Top 3 MOST annoying things in WH40K rules?

[Lost Vyper]

Hello,

What are the three most annoying things in WH40K rules? I´m not necessarily talking about universal rules, but some "loopholes" or OP things some armies bring on the table. Here´s what i hate the most...

1. Necrons "I can jump 30" every turn la-di-daa..." Royal court (or whatever) doing this...why bother even playing against these a**h***s?

2. Necrons 5+/4+ "I´ll just get the f*** back up, even if you smashed me with S10 hit..."c´mon!, They nerfed the FNP, so here´s the next one to go IMHO...or at least the same thing that FNP has, double S over T and you are out!

3. This gets most votes me thinks :)...Heldrake...what the hell, you cannot take cover saves against huge claws diving for you from the sky? No, i just stand here and take it like a (soon dying) man. I´ve had my Pathfinders (with 2+ cover save) hiding in ruins (not even on the top floor) and some how the claws find their way from the nooks and crannies to pry the flesh from bones? Vector strike itself is a cool idea, but it should definitely allow you to take a cover save. If you were on the open, who wouldn´t dive to ground (unless fearless :) ) when a mechanized iron dragon tries to catch you?
Torrent flamer...and you can measure it from the things bunghole...logical...highly logical...torrent flamer rule itself gets an honorable mention...

Well, it´s me venting out some frustrations (and i haven´t faced the Necrons with my new Eldar yet :p ) in this game i love, but what´s your beef and who is it with?

- Lost Vyper

[RGilbert26]

Hmm,

1. Helldrake - nuff said.
2. Fleeing in the opposite direction of the enemy which caused the Morale check causing units to run off table instead of towards my table edge, i've lost a few good units to this.
3. Fast units with 2+ cover save just because they moved one inch.

[Bob821]

Overwatch... Like it was not hard enough for my old assault marines to slog all the way accross the battle field to finally get close enough to attempt a charge... To just make the charge distance... Then loose the front marine or 2 and fail the charge. Then of course they get spanked because they are stood around in the open Like a bunch of ballons. Hate it.

Tau supporting fire... AS above but all his mates get a free crack at you as well.

Walkers... I love my dreadnougts. Being the proud owner of 6 including a forge world chaplin. However they just dont work any more. They just die to easy to monsterous creatures in close combat. My death company dread when toe to toe with a Tau riptide the other day and got spanked. You can not believe how hard it was to keep him alive to get in to that combat. That can not be right. It happened a few weeks ago as well against a deamon prince. Not even a close fight. They need a new rule. Somthing like 'titanic struggle'. To give them a little boost when going head on with monsterous creatures.

OK so you got me going now...

Riptides and wraith knights... How the hell are they monsterous creatures? They are huge mechanical walking machines! So walkers then? Monstertous creatures are big deamons, huge tyranids maybe even some super massive ork!

Power axes being I1... What the &*^% maybe drop them one I point but really as slow and heavy as a thunder hammer... Er no.

Power Swords being AP3... Thought they sliced though armour like butter. Not any more. No better at cracking open terminators than a sharp stick. Rubbish!

That rule that eldar have that gives there guns what is bassically rending. Dont get me wrong they needed a boast... Assault 3 maybe? Or an extra 6 inch range? You get the idea! I know that a sqaud of guardians killed 3 Lighting claw armed terminators the other day when they tellported in next to them. Another on on the charge using over watch then the last they got lucky and killed in close combat before it got a chance to even swing a claw!

Ok ok stopping now... Sorry to vent you did just ask for three so...

Over watch,

Supporting fire and

Walkers.

[MajorWesJanson]

1. And They Shall Know No Rules: ATSKNF is way too good. It ignores so much of the morale game that most morale effects are generally ignored. Immune to Fear, ok, fluffy. Auto-regroup and consolodate. OK, not bad. May move and fire like normal after the auto-regroup and consolodate while everyone else has to stand around and snapshoot? Not cool.
To make it less overpowered, I would remove the "may move normally" bit out. You get the 3" consolodate like everyone, and can shoot or charge normally, but you don't get to move 6" on top of the free 3" consolodate.

2. Vehicle speed bands. Snapshots help some, but shooty tanks are still rather immobile. Vehicles are more vulnerable now, let them have some teeth back. Make combat speed 6" and may fire all weapons, cruising speed 12" and fire 1 plus snapshoot the others. And let troops assault after disembarking if it did not move that turn. Instead of fast vehicles affecting weapons, make fast give an extra 6" if you go flat out.

3. Assaulting vehicles. Make it less of a gimme. Stationary vehicles hit automatically. Combat speed hit on a 3+. Cruising speed hit on a 4+, flat out on a 5+.

[RGilbert26]

Bob821 - just to point out, you roll charge distance after overwatch, not before.

[Lost Vyper]

1. And They Shall Know No Rules: ATSKNF is way too good. It ignores so much of the morale game that most morale effects are generally ignored. Immune to Fear, ok, fluffy. Auto-regroup and consolodate. OK, not bad. May move and fire like normal after the auto-regroup and consolodate while everyone else has to stand around and snapshoot? Not cool.
To make it less overpowered, I would remove the "may move normally" bit out. You get the 3" consolodate like everyone, and can shoot or charge normally, but you don't get to move 6" on top of the free 3" consolodate.

3. Assaulting vehicles. Make it less of a gimme. Stationary vehicles hit automatically. Combat speed hit on a 3+. Cruising speed hit on a 4+, flat out on a 5+.

I SO co-sign these two, maybe my n. 4 & 5 on the list? :) ATSKNF is stupid. Just in the last game i said to my friend the same thing. "It would be cool with out the act normally part. Just auto regroup and the 3"..." We have discussed in our FLGC about the vehicles in CC and what you said above is EXACTLY how it should be in the 6th edition and how we should play them.

[Bob821]

Bob821 - just to point out, you roll charge distance after overwatch, not before.

Oh thats interesting. Thanks. We have been playing that wrong then! Opps. Thats the problem when you always play with a small group of mates. Miss read a rule once and no one ever picks you up on it.

What I said still works though. If you where 6 inchs from making it in to assault and lose your front guy or two making it 8 inches then role a 7 you have still failed to make the charge because of the deaths caused by over watch.

[RGilbert26]

Well yes but only if you roll under the amount :p

[Katharon]

Not being able to use krak grenades in close combat...

[Dave Mcturk]

swooping hawkz that cant swoop ??? [and in a brand new codex as well]
overwatch ability / firepower the same for all elite terminators and orcz boyz mobs ???
[nb: i play orcz so not complaining ! .... but its certainly broken!]
[imo;cure is to make only the nearest five figures fire overwatch... ]
and previous poster spot on with vehicle assault rules... hull points is an interesting idea...
but against vehicles that are moving over 6" ... not sure a 3+ to hit reflects well... the old rules were fine ! and i would say only figures in b/b with vehicle can attack !
[also really dont understand why units cant consolidate after attacking a vehicle .... especially if they immobilise or destroy it ! ... are they frozen in time ??]

[Denzark]

Hmmm. Feel sorry for my poor Helturkeys. Not much love there. Can I say I think no cover save is sensible - in terms of you don't get one against hth attacks, so VS is clearly a hth attack. Besides, what do you think a bit of crumbly ruin is going to do against several tons of swooping metal daemon eh?

For my 3 rules, I will try to come up with actual rules, rather than units I feel are written wrong.

1. Look Out Sir. It is amusing to start with, but when my Warlord has used the first 15 cultists as ablative wounds, it probably gets a bit old for the opposition. Suggested improvement? Only one LOSA can be taken per phase.

2. Challenges. Really? The Space Marine Sgt will really duel my Bloodthirster, preventing it tearing through a Squad? Suggested improvement? Monstrous Creatures can ignore challenges.

3. No Assaults after disembarking. Rubbish. What, not even from Stationary any more? Suggested Improvement? Back to 5ed assault rules.

[Mr Mystery]

Just the one for me really....

People confusing my tactical competence for me fielding a beardy/broken/overpowered army list.

The Cure?

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-hnsao6n5JLw/Tb17nyYBsxI/AAAAAAAAACA/MIbVPwwTfBo/s1600/the-cure.jpg

That's the only Cure I know.

[Cap'nSmurfs]

The Space Marine Sergeant will really duel your Bloodthirster, because he is the thin line between the people of the Imperium and the madness and despoilation of Chaos. If his life must be given to achieve that end, then so be it. The Bloodthirster, meanwhile, is a creature of pure rage and ego, and its martial pride has just been called out by this puny mortal. Show the puny mortal his place in the universe.

So there you go. ;)

I'm not super-bothered by it, but if I had to choose, I'd say that I like randomly choosing psychic powers the least.

[Mr Mystery]

Plus, I can't see a Bloodthirster turning down a challenge to it's martial prowess. I'd imagine Khorne may frown upon refusal....

[SaveModifier]

Other players whining about tiny things little things that can easily be house-ruled are probably the most annoying thing about WH40K, the other two, hmmm, narrative gaming is encouraged but no rulebook support (yet) for games masters and the like and I'd say for third I'd say fortifications being placed before terrain limits the usefulness of the bigger pieces if you're not using the narrative method of placing terrain

[Lost Vyper]

The cover save against Vector Strike --> they see it coming and hide (like any rational being). Yes, it´s called a CC attack --> no cover save, but IMO, it´s not the same, but well, this is how it is...in our FLGC we build the table first --> then fortifications, it´s just logical (for that narrative gaming...)...house ruling is a difficult thing. We had MAJOR issues with our Marine players, when we debated about disembarking from the Drop pod (from the hull 6", NOT the wings), but we got it locked in. Not looking for the next major thang :)...line of sight issues (yes, there´s always few cases per day), how Storm Raven is "ok" to contest the objective (in a certain mission) in higher ruin levels due to the tallness of the whole model, "running" with a flying MC etc...

[magickbk]

1. Random psychic powers. (Really? Like a Farseer shows up to the field of battle, his warriors calling for the Farseer's guidance: "Wait, guys, I forgot some of my runes. I can make a storm, will that help?")

2. Assault. All of it. There has to be some middle ground that can be balanced. It used to be too powerful, now it is a suicide march.

For those complaining about Look Out, Sir!, this is basically by default how allocation worked in 3rd. You just took the wounds where you wanted them and rolled up the saves.

Also, ATSKNF has basically gotten less powerful over time. It is simply what Marines are and always have been. If you haven't been playing very long, way back in the day, they simply didn't take tests. Now you can at least drive them back a few inches sometimes if they fail, even if they auto-rally.

[Demonus]

Not being able to use krak grenades in close combat...

You can't use Krak Grenades in close combat? wth are they for then just to have 1 dude throw it?

atsknf needs to be changed. helldrakes just need to have their turret changed to 180degrees in front of model and they are fine. im not sure what 30" move necrons have every turn. I must be playing them wrong. Also the 4+ well be back affects 1 unit with the orb and is expensive. hell most necron players dont even take it anymore. Eldar shouldnt randomly determine spells as the premier psykers of the universe.

[Daemonette666]

1: Too many charts and lists in the main rule book and codexes that you have to roll on before and during the game. In fact too many to remember them all sometimes, and you miss out on some important thing that could have won or lost you the game, and you either get called a cheat, or your opponent who probably remembered the need for the roll purposely forgot to tell you.

2: Too many weapons have been changed for the worse, while too many of the special rules make some units useless, especially now that we have overwatch. For example Salvo weapons move and they can only shoot at half range, stand still they are good, so limits units to sit on an objective. Slow and Purposeful, can not run, and can not overwatch, so units like Obliterators can not use twin linked flamers to hose down assaulting enemy. I would have changed Salvo weapons so that its stat line is as follows Assault (first value)/ heavy (second value). With the unit not being able to charge if they fire their salvo weapon in the second mode, even if the unit has relentless or slow and purposeful. I would also have made it so Slow and purposeful was similar to Relentless, but the unit has to roll 3D6 for charge distance and use the 2 lowest, and that the unit can not run/ or turbo boost (they are slow in getting from point A to Point B, not slow in picking up a weapon and shooting it).

3: The vehicle rules are really ridiculous. Not being able to have a normal game turn if you disembark from a transport vehicle before it moves. Unless it is an assault vehicle or open topped. You should be able to disembark from a transport that moved and then assault if an assault vehicle, or get a full movement shooting, assault if you disembark from a transport that did not move before you got off. However they should still limit the distance the vehicle can move in order for the unit to disembark - 6".

[Brandoncbaker]

I don't know about 3, but one of the most annoying rule loopholes I can think of if the "open toped" vechicle. I can shoot at you if this fraction of a inch of my prow is peeking out rule..ugg

[Denzark]

Other players whining about tiny things little things that can easily be house-ruled are probably the most annoying thing about WH40K, the other two, hmmm, narrative gaming is encouraged but no rulebook support (yet) for games masters and the like and I'd say for third I'd say fortifications being placed before terrain limits the usefulness of the bigger pieces if you're not using the narrative method of placing terrain

This is quite short-sighted. 'House' implies you play at the same place and thus can make a common sense ruling based on the majority opinion, shared experience, etc.

That shared experience is missing if you play at different clubs or tournaments etc, and as such house-ruling is not likely or good.

[SaveModifier]

This is quite short-sighted. 'House' implies you play at the same place and thus can make a common sense ruling based on the majority opinion, shared experience, etc.

That shared experience is missing if you play at different clubs or tournaments etc, and as such house-ruling is not likely or good.


The game is meant to have some flexability to allow you and your opponent to enjoy it, and ha done since Rogue Trader and before then when you look at the heritage of the game, if you're not enjoying the game as it is, then you can change the rules so that you do, if you aren't able to change the rules and you're still getting annoyed at the game, then that begs the question of why you're playing in the first place?

[magickbk]

The game is meant to have some flexability to allow you and your opponent to enjoy it, and ha done since Rogue Trader and before then when you look at the heritage of the game, if you're not enjoying the game as it is, then you can change the rules so that you do, if you aren't able to change the rules and you're still getting annoyed at the game, then that begs the question of why you're playing in the first place?

What Denzark was referring to is people like me, the hobby hobo. My schedule doesn't allow me to make a consistent gaming night anywhere, so I have a tendency to show up at a store with an army on a gaming night, play a game or two, and then when I have another night off, do the same at some other store. Having one set of rules, no house rules, means that I can go anywhere with my army and get a game in, even if I don't speak the same language as my opponent. With house rules, I may roll up a unit to something, go to use some ability, and my opponent goes "we don't play that way here, we have a house rule against it."

[DarkLink]

Snap Firing at Flyers. Skyfire is too rare, and GW seems utterly incapable of balancing their Flyers. With the exception of the Storm Raven, which is pretty well priced for its abilities, Flyers are either way, way too good (Heldrake), or terrible (DA Flyers).



What I said still works though. If you where 6 inchs from making it in to assault and lose your front guy or two making it 8 inches then role a 7 you have still failed to make the charge because of the deaths caused by over watch.

People are like "oh, but assault is better because you can charge further". Those people are stupid.

You can charge further, but you also now have roughly a 30% chance of failing a 6" charge. You can take casualties on the way in, particularly against Tau, one of the few armies who's major weakness is assault, and those casualties turn your 6" charge into a 7-8" charge, bumping your odds of failure up to over 50%. It's more difficult to assault through terrain, and Disordered Charge is a huge nerf in and of itself. All so you can, what, charge an extra inch on average?

To be competitive, you must be reliable. Assault is not reliable, and it received multiple nerfs, so it's weaker, and it shows. The only reason it is still a major part of the game is that certain units are so ridiculous, like flying Daemon Princes, that they're effectively impossible to shoot to death and turn the game into herohammer. Otherwise, assault is a major afterthough to shooting, even if it is a useful one.


Not being able to use krak grenades in close combat...

Ummmm.....


The game is meant to have some flexability to allow you and your opponent to enjoy it, and ha done since Rogue Trader and before then when you look at the heritage of the game, if you're not enjoying the game as it is, then you can change the rules so that you do, if you aren't able to change the rules and you're still getting annoyed at the game, then that begs the question of why you're playing in the first place?

You're missing the point. If you just random show up and grab a pickup game with someone you don't know, which happens all the time if you don't just play in your mom's garage with a couple of friends, they will just give you a weird look and find someone else to play if you hand them a sheet and say 'by the way, I've modified the core rules because I think these things are broken'. House rules are not, and cannot be, and effective solution to this problem for a very large portion of the 40k community.

[Cleon]

1 - Look out sir. Artificer armour wearing bike captains being able to take every AP3 or worse hit and then pass off the AP2s on a 2+ gets old, fast.

2 - Snap firing Tesla. Really you got a hit and now it's 3 hits Ok during normal shooting, but on over watch it really hurts.

3 - Power Axes. Really Dante swings at the same time as power fists? how did he live so long?

[confoo22]

1. You should be able to assault when walking on from reserves. I can understand not being able to when you deep strike since you might be disoriented or de-harnessing yourself or whatever, but if you walk on I don't understand why you wouldn't able to assault.

2. Jet pack units. The ability to jump-shoot-jump at full BS is a little op imo. They should make it that if they want to jump after shooting they can only fire snap shots.

3. And because this particular dead horse hasn't been beat enough... Heldrake, Heldrake, Heldrake.

[ajefferism]

Having a 2+ armour/cover/invul save model in front all the other 20+ models in his unit, yet somehow all the bullets magnetically go to him first.... lame. Suspension of disbelief, destroyed.

[Jim Christensen]

1:Just Space marines

2:Blood Angels

3:...And uhm Space marines.

[wbravenboer]

My personal issues
1. Gauss auto-glancing, and glancing hits in general, enough hits, and vehicle wrecked.
2. Necron Scythes
3. Some codexes have too few troop choices, I would like too see a bit more variation, Eldar have a nice selection for instance.

[Archon]

1. And They Shall Know No Rules: ATSKNF is way too good. It ignores so much of the morale game that most morale effects are generally ignored. Immune to Fear, ok, fluffy. Auto-regroup and consolodate. OK, not bad. May move and fire like normal after the auto-regroup and consolodate while everyone else has to stand around and snapshoot? Not cool.
To make it less overpowered, I would remove the "may move normally" bit out. You get the 3" consolodate like everyone, and can shoot or charge normally, but you don't get to move 6" on top of the free 3" consolodate.

2. Vehicle speed bands. Snapshots help some, but shooty tanks are still rather immobile. Vehicles are more vulnerable now, let them have some teeth back. Make combat speed 6" and may fire all weapons, cruising speed 12" and fire 1 plus snapshoot the others. And let troops assault after disembarking if it did not move that turn. Instead of fast vehicles affecting weapons, make fast give an extra 6" if you go flat out.

3. Assaulting vehicles. Make it less of a gimme. Stationary vehicles hit automatically. Combat speed hit on a 3+. Cruising speed hit on a 4+, flat out on a 5+.

This - I totally agree, couldn´t have write it better. ATSKNF is this arkward rule, when a marine with normal chapter-tactics, failed his leadership because he want to be closer, in his next turn ... :confused: - thats ugly.


Snap Firing at Flyers. Skyfire is too rare, and GW seems utterly incapable of balancing their Flyers. With the exception of the Storm Raven, which is pretty well priced for its abilities, Flyers are either way, way too good (Heldrake), or terrible (DA Flyers).

Yes HD is a bit over and yes DAs Flyers a bit under but the Storm Raven is a bit underpriced, because:

12 allaround - a flying fortess
shooty as hell(drake) on two targets (i see them usually with assault cannons and multimelta) and can reach almost every unit it wants
can shoot a lot, even if jinked, thanks to twinlinked weapons
can bear a lot of assault-nastyness in it belly

[Chaoschrist]

You should be able to assault when walking on from reserves. I can understand not being able to when you deep strike since you might be disoriented or de-harnessing yourself or whatever, but if you walk on I don't understand why you wouldn't able to assault.

Well... I think this would be a start for certain units/armies.

I have no clue why I should even bring a unit of Bloodletters in a daemon army (oh wait; I know... to man a Quad gun). If I deepstrike them and they stand there waiting for a turn they're not going to do a lot. And walking them over from my deploymentzone isn't helping a lot either.

Granted, a unit of powersword wielding models for about half what a full marine squad costs that will most likely chop up a full squad in 1 go sounds a bit OP I guess. But right now a unit like that doesn't do a lot at all.

And yes, that's Assaulting from Deep strike...

Similarly Genestealers from reserve... an outflanking specialized CC unit does what? Most likely die, cause it can't assault. Outflanking stuff like that should be fast and dangerous. I thought that was the general idea.

Coming from reserve now feels more like the only ones actually having a benefit are the ones with at least a 3+ save, just in order to prevent them from not getting shot up before they do a thing.

[Mike Wyvill]

Been playing since Rogue Trader so I am an old coot so that may color my opinions. Here we go:

Allies. Learn to play your army before you add something you think may improve it. All it does is make that army play like a lot of others. Soooooo tired of seeing Space Wolf Librarians or Eldar Farseers in armies. I truly am.

Force Org. Stop the 1999+1 Insanity Tournament organizers! Say only one force org or make it 1999!!!

Grenades. oh I long for the days when I had a 2 inch blast template for frag grenades.

Ok. There are mine.

[SON OF ROMULOUS]

1. the absolute ruining of assault. yes please we needed to tone down assault so much so that no one even wants to do it... prime example is on bols tau vs flying circus... when do any of those daemons assault? answer never they sit there shooting spells... that was honestly painful to watch.. seriously assault is so dead in this edition its like beating a dead horse.

2. tanks.. seriously i understand they needed to be changed and toned down but really you made them like a mewing kitten... their not scary anymore. the hull point system is a great concept yet you made it so that glances are an auto hull point? how it didn't pen the Armour it bounced off that not a hull point... that's scratching the paint. then the rules to tank shooting seriously you brought in fortifications my tanks are not pill boxes their not bunkers their main line battle tanks.. move 6 fire everything.... fixes so much

3.shooting.... seriously we all love to roll dice i understand that but did you have to make an entire edition based on line up and shoot? i thought that was most 4th ed missions... i don't want to sit there and play gun line after gun line. its like playing the same army the same play style in every codex. it gets ridiculously boring. super fast. make shooting and assault balanced where is the drawbacks? okay mission wise that's supposed to be fixed? except when your opponent brings enough firepower that all he has to do is hunker down on his single objective because he's gunned down everything else you had. seriously a balanced army should be good and bad at things not. looking at you tau.. shot shot and shot... your weakness is assault but oh wait every special rule you have is set up to mitigate assault... so basically weakness null en void... WTF

[Scion_of_Terra]

1. ATSKNF. As someone else said earlier, if it was only the auto-regroup I would be happy. But the whole acting normally thing afterwards, not to mention the immunity to Sweeping Advance, is more ****ed up than a football bat hitting a golf puck through a tennis hoop.

2. Being unable to assault the turn you come in from reserve. This is fine with Deep Strikers. But if someone is literally walking on from a table edge (or a webway portal - my personal beef), then they should have no problem engaging in CQC.

3. The lack of 0-1 restrictions. Three Riptides/Wraithknights/Heldrakes/misc. OP bull**** in one army is just stupid. Save it for Apoc.

4. Ld8 Warlocks. If you're requiring them to take psychic tests, a little Ld boost would be logical, given that they're, you know, Eldar.

5. Overly beneficial Ally options. Tau w/ Eldar springs to mind, but there are definitely others.

[Psyfer]

Only one really:

The fact that I have to mortgage my firstborn to afford a halfway decent sized army.

[DarkLink]

Scion of Terra, if GW writes such imbalanced rules as Heldrakes in the first place, what makes you think that they'd be capable of determining which units deserve a 0-1 limit anyways? Besides, multiple Riptides/Wraithknights are not what make Tau/Eldar cheesy.



Yes HD is a bit over and yes DAs Flyers a bit under but the Storm Raven is a bit underpriced, because:

12 allaround - a flying fortess
shooty as hell(drake) on two targets (i see them usually with assault cannons and multimelta) and can reach almost every unit it wants
can shoot a lot, even if jinked, thanks to twinlinked weapons
can bear a lot of assault-nastyness in it belly

It's also about as expensive as a Land Raider. You pretty much get one, and only one, and there is enough Skyfire in the game to deal with one AV12 Flyer, and Flyer movement is restricting enough that you can mitigate and ignore one Storm Raven. A Heldrake it is not.

Flyers also make pretty poor assault transports. The Raven is a gunship. You fly around and shoot stuff. Dropping into Hover mode in order to deliver an assault unit is a great way of getting your very expensive gunship killed prematurely. And since a crashing flyer hits the embarked unit with a bunch of Str 9 Ap 2 wounds, you don't want an expensive assault unit sitting around wasting time inside of it, because your opponent will kill it and the unit inside.

Storm Ravens are very good, yes, but they're not game-breaking like multiple Heldrakes or Vendetta spam can potentially be.

[Eric French]

1: give the heldrake a baleflamer in front and in back then give them the 180° arc and let them shoot both, oh and make them ap 2.
2: Slaanesh need higher initiative, Nurgle more toughness and Tzeentch higher leadership, say 11.
3: rhinos should carry 20 marines and 35 cultists.
4: I should try my hand at trolling for no reason HAHA.

srsly though.
The quad gun should need to be behind the aegis but not connected to it.
Psykers pick their own abilities.
GW needs to make every single thing in their universe period end of story, so tired of counts as proxy imagine this as oh and by the way crap. Some people don't like kit bash conversion they want all the weapon options, all the models and to play accurately.

[Deadlift]

1. The knob head who regurgitates every minutiae of the rules to his or hers advantage during their turn and to your disadvantage during yours.

That is all.

[fufuhugs]

I think over watch should only happen on a passed initiative test/moral test or have some kind of role to determine the soldiers are able to react in time or something, jesus

[Drunkencorgimaster]

I just don't like "excessive" arbitrary codex-based exceptions to normal rules. By excessive exceptions I mean any garbage that bends normal game play beyond what a reasonable observer would judge to be normal. For example: the Serpent Shield. A 110-pound Demolisher shell packing high explosive charge traveling 1200 feet per second crashes into a Wave Serpent. Destruction ensues? Nope, the magical energy field turns that into a paint chip. That is just one example, I am not picking on the Eldar, every army has some such annoying nonsense (the Heldrake's multiple shenanigans is another that comes to mind). Locke, Montesquieu, Voltaire, etc. argued that it was not authority or rules that angered a citizenry, but rather arbitrary authority that runs counter to human nature. Yes, you want each army to have some special abilities, but it is the excessive number of seemingly arbitrary rules that pop up in every new codex that leaves me beating my head on the wall. With so many exceptions, what becomes normal? The game looses consistency. It comes apart.

A more balanced rule that I just do not personally care for is eternal warrior. I get its purpose, but it is still a mega immersion breaker for me. I run Chaos Space Marines, but I like the idea that if Abadabbadoo takes a Tau Railgun shot to the face, his head should explode into a greenish-reddish mist and stick-a-fork-in-him-he's-done no matter how many wounds he has left on his profile.

[Ursa]

1. Challenges. They have no place in 40k. This is not fantasy. If you want challenges play tracking fantasy.
2. Hull Points. Worst rule ever! Makes vehicles WAY too vulnerable. Especially walkers. Too slow and not enough armor.
3. Fliers. Ive played every version of 40k and never seen a rule (s) that break a game like fliers and flying monstrous creatures.
As I said ive played 40k since before it was 40k and have owned every army ever made for the game. This is the first edition that might drive me from the game. Its not any fun anymore.

[Cadian122]

Monstrous Creatures. I don't like how my Leman Russ can get taken out with one Lascannon shot, whereas, it takes at least 3 to get rid of a Carnifex or other MC. There's also the fact that they fight at full capacity even when on one wound left, I think that Vehicles shouldn't be destroyed until they've lost their final hull point.
Another thing that bugs me is the fact that a Leman Russ has the same amount of Hull Points as a Predator or Chimera. I think it should have 4, and Land Raiders 5.

[DarkLink]

2. Hull Points. Worst rule ever! Makes vehicles WAY too vulnerable. Especially walkers. Too slow and not enough armor.

Wrong. Hull Points literally singlehandedly fixed almost everything that was wrong with 5th edition. Unfortunately, GW went and did this:



3. Fliers. Ive played every version of 40k and never seen a rule (s) that break a game like fliers and flying monstrous creatures.


Yeah... GW just can't get ahead.

[Dave Mcturk]

[QUOTE=Scion_of_Terra;339502]
"4. Ld8 Warlocks. If you're requiring them to take psychic tests, a little Ld boost would be logical, given that they're, you know, Eldar."

this !

and eldar exarch's being ld 9 !!! the same as their unit... not much leadership there!

[Demonus]

2 - Snap firing Tesla. Really you got a hit and now it's 3 hits Ok during normal shooting, but on over watch it really hurts.

Yeah as a Necron player Ive always felt it should have just given an extra hit.

[DarkLink]

Funny fact, snap firing twin linked Tesla is better (albeit only slightly) than firing it normally, because the extra misses net you more 6's. There's something wrong with that.

[Archon]

It's also about as expensive as a Land Raider. You pretty much get one, and only one, and there is enough Skyfire in the game to deal with one AV12 Flyer, and Flyer movement is restricting enough that you can mitigate and ignore one Storm Raven. A Heldrake it is not.

Flyers also make pretty poor assault transports. The Raven is a gunship. You fly around and shoot stuff. Dropping into Hover mode in order to deliver an assault unit is a great way of getting your very expensive gunship killed prematurely. And since a crashing flyer hits the embarked unit with a bunch of Str 9 Ap 2 wounds, you don't want an expensive assault unit sitting around wasting time inside of it, because your opponent will kill it and the unit inside.

Storm Ravens are very good, yes, but they're not game-breaking like multiple Heldrakes or Vendetta spam can potentially be.

Spamming those things is breaking enough. Heard of a BA List with 3 of this a guy who makes his own FnP on 2+, a bloody sorcerer with stats like a MC and an allied guy with hammer n shild n eternal warrior ... and few scouts or somthing. Enough to tear down a csm army without big fear of a drake or two (those ravens a execellent in AA).

The drake can be easyly fixed, just make the weapon 180 degree. On drake is no breaker.

Spamming is always not fine (in my opinion), spamming best/broken units is annoying.



But afar from this I would like to say:

Hullpoints are fine. But - as mentioned here earlyer - how they work isn´t. Give us a glancing table, somthing like this:

1 - nothing - ohoh
2 - 3 - shaken
4 - 5 - stunned
6 - weapon destroy / if it has no weapon left then immo an loose a HP (only here)

results:

no dead-glancing on vehicels with low armour
heavy armourd vehicels are stronger but you can temporary make them less dangerous
extra armour makes sense - again

[Fanboy]

1. Matt Ward writing codices/rules. Bring back Andy Chambers, Gav Thorpe, Rick Priestley,..... all is forgiven.........
2. Fliers. What was GW thinking!!! what a load of @#$%. I know how this started out: Matt Ward thinking ....'How do I really unbalance this game.........Fliers"........... oh cr#p, this is really not good, majorglobal fall out, lets introduce AA............:mad:
3. Challenges.... WTF! If I wanted this, i would have played Fantasy......
4. Necron Codex........lets really unbalance this game............

[Cap'nSmurfs]

The thing I dislike most is people who reflexively blame Mat Ward for everything.

[Fanboy]

LOL, good one........

[DarkLink]

The thing I dislike most is people who reflexively blame Mat Ward for everything.

Especially when Phil Kelly is worse than Matt Ward. With the exception of DE, every Phil Kelly codex has turned into either an OP cheesefest monobuild, or an outdated monobuild. He loves writing books where one particular unit is obviously significantly better than everything else in that FOC slot (Wave Serpents, Warp Spiders, and War Walkers with 6th Eldar, or Harlequins and Falcons back in 4th, Nob Bikerz and Battlewagons for Orks), or sometimes even in the whole codex (Heldrakes, Long Fangs). And even with Dark Eldar, Venom/Ravager spam is still the norm, with the occasional Beastmaster or Hellion unit thrown in the mix.

Really, none of the writers are actually particularly good at making balanced rules. But Mat Ward is definitely not the worst.

[Shotgun Justice]

1. The whole pre battle sequence: choosing sides before terrain, fortifications before terrain, objectives after choosing sides, random warlord traits, random psychic powers. Especially galling is rolling a warlord trait that is useless e.g Target Priority or Tenacity in Purge The Alien, Master of Ambush if you have no outflanking units. GW noticed this for codexes - Tau is the one I've read where you can re-roll if the trait is useless. Actually, more galling still is rolling crap psychic powers - "Brother ****-face we need that handy forewarning thing you did yesterday, that's a bleeding Vindicator coming this way."
"Sorry, can't - winds of chaos, I mean uh... yeah... but I CAN tell you what's in that forest over there."
*DEAD*

2. Blessings & Maledictions manifested at beginning of Psykers movement phase - so a Psyker can't move to target an enemy with a malediction in the same manner that he does for a psychic shooting attack seconds later. See also inability to manifest these powers from firing ports.

3. Scatter with non barrage. Should be roll to hit, then scatter if a miss, using the arrow on the HIT symbol. Why is a BS5 (signum) Devastator less accurate with a frag missile fired out of the same tube as an accurate krak?

[DarkLink]

You should be able to just pick warlord traits and psychic powers. There are a wide variety of both, and I know for a fact that I would pick different powers in different games and I would use quite a few of the options available to me (Grey Knights).

Yes, some of the traits (stealth and move through cover for everyone in ruins? Really, GW?) and psychic powers (Invisibility, Hallucinate, Iron Arm) are pretty ridiculous. But this would, presumably, force GW to write some better, more balanced psychic powers in the first place. At least, one would hope. Instead, they try and cover up their lazy writing with randomness in the guise of balance.

And I agree, Blessings and Maledictions should just occur during the movement phase at any time, not restricted to the beginning.

[Rev. Tiberius Jackhammer]

You should be able to just pick warlord traits and psychic powers. There are a wide variety of both, and I know for a fact that I would pick different powers in different games and I would use quite a few of the options available to me (Grey Knights).Agreed, having random Warlord Traits really hurts character building! I might write my Chaos Lord as a defensive, reserved commander, but he can still roll an all-out assault trait.

[DarkLink]

If you got to pick, the rulebook table is actually pretty good. There are some very useful abilities there. Problem is, they're random, so on the particular occasion that you happen to need Night Fight turn 1, you're probably going to get Counter Assault in your own deployment zone instead.

[Daemonette666]

I was thinking about the Helldrake, or Hell Turkey as many who have been on the receiving end of its bale flamer have called it. It is a very good flier, and one that can also have its limitations.

It is 170 points, - way to cheap for what it can do. The vector strike is cool, but should it be forced to take a dangerous terrain or grounding test everytime it, and Flying MCs everytime when they do a vector strike? or would you allow the enemy in area terrain to get a cover save top make the attack a bit more survivable?

Also the Bale flamer. I can see what GW talk about when they say its head moves around and shoots under its body and can therefore target units in its rear arc. All I can say is thank Gawd that GW did not make it so the template can be placed over any unit the Helldrake passed over, or fired from any point during its movement. The Bale Flamer is there for one purpose, and one purpose only - to remove pesky powered armoured units say devastators or those with massive cover saves like Pathfinders that sit in cover, and take out all your high priority/threat units the enemy fears the most.

It is a flier, a cheapish flier, not as cheap as say a Valkyrie or Vendetta, both of which have 3 HP and armour 12 to the front and sides, as well as a plethora of long ranged weapons. However it gets an invulnerable save, and can still fire the template weapon without having to make a jink roll. The vector strike is also good at removing units that other units in the CSM army can not get to or see, such as artillery hiding behind walls.

I would correct the Helldrake by one of 2 methods. 1 - Make it 190 points (but that makes it too hard to filed them at all in some games. 2 - make the Bale flamer upgrade cost extra points. Note however the bale flamer can not shoot at other fliers, and if they keep ahead of it, they can avoid being vector striked.

A limit on the number of Helldrakes is a waste of time. I would them make enemy limit the number of artillery pieces, Wave Serpents, Monstrous Creatures, or even terminator units they can take because they are hard to kill, hard to get to, or kill off my units quicker. I would not do this, so why should I allow an enemy to limit how many fliers I take. The FOC limits what I can take. IN a Double FOC with Black Legion Allies I can get 8 Helldrakes. But Why would I? I could spend the points elsewhere on troops in rhinos with dirge casters, massed huge formations of cultist, or as some would have it, plague zombies, etc.

What is scary is in a Double FOC with IG allies, I could take 6 Heldrakes, and up to 6 (2 squadrons of) Valkyries and/ or Vendettas. 12 fliers - your opponent's only options would be to refuse to play against you, or hope to kill off all your forces on the table before the start of your second turn.

Onto another subject - random psychic powers, or getting to choose them before the battle based on your opponents army. here is what I think. I think that the spells should not be random, you should have to pay for them. The nastier they are, the more expensive they cost. Want a good combination of spells, then pay through the tooth for them.

Also armies that do not have psykers in their army should get a natural resistance to psychic powers say a 5+ to deny the witch - Tau (because the books say they are psychic resistant), Orks (because their Psykers are crap, and they are a naturally psychic race) and Dark Eldar . Armies like Sisters of Battle get a 4+ (because their faith protects them).

[Lost Vyper]

Just watched BTP batrep Eldar vs. Necrons...that damn Tesla-rule is SO stupid...snap shooting and getting two hits = six hits? No good, start the dance...

[Mr Mystery]

Which is the whole point of Tesla. It's usually just a one shot assault weapon, with no AP. Hardly any great shakes, even at S5. The zappiness is what makes it work!

[Cactus]

*The historical war gamer in me doesn't like how few Troops are fielded. Troops should be at minimum 50% (points) of your army imho. Plus, most armies have too few choices for Troops.

*Allies. Your army should have bonuses and weaknesses and not the ability to patch holes.

*Named or special characters in games less than 50,000 points. The balance has gotten better but I really dislike them, especially characters that allow you to restructure your army so you only have to take the top elite choices.

[Daemondad]

FLYERS I hate these things so bad. They are making so many differant types of units, that in order to make a good all comers list, you need to water down your army so bad that you are left with weak army against anyone who bring s a spam army.

SNAPFIRE Hey! Lets discourage people from getting into hand to hand combat!

JotWW With all the new shiney toys and codexs' coming out, dont think I forgot about that rediculous power! Btw, you can shove those Runes Staves up your %$# too.

[Dave Mcturk]

just decided i can cope with the grumpy witches rules writing ... just about... but the one that is really knarking me off now is the failed morale roll... the random fall back [just a few inches] then a consolidation move... and then fry the unit that just beat you up in h/h but didnt win on iniative roll...

fall back should be 'normal move distance' +D6 if they like random... crazy situation when you benefit from losing in H/H

and consolidation can be a 3" move but not forwards... ie 'spread out' 'find cover' 'stand firm'... but not 'oh look we can gert back into range and shoot them cos they are standing watching us run away... and now we arent any more !'

[phreakachu]

If you were on the open, who wouldn´t dive to ground (unless fearless :) ) when a mechanized iron dragon tries to catch you?
If you were not busy screaming "OH SHIIIIIIIIIII-" in a suitibly dramatic fashion while it was happening, then yes.

1,2+3: Tau shooting through 2 F*****g windows on 2 separate pieces of terrain, THEN denying your Cover Save.

[Fanboy]

FLYERS I hate these things so bad. They are making so many differant types of units, that in order to make a good all comers list, you need to water down your army so bad that you are left with weak army against anyone who bring s a spam army.

SNAPFIRE Hey! Lets discourage people from getting into hand to hand combat!

JotWW With all the new shiney toys and codexs' coming out, dont think I forgot about that rediculous power! Btw, you can shove those Runes Staves up your %$# too.



+1
'What he said'

[knas ser]

Can I go a little different here and list how annoyed I am by a rule that doesn't exist?

Vibrocannons - back in Epic Space Marine, V-cannons were the ultimate building destroyers and it really made sense given the fluff. Now they're not particularly good at it at all and that makes me sad.

Other than that? ATSKNF. You represent great morale by having high leadership. ATSKNF is just a side-step of the entire morale system. I mean it's actually insanity and the only reason the trait is a good thing is for the meta reason that the SM player knows they'll put the unit back in the box and bring it out again next game. In realistic terms (dangerous ground, I know), a military unit that saw one in four of themselves suddenly die in one go or who were losing a hand to hand combat, should be getting out of there. This is just winning a battle to lose a war. But mainly it just annoys me.

And setting up terrain after fortification placement and table end choosing, as others have said.

[deinol]

My biggest complaint, linking shooting at ground targets with interceptor. Because of that, "dedicated" anti-air guns can't shoot at flyers as they come in, because they'd be used too often against tanks as well.

[Kirsten]

I don't like the deployment and initiative stealing personally. I freely admit to being biased because I have never ever seized the initiative, but have had it happen to me the last two games in a row for example. but the Fantasy deployment system is far far superior in my opinion. Not keen on psychic powers either, psychic heavy armies are a serious pain and there is very little you can do about it.

[Demonicsarge55]

Supporting overwatch.

[knas ser]

Actually, I have a new one. It is the most bone-headed, counter-intuitive and frustrating rule in the entire game. It's just stupid and makes no sense.

Elder Warlocks must be assigned to their units "immediately after determining Warlord traits". I.e. before determining psychic powers. I HATE this.

I mean how do the the eldar organize their armies?


"Hey Joedrad - you've got the ability to enhance people in close combat, why don't you go with the guardian defenders in those woods and Billdrad - with your ability to make people move a little faster, I want you with the Jetbikes."
"Sounds good to us, but what about you Briandrad?"
"Well, with my ability to increase my unit's strength, I'm a natural fit to lead the artillery unit"
"Wow - we really are a wise and ancient race, aren't we, Briandrad!"
"We sure are, Billdrad"


Stoopid!

[GravesDisease]

Can't stand "Feels No Pain". It seems lazy and bolted on and has really opened up a pandora's box of RAW trolls.

[Kaptain Badrukk]

ATSKNF giving you fearless if you get caught breaking from combat.
All the other stuff I'm fine with, you pay the points for that no worries.
And maybe if it was a separate special rule that applied to CSM too i'd buy it more.
But my issue basically falls to this;
CSM vs SM in combat.
SM lose and run away, CSM catch them!
And then they stand there awkwardly, not knowing what to do, like a dog that's caught up to the car he was chasing.
CSM lose and run away, SM catch them!
And slaughter them to a man without even blinking or taking a single casualty.

[Cap'nSmurfs]

It's because there's no such thing as a disorganised rout among loyal Space Marines. They're always Falling Back, never Running Away. Those oath-breakers, on the other hand...

[Kaptain Badrukk]

Don't buy it.
A) Find me a novel where CSM rout en-mass. They just don't.
B) It worked when fearless meant taking casualties but now a Marine player is REWARDED for losing, fleeing and getting caught, because he can always be shepherded off the table if he gets away.
A mechanic that lets you ignore it all together "Marines are fearless in combat" or "Marines ALWAYS win the initaitive-off" either of those i'd be fine with. But a rule that rewards you for getting ganked just makes no sense.

[Aegwymourn]

A) Battle of Terra :rolleyes:

B) Regular Marines are willing to lay down their lives without hesitation do to their phsco-conditioning. Chaos marines are far to personally invested to consider that.

I still agree that ATSKNF is a ham-fisted rule that probably needs an update. Although I think that about the whole Moral mechanic in the first place. The whole thing is fairly stupid. Almost every army has a way to mostly ignore it. From either having majority fearless or LD10.

[Kaptain Badrukk]

A)Battle of Terra: Yeah, wouldn't call that a rout. They still managed to burn a trail of destruction all the way to the eye of terror.
B)So by that logic the willingness to die make you invulnerable to harm when caught by the enemy. A personal investment in survival means you run screaming, dropping your weapons and weeping like a kid with a skinned knee, and drop into a fetal ball as soon as someone gets near you. I can see guard doing that, I can certainly see grots doing it, but an Astartes (even a fallen one)?

Don't get me wrong, i have no issue with the idea of them "running away" when they're under heavy fire or their numbers are down, they should. As is pointed out they can and do because they're selfish and want to survive.
I do take issue with the concept of them getting run into the ground like grots (sometimes by grots).
CSM shouldn't have ATSKNF, more that ALL:SM should have a marine version of the OLD fearless rule in combat only i.e. 1 armor save for every point they lose by.
Then Marines should have ATSKNF to allow them to fight on when all seems lost, whilst the chaos guys leg it.
I'm a marine player more than a CSM player, and an Ork player more than either. And it's never made sense to me at all.

[Cap'nSmurfs]

It's not about running screaming, it's about being disordered. Space Marines fall back in good order; they possibly don't even turn their backs on the enemy, but cover each other as they attempt to move back. Chaos cut and run, they lose their cohesion and behave selfishly, and in so doing they open themselves up to being isolated and taken out as they flee.

That's actually a good description of what happens when Horus dies. The horde immediately fragmented and left themselves open to being picked apart as they were driven into the Eye. The Traitor Legions took most of their Heresy-era casualties when Horus fell, I suspect, precisely because of this effect.

Routing is the most deadly part of a close-combat engagement. If you never rout, per se - if, say, you were unable to ever feel fear - then you'd avoid most of your close combat casualties.

[Kaptain Badrukk]

Hmmmm it is a cohesive argument.
Allow me to re-phrase my argument then, as it actually seems that ATSKNF isn't my big issue, it's just something which directly taps into it.
"Fearless should still cause some casualties when losing combat."
Because TBH that is my major issue.

OR there should be some differentiation between a defeat and a rout, possibly that a unit above 50% strength does not rout and one below does. Except loyal marines, who never do.
Routed units are vulnerable to getting run into the ground, but defeated units take armor saves based on their losses if caught.

That way a fight between (moving away from marines for a second) doesn't got like this.
10 Striking scorpions charge 30 grots and their 3 ork minders.
Scorpions cause 3 wounds (killing all three Orks), but due to horrific rolling don't kill anything else.
Grots cause 4 wounds due to lucky rolling.
Scorpions (near fearless embodiments of the god of murder, led by a near immortal representation of the path of war) flee and are caught and immediately cut down by the grots (a disorganised rabble armed with whatever they can find and led by no-one).

We all know the scorpions would disengage in good order, and the grots are more likely to turn on each other.

So in the amended scenario above the scorpions would instead lose (statistically) another warrior. Which means if they lost combat AGAIN they'd be routed and run down by the now emboldened grots.

Reverse the roles, where the scorpions cause 16 wounds to the grots 0 (more likely scenario TBH).
The grots are caught and take another 14 casualties, all but wiping out the unit.
But if the scorpions do rout them then the scorpions from kill them all right away.

I agree that the rout is the worst part of any battle, but the rout rarely happens because you are doing slightly worse than an opponent. It happens when you're screwed.
And the issue that CSM players have with ATSKNF is that in a toe to toe fight CSM can rout really easily when taking low casualties but marines can't rout at all. Marines probably shouldn't be able to rout, but it's WAY too easy for a vanilla CSM to rout.

[Mr Mystery]

Yup. There is a difference between falling back, and a rout. This is typically represented in GW games by being caught by pursuers.

If you break off from combat, and aren't caught, the unit remains in a sort of cohesion, and can be whipped back into a fighting formation.

If you're caught, your dudes aren't dead, they're routed, scattered around in a blind panic. The reconstitution of a routed unit lies outside the time scope of the game.

Ergo, Marines never, ever rout, which is a significant thing!

[Kaptain Badrukk]

Yup. There is a difference between falling back, and a rout. This is typically represented in GW games by being caught by pursuers.

If you break off from combat, and aren't caught, the unit remains in a sort of cohesion, and can be whipped back into a fighting formation.

If you're caught, your dudes aren't dead, they're routed, scattered around in a blind panic. The reconstitution of a routed unit lies outside the time scope of the game.

Ergo, Marines never, ever rout, which is a significant thing!

I like this interpretation more. But still struggle with the issue of early routing on barely damaged units. Same tbh as I do with units fleeing off the board at the first marker of casualties. The GW representation of morale as a whole is too 2d to really work for me.

[deinol]

Maybe I haven't played enough games (ok, I definitely haven't played enough games). But ATSKNF has never really effected any game I've been in. I mostly play Eldar, and I think I've had one time where one of my squads break from shooting casualties. When it comes to close combat, usually either I slaughter my opponents to a man, or they slaughter me. So silly morale shenanigans really don't seem to be a deciding factor in many games.

Do people really get tac squads stuck in close combat for turn after turn?

[Ursa]

Been playing marines for 20+years and I'm tired of people *****ing about this rule. Its not enough that we have the weakest superhumans in the universe (fluff wise vs rules wise) . It is what makes marines unique. Don't you think I would like to have a T8 flying monstrous creature that can shoot 12 str6 twin linked shots. Or 72" range str10 pie plates. Fliers that are designed to kill marines. Every army made is designed with killing marines in mind. So give up the *****ing. There are far worse rules in this game.

[Kaptain Badrukk]

Funny, i've been playing marines since 2nd ed and I still don't like the rule.
My gripe isn't along the "oh no, marines are better than me!" line, they're along the "the whole issue of morale in combat needs re-jigging and marines are the white-head on the pimple of the issue" line.
I love my marines, but I concede that this rule is plain daft when you look at the way morale works in combat. Every other aspect of it makes perfect sense (except perhaps that they SHOULD be able to rally with foes nearby).
The more I think about it it's not about how good ATSKNF is, it's more about how badly thought out morale in combat is.

[Dave Mcturk]

yep... mixed combat... every unit is affected by losses... very strange mechanic...

[Katharon]

I always thought that 40K should take a leaf out of WHFB's book and have it so that if a unit breaks from a failed morale check then any friendly units within a certain range (able to have seen why they broke) have to take a morale check of their own to see if they run too. Modifiers being that a unit that is already locked in combat does not have to take the test.

[Dave Mcturk]

no problem with the concept of 'spreading panic' ... but dont think twenty dead 'cannon fodder' types would seriously effect the morale of 'elite' units... mb a -1 modifier maximum for the units that 'lost' combat but didnt take ANY casualties...

[Katharon]

no problem with the concept of 'spreading panic' ... but dont think twenty dead 'cannon fodder' types would seriously effect the morale of 'elite' units... mb a -1 modifier maximum for the units that 'lost' combat but didnt take ANY casualties...

Can't make it too complicated; would rather have a simplified blanket system than a bunch of loop-holes, etc. SM would, naturally, be immune to these effects due to ATSKNF; so too would units that are Fearless -- but that's about it.