONE, (and only ONE) main bugbear with your list, and your suggestion as to how GW could improve. It could be rules, it could be models, as long as you choose your one main issue.

Well, carry on!

Tyranids: PLASTIC GARGOYLES!
Ruleswise, there was a thread a while back on the Game Development board that was an attempt to fix the 'Nids.

As for a more general "how GW could improve" my main complaint is that they don't have a strong system of terminology that they use consistently.

Raze
11-06-2007, 17:43
Dark eldar - DO NOT DO A COMPLETE REVAMP! :mad: , Just change the few things that are useless (mandrakes, scourges, etc.) Dont change a thing otherwise! There awsome leave them alone!

Imperial guard - It would be cool if they just put all the weapon options on the sprue, not just flamer/nades. Do something like they did with the marines.

shakespear
11-06-2007, 20:15
How about just improve the game itself?

Tablesize needs to be increased. Say 6X8? This alone would be a radical change. Army lists, codexes, you name it, would all change for the better. No more game is decieded by who gets first turn.

How about standardizing the terrain? How big pieces can be and how many can be on the table. As well as what kind of save they give. Once again, radical change.

Just take away the whole "you and your opponet need to agree.."

Also run a FAQ system the way Privateer press does!

Vet.Sister
12-06-2007, 01:26
Space Marines - a firm but gentle roll-back. Let other armies be more competitive by reigning in the Space ****** a bit.

Orks - gimme the crazy guns!!! or at least some updated rules.....

Tyranids - Oh please, please make an all flying force!

Battle Sisters - As fun as Arco-flaggelants, Penitent Engines and Assassins are..... I'd like to field an army of nothing but Sisters, with a unit or two of combat sisters that can totally get the job done in close combat!:angel:

Lord Inquisitor
12-06-2007, 01:41
How about just improve the game itself?
Tablesize needs to be increased. Say 6X8? This alone would be a radical change. How about standardizing the terrain? How big pieces can be and how many can be on the table. As well as what kind of save they give. Once again, radical change. Just take away the whole "you and your opponet need to agree.."
What? As it happens I have an 8x4 board, but I used to have a 6x4 board. Daft idea, and one that would just **** enormous amounts of people off for dubious benefit. I don't find games on an 8x4 much better than on a 6x4, indeed large areas of the board get ignored. And as for standardising terrain, why not just say that only official terrain bought from Games Workshop can be used! Any attempt to standardise terrain will just curb imagination. The "agreeing with your opponent" thing is there to keep it fair. If you can't agree with your opponent whether a wall is a 4+ or a 5+ save...?


Also run a FAQ system the way Privateer press does!
A decent FAQ system would be good.


Space Marines - a firm but gentle roll-back. Let other armies be more competitive by reigning in the Space ****** a bit.
You mean nerf Space Marines? Bah. Every army should be balanced and I see no indication that Marines are overpowered.


Battle Sisters - As fun as Arco-flaggelants, Penitent Engines and Assassins are..... I'd like to field an army of nothing but Sisters, with a unit or two of combat sisters that can totally get the job done in close combat!:angel:
Uh. Is anyone holding a gun to your head and forcing you to take assassins? I've seen plenty of all-sisters armies. Including ones with seraphim - not close combat enough for you? Leave those of us in the Ordo Hereticus with our toys.


As for myself, apart from hurrying up with an Alienhunters or combined Inquisition codex...

Drop the "heavy close combat weapon"/choppa rule. Nonsensical rule.

Allow armour saves and cover/invulnerable saves. Cover should benefit all troops against all weapons.

A neutral shade of black.
12-06-2007, 01:42
Tau - Pathfinder transport also has scout ability.

I see you your comment and raise you one better: the Devilfish is no longer a mandatory upgrade and Pathfinders can opt to lose Scout and gain Infiltration for one or two points per model. That way, we can actually use our markerlights, which GW seems to think was their biggest achievement for C:TE.

That and Stingwings that are actually useful 90% of the time rather than 10% of the time against their target.

RampagingRavener
12-06-2007, 02:03
Dark eldar - DO NOT DO A COMPLETE REVAMP! :mad: , Just change the few things that are useless (mandrakes, scourges, etc.) Dont change a thing otherwise! There awsome leave them alone!

I am agreeing with this.

Hell, I don't care if we get no new rules or models when the new codex comes around, just so long as they don't get warped into Chaos Eldar.

Lone Monkey
12-06-2007, 02:04
Eldar:
Buying Phoenix lords at their huge and over priced point cost should let them have a retinue and/or make their aspect as a troops choice, representing the huge entourage that accompanies them.


Amen to that brother! This was one of the most disappointing things for me in the new Eldar 'dex. Plus it would let people like my brother who played Beil-Tan in 3rd Ed. actually use the ridiculous amount of aspects he has that just lay around now.

Back on the thread:

Dark Eldar: Let us have Harlequins!!! Also as said before, some tweaking to the less worthwhile units and some current edition streamlining.

Ravenous
12-06-2007, 02:12
Ya it was a big dissappointment for me as well.

I got more displeased when Dark angels came out and they got to make thier Deathwing and ravenwing armies because of their commanders.

Its lame.

Some may say "oh an army of fire dragons is cheesy!" not really considering how easy they die to shooting and CC.

As for the related topics.

Necrons: Fix living metal. It was easy to understand at first, then the made it worse with the reprint, then worse with the FAQ. It is the most annoying rule in 40k right now. Some players understand how it was intended and say only things that add on to the pen after it hits the armour dont work and then there are others that think it ignores everything that they deem a "bonus" (haywires, AP1 etc).

Master Bait
12-06-2007, 02:20
Race: Humans
Faction:40k players
Suggested fix: Decrease general bad outlook on things.
ahahahahaha this DEFIANTELY deserves to be sigg'ed :D

Dark Angel Space Marines: um, i'm not too fussed with this one - new azrael model sounds like a nice idea

Tyranids: someone mentioned making CC carnifexes more viable - remember when they were "screamer-killers"? maybe some sort of biomorph, where they can force a unit they're bearing down on to take a pinning test or something to that effect?

though the current models don't exactly look like their shrieking like the old ones did

chiffmonkey
12-06-2007, 02:29
gw and forge world necrons. not exactly a lot of choice eh? forgeworld makes the pylon, whereas allother races get fw stuff coming out their ears. immortals and parriahs in boxed sets, after all any one gw seems to have 1 or 2 parriahs blisters. why dont they see we want to buy a squad, not one parriah, i mean what can you do with one?? eat it?...

Magistrate
12-06-2007, 02:46
1.) The bitchability of 40k needs to be fixed.
2.) Improve bitching, there's clearly not enough of it
3.) Did I mention more bitching? I could've sworn I did..


Oh and PS. please nerf non-Marines KTHX!

*When have Carnifexes not been lumbering? As far as i'm aware their purpose is synenergy with the weedy bugs, who hold down enemy lines in melee while the Carnifex moves in for the kill. :eyebrows:

Sasquatch_Man
12-06-2007, 03:39
Tau) Pathfinders gain infiltrate rule but lose scout rule and compulsory devilfish.

Templar Ben
12-06-2007, 03:39
Black Templar: Give them lower cost Crusaders that hold 16 models (20 would be better but I am a realist).
Imperial Guard: Urban Fighter doctrine (just like jungle fighters but is for urban/city terrain)

Codsticker
12-06-2007, 03:56
Imperial Guard: the main problem I see with Guard armies is that you have a multitude of different options in the doctrine system but only a couple are worth their points (and a few under-costed) thus reducing their effectivness on the tabletop. Shame too, because we could see a wide variety of Guard armies out there, each with different ways of being competitive.

Master Bait
12-06-2007, 04:04
Black Templar: Give them lower cost Crusaders that hold 16 models (20 would be better but I am a realist).

:eyebrows:
but

they

already

hold

16 models?

downundercadet07
12-06-2007, 04:16
Dark Eldar: New models. Please.

Eldar: More plastic aspect warriors. Especially for the dynamic ones like scorps and banshees. Metal is fine for stationary characters like Rangers and Reapers, though

Tau: make markerlights a BS4 vehicle weapon option on devilfish

Kroot Mercenaries: Give them some legitimacy, a new WD codex would be nice.

Guard: Have a doctrine that gives all non-mechanized troop choices the without number special rule but restricts the units taking it to either a special or heavy weapon, and impose a leadership penalty as well. No points cost.

Lord Malek The Red Knight
12-06-2007, 04:30
IG: Ogryn need an overhaul, both in terms of rules, effectiveness for cost and model range

SM: get the DA treatment with regards to Combat Squads, free Bolt Pistol, Frag & Kraks.

Necrons:
a) Fix the Tombspyder (im taking this as a free request as its rules in the codex are fine, its just 4th ed screwed it over)
b) make Flayed Ones a more viable CC unit (make them Troops for a start and... i dunno...give them Rending, i guess :angel:)

~Tim

Templar Ben
12-06-2007, 04:32
:eyebrows:
but

they

already

hold

16 models?

No DA and BA crusaders hold 16. Space Marine and BT crusaders hold 15. SM and BT crusaders also cost 15 points more. Look at SM Codex page 40 and BT Codex page 42 and compare to DA Codex page 86.

If you must be so incredulous, try looking it up before typing such a response.

Master Bait
12-06-2007, 04:52
ease up el' stiffo, not everyone wants to spend the money on every single codex out there.

Rioghan Murchadha
12-06-2007, 04:52
gw and forge world necrons. not exactly a lot of choice eh? forgeworld makes the pylon, whereas allother races get fw stuff coming out their ears. immortals and parriahs in boxed sets, after all any one gw seems to have 1 or 2 parriahs blisters. why dont they see we want to buy a squad, not one parriah, i mean what can you do with one?? eat it?...

The reason you'll never see pariahs or immortals in a boxed set is because boxed metals (generally 10 models) retail for 50 - 60 dollars (all prices in Canadian funds), where a 10 man squad of immortals currently retails for 130 dollars (1 to a blister, at 13 bucks a pop). Same boat with pariahs. BTW, not sure if you're buying from a GW or an indy retailer, but most GWs carry at least 2, sometimes more blisters of overstock on any item. Ask them to check their storage.

Oh, and yes, you can eat it. They aren't made of lead anymore. Although you may want to file down the sharp bits first.

For myself,
Necrons: Plastic warriors that look exactly the same, but where the GUN alone doesn't consist of as many pieces as most other entire plastic models. Rewrite the flayed-one fluff before doing anything.. How the HELL does ANYONE fall for that? "Oh look, a rather large, malevolent looking clawed robotic monstrosity draped in bloody flesh... Mom, is that you?"

Thousand Sons: Make them an army that people play for more than just aesthetics, or when they feel a great desire to lose.

loveless
12-06-2007, 05:05
Rewrite the flayed-one fluff before doing anything.. How the HELL does ANYONE fall for that? "Oh look, a rather large, malevolent looking clawed robotic monstrosity draped in bloody flesh... Mom, is that you?"


Uhm...does it say that they're trying to blend in? I was pretty sure it was just to freak out the enemy. In fact, I know the Codex says that they adorn themselves with the skins of their enemies and leave the skinned bodies laying around to sow fear and confusion amongst the enemy


Thousand Sons: Make them an army that people play for more than just aesthetics, or when they feel a great desire to lose.

Just wait for the next Codex in September...AP 3 Bolters and a 4+ Invulnerable Save for Thousand Sons - fun times.

Maleficum
12-06-2007, 08:35
Space Marines: My friend told me to write that his wish for marines is that 'shotguns' will be a viable choice for Scouts.


Chaos: more (unaligned) deamons (if the rumours are true we might get to use other models for variety)

Tyranids: plastic gargoyles? more TROOP slots on the FOC? :)


IG: (though I don't play them, ... yet) Cheaper Chimeras

tuebor
12-06-2007, 09:03
Tau-BS. Why the wing dang doodle the supposed premiere shooty army in Warhammer 40,000 is as bad a shot as IG while ALSO managing to be the worst CC army seems a bit OOP.

Fluff reason:

Tau are well trained soldiers, just like the IG, but that's all they are. BS4 are for those who train every hour of the day (such as SoB and Stormtroopers)and/or are superhuman in some way.

A Conscript, who would have gone through a very basic military training and a few times at the rifle range is BS2. A well trained rifleman is BS3. A highly trained and elite marksman would be BS4. Someone who had never fired a weapon before would likely be BS1.

Real reason:

BS4 Fire Warriors would be far too killy for their points, and more costly Fire Warriors would be far too easily killed for their points.

Anyway, what I'd like:

IG

Cheaper Chimeras
Cheaper Sentinels
5 point Guardsmen
T5 W2 Ogryns
Fleet on Sentinels
Hellgun stats at 24" S3 Assault 2 or similar
Cheaper Advisors
Purchasable powers for Psyker
Cheaper Techpriest

Witchhunters

S4 shotguns for my poor, poor Arbites

Stormsender
12-06-2007, 09:04
All marines stronger should be toughness 5, strength 5, all bolter weapons should be ap3, at a points cost of 22points each, 27 points for Assault Marines.
Landraiders should have 2 structure points, and a Venerable drednaught type of reroll.
Just my thoughts not like thats ever going to matter.

Surgency
12-06-2007, 09:31
release an Alienhunters codex, and do NOT combine the inquisitional armies into one codex!!!!

The Keeper of Secrets
12-06-2007, 09:48
Tyranids - Oh please, please make an all flying force!



Flyrant, flying rippers, loads of gargoyles....

...even zoanthroapes?

Bunnahabhain
12-06-2007, 12:53
All marines stronger should be toughness 5, strength 5, all bolter weapons should be ap3, at a points cost of 22points each, 27 points for Assault Marines.
Landraiders should have 2 structure points, and a Venerable drednaught type of reroll.
Just my thoughts not like thats ever going to matter.


You want movie marines as standard?! I suppose the AP3 heavy bolters would make up for it. No longer would we have to watch the marines wade through heavy machine gun fire, with it pinging off their armour like a summer shower. Would really make races without heavy bolters cry though.

Surgency
12-06-2007, 12:59
yeah, thats not so much a good idea, as only 4 armies or army sets(chaos, marines, inquisition, IG) get heavy bolters

god octo
12-06-2007, 13:01
release an Alienhunters codex, and do NOT combine the inquisitional armies into one codex!!!!

I'm really worried that a combined Inquisition Codex would ruin all 3 armies and make them even less popular. Plus, the fluff would probably be destroyed, or cut down to "Sisters of Battle are women. Grey knights are like space marines. Alien hunters fight aliens."

Oh, and S4 shotguns would make them actually usable.

Corax
12-06-2007, 13:02
Bugbears, eh? You usually find those in Fantasy settings! I don't think any of my armies contain bugbears. Or Owlbears. Or any other sort of bears for that matter! Me'thinks Mad Doc Grotsnik is confusled.

Anyway, things I would like to see modified.

General: Vehicles are sitting ducks most of the time in 4th Ed. Some sort of adjustment to the vehicle damage tables would probably fix it. As it stands, the proliferation of Lance, Rending, Melta, Gauss, whatever, weapons makes them terribly vulnerable.

SM: Fix the Dreadnought so that it is the big stompy engine of destruction that it is supposed to be. At the moment, due to the vehicle rules
it gets shot to pieces far too often.

IG: Bring back some of the old regiment models. Or even better, sculpt some new ones. The oft mooted, but never sighted Greatcoat gaurd would be nice, as would those Praetorian nitwits in the Pith Helmets! Basically, I would like to see a little more variety in the regiments available.

WH: New sculpts for Celestians, and Sisters generally. How 'bout some plastics? Surely the robes can't be the reason anymore. The BT and DA plastics have robes, so there's no technical reason for not doing it.

Orks: Either reduce their point cost or do something to give the green boyz a chance! It'd be nice if the Warboss could get a bit of an upgrade too while we're at it. He's pretty mediocre at the moment.

Necrons: Living Metal - bit too good. Maybe tone it down a little. Another Troops choice would be nice.

Dark Eldar: NEW MODEL RANGE, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!!!!

Ianos
12-06-2007, 13:03
Eldar: Plasma grenades for storm guardians.

Dark Eldar: full release and fast!

Daemonhunters: Give them decent Anti Tank and points reductions all over.

DasAtomkind
12-06-2007, 13:16
I'm really worried that a combined Inquisition Codex would ruin all 3 armies and make them even less popular. Plus, the fluff would probably be destroyed, or cut down to "Sisters of Battle are women. Grey knights are like space marines. Alien hunters fight aliens."

Oh, and S4 shotguns would make them actually usable.

I am worried about the Inquisition too :( I think the generalization would be the worst for these armies. And I'm also afraid the GW would eventually hear (mainly) the Space Marine players whines about Sisters and their "horrendous AP1 bolters" and "a**-kicking HQ with ini 6 and 2+ invulnerable save" and would mess up Acts of Faith, give Exorcist worse AP and fixed amount of rockets and...Emperor knows what else...:rolleyes:

A neutral shade of black.
12-06-2007, 13:16
I'm really worried that a combined Inquisition Codex would ruin all 3 armies and make them even less popular. Plus, the fluff would probably be destroyed, or cut down to "Sisters of Battle are women. Grey knights are like space marines. Alien hunters fight aliens."

I don't know; it could quite easily work. Have an armoury that has a few items limited to either Ordo, have Grey Knights, Sisters and storm troopers in there (plus whatever Xenos gets) with a special rules that says that which type of Inquisitor you pick as HQ dictates what Ordo your army belongs to, and have the background be broken down into one general section (the largest of all four) that details the Inquisition wars, then two or so pages of fluff for each Ordo. Include one special character for each Ordo, and you're good to go.

DasAtomkind
12-06-2007, 13:27
I don't know; it could quite easily work. Have an armoury that has a few items limited to either Ordo, have Grey Knights, Sisters and storm troopers in there (plus whatever Xenos gets) with a special rules that says that which type of Inquisitor you pick as HQ dictates what Ordo your army belongs to, and have the background be broken down into one general section (the largest of all four) that details the Inquisition wars, then two or so pages of fluff for each Ordo. Include one special character for each Ordo, and you're good to go.

I think we wouldn't "be good to go". What you are probably suggesting is that you'd HAVE TO take an HQ Inquisitior, which - apart from that cheap fire-support Mkerr pattern - is not at all cost-effective IMO. Also, I think that Grey Knighs and Sisters are so distinct from each other that generalizing them would only do harm. And of course, as you suggest shared armoury - I do have a reason (Dark Angels Codex) to assume, that this armoury would be very limited and that all units would again have already assigned equipment. Gosh, this is a silly gimmick I can't understand - the players are not stupid, are they ? They are able to choose the wargear for themselves .... I mean, I consent with changes that lean towards balancing the armies (like for example no more min-maxed 5-man lascannon/plasma squads or no more five termies with two assault cannons), but I hate changes that puts player into a strait jacket when concerning choices he can make and variability his army can achieve. Nowadays it's pretty boring to see two Dark Angels fighting each other, let me tell you. The armies look more or less the same.

the1stpip
12-06-2007, 13:30
I do believe there should be no upper limit on the number of troops choices.

I have often fielded armies that I have wanted to contain more than six units of troops (Dark Eldar Warriors, Daemonettes), but have not been able to due to the FOC.

Kargush
12-06-2007, 13:43
Space Marines
1: Give Scout bikes some sort of weapon upgrade option, flamers if nothing else.
2: Clean up the Trait system, particularly the disadvantages (get rid of We Stand Alone, make Eye To Eye a bit more disadvantageous).
3: DON'T REMOVE THE ARMORY! :mad:


Orks
I had an idea for Orks that would let GW get rid of the Heavy CCW rule without significantly effecting the performance of Orks. WS3 S4 Orks without Choppas have almost exactly the same performance as do WS4 S3 Orks with Choppas. Their performance against GEQs is exactly the same, and against MEQs they dish out the same amount of damage while absorbing slightly more return casualties. Of course, that doesn't take into account the fact that burnas would be much more effective in close combat wielded by a S4 Ork.

Agreed.


Tau-BS. Why the wing dang doodle the supposed premiere shooty army in Warhammer 40,000 is as bad a shot as IG while ALSO managing to be the worst CC army seems a bit OOP.'

Perhaps it's down to the fact that the Tau have bad eye focus? As has been mentioned in fluff and by GW designers plenty of times? I think Adam Troke used it as a counter to someone demanding BS4 Tau in one of those chat interviews.

For my own part, I can only ask for more doctrines, more traits, options for taking special armies(like Deathwing or Deathskulls Orks) without having to take a special characters(or named character, if you preffer that moniker).

Dicey
12-06-2007, 13:48
GW: review pricing

DE; love the codex as it is, though some new rules for the unts nerfed by 4th ed.

ORK for the love of Gork a new codex, and make them fun again.

get the forge world model designers to design the other models too.

Remember gamers exist that are over 16

DasAtomkind
12-06-2007, 13:56
Remember gamers exist that are over 16

*thumbs up* The best point in this entire thread, I think. It sums up all what unfortunately from my point of view GW seems to do - converting WH40K into simple, stereotypical game for little kids.

Blandman
12-06-2007, 14:22
Imperial Guard: Something like "Mob Rule" could be nice. After all, strength in numbers.

Mozzamanx
12-06-2007, 16:03
Tau- similar system to the Tau in Dark Crusade, where its basically kroot mercs or tau, and your choice of commander affects which one you take.
However, if you take one, you cannot take the other as well.

eg.
Tau commander- Allows Crisis suits, Hammerheads and Skyrays.
Kroot Master Shaper- Allows Krootox herds, Great knarlocs and Trackers
Units like Fire Warriors and Kroot hounds available to both.

Thoughts?

Nemo84
12-06-2007, 17:07
I don't know; it could quite easily work. Have an armoury that has a few items limited to either Ordo, have Grey Knights, Sisters and storm troopers in there (plus whatever Xenos gets) with a special rules that says that which type of Inquisitor you pick as HQ dictates what Ordo your army belongs to, and have the background be broken down into one general section (the largest of all four) that details the Inquisition wars, then two or so pages of fluff for each Ordo. Include one special character for each Ordo, and you're good to go.

I also would like to see a codex:Inquisition, but only if it would be actually a nice bit thicker than your average codex. I wouldn't mind paying for the extra size if that means more fluff. However, I think there should only be one type of Inquisitor, who has access to the wargear from all three Ordos. After all, Inquisitors rarely have one defined goal, but combat all of the Imperiums foes when they find them.

I would make an HQ and Elite leader (with possible retinues) choice for Inquisition, Sororitas, Grey Knights and Deathwatch. If you take the HQ leader, you gain unlimited access to that faction's units for all other slots. If you take the Elite leader, you get limited access (2 troops and 1 fast attack for example). Then simply throw the two existing army lists together, add some novelties for Xenos, rewrite some of the useless units and wargear and voila: one new codex. If GW would do just that, it would make me a very happy Inquisitor and they'll be allowed a quick and relatively painless death for all their previous heresies (aka Penitent Engines, Repentia) :D

ashc
12-06-2007, 17:14
As a general point I would just like to see some more advanced (and clearer) basic rules for the game. I think even just adding a simple actions orders phase could add much more interest and complexity to the game.

Some of these things in this thread make sense and I would deem as logical additions or changes to the game; others are complete and utter :wtf: pipe dreams.

Ash

Lord Malek The Red Knight
12-06-2007, 17:25
release an Alienhunters codex, and do NOT combine the inquisitional armies into one codex!!!!
why not? surely it makes sense not to have to repeat the rules, costs, fluff, art and painting guides/photos of the same generic Inq. units?

apart from upping the cost of an individual book (but lowering the cost if you would have bought 2 or more of them anyway) and making it a bit thicker than a normal Codex, i dont see a problem with it. :confused:

~ Tim

ashc
12-06-2007, 17:29
apart from upping the cost of an individual book (but lowering the cost if you would have bought 2 or more of them anyway) and making it a bit thicker than a normal Codex, i dont see a problem with it. :confused:


Agreed. I am a big advocate for the BIB. (Big Inquisitorial Book).

Ash

chiffmonkey
12-06-2007, 17:49
16 isnt a little kid. i am 16, but appreciate the points brought up in this thread. the age group youre on about are 14 year olds (waits for a 14 year old to post in turn)

Dicey
12-06-2007, 18:06
16 isnt a little kid. i am 16, but appreciate the points brought up in this thread. the age group youre on about are 14 year olds (waits for a 14 year old to post in turn)

Sorry Chiffmonkey no offence ment, I only chose 16 as that is the age my store "elevates" people to veteran status. You might notice this coincides with people starting to drift from the hobby. Some re-appear later some dont.

MysteryGilgamesh
12-06-2007, 18:11
Perhaps it's down to the fact that the Tau have bad eye focus? As has been mentioned in fluff and by GW designers plenty of times? I think Adam Troke used it as a counter to someone demanding BS4 Tau in one of those chat interviews.

...So they can't see well enough to shoot better, but putting a faint, tiny beam or 2 (Markerlights) on a target turns them into wondershots? WTF logic is that? And where in the TEC does it say they've got bad eyesight?

Thats just as bad as Terminator armor being more heavily armored suits designed for work INSIDE plasma reactors, yet plasma pistols can blow through them like nothing. Fluff=/=Mechanics!

Again-Tau need BS 4, or at least better ML's/ML units.

Templar Ben
12-06-2007, 18:16
ease up el' stiffo, not everyone wants to spend the money on every single codex out there.

Didn't say you need to. If you are going to post in a manner that makes it seem like I don't know about that which I write it would behoove (behove if you are British) you to get your facts straight first though.

ashc
12-06-2007, 18:24
Again-Tau need BS 4, or at least better ML's/ML units.

so are you prepared to be paying 14-16pts all-round for all basic Tau at BS4, let alone once you upgrade everything else? :eyebrows:

Ash

chiffmonkey
12-06-2007, 18:34
ty dicey, no disrespect to your judgment of younger people, most people i know are indeed losing interest, yet i re-discovered the hobby recently. Keep warhammer complex, then people who enjoyed mucking about as a small kid may see the reason to come back to the hobby. besides, most people my age are kinda hard to please :)

Formarion
12-06-2007, 18:52
I like the way the deathwing and ravenwing are set up now, makes sense that the leader of those forces would be present if they were heading into battle. Kind of goes messy if you're doing a successor chapter like me...but meh ^^

I would like to see Khornate Berserkers coming with 12 Axes per box, instead of 6. As most people who play WE will be using the axes anyway, it just forces us to buy another box or use the "count as" rule....which a lot of people bitch about in tournament settings.

I would like to see plastic Steel Legion troops too, or even resin based ones. I know that the Krieg force is out now, but I am quite picky ^^.

For imperial guard...new commissar models...

Thats pretty much all I can think of...oh and WD actually being worth 4 and not just acting as a glorified catalogue.

MysteryGilgamesh
12-06-2007, 21:24
so are you prepared to be paying 14-16pts all-round for all basic Tau at BS4, let alone once you upgrade everything else? :eyebrows:

Ash

They're overcosted for FW anyway, so there'd be no change for them. As for other units, yes, I'd be willing to drop the extra 5 or so pts per model.

ashc
12-06-2007, 21:33
They're overcosted for FW anyway, so there'd be no change for them. As for other units, yes, I'd be willing to drop the extra 5 or so pts per model.

Overpriced as they are now? what game have you been playing? :eyebrows:

Considering at the time of creation GW tried playing Tau with BS4 and decided themselves that it was far too overpowering with the advanced weaponry they used.

Tau are one of the few armies I have no gripes about; the only thing I would like to see is the Pathfinders and their Devilfish re-errated; at the moment its just daft.

Ash

MysteryGilgamesh
12-06-2007, 21:43
Overpriced as they are now? what game have you been playing? :eyebrows:

Yep, overcosted. Bad base Ld, no Ld. "cheat" rules like other armies (bond doesn't count, I mean things like ATSKNF, Vox's, Synapse, etc.), statline that makes an IG look good, and CC so bad it's a joke.

They're about 1 1/2 pts too expensive given how easy they break and that they're almost assured to lose any CC they get thrust into (and they will get into some eventually).

Hell, they don't really NEED better BS-Just ML's that are worth using. They're too costly as is, and being Hvy negates the prime Tau advantage-Speed. A 18-24 range Assault ML that cost 8-10 pts (15 drone) might actually see the things used in games other than "friendly".

Glavemaster
12-06-2007, 21:50
16 isnt a little kid. i am 16, but appreciate the points brought up in this thread. the age group youre on about are 14 year olds (waits for a 14 year old to post in turn)

I know how you feel; though I am fourteen myself, most of the kids at my age are... Well, not fit as gamers. :D

BrainFireBob
12-06-2007, 21:53
Yep, overcosted. Bad base Ld, no Ld. "cheat" rules like other armies (bond doesn't count, I mean things like ATSKNF, Vox's, Synapse, etc.), statline that makes an IG look good, and CC so bad it's a joke.

They're about 1 1/2 pts too expensive given how easy they break and that they're almost assured to lose any CC they get thrust into (and they will get into some eventually).

1) Can't nearby squads use the Shas'vre's LD?

2) If you are using Firewarriors and only Fairewarriors, then yes- but that's not how they designed the army to play.

That basic Str 5 gun hurts like hell, and the Battlesuit jump rule is highly aggravating. The Tau suffer from one design flaw, and that is that it's hard for them to have crushing victories or slaughters- they're all about doing enough damage on the way in to mob their opponent's few closing units.

MysteryGilgamesh
12-06-2007, 22:00
1) Can't nearby squads use the Shas'vre's LD?

2) If you are using Firewarriors and only Fairewarriors, then yes- but that's not how they designed the army to play.

That basic Str 5 gun hurts like hell, and the Battlesuit jump rule is highly aggravating. The Tau suffer from one design flaw, and that is that it's hard for them to have crushing victories or slaughters- they're all about doing enough damage on the way in to mob their opponent's few closing units.

1-Only w/costly hardpoint eating upgrade.

2-FW's are still important, or SHOULD be. I think it's a gross sign of imbalance when you see almost every Tau tournament army going extra light on FW (and wouldn't take any if they weren't compulsory) in favor of cheaper and arguably far more effective Kroot.

ashc
12-06-2007, 22:09
2-FW's are still important, or SHOULD be. I think it's a gross sign of imbalance when you see almost every Tau tournament army going extra light on FW (and wouldn't take any if they weren't compulsory) in favor of cheaper and arguably far more effective Kroot.

I don't see that at all. I see plenty of players stocking up on units of firewarriors flying around in devilfish and then dropping themselves and firing like the bomb they are to wipe out units.

For every person I know who swears by Kroot I know another who can't stand to use them.


Ash

MysteryGilgamesh
12-06-2007, 22:14
I don't see that at all. I see plenty of players stocking up on units of firewarriors flying around in devilfish and then dropping themselves and firing like the bomb they are to wipe out units.

For every person I know who swears by Kroot I know another who can't stand to use them.


Ash

I'm the latter. All IRL comments on my list (Army List forum as I put it up for some online aid, if you're curious) boil down to "WTF NO KROOT U R MAD!".

Vet.Sister
12-06-2007, 22:39
Uh. Is anyone holding a gun to your head and forcing you to take assassins? I've seen plenty of all-sisters armies. Including ones with seraphim - not close combat enough for you? Leave those of us in the Ordo Hereticus with our toys.



You misunderstand me good sir! Assassins are great, and Arcos are good too. I don't want them taken away! That would be a bad thing!:mad:
But for those of us who want a pure Battle Sisters force, I want a close combat unit that can actually do CC vs other armies standard troopers. I'm not asking for Assault Terminators, Khorne Berserkers, etc, etc......

EDIT--> Don't get me wrong, Seraphim are great too.... great at shooting their opponent to death! I want a Sisters unit that does CC well! Perhaps comparable to an assault marine? perhaps that's too much....

Formarion
12-06-2007, 22:39
I only use kroot in 1500+ point games, and even then it's usually just to fill up 1 troop choice out of the other 5 I use for my FW squads. Sure FWs break in CC, but they are really meant to...I am happy enough with their statline and even though they have poor I they have a 4+ save, that will allow you to get some attacks back at least.

ashc
12-06-2007, 23:00
You misunderstand me good sir! Assassins are great, and Arcos are good too. I don't want them taken away! That would be a bad thing!:mad:
But for those of us who want a pure Battle Sisters force, I want a close combat unit that can actually do CC vs other armies standard troopers. I'm not asking for Assault Terminators, Khorne Berserkers, etc, etc......

EDIT--> Don't get me wrong, Seraphim are great too.... great at shooting their opponent to death! I want a Sisters unit that does CC well! Perhaps comparable to an assault marine? perhaps that's too much....

Its never going to happen though, is it? for them to be as good as an assault marine, they need to have the stats of, well, assault marines. - Then whats the point in army diversity?

Its just more food for Marinehammer 40,000.

Lord Inquisitor
13-06-2007, 00:17
You misunderstand me good sir! Assassins are great, and Arcos are good too. I don't want them taken away! That would be a bad thing!:mad:
But for those of us who want a pure Battle Sisters force, I want a close combat unit that can actually do CC vs other armies standard troopers. I'm not asking for Assault Terminators, Khorne Berserkers, etc, etc......

EDIT--> Don't get me wrong, Seraphim are great too.... great at shooting their opponent to death! I want a Sisters unit that does CC well! Perhaps comparable to an assault marine? perhaps that's too much....

But... but... but... not having any combat-monster unit is one of the things that makes the sisters what they are... It differentiates them!

Still, acts of faith can give units like seraphim the edge. And what about sister repentia? S6 power weapons for the whole squad seems like a unit that can actually do CC pretty well! (Yeah, I know they're not considered a great unit for the points, but that is not really here or there.)

And if you REALLY want lethal combat monsters in your army you DO have access to arcos, assassins, inquisitors and penitents. But if you don't want to allow such freaks (and watch what you say, the Inquisition is watching :skull:) into your army to maintain the character of your army - perhaps you should accept that uber-combat units of doom really aren't part of the character of your army!:confused:

Pehaps you should be wishing for tweaks to the army to make units like Repentia more viable, instead of wishing for new units...

Vet.Sister
13-06-2007, 00:26
But... but... but... not having any combat-monster unit is one of the things that makes the sisters what they are... It differentiates them!

Still, acts of faith can give units like seraphim the edge. And what about sister repentia? S6 power weapons for the whole squad seems like a unit that can actually do CC pretty well! (Yeah, I know they're not considered a great unit for the points, but that is not really here or there.)

And if you REALLY want lethal combat monsters in your army you DO have access to arcos, assassins, inquisitors and penitents. But if you don't want to allow such freaks (and watch what you say, the Inquisition is watching :skull:) into your army to maintain the character of your army - perhaps you should accept that uber-combat units of doom really aren't part of the character of your army!:confused:

Pehaps you should be wishing for tweaks to the army to make units like Repentia more viable, instead of wishing for new units...


I still have doubts as to whether Repentia can be viable, and technically Repentia aren't Adepta Sororitas! I've outlined some tweeks for Celestians and a particular piece of wargear in a different thread..... I think my new unit could do well with a few judicious AoF.

loveless
13-06-2007, 00:52
How I wish Repentia were viable...the thought of a group of S6 eviscerators is fun in theory, but just doesn't hold up. Honestly, I don't know how to improve them other than lowering their points cost by maybe as much as 5 (making them 5 points less than they are now...if that was confusing).

Or, we could give the Mistress the Sororitas rules and let her be able to affect the Repentia squad...though that would be TOO powerful...hmm...*ponders*

silashand
13-06-2007, 01:02
But... but... but... not having any combat-monster unit is one of the things that makes the sisters what they are... It differentiates them!

I've played Sisters almost since the beginning and that is *not* what's supposed to differentiate them. That's an opinion, and not one held by many "pure" Sisters players that I've met.


And if you REALLY want lethal combat monsters in your army you DO have access to arcos, assassins, inquisitors and penitents. But if you don't want to allow such freaks (and watch what you say, the Inquisition is watching :skull:) into your army to maintain the character of your army - perhaps you should accept that uber-combat units of doom really aren't part of the character of your army!:confused:

Again, that is an opinion formed by those who want the freakshow stuff. Gav and then Andy H. when first writing the WH list were bombarded by players who didn't want the freakish stuff to overshadow the Sisters themselves, and by and large they don't. The problem is that the *ONLY* new Sisters unit we got was the Repentias and as noted they aren't even Sororitas. While some people like them, they are certainly not what most Sisters players I know envisioned as a new and exciting Sisters unit.


Pehaps you should be wishing for tweaks to the army to make units like Repentia more viable, instead of wishing for new units...

I can agree with that. As they stand now they are not very useful in a majority of situations (and the models suck IMO). Every unit should have some ability to be used occasionally and the Repentia really don't.

As for the freakshow stuff, I don't particularly like it, but even if I did, I have to say the models are generally crap. The Repentias, if you call them part of the freaks and I do since they are goaded into battle by an S&M mistress, aren't all that effective. The arcos may work, but the models have not nearly enough detail to look decent. They need to be more like the Inqusitor versions IYAM. The only freakshow element that I think looks kinda cool is the penitent engine, and it's so lightly armoured that it dies to a strong breeze.

Anyway, if I had one wish (as per the OP's request), it would be to:

0. All armies: use a doctrines/traits/skills system for *ALL* armies to allow the most variety possible, but fix the broken ones. As it stands instead of fixing the SINGLE BEST THING about some lists, GW appear to have committed to removing it. If for no other reason I think they all should be fired. The new bland-esque codexes are IMO just plain boring.

1. Witchhunters: fix repentias, add novices (an actual sororitas unit), bring back the HF as a viable weapon for Retributors and make the multimelta (the troop version) worth fielding.

2. Chaos, Alpha Legion: leave the deamonic gifts, but fix the ones that are overpowered/never used. I know this is only wishful thinking since it's pretty much confirmed that they are gone and that's a shame IMO. It takes away so much of the character of chaos as an army that I think it's totally wrong for them to do it.

3. Eldar: Bring back variants between the craftworlds. Ulthwe is supposed to have the best psykers, yet the list now allows all other lists to match them. Same with Saim Hann and jetbikes, Biel Tan and aspects, etc. Maybe some of the old ones were broken/unusable, but the idea behind them was sound.

Cheers, Gary

Vet.Sister
13-06-2007, 01:20
I've played Sisters almost since the beginning and that is *not* what's supposed to differentiate them. That's an opinion, and not one held by many "pure" Sisters players that I've met.



Again, that is an opinion formed by those who want the freakshow stuff. Gav and then Andy H. when first writing the WH list were bombarded by players who didn't want the freakish stuff to overshadow the Sisters themselves, and by and large they don't. The problem is that the *ONLY* new Sisters unit we got was the Repentias and as noted they aren't even Sororitas. While some people like them, they are certainly not what most Sisters players I know envisioned as a new and exciting Sisters unit.



I can agree with that. As they stand now they are not very useful in a majority of situations (and the models suck IMO). Every unit should have some ability to be used occasionally and the Repentia really don't.

As for the freakshow stuff, I don't particularly like it, but even if I did, I have to say the models are generally crap. The Repentias, if you call them part of the freaks and I do since they are goaded into battle by an S&M mistress, aren't all that effective. The arcos may work, but the models have not nearly enough detail to look decent. They need to be more like the Inqusitor versions IYAM. The only freakshow element that I think looks kinda cool is the penitent engine, and it's so lightly armoured that it dies to a strong breeze.


Cheers, Gary

Emperor Bless you Gary!!!!
I've had this opinion since 3rd edition and the Chapter Approved book.:D

edit--> If I could sig the above in its entirety.....

Core_Commander
13-06-2007, 01:24
Hmmm... let's see...

GW - quicker FAQ'ing (:angel:) and FAQ that don't FAQ things up (for the n'th time Tau Empire FAQ be damned!!!).

Tau - Vespids that don't suck (better gun range/BS and some armour would do, for example make them BS4 if Strain Leader is alive?) and Pathfinders that aren't overpriced bullet magnets.

@BrainFireBob - that costly hardpoint-taking upgrade actually works for target priority checks only... Eh and bah. I'm not saying that Tau should be another fearless army, but...

Dark Eldar - a release at last.

Eldar - make them fragile like they ought to be (Falcon, I'm looking at you!).

SM - nerf rites of battle to, say, one squad a turn. How many mouths does that commander have to issue orders with?

Sisters - new models, less hideous and more akin to the pictures in-game. How come Daemonettes may look good but sisters' faces remind me of a cross-dressing Governator :wtf: (note-that's just a matter of personal preference, if you like them please don't feel offended :angel: ).

Hmmm... seems like enough ranting for now :p ...

Master Bait
13-06-2007, 01:40
Didn't say you need to. If you are going to post in a manner that makes it seem like I don't know about that which I write it would behoove (behove if you are British) you to get your facts straight first though.

strange thing about the internet - i can write whatever i want and you can interpret it any way you want
sure i'm wrong, but its your own fault if you're going to get your knickers in a twist over an off-hand comment

mattmanforever
13-06-2007, 01:51
All I've ever played is Tau, so that's my only insight. Apart from standard "Make the Devilfish Scout or give Pathfinders Infiltrate" stuff, which I think is spot on, I feel as though there's only one thing I'd like changed.

Army: Tau
Sub-army: None
Gripe: Reduce the cost of Marker Drones. It seems clear to me that they were created to try to increase the viability of static Fire Warrior teams by increasing their strengths (as opposed to decreasing their flaws). However, the prohibitive cost of Marker Drones is such that it ends up not helping much. A 5 or 10 point reduction in cost would be pretty groovy. Not that I don't use them anyway.

Duel_Crisis
13-06-2007, 02:00
You misunderstand me good sir! Assassins are great, and Arcos are good too. I don't want them taken away! That would be a bad thing!:mad:
But for those of us who want a pure Battle Sisters force, I want a close combat unit that can actually do CC vs other armies standard troopers. I'm not asking for Assault Terminators, Khorne Berserkers, etc, etc......

EDIT--> Don't get me wrong, Seraphim are great too.... great at shooting their opponent to death! I want a Sisters unit that does CC well! Perhaps comparable to an assault marine? perhaps that's too much....

How about just fixing the Repentia? Technically they are sisters. That's my battlesisters complaint.

Tau... make Vespids useful. Make both the all Tau force, and Auxilliaries more viable.

Grey Knights- More varity. You have Grey Knights(comes in reglar, quick, and well supplied), Termies and their expensive version of the tanks. Give them something different, like you did with Witchhunters and the Penitent Engine.

Inquistors in general...make close combat, and psyker powers more practical to use...they are a great unit with lots of potential for varity, but that potential is going by the wayside with only a few viable options.

Guard... make as many doctrines as viable as possible

Master Bait
13-06-2007, 02:08
do Daemon Hunters REALLY need more anti-tank available to them?

this is a fluff vs. game-play argument here; i know that DH and GK aren't a strong army when facing armies with a lot of armour, but they're not MEANT TO. same reasoning as to the argument to make them more varied - they're designed to do the job they do, nothing else. perhaps more different types of Daemon Hunters can be introduced, but i think grey knights are as varied as they should be from a fluffy perspective

so; they hunt daemons - why would they need anti-tank weaponary?
the majority of armies they DO face aren't going to be daemon armies. end of the day, GKs are a nice concept but far too specialised to really be represented on the tabletop.

they are a very attractive army, but you can't expect them to be tank-busters

Worsle
13-06-2007, 03:36
Really need it? While it might not be in their background to be all about taking out all the tanks, this is a game and game wise they certainly need it. Sure I don't think this should be the armies strong point but game wise how could you not need it?

Now any way as to much more important witch hunter codex I would not like to see them wrapped up in one inquisition codex as you would just have to many units for details not to be lost. Sure all inquisitors are the same, but sisters of battle, ecclesiarchy, grey knight and death watch should be nothing alike. Though I do want to see the ecclesiarchy units improved on a lot (priests, arco-flaggents, zealots and penitent engines) as I want to field those units with out feeling like I have just waisted all the points, time, money and effort. It is a real pity too as I would love to field penitent engines just their rules seem to have been put together in the dark. More fast attack options too, when you have about as many as chaos some thing is wrong here.

Master Bait
13-06-2007, 03:49
i never said that they never needed it gamewise.

certainly if they were to be balanced to face against every army available in 40k, they need some form of AT.

i'm talking from a fluff perspective, where you'd probably NEVER see an army of GKs facing off against an imperial armoured company.

that's why my conclusion is that GKs should never have really been considered for production as a viable force to use in 40k, their fluff just doesn't fit it.

scarvet
13-06-2007, 03:53
Well, GK don't just go in and fight daemon---they have to fight they RL minion as well, and those RL minion have tanks...problem solve.

Or, instead of that, make GK as hardcore as Haliques, like night fight instead of shourding, or the unit can use force barrier once per turn etc.

I think GK need a "blessed" melta gun, or something to shoot toward the Big Nasty daemons, as well as daemon engine. The other thing i think GK should have is a real FA choice that move faster(mounted GK, Flying GK), not just deep striking units.

Master Bait
13-06-2007, 04:33
Well, GK don't just go in and fight daemon---they have to fight they RL minion as well, and those RL minion have tanks...problem solve.

are they though? i thought that's what more conventional Imperial Guard or Space Marines are meant to be for. and that's why they have all those heavy weapons - after all, you're a 'Daemon Hunter' your weapons are meant to take out 'Daemons'.

after all, the introduction of GKs was just to use them as an ally unit to another imperial army. you used to them to tackle specific units or large daemons, or at least, i'm sure that was the idea.

now they've expanded upon them, and you can field an army of them, i'm sure largely in credit to the fact their concept is just plain *********** cool. but in keeping with their background, you can't really have them as being tank busters. it goes against the entire idea of them.

but surely the inquisitorial stormtroopers i've seen them working alongside can be equipped with heavy weapons? that makes sense to me, and surely should appease the DH players out there?

Duel_Crisis
13-06-2007, 04:42
I don't know. They tend to show up whever deamons are, or where ever the Inquistion wants them to be...that includes corrupted units and forces like say Iron Warriors.

Lord Inquisitor
13-06-2007, 04:50
No DA and BA crusaders hold 16. Space Marine and BT crusaders hold 15. SM and BT crusaders also cost 15 points more. Look at SM Codex page 40 and BT Codex page 42 and compare to DA Codex page 86.
Is there any advantage to 16 over 15? I suppose it allows BTs to add an IC, but I can't see why this is a change that is worth arguing over. Are there even any BA or DA that can actually use up all 15 spaces?


I also would like to see a codex:Inquisition, but only if it would be actually a nice bit thicker than your average codex. I wouldn't mind paying for the extra size if that means more fluff. However, I think there should only be one type of Inquisitor, who has access to the wargear from all three Ordos. After all, Inquisitors rarely have one defined goal, but combat all of the Imperiums foes when they find them.
Actually, I agree. I plumped for this approach in Epic - an Inquisitor is an Inquisitor. No real need to differentiate them - you can theme your Inquisitor to an ordo if you wish. After all, Eisenhorn carries enough anti-daemon equipment on him to shame the most ardent Malleus man, and he's Ordo Xenos...


I would make an HQ and Elite leader (with possible retinues) choice for Inquisition, Sororitas, Grey Knights and Deathwatch. If you take the HQ leader, you gain unlimited access to that faction's units for all other slots. If you take the Elite leader, you get limited access (2 troops and 1 fast attack for example). Then simply throw the two existing army lists together, add some novelties for Xenos, rewrite some of the useless units and wargear and voila: one new codex. If GW would do just that, it would make me a very happy Inquisitor and they'll be allowed a quick and relatively painless death for all their previous heresies (aka Penitent Engines, Repentia) :D
Something like that. It would be nice to have the option to mix, say, sisters and deathwatch in the same army, but some kind of restriction would be a good idea to stop total mish-mash armies.


Agreed. I am a big advocate for the BIB. (Big Inquisitorial Book).
Me too. We need a tome we can smack down on the table and lean on, peering imperiously.

Or that might just be me.

But yes, I wouldn't mind a combined Inquisition codex providing that doesn't mean cutting corners.

Wierdly enough, I actually wouldn't mind the removal of the wargear list for the Inquisition. ("Radical" I hear you cry!) I think it is the only way it would work. Obviously a power weapon in the hands of a Deathwatch captain is more worthwhile than in the hands of a stormtrooper sergeant. By putting all the options in the army list it would allow for appropriate points to equipment. 15 points for a power weapon for an Ordo Malleus stormtrooper, but only 10 for Ordo Hereticus? Daft. Besides, the vast majority of the armoury is for Inquisitors only - they can have a giant entry and it might not entail losing too much variation.


I still have doubts as to whether Repentia can be viable, and technically Repentia aren't Adepta Sororitas! I've outlined some tweeks for Celestians and a particular piece of wargear in a different thread..... I think my new unit could do well with a few judicious AoF.
That's very technical. They're still a proper Sister of Battle unit.


How I wish Repentia were viable...the thought of a group of S6 eviscerators is fun in theory, but just doesn't hold up. Honestly, I don't know how to improve them other than lowering their points cost by maybe as much as 5 (making them 5 points less than they are now...if that was confusing).

Or, we could give the Mistress the Sororitas rules and let her be able to affect the Repentia squad...though that would be TOO powerful...hmm...*ponders*
I think a simple points break would do the trick, but definately no acts of faith. They're disgraced, no holiness for them!


I've played Sisters almost since the beginning and that is *not* what's supposed to differentiate them. That's an opinion, and not one held by many "pure" Sisters players that I've met.
:eyebrows:
You really don't think that one of the characteristics of the sisters of battle is an emphasis on short-ranged firefights? It may not be the only way to fight, but it is what they do best...


Again, that is an opinion formed by those who want the freakshow stuff. Gav and then Andy H. when first writing the WH list were bombarded by players who didn't want the freakish stuff to overshadow the Sisters themselves, and by and large they don't. The problem is that the *ONLY* new Sisters unit we got was the Repentias and as noted they aren't even Sororitas. While some people like them, they are certainly not what most Sisters players I know envisioned as a new and exciting Sisters unit.
Well, the sisters did have a full and complete army to start with, no? While I know a lot of sisters players didn't like the Repentia, don't forget that there are those of us who actually want the Witch Hunters codex for the Ordo Hereticus, and any more emphasis on sisters might eclipse that.


The only freakshow element that I think looks kinda cool is the penitent engine, and it's so lightly armoured that it dies to a strong breeze.
Well, at least it isn't AV10. But I agree - they're such cool models, shame they don't stand up to much on the table.

Some of the Ordo Hereticus figures steal the show in terms of coolness. That Inqusitior with the long-barrelled plasma pistol? Marvellous.


1. Witchhunters: fix repentias, add novices (an actual sororitas unit), bring back the HF as a viable weapon for Retributors and make the multimelta (the troop version) worth fielding.
Reducing the minimum squad size might help. Never understood the 10-20 thing.


Grey Knights- More varity. You have Grey Knights(comes in reglar, quick, and well supplied), Termies and their expensive version of the tanks. Give them something different, like you did with Witchhunters and the Penitent Engine.
Really? I think the Grey Knights are okay, and should be kept to just GK Termis and GK power armoured. They kill daemons and really shouldn't be more versatile. Although perhaps they should have an option to battle daemon engines too?

However, the Daemonhunters desperately need some serious anti-tank. How does the Ordo Malleus deal with Daemon Engines? Chaos in general? My vote's for some serious firepower like Rapiers - or maybe some serious battle servitors like Praetorians (makes sense to use servitors against Chaos, can't be corrupted).


so; they hunt daemons - why would they need anti-tank weaponary?
the majority of armies they DO face aren't going to be daemon armies. end of the day, GKs are a nice concept but far too specialised to really be represented on the tabletop.

they are a very attractive army, but you can't expect them to be tank-busters
Daemon Engines. Defilers, Lords of Battle. Subjugators, Daemon Knights. Plague Towers. Doomwings. Cannons of Khorne.

Who but the Daemonhunters could hope to counter such a blasphemous melding of daemon and machine?

Only they sadly lack any kind of ability to do so.

Master Bait
13-06-2007, 04:52
i still don't see that as justification for equipping the GKs themselves with AT weapons.

if people really want them as a well-rounded army as possible in 40k, then i think the idea of Imp Guard conscripts or Inq Storm troopers armed with heavy/special weapons is a better way to go, and then you have an army under the command of an inquisitor doing his bidding.

Worsle
13-06-2007, 04:54
Grey knights have also been used to wipe out space marine chapter at least once when an inquisitor found them funny looking (busting into flames and all) so they can't always be going up against daemons any way. I don't think they should be used with out support but it seems silly of them to have nothing to use on tanks.

Lord Inquisitor
13-06-2007, 04:54
i still don't see that as justification for equipping the GKs themselves with AT weapons.
Didn't say they should. I agree, there should be other units for that.


if people really want them as a well-rounded army as possible in 40k, then i think the idea of Imp Guard conscripts or Inq Storm troopers armed with heavy/special weapons is a better way to go, and then you have an army under the command of an inquisitor doing his bidding.

Well, an option for Stormtroopers or even Imperial Guard with a respectable number of heavy weapons would certainly help. Currently that really isn't viable right now.


Grey knights have also been used to wipe out space marine chapter at least once when an inquisitor found them funny looking (busting into flames and all)
And again when a chapter developed a rather naughty and unhealthy* penchant for daemon weapons.

*Having the Grey Knights assault your Fortress Monastary is generally considered unhealthy for anyone.

SamaNagol
13-06-2007, 05:05
GK Dreadnoughts

Land Raiders

They have anti tank weaponry.

Master Bait
13-06-2007, 05:07
Didn't say they should. I agree, there should be other units for that..

heh, my comment wasn't really aimed at you, more at the post above yours - you just replied too damn fast :p

Sasquatch_Man
13-06-2007, 05:34
GK Dreadnoughts

Land Raiders

They have anti tank weaponry.

Yeah, but thats expensive. Other armies can get a lot more anti tank stuff for cheaper.

SamaNagol
13-06-2007, 05:40
It's expensive for a reason. That's how the army list is balanced

Lord Inquisitor
13-06-2007, 05:43
There's balance and there's a deficiency in the list. Not being able to deal with adequately deal with heavy armour? I'll give you a clue - it's not balance.

Master Bait
13-06-2007, 05:58
having said that, if every army was balanced they'd all be the same....

rev
13-06-2007, 06:32
General game improvement:

AI card style movement orders.

Each unit is nominated an action card for movement (march, hide, wheel or whatever) and then each player moves a single unit in turn until all have been moved - exaclty like in AI.

would make the game much more intresting.

DasAtomkind
13-06-2007, 10:01
You mention that GK are not meant to be a viable force to fight on its own, since fluffwise, they are specialized for killing Daemons. I agree - fluffwise, they just drop, kill the DP and then go - but gamewise, if they can't make up for a stand-alon force then there is the question why GW bothered to issue whole codex for them (they could just make some GK rules and publish them in WD or on their website etc.) ... thus something tells me that either there is something we do not see about how Daemonhunters are intended or that GW might have been just mocking us when making such handicapped army....;)

Vanger
13-06-2007, 13:26
Tyranids: Cheaper Warrior, plastic gargoyles

Dark Eldar: New, shiny, scary, SEXY models, not these ugly as hell ones!!!

Tau Empire: Pathfinders without Devilfish!!!

Necrons: Reduce the cost of Pariahs, ot give them FNP, make scarabs a Troops choice (can't be compulsory choices)!!!

CSM: Why on earth go back to RANDOMLY generated abilities for Possessed???

Space Wolves: Extra abilities for HQs, cheaper wolf guard bodyguard, I beg of you!!!

rintinglen
13-06-2007, 20:15
do Daemon Hunters REALLY need more anti-tank available to them?

this is a fluff vs. game-play argument here; i know that DH and GK aren't a strong army when facing armies with a lot of armour, but they're not MEANT TO. same reasoning as to the argument to make them more varied - they're designed to do the job they do, nothing else. perhaps more different types of Daemon Hunters can be introduced, but i think grey knights are as varied as they should be from a fluffy perspective

so; they hunt daemons - why would they need anti-tank weaponary?
the majority of armies they DO face aren't going to be daemon armies. end of the day, GKs are a nice concept but far too specialised to really be represented on the tabletop.

they are a very attractive army, but you can't expect them to be tank-busters
Last time I checked it was a game, not a book. Therefore, the rigid adherence to fluff (even when it hurts the game balance) argument should carry no weight. It is a crying shame that the arguably most visually appealing army should be one of the least playable. The lack of heavy weapons not only hurts against armour, but also against monstrous creatures, like DEAMONS. At the very least, they ought to have "Holy handgrenades" ala black templar. Ideally, they ought to have missile launchers included in the mix.

Llynus
13-06-2007, 23:19
They need friendlier staff, I'd bought some stuff, and talking to a mate who I hadn't seen in years who was a redshirt, and the manager basically came over and in a veyr patronising manner told me effectively to **** as the redshirt had work to do. As someone jsut comign back to the hobby, it really put me off, and I almost considered dropping it again right there.

chiffmonkey
13-06-2007, 23:45
less focus on the imperium, and maybe follow the viewpoint of another race in a rota. when was the last new model for orks? necrons? chaos? witch hunters ?

loveless
13-06-2007, 23:56
Orks got a new model last summer, Necrons haven't had one for awhile, Chaos got new models last summer, and the Witch Hunters haven't had a new mini in a decent amount of time.

I find it interesting that you call for less focus on the Imperium, and then ask for new Witch Hunters stuff :p

chiffmonkey
14-06-2007, 00:28
i meant fluff, but hey, models for all!

loveless
14-06-2007, 00:33
You know...I'd probably kill for some alternate Cannoness models, like one with a jump pack. Some other Veteran Sister Superior minis would be good, too. Oh, and give me access to Gideon Lorr. I still hate that I missed out on getting him.

Master Bait
14-06-2007, 00:42
Last time I checked it was a game, not a book. Therefore, the rigid adherence to fluff (even when it hurts the game balance) argument should carry no weight. It is a crying shame that the arguably most visually appealing army should be one of the least playable. The lack of heavy weapons not only hurts against armour, but also against monstrous creatures, like DEAMONS. At the very least, they ought to have "Holy handgrenades" ala black templar. Ideally, they ought to have missile launchers included in the mix.

i consider that argument in my posts so i don't know why you're trying to repeat things i've said - and besides you're wrong, because everything about this game is based upon the fantasy that has been developed over the past 20 years; whilst you certainly can't represent this background 'accurately' it becomes the starting point with which you develop the rules and game play for the various armies.

in that way you weigh up the pros and cons of the armies and you design their gameplay to represent their background fluff. sure GKs might want to use heavy weapons to take out monstrous creatures, like Daemons, but that's what all their nemesis force weapons and what not is meant for right? they've been specifically equipped to handle daemons, whether they be monostrous creatures or not.

now i've said that i KNOW this makes for a very slack army for someone to collect gamewise - and it sucks because they're a very appealing army, i agree. but i totally disagree that the rules should take priority before Fluff. its the reason why me and several others first got into this game.

that aside i thought i had made it very clear that a fair compromise in how to equip a Daemon Hunters army with heavy weapons is to have Conscripts or Inq Storm Troopers having access to them.

there anything wrong with that at all? it keeps inline with fluff and gives DHs the options to be able to make them flexible against any opponent they wish to face, without over-powering them

The Keeper of Secrets
14-06-2007, 08:23
less focus on the imperium, and maybe follow the viewpoint of another race in a rota. when was the last new model for orks? necrons? chaos? witch hunters ?

AND DARK ELDAR!!!!!!

Dunno how you missed that!

ColdWind
14-06-2007, 09:04
Orks - a new battlewagon kit please - I'm getting tired of converted land raiders.