Author Topic: If you could change one rule in the 8th ed what would it be? (Read 14370 times)

Obi · « **Reply #75 on:** May 30, 2011, 02:50:34 PM »

What I personally dislike about TLOS is that it pretty much amounts to everything always having line of sight to everything. Also the cover modifiers are bull- especially for other units. If you suffer a -2 to hit, say 6+ instead of 4+, the 4 and 5 should hit the screening unit

I really like magic in this edition. It can help you out and let you down a lot. But it adds more randomness and more fun.

For me overall, 8th is a lot more fun than 7th. 7th was good, but a lot more tactical and less relaxing.

Shadowlord · « **Reply #76 on:** May 30, 2011, 04:15:30 PM »

Quote from: Obi on May 30, 2011, 02:50:34 PM

7th was good, but a lot more tactical and less relaxing.

Less relaxing but not more tactical - unless you count breaking at all times from terror and from a Blood Knight charge as tactical.

rufus sparkfire · « **Reply #77 on:** May 30, 2011, 04:24:15 PM »

...and huge units being destroyed just because they ran through half a dozen harpies. Plus a lot of the 'tactics' were just taking advantage of silly rules, like the skirmisher redirect trick.

7th edition was bad. 8th is a considerable improvement!

patsy02 · « **Reply #78 on:** May 31, 2011, 12:56:01 AM »

Quote from: rufus sparkfire on May 30, 2011, 12:23:25 PM

True line of sight = non-issue.

Agreed. If you're having arguments about it you should probably find someone else to have a game with.

Cannonofdoom · « **Reply #79 on:** May 31, 2011, 06:09:15 AM »

If I could change one rule in 8th edition it would be to make a rule that says people aren't allowed to decide for themselves what "makes sense". That way, when someone gets all up on their high horse saying "Well I, for one, think the intent of the rule was blah blah blah, so you would never catch anyone at MY gaming group playing it that way." and then, if they did say something like that, it would be legal to throw a metal Great Unclean one at their head for being a rotten big whiner!

Uryens de Crux · « **Reply #80 on:** May 31, 2011, 07:51:29 AM »

TLOS is stupid for the fact it invalidated almost everyone's scenery. What's the point of a GW hill (or small bump) that can now be see over by everyone's troops?

"I'll charge that unit...
"but they are behind a hill...
"doesn't matter, my extra tall chaos warriors can see over the hill thanks to their platform shoes..."

That's why I dont like TLOS.

It's fine in a skirmish game. Not in WFB.

I don't like the way skirmishers work now, they are quite pointless in this ed

On the whole though the game is an improvement on 7th ed.

Justnorth · « **Reply #81 on:** May 31, 2011, 08:21:33 AM »

Quote from: rufus sparkfire on May 30, 2011, 04:24:15 PM

7th edition was bad. 8th is a considerable improvement!

7th was rubbish, 8th has some improvements.

Fandir Nightshade · « **Reply #82 on:** May 31, 2011, 08:50:16 AM »

Quote

TLOS is stupid for the fact it invalidated almost everyone's scenery. What's the point of a GW hill (or small bump) that can now be see over by everyone's troops?

"I'll charge that unit...
"but they are behind a hill...
"doesn't matter, my extra tall chaos warriors can see over the hill thanks to their platform shoes..."

Well no converting just use the regular GW stuff. (bad argument I hate TLOS too and I do love converted armies)

Quote

That's why I dont like TLOS.

I know I dislike it

Quote

I don't like the way skirmishers work now, they are quite pointless in this ed

They work fine now if you use them right...you know they are stubborn in woods....and regular rank and file isn`t. The only thing about skirmishers they only work if they have missle weapons the cc only skirmishers well....hmm you can walk into a wood and stay there and be left alone. Putting 20 duellists into a wood shooting 20 shots of armour piercing pistols out forces the enemy to fight them (if only we had duelists in the army list and not only in the dogs of war entry....oh or empire of wolves awesome army list). I do like Wood elf skirmishers marching 10 inches shooting 30 inches with no penalty and being stubborn in woods...where the enemy isn´t

)

Quote

On the whole though the game is an improvement on 7th ed.

Totally.

commandant · « **Reply #83 on:** May 31, 2011, 11:22:30 AM »

If they changed the TLOS rule (please read get rid of it) and allowed flanking to break steadfast as well as ranks this would be brilliant. The VPs is also a big problem but then I never use VPs to work out who won anyway

Fandir Nightshade · « **Reply #84 on:** May 31, 2011, 11:51:44 AM »

I like steadfast as it favours large sexy regiments.....sexy I say.

commandant · « **Reply #85 on:** May 31, 2011, 12:06:07 PM »

I also like steadfast but if you have a unit piling into your flank you tend to loose your steadfast

Fandir Nightshade · « **Reply #86 on:** May 31, 2011, 12:12:43 PM »

I consider steadfast more being about numbers of bodies huddling and cuddling together and holding firm even though the flank is attacked.

Fluff wise

Rules wise I like that large formations usually stick around a while especially if you have a general and bsb close by.

Love it.

LOS

hate it.

rufus sparkfire · « **Reply #87 on:** May 31, 2011, 04:12:22 PM »

I'd change the rules so that Fandir wasn't allowed to play. That would fix everything!

Aldaris · « **Reply #88 on:** May 31, 2011, 04:15:18 PM »

Quote from: rufus sparkfire on May 31, 2011, 04:12:22 PM

I'd change the rules so that Fandir wasn't allowed to play. That would fix everything!

While it certainly would, I doubt even GW has the power to do that.

But I completely agree that Fandir is broken and cheesy and needs to be fixed.

Fandir Nightshade · « **Reply #89 on:** May 31, 2011, 07:10:02 PM »

Awwwwwwww.....and I don´t even play Skaven *wink wink nudge nudge*

Also I think I am so sad right now I will never play warhammer again....or post Eurobash pictures.

rufus sparkfire · « **Reply #90 on:** May 31, 2011, 09:52:55 PM »

But you know I love you really, so it's OK.

MrDWhitey · « **Reply #91 on:** May 31, 2011, 09:57:26 PM »

You love no-one!

rufus sparkfire · « **Reply #92 on:** May 31, 2011, 10:01:30 PM »

commandant · « **Reply #93 on:** June 01, 2011, 01:10:10 AM »

Quote from: Fandir Nightshade on May 31, 2011, 12:12:43 PM

I consider steadfast more being about numbers of bodies huddling and cuddling together and holding firm even though the flank is attacked.

Fluff wise

Rules wise I like that large formations usually stick around a while especially if you have a general and bsb close by.

Love it.

LOS

hate it.

You do have a point. Maybe only the TLOS needs to be changed back to the 7th ed line of sight rules

Justnorth · « **Reply #94 on:** June 01, 2011, 09:34:45 AM »

Somebody at GW has finally worked out that if you make the game more friendly towards rank and file then you will sell a lot more models.
That was a massive rule change, that will affect all of our spare change.

Midaski · « **Reply #95 on:** June 01, 2011, 09:42:12 AM »

Quote from: Justnorth on June 01, 2011, 09:34:45 AM

Somebody at GW has finally worked out that if you make the game more friendly towards rank and file then you will sell a lot more models.
That was a massive rule change, that will affect all of our spare change.

.. Ah, but did they hold that off long enough - maybe they could have got Rank and File down to 5 models per box first.

Hang on - maybe that's the plan for Ed.10.

Ed.9 no real change just change the models per box quantities over the next year or two, so it's £16 for 5 minis .....

................ then Bang

... Ed.10 changes the points costs and new rules bring in SuperHordes and suddenly you need 100 troopers per core unit ...............

Fandir Nightshade · « **Reply #96 on:** June 01, 2011, 10:07:40 AM »

Nope you will just have to pay 100 € each month to be allowed to play warhammer.

Justnorth perhaps you should play a skirmish game.

First people complain that 7th edition made small elite units too good and it was all about the money bad gw forced them to buy elite units....than 8th gives the guys what the want....large dashing regiments marching in line to the beat of a drum (that is really good now) and again it is bad GW just in for the money.

Jerseyboy381 · « **Reply #97 on:** June 01, 2011, 11:05:55 AM »

Quote from: Fandir Nightshade on June 01, 2011, 10:07:40 AM

Nope you will just have to pay 100 € each month to be allowed to play warhammer.

Yes, but due to exchange rates in Nottingham, where it is perpetually 1989, Aussies have to pay triple that amount.

As far as steadfast, It is an interesting ~~marketing ploy~~ addition to the game, but I think it's why people hate 8th so much. You had to go out and buy almost a new army because so few 7th ed builds work in 8th. And we all know how resonable GW's prices are so that's not a problem, right?

Finlay · « **Reply #98 on:** June 01, 2011, 11:34:43 AM »

so GW should have perpetuated a weak game system, just so people could use the same boring old armies they always had? That doesn't make sense, either from a "hobby" or business viewpoint.

Certainly bigger units makes people buy more models, but it has also drastically improved the game, and I think GW were aiming for both.

I have Empire and OnG armies.
Empire you can expand easily/cheaply with historical minis. Especially perry!
OnG I just bought loads of the BfSP stuff off ebay, as well as getting some generous donations from people on the forum. Still, without being given stuff, it wouldn't be that expensive to just buy an army from ebay.

There are ways to build armies a lot cheaper than buying from GW.

rufus sparkfire · « **Reply #99 on:** June 01, 2011, 11:39:33 AM »

Also, unit fillers!

Lots of unit fillers.

News:

Author Topic: If you could change one rule in the 8th ed what would it be? (Read 14370 times)