No1 rule that you think needs changed.

[TorvaldTheMild]

If you could ask GW to change a single rule, what would it be?

[MARK0SIAN]

You should be able to disembark from any transport AFTER it has moved.

[Marshal Rohr]

Releasing rules that don’t have models

[Gederas]

Why can't I shoot Guilliman because there's a single marine hidden behind a wall closer to me than Guilliman, and I can't see the marine, which means it isn't a valid target to shoot at in the first place?

 

You should be able to disembark from any transport AFTER it has moved.

Also this. Especially Land Raiders.

[Guest Triszin]

cities of death cover rules for primary 40k

[kombatwombat]

The total and complete death of Mortal Wounds.

 

Also, what Mark0sian said.

[Custodian Athiair]

Hard to compete with leaving transports after they move and shooting characters if you can't see another target. Both rules as they stand make absolute zero sense.

Those are two large bugbears of mine.

[Slasher956]

One of the following....

 

Cover...being 90% behind cover but not getting the benefit because you aren’t in it!

Targeting characters hidden by non targetable units

Disembarking after a vehicle moves (no assaulting unless the vehicle has the assault vehicle rule)

[The Unseen]

All the people talking about the character targetting rule...

Would you prefer lascannons that can snipe your characters when they have a friendly vehicle block their los to anything else?

 

As for me, the cover rules.

Unless you've got big chunks of LOS blocking chunks everywhere, may as well play on planet bowling ball.

It basically does nothing.

[MARK0SIAN]

All the people talking about the character targetting rule...

Would you prefer lascannons that can snipe your characters when they have a friendly vehicle block their los to anything else?

 

As for me, the cover rules.

Unless you've got big chunks of LOS blocking chunks everywhere, may as well play on planet bowling ball.

It basically does nothing.

I don’t mind the character targeting rule too much but I would amend it so that the unit preventing you shooting the character must be between the shooter and the character.

 

It is silly that they could be behind the unit shooting at the character but because they’re still technically closer they prevent you shooting them.

[old git]

Allow characters to join units again.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

Some better restrictions on cover would be nice. I once lost a LRC to a Eldar Tank in one hit, despite it being a city board, with both tanks in opposite corners. But because one corner of my tank was visible to a vane of the Eldar one, through about 5 windows, LOS was found.

[Cleon]

The army selection rules.

 

Make command points a straight 'per size of game' thing, the battalion detachment 'free' and all other detachments COST command points. Stop the min max of small squads to mine command points.

[BitsHammer]

From order of importance of what I feel needs to BA changed:

1. CP generation not being tied to lost creation (copy AoS)

2. Turn priority not being fixed (to promote more aggressive playing the mission)

3. More in depth terrain rules (allow models with the Titanic keyword to engage models in buildings more easilly for starters)

4. Total VP per player turn not at the end of the game

 

I went with a list in case they already addressed one or all of these.

[Bryan Blaire]

Drop True Line of Sight. Everything else in the game practically is an abstraction, why in the world would Line of Sight be basically the only simulationist aspect?

[The Unseen]

 

All the people talking about the character targetting rule...

Would you prefer lascannons that can snipe your characters when they have a friendly vehicle block their los to anything else?

 

I don’t mind the character targeting rule too much but I would amend it so that the unit preventing you shooting the character must be between the shooter and the character.

 

It is silly that they could be behind the unit shooting at the character but because they’re still technically closer they prevent you shooting them.

Alright, define "between shooter and character" in a way that would stand up to tournament scrutiny, doesn't have any exploits like the aforementioned los blocking rhinos, and ALSO doesn't require you to get out a protracter at the table.

If anyone can do that, I'd agree it should be changed too that.

Otherwise, currently the rule works to keep characters a part of the game without bringing the god-awful characters joining units thing.

I think that page (and yeah, it was a whole full sized rulebook page to itself) led to more game breaking loopholes and exploits than any other single section in previous editions.

 

Does it have some bugs? Yep.

But so far it's the best we've managed.

 

Now, if you bring back to-hit modifiers for cover, intervening models, beyond half range, etc, like I wish 40k had, ala bolt action, the character rule could very easily just be -1 to-hit modifier like bolt actions "small team" rule.

But that's a lot more changes than just the character rule, and goes back to my main soap-box, 40k needs a better LOS and cover system.

 

It's the weakest part of 8th, and I feel it's one of the primary drivers behind other issues, like the overly lethal nature of the first 2 turns.

 

In Bolt Action, while there are less bullets flying overall, the fact that units on the move turn 1 are looking at a -2 AT LEAST to-hit modifier, against a unit standing in the open, and probably more like -3 or -4 thanks to cover, means that the first few turns are more about maneuvering to set up the fighting, rather than just blowing your opponent away, as vet units are probably looking for 6s to hit, and less experienced troops are hitting 1/36 of the time if they're simultaneously firing long range at a unit in cover while moving.

It means stuff doesn't die immediately, mobility from transports is huge, and cover makes a huge difference in how stuff moves around the table.

[Bryan Blaire]

Why would an enemy unit closer to you, but behind you - where you are usually the most vulnerable, be less threatening and worthy of your attention than a single individual a 1/4 or more of the battlefield away?

[Kinstryfe]

Cheating on the single rule front, but...

 

Character targeting: allow them to be targeted as normal if you're within a certain distance. Blending in makes sense at half the battlefield away, not so much when they're 6" from you.

 

Drop the Supreme Command detachment. All it seems to do is allow the most ridiculous soup combos in the cheapest possible way.

 

Generate CP somehow throughout the game instead of at the beginning. Helps lessen the impact of alpha striking and works well in other games.

[Ishagu]

Why can't I shoot Guilliman because there's a single marine hidden behind a wall closer to me than Guilliman, and I can't see the marine, which means it isn't a valid target to shoot at in the first place?

 

 

You should be able to disembark from any transport AFTER it has moved.

Also this. Especially Land Raiders.

That rule about shooting characters should not be changed. It's possible to create a situation where you only see a character by blocking other units with your own vehicles or terrain features. People have gamed this before.

[BitsHammer]

I disagree. It was rewarding smart use of movement to create favorable situations.

 

Being able to active units via alternate activation could balance that by rewarding both players for using movement to creat firing lanes or to block movement or line of sight.

[Ishagu]

Nothing smart about it. People were using two rhinos to create a slit of Line of Sight to an enemy character, blocking everything else out.

It's a rule that can be gamed, unfortunately.

 

I have no issues with the character rules as they are. They are infinitely better than the super units that were possible in past editions. It's just an abstract gaming mechanic and one that has worked pretty well.

[Volt]

All the people talking about the character targetting rule...

Would you prefer lascannons that can snipe your characters when they have a friendly vehicle block their los to anything else?

 

As for me, the cover rules.

Unless you've got big chunks of LOS blocking chunks everywhere, may as well play on planet bowling ball.

It basically does nothing.

Sure, it's more realistic and provides incentive to use transports for characters. Apocalypse has a far better ruleset where light characters just have a -1 to hit, and iirc AOS has something similar as well.

[Ishagu]

Nah Apocalypse does not have better rules overall. It's better in *some* ways, worse in many others.

 

I'm not sure why some people have such grief over character rules. The models are just abstract gaming pieces that represent the characters. Why would the hero wave his sword around in the air, making himself look bigger? He wouldn't - but the gaming piece looks nice and epic. That's all it is.

[Zeller]

Vehicles moving and shooting at standard speeds without a to-hit penalty. It's the 42nd millennium and there are hyper advanced alien races among the group. It's beyond stupid.

[Volt]

Nah Apocalypse does not have better rules overall. It's better in *some* ways, worse in many others.

 

I'm not sure why some people have such grief over character rules. The models are just abstract gaming pieces that represent the characters. Why would the hero wave his sword around in the air, making himself look bigger? He wouldn't - but the gaming piece looks nice and epic. That's all it is.

Because it makes it infuriating hard to get rid of characters and their stupid aura buffs even though realistically there should be nothing preventing you from blowing them clean off the table so long as you have a clear shot. All characters should be target-able, it forces people to buy transports, use cover, and play smart instead of resorting to the braindead unit blobs of 8e clustered around auras. Apocalypse, while also suffering from auras due to the stupid 12 inch command aura for a detachment, actually incentivizes some minor amounts of tactical thought by targeting characters in a detachment over vehicles or infantry specifically to cripple it.