40K - Only Troops are able to claim objectives WTH

I've found the 5th edition restriction on only troops choices being able to control objectives, has resulted in a surge of horde armies fielding the max 6 fullsize troops choices and little else.
2 weeks ago during our local gaming clubs tournament i found i was able to win games against armies that were previously considered fairly balanced by simply wiping out their 3 or so troop selections and then worrying about the rest of their army afterwards. No troops left means u simply cannot win in scenarios requiring control of objectives.
Combined fire from 2x15 man kroot units 2x12 man fire warrior teams and support fire from broadsides, hammerheads, pathfinders, and battle suits could often reduce an opponent to a no win situation in 2 turns depending on their force.
Decided the next week to test my theory with a HtH heavy army and found the same strategy worked as effectively with a Genestealer based Tyranid HTH army with zero ranged fire capability. A single unit of genestealers would go to ground behind cover or hide out of sight within 12" of an objective whilst the rest of the army ran flat out to get to grips with the opponents troops. At one point i sent a Zoanthrope into HTH with a small assault squad just to hold them up while the other units moved past to get at a tactical squad beyond them.
The result of these tests has been pretty conclusive that without fielding mass troops your doomed to draws and losses against smart players.
4 consecutive games with one of our better players resulted in 4 draws as we both wiped out each others respective troops and therefore neither of us were able to claim any objectives.
Our club has decided to remove that restriction from play for these very reasons and return to the 4th edition version were any unit unless specified otherwise (ie. swarms, living artillery, snipers, etc) can take and hold objectives.

Ha! I am by all means not a 40K player, and I have only flicked through the 5th Rulebook, but this is exactly what I thought these new rules would result in.

And how about this LOS rule? This sounds ridiculous to me. I means you can shoot through wood if you see a model's leg? Even if the wood is 10 inch thick?
I mean come on! it is nigh impossible to represent a wood accurately in a tabletop game, because if you do, it becomes impossible to place minatures in it.

Believe me, as a wood elf player fanatic I have thought a lot about using wood in game.

What's your experience with that?

I really like the 5th edition rules. LOS isn't a problem as troops shot-at through cover get a hefty cover save (fluff-wise its justified by scanners / satellites / hyper-senses / etc.)

The Troops thing is weird to start with but you get used to it. Bell of Lost Souls has loads of tactics articles that help you deal with the changes of 5th ed.

As a non-player my comments should be taken cum grano salo, but my impression of the revised rules for both 40K & WFB, the various new codexes, & army books is that they are written to a large part to maximize the number of minis that must be purchased for an effective game rather than enhancing the existing game system.

DeafNala wrote:

[...]cum grano salo [...] they are written to a large part to maximize the number of minis that mut be purchased for an effective game rather than enhancing the existing game system.

For WH40k it's blatant. New Space Marine codex every 8 months. New Imperial guard codex every 10 months. All of a sudden you need completely new troop types. Honestly, who needs drop pods? Who needs Valkyries? To me all this aerial combat just seems totally out of scale when you look at the size of most 40K games (i.e. 3 squads + a tank or two).
So in a sense, the only way to have a winning army, is by LITERALLY "buying into" the arms race.

For WHFB it's the same, but I guess it is a little more subtle. They bring out new army books at a very high rate, and every army book shifts the abilities of troops in such a manner that you suddenly need a certain troop type to be effective. Previously orc archers were useless, now they suddenly become quite essential etc... at least here you can adapt by assembling your models differently.
And then usually new WHFB plastic kits are pretty useful/good looking (e.g. Plastic Cold One Knights, Plastic Flagellants, plastic Bloodletters etc are all very nice models) whereas I personally find new 40K stuff to be just more of the same (don't all space marines look alike?).

Why can't GW just sit down, and try to make a system that REALLY relies on tactics? Why can't someone design a "scissors/paper/rock" type of system?
Look at the age-old game chess. The rules have not changed for centuries and it is the most tactical game ever.

Of course achieving something like that with a tabletop wargame is much harder, but why can't we try this at least?

I'll tell you why: because a perfect system would not sell many miniatures.

It seems to me that the US publisher Privateer Press (producer of Warmachine and Hordes) is at least making considerable effort in that direction. Their system is far from perfect, but as I am reading through the rulebooks which I recently bought, it seems to me like the factions are really ballanced against each other. Much more so than in Warhammer.

End of the day GW is trying to in the business of selling miniatures - it's were they make most of their profits. The LotR, 40K and Fantasy rules always have been, and always will be, marketing tools to sell toy soldiers. Once you come to terms with that it easier to get on with enjoying the game... or find some other game to play (Mordheim!!)

Personally I would hate Warhammer, et al, to be reduced to the predictability of chess. I like the complex, random, weird and often bloody stupid things that can happen in a game. That's were the story comes from! Imagine writing a Battle Report about a chess game...

~~~

And Tom: all Space Marines look the alike to me too!

I agree with DeafNala and Tom.

I'm a 40k player... and I like the game. I have seen how GW has slowly progressed to a 'more is better' approach and new Codecii just pump up units without reason... except to make them more popular among new (and power) players. 5th Edition 'destroyed' the Necrons (race of robots), regardless what the fluff said. It is a very easy fix (add +1 to the Glance roll when attacking vehicles) yet GW refuses to make an FAQ. Why? They are working on the Necron's new Codex. It would be counter productive (read, no $) for them to make a simple fix and keep the current Necron players happy while they 'could' get the unhappy players to try a new army. Now that they released the Imperial Guard Codex (again) everyone and their grandmother wants an IG army. It happens on every release... and true players who are in for the love of the game get stuck.

The new 5th Edition rules changed (again) the feel of the game. Now players started working on power gaming (again.) As a Necron player, I refuse to field my army. As a Tyranid player I just want to field 6 Squads of 32 Gaunts... if at least one of them survives near the objective, I can claim it! I constantly argue that GW screwed up its game scale. Rather than using the 'suggested' 0 to 10 scale, they actually use (in practical terms) a scale of 3 to 5... If you see any model with T6 you scream 'CHEESE!' If a normal human is T3 and a Space Marine is a super-human... then why they have a T4? Why if a Gretchin is nothing but dirt they have T2? The logical scale would be a human to have T4, a Space Marine T6 and Gretchins T2. It gives the game room to wiggle.

The only troops can take objective rule is in the same boat. As a new designer, I would had made the rule that enhanced the 4th Edition rules. For example...

Any unit (unless specified) can hold an objective if their Squad is at least 50% strong. Troop choice Squad can hold an objective as long as one model stands.
Now, there is a head-turning rule! It still favors the troops... but allow troop-poor armies to be able to accomplish their goals. Also it would allow for a greater variety of armies.

I'm a story-driven guy... that was my initial attraction to Mordheim. I guess that is why I'm VERY happy with my 40k armies in boxes (semi-retired) and just concentrating Death Squads (our 40k skirmish.) I believe that a good game needs to be balanced... then there is no need for other 'more powerful' stuff. Balance should be king! At least I feel that with that game we can strive to make balanced rules and allow player's strategies and tactics (as well as some good ol' fashion loaded dice) call the shots rather than Math-Hammering and power-gaming everything.

I've noticed this too (about the quality of the rules with each edition). 6th Ed Warhammer to 7th Ed was ridiculous. After I bought the rule book, I felt like that changes could have been covered in a 5 page PDF. I look to something like DnD where, say what you want about the game itself, at least every edition is practically a whole new game.

GW's games now seem focused on buying the armies and playing the game strictly by the rules. They don't make up scenarios anymore, put out great books like the General's Compendium, nothing. It's just army books and how to min/max with them. They seem to be taking the imagination and fun out of it - unfortunately.

Oh well, heard a rumour that their Space Hulk and Warhammer Quest boards games are on the way... Maybe it'll be true.

Mordheimer wrote:

5th Edition 'destroyed' the Necrons (race of robots), regardless what the fluff said.

Could you elaborate on this point as to how they were broken as i've played against a few necron players and they still seem very effective.

Mordheimer wrote:

Any unit (unless specified) can hold an objective if their Squad is at least 50% strong. Troop choice Squad can hold an objective as long as one model stands.

Now this i like. It seems to be a fair middle ground that could balance fairly well, definately will try it out at this weekends club day.

@Tom actually drop pods are very useful.

I'e taken to using a unit of sternguard in one and dropping it where needed. this can either be off to one edge of the enemies deployment zone to get their attention with shooting. or in behind a tank which i think will cause me trouble and blowing it up with combi meltas.

The idea of troops scoring was becaose far too many people were just filling up on armies of elites, and let sbe honest their elites for a reason, your not meant to have entire armies of the guys, thus troops were given the important roles of holding objectives so the killy units could move on to further fights.

It makes sense and having atleast two troops in 1k games and maybe a third in 1500 point games ensures you can capture places.

If your marines you can break up 2 tact squads to amke 4 scoring units... the point is to make sure you use the troops and give them enough cover to do their job. Sending them out and loosin gthem is poor tactics and thus players need to be prepared with the right amount of troops and killy units.

Personally i'm happy with the change as it means there is finally a use for the lil guys and armies aren't just all termies or such.

The drop pods especially add a new element to marine armies, instand placement where you need/want it, no driving a rhino to the place and having ti shot down, It allows you to launch assault sin the back field of enemies and wipe out their support. Valks though are kind of like the eldar skimmers n my eyes, and cost far too much...

In regards to the necrons.
I think Mord is saying how sweeping advance i think it is kills the necron units with their I2 (Recalling a topic on it on another forum) which means they get wipped out easier and dont come back.

i'm not fanboy but i do see the benefits of troops being only scoring units.

Hmm i see the point with the effect on necrons (Orks and Tau aswell) and the sweeping advance rule, but on the other hand u can no longer consolidate into a new melee. Thus leaving your unit in the open for close range return fire from nearby units.

Personally i think if the issue was people loading up on too many "special" units they should have handled it in a similar way as they do WH Fantasy. Restrict the elite, fast attack, and heavy support maximums based on the games points limit. This has been around in fantasy for a long time now and works quite efectively whilst still allowing characterful armies.