yoon_wish Posted February 7, 2014 Share Posted February 7, 2014 -All infantry should gain furious charge.-When locked in combat each unit should take a roll and on a 5+ they should get rage for the round.-Give Sanguinary Guard 2 wounds, and maybe toughness 5 (I like the 5 man squad more of an elite feel)-All assaulting models should get fleet.-DOA allows for assault right after deep striking.-Point reductions across the boardPerhaps this is OP but shooty armies just dominate way too much nowadays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Memento Of Prospero Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 -All infantry should gain furious charge. -When locked in combat each unit should take a roll and on a 5+ they should get rage for the round. -Give Sanguinary Guard 2 wounds, and maybe toughness 5 (I like the 5 man squad more of an elite feel) -All assaulting models should get fleet. -DOA allows for assault right after deep striking. -Point reductions across the board Perhaps this is OP but shooty armies just dominate way too much nowadays. Yeah, it is lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sockwithaticket Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 -All infantry should gain furious charge. -When locked in combat each unit should take a roll and on a 5+ they should get rage for the round. -Give Sanguinary Guard 2 wounds, and maybe toughness 5 (I like the 5 man squad more of an elite feel) -All assaulting models should get fleet. -DOA allows for assault right after deep striking. -Point reductions across the board Perhaps this is OP but shooty armies just dominate way too much nowadays. Although this would be a lot of fun for us for a short while, we'd end up as reviled as 5th ed. Grey Knights. Even just 1 or two of those rules, eg. Descent of Angels permitting assault after deepstrike, would break the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quixus Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 sockwithaticket, on 08 Feb 2014 - 11:01, said: Although this would be a lot of fun for us for a short while, we'd end up as reviled as 5th ed. Grey Knights. Even just 1 or two of those rules, eg. Descent of Angels permitting assault after deepstrike, would break the game. How about we have to choose whether to assault after Deep Strike or to get the increased precision Deep Strikes as from DoA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sockwithaticket Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 That would be an interesting mechanic and certainly mitigate against potentially being overpowered. It's highly unlikely that we'd get it though :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quozzo Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 sockwithaticket, on 08 Feb 2014 - 11:01, said: Although this would be a lot of fun for us for a short while, we'd end up as reviled as 5th ed. Grey Knights. Even just 1 or two of those rules, eg. Descent of Angels permitting assault after deepstrike, would break the game. How about we have to choose whether to assault after Deep Strike or to get the increased precision Deep Strikes as from DoA? But that's worse than we have now. I'd rather keep the current points for VV than have to choose, unless we get servo skulls or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quixus Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 sockwithaticket, on 08 Feb 2014 - 11:01, said: Although this would be a lot of fun for us for a short while, we'd end up as reviled as 5th ed. Grey Knights. Even just 1 or two of those rules, eg. Descent of Angels permitting assault after deepstrike, would break the game. How about we have to choose whether to assault after Deep Strike or to get the increased precision Deep Strikes as from DoA? But that's worse than we have now. I'd rather keep the current points for VV than have to choose, unless we get servo skulls or something. that suggestion was made under the assumptions that a) Vanguard Veterans do not get the old Heroic Intervention and that this option is available to every unit which now has DoA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quozzo Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 It won't be added to every unit with a Jump Pack, I seriously doubt we will keep out VV with it tbh but there's always hoping. In any case, needing to choose between our HI or DoA makes the VV worse than we currently have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spagunk Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I like the rage token idea. Definitely worthwhile. It would be interesting if they can re-shape sternguard to give them an assault focus. Swap out special use ammo and give them blood shard ammo? Veteran Assault Marines used to be in addition to normal Veteran Marines back in 3rd ed. But because they were assault oriented (also vet marines were crud), they were better suited for BA and thus more useful. You can't reshape sternguard into something else. They wouldn't be sternguard anymore. Might as well make a new unit. Why not add: X number of Sternguard can exchange special ammo for bloodshard ammo for x points/free. Solved without making a new unit! Besides, I'm pretty certain GW is willing to break/mold/change whatever they want to any unit if it means that they sell more of the kit. New special ammo can do that without a kit redo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Durundal Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 What is bloodshard ammo? Yeah you really can't predict what GW is going to do next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blindhamster Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 blood shard is assault ap4 rounds with 18inch range. isnt there already ap4 rounds with 30" range? And isn't there already assault rounds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RenderDead Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I don't think GW cares about what breaks the game these days.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disruptor_fe404 Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 There are Assault rounds (Metal Storm Frag shells, S3 AP-, Assault 2. Or is it Assault 1?), but those are on the Deathwatch Kill-Team, not Sternguard. The 30" AP4 rounds are Kraken, and are Rapid Fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quozzo Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 I like the sound of 18" assault rounds, the sternguard could then assault, or use Kraken rounds if over 12". But the sternguard are not assault focused and I think they should not be given "an assault role". leave the shooting to the bolters and the melee to the chainsword wielding battle crazy red thirst induced monsters that can do damage in assaults. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appiah4 Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Yeah, let's give Sternguard that so no one may ever need an assault elites unit, like, ever again. Come on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnorriSnorrison Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 I feel that the next codex needs a complete overhaul in the assault unit section to implement the close combat-theme of the Blood Angels in 6th edition. If GW won't do that "correctly", I believe we may end up with a very characterful codex that is true to the background, but also very weak, or a red C:SM with special units, that will have us go with the trend and shoot everything to bits with ugly, bulked up terminator-dreadnoughts and other laughable gimmicks. They'll be painted red, mind you. In my very humble opinion, the key to a successful realisation of C:BA ( a codex true to the background that is also able to compete) is to swim against the flow of the current edition. Just think of it, every unit designed for the Blood Angels has an assault-y theme to it, a theme that has become worthless in an environment that benefits ranged weaponry mostly and punishes those who actually try to get up close. I'm not sure wether I deem GW capable of doing what needs to be done for a new C:BA. Snorri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disruptor_fe404 Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Were I a proper Blood Angels player, I'd be very worried after Codex: Tyranids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toomanyprojects Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 How about letting infantry assault out of all vehicles as if they have an assault ramp? That'd give things a bit more bite :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quixus Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 How about letting infantry assault out of all vehicles as if they have an assault ramp? That'd give things a bit more bite Which vehicles have an assault ramp but are not assault vehicles anyways? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Durundal Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 I feel like our vehicles need to be assault vehicles. Even if they cost a bit more for the upgrade. If our troops get cheaper and buffed I wouldn't mind that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toomanyprojects Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 How about letting infantry assault out of all vehicles as if they have an assault ramp? That'd give things a bit more bite :)Which vehicles have an assault ramp but are not assault vehicles anyways? I meant treat every transport vehicle as if they were assault vehicles. From drop pods to razorbacks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Memento Of Prospero Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Even lucius drop pods lost that ability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bartali Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 I feel that the next codex needs a complete overhaul in the assault unit section to implement the close combat-theme of the Blood Angels in 6th edition. If GW won't do that "correctly", I believe we may end up with a very characterful codex that is true to the background, but also very weak, or a red C:SM with special units, that will have us go with the trend and shoot everything to bits with ugly, bulked up terminator-dreadnoughts and other laughable gimmicks. They'll be painted red, mind you. In my very humble opinion, the key to a successful realisation of C:BA ( a codex true to the background that is also able to compete) is to swim against the flow of the current edition. Just think of it, every unit designed for the Blood Angels has an assault-y theme to it, a theme that has become worthless in an environment that benefits ranged weaponry mostly and punishes those who actually try to get up close. I'm not sure wether I deem GW capable of doing what needs to be done for a new C:BA. Snorri The codex doesn't need a complete overhaul in the assault section, the rules for assault do. I don't want a 6th BA codex, I want a 7th ed one with hopefully revised rules for assault, jump packs and transports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Memento Of Prospero Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 I don't see the point in getting a 7th ed codex halfway through 6th... their planned changes have the time to rot 10 times over before they have a clue as to how to force us to buy new models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RenderDead Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Would it be OP if we got grav-guns? Or is that only C:SM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.