Topic: If you could change one rule in the 8th ed what would it be?

[MrDWhitey]

Now that's done, no whining in this thread about rats, ok?

[patsy02]

Man, I really hate mice.

[commandant]

I met a nice rat once.   I am almost sure of it.   *Looks around confused*

[StealthKnightSteg]

I know i'm cheating but here it is:
# 1: a cannonball hitting an obstacle destroys the obstacle but the cannonball stops. How ridiclus is it that a simple fence stops a cannonball dead in its tracks!
# 2: fleeing units automatically destroyed when charged, it sucks!


we use TLS with exception for woods, for woods we use ye olde 2" of sight rule

This your own rule? If you think it sucks why use it???
Fleeing units getting charged need to redo a flee roll. Though fleeing 2d6 versus 2d6+M from the charge makes it a bit iffy.

[Siberius]

TloS and of course no guessing for ranged weapons. And you can tell that rule is bad when even most of the people it benefits wish it hadn't changed...

[rufus sparkfire]

no guessing for ranged weapons.

I like that! It speeds the game up.

[commandant]

no guessing for ranged weapons.

I like that! It speeds the game up.

It is a bit broken though, I would make all ranged weapons BS weapons.   New rules for cannon.

Nominate where you want the cannon ball to bounce.   Roll BS + artillery dice (only take artillery dice into account if it is a miscast).   If you hit then roll to bounce.   If you fail you fail.
It would mean that master gunners of BS5 and BS6 would become more important.

[warhammerlord_soth]

I disagree.


You already have a 1 in 6 chance of misfiring, and then a chance of blowing up or being hampered another turn.


Then you have a fair chance of overshooting the target.


Cannons are fine the way they are.




The mortars and such, however... 1 chance in 3 of being spot on is perhaps a bit too good.

[McKnight]

Remove the cover rules. -1 or 2 to hit in addition to other factors such as long range is just too much. It sucks and should go away, since it is the reason i almost never take any BS shooting.

TLOS is awesome and should stay, dont see why you hate it so much.

[rufus sparkfire]

The mortars and such, however... 1 chance in 3 of being spot on is perhaps a bit too good.

Only because mortars are cheat-tastic. Stone throwers are not that good at all!

Mortars need to cost more points.

[Commander Bernhardt]

I know i'm cheating but here it is:
# 1: a cannonball hitting an obstacle destroys the obstacle but the cannonball stops. How ridiclus is it that a simple fence stops a cannonball dead in its tracks!
# 2: fleeing units automatically destroyed when charged, it sucks!


we use TLS with exception for woods, for woods we use ye olde 2" of sight rule

This your own rule? If you think it sucks why use it???
Fleeing units getting charged need to redo a flee roll. Though fleeing 2d6 versus 2d6+M from the charge makes it a bit iffy.

hmm I just re-read the rules and it seems your right! I guess I should read the rules more often instead of relying on my evil friends 

well in that case I have only one rule I wish to drop: a fence stopping a cannonbal AAARGH!!

[rufus sparkfire]

well in that case I have only one rule I wish to drop: a fence stopping a cannonbal AAARGH!!

Don't use any fences in your games: just use solid-looking stone walls!

[Uryens de Crux]

Mortars are way overpowered now, and well undercosted

[Aldaris]

Yep... Mortars really make me sweat when I spot them across the field.

But all in all I really enjoy 8th edition - I wouldn't mind flanking negating steadfast though.

[commandant]

it is something that could easily be house ruled, like the TLOS thing.   
The problem is that artillery was balanced by the guess range thing.   Now that is gone mortars and rockets are really strong.   Hummmm needs thinking about for 9th

[Finlay]

They just need to be more expensive.

[Aldaris]

The problem is that artillery was balanced by the guess range thing. 

I'm sorry, but no. That's simply not true. They were not balanced by that - some players could guess ranges perfectly, some were lousy at it. This isn't game balance, this is rewarding a secondary skill that has nothing to do with strategy.

Finlay has it right I think - a weapon like this (large template, good range) needs to cost in the 100-110 range, it is simply a bit too cheap at the moment. Not a big deal though.

[commandant]

Admittedly it rewarded people that could count but the fact that people couldn't or were not great at it is what balanced the game (in so far as it was balanced)

[MrDWhitey]

Nah, Aldaris is 100% correct in this.

I hope that wasn't an implied insult either. You looked like such an amicable chap.   

[Timbor]

Well, they were more balanced before when there were partial hits.  Now that any sort of a 'glance' by the template causes a direct hit, template weapons go wayyyy more powerful.

[rufus sparkfire]

Well, they were more balanced before when there were partial hits.  Now that any sort of a 'glance' by the template causes a direct hit, template weapons go wayyyy more powerful.

You can blame the skaven for that, as usual!

[MrDWhitey]

You can blame the skaven for that, as usual!

[rufus sparkfire]

Yes!

[McKnight]

You should blame 40k if any. They copied the TLOS rule directly from the 40k rulebook as well as the template hits.

[wissenlander]

I liked guessing ranges.  Felt somewhat like a real artilleryman then.