Rewrite

[Kawauso]

More guns = more shots would make (current) twin-linked Assault Cannons oh-so lovely...

[helvexis]

well you add a 2nd splinter cannon to a venom and it doesnt become twin linked :|

and i think its been mentioned but having fast transports be able to have the occupants fire at cruising speed makes sense.
but that may make things like ba rhinos brutal and even venom spam would become even more powerful

[Maelstorm]

I'm with Nosmo75 on this one, but I'll go one further: if the vehicle is simply wrecked, then everyone takes the hit, saves applicable, and on with the show. If the vehicle explodes then everything in it takes a wound, no save. It is ridiculous that I finally pop the damn transport, blow it to bits, leaving a crater for CENSORED sake, kill the crew deader than Elvis, and yet the passengers blithely walk away, with maybe a couple stubbed toes.

I agree.

As an extreme example: Explode a Rhino with 10 passengers using a D-weapon in an APOC game. Everything inside should be vaporized. But with the current rules and basic Space Marine armor 90% of the passengers walk away unscathed? WTF?

[Maelstorm]

Make Psy-grenades only effect a random model in B2B with the lead model - similar to Necron Mindshackle Scarabs (15 point option)

For ranged Psy-weapons, make them AP - against vehicles, similar to the Necron Tesla Weapons.

Suddenly Grey Knights become less broken and more manageable...

[bforber]

2) Twin-linking doubles the shots of a weapon, rather than providing re-rolls to hit. Because that's exactly what twin-linking a weapon would do in real life, plus it means that units that have twin-linked weapons can also benefit from other abilities that grant re-rolls to hit, like Ammunition Stores in Cities of Death. =)

So many examples of how this would just be awful.

Venerable Dreadnoughts with autocannons- GK ones especially
Salamanders codex chapter lists 2 melta shots or doubling the number of hits on a flamer? no thank you.
TL tesla destructors ... ow.
Hydras
Hurricane bolters (24 shots in rapid fire range, again, ouch.)

etc.

[LordGrise]

On the subject of twin-linking? My humble opinion?

Get rid of it.

It guarantees that half the shots you should be getting miss, and is aesthetically (word of the day) displeasing to look at. Particularly if you spend a lot of time looking at twinlinked heavy ordnance (Broadsides) and wishing you had a second shot, since the first one hit but didn't kill.

[Cheexsta]

Ok, so I set out to write down a few of the things I'd change. Then I just kept adding to it. And adding to it. Would anyone mind if I posted the whole list (it's quite long), or should I just post a few select ones?

[alshrive]

that twin linking solution unfortunately wouldnt work as it would make the Necron Targetting Array Rule on the Triarch Stalker ridiculous! potentially doubling the entire fire power of an army against a single target!!! while nasty- not exactly fair!

ALShrive

[Bean]

I would re-write the rule which prevents units from firing at engaged units so that it exists. As opposed to not.

I don't have the rulebook in front of me at the moment, but the wording in the rulebook is something like,

"Though some unscrupulous commanders may wish to fire indiscriminately into a combat, this is not allowed."

Of course, firing indiscriminately is not something the game allows for anyway, so this rule has no actual effect as written.

It could be fixed simply by writing, "engaged units may not be targeted by shooting attacks."

[Nosmo75]

well you add a 2nd splinter cannon to a venom and it doesnt become twin linked :|

Umm... no-one said that they would become twin-linked... =S