The 40K rules need to be seriously revised.

[Dave the Walrus]

I have been wargaming for 50 years "...and it doesn´t seem a day..." and I can seriously say that the 8th Edition 40K rules are the worst I have ever played with. Myself and my two sons have organised a knockout cup system, like the World Cup and we have used almost every army that has featured in the rules. The problem is that "Horde" armies are too powerful and don´t cost enough per figure. In effect, the rules are biased towards horde armies.

The terrain rules are too weak and the Morale system is flawed in that the lower the number of figures in your unit, the more likely you are to stay. There should be no Hand to Hand Combat, except in fighting for buildings. We have to accept that these are fantasy rules, in a fantasy universe, but we have to have some philosophy behind them and surely in the period envisaged by the rules, weaponry is so
powerful that "Shooting" and ranged weapons should dominate everything. Why not have firing taking place at long ranges, for example, Shuriken cannon range of 24 inches and the result of fire is that
everybody gets their heads down and advancing is very difficult. In effect, there is a "shoot out" at long range and superior numbers in firepower make you advance.

In cover, such as buildings and Woods, if a unit is inside, it should be hidden and not available to fire or be a target, unless it is at the edge or say 1 inch from the edge. It´s 40K!...everybody would be
looking for cover and getting their heads down.

I have only mentioned the main points that spring to mind, and in future posts, I can expand upon this

[Morgrim]

So... basically you want to play a game that isn't Warhammer at all, then. The three pillars of the game have always, ALWAYS been moving, shooting and close combat. So completely removing close combat means you're not playing 40k. Also there have been editions of the game that have severely nerfed CC and that harmed the game, not helped it.

[SharkMango]

Yeah boss, the game you're describing seems more fit for a World War 1 or 2 era game, where soldiers have to keep their heads down whenever a bullet whizzes too close. In 40k, Space Marines have armor that can shrug off all but the deadliest of weapons, so why would they take cover? Imperial Guardsmen are pushed into the enemy to drown them in bodies. Tyranids care not for the weapons of enemies, so why should they worry if a few gaunts are cut down? Orks see death as weakness, and will fight and take wounds just to become stronger. Even the wise Eldar are so swift and agile that remaining in one place and simply ducking under enemy fire seems befit only of lesser beings, and Necron are machines that advance regardless!

Close combat is integral to the game. There are whole units based entirely around it, like Khorne Berzerkers. You'd chop off a third of all units and upgrades just to have a boring shoot-out where everyone keeps their armies stationary across the table? Back in 5th, 6th, and 7th edition, there were certain armies that did just that, and they were the MOST BORING games I've ever seen!

[Lemt]

Horde armies are fine, not too powerful. That's what flamers are for. You have to assume enemies are going to get close and want to assault, so burn them to a crisp. Most armies even have long range answers to hordes.

[Dave the Walrus]

I think you have a point there, because I am currently playtesting my own rules that i have written for the Peloponnesian Wars. However, I do like playing 40K and I like the challenge it gives, after all I don´t quibble and moan about the rules for Monopoly or Chess, I just accept them. However, I think that rules for Cover and being in Cover and Terrain could be made more difficult and I think the morale rules need to be revised.

I fight with an Ealdari army and I tend to go for a lot of "infantry" (can you spot the old wargamer influence there?). I have a hard time beating "Horde" armies, but there must be a way of defeating them, so I just have to persevere.

- - - Updated - - -

- - - Updated - - -

Horde armies are fine, not too powerful. That's what flamers are for. You have to assume enemies are going to get close and want to assault, so burn them to a crisp. Most armies even have long range answers to hordes.

Thanks for that, I have to have a look at flamers.

[Denzark]

If you are infantry heavy eldar do they not come out in points as a horde?

[JMichael]

You should check out the game Infinity then!
Free rules, free army builder, beautiful minis, won't break the bank.

[Fueldrop]

Flamers are nice for those who have them. #DarkEldar

[Dave the Walrus]

If you are infantry heavy eldar do they not come out in points as a horde?

Yes, you do have a point and I do have an Ealdari army. However, I tend to use the infantry in small groups, as I think they have more mobility and flexibility that way.

[JesseS]

Hahaha, sorry man but this thread kinda reads as "I don't understand why hordes are so powerful when I only use 1/3 of the options in my Codex".

Eldar have a lot of anti-horde tools from spamming jetbikes with shuriken cannons/scatter lasers to Wraithguard with D-Scythes, to just charging in units of Striking Scorpions.