I struggle to see what wrong with the Blood Rage rule as it is as the moment tbh.

Problem is, that there is no accepted Blood Rage rule. The one we are using is not accepted by anyone other than us at the present that I know of.

I encourage any of dobbsy's and other's proposals in the hope of helping people to agree on something. Without the discussion, there will never be closure I guess...

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

Have people used your blood rage before, are people aware of what it is or how it does and does not affect the game.

I disagree. People just do not know how to play against the forces.

Hena, can you please demonstrate or show how many games this opinion is based on and with what lists? My experience is that Fearless units are hard hitting but they suffer on numbers and stayability.

I appreciate that you are doing something different in the DG list, but have you tried the World Eater lists that are going around, or is this just stating dogma?

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

Other than my playtest results, I daresay no-one else is playing World Eater lists, and I will go as far to state that no-one other than dobbsy and myself (+ about 3 others from the past that I have found yet have not been active) seem to give two-hoots whether they exist or not - although you will get someone once in a blue moon state that they like the World Eaters and ask which list they should use.

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

I've played against a all fearless army a few times now from Frogbears list and I don't find a issue with it at all.

I got a little shock the first time, but I knew about it was all cool.

Sure dude. That intention was never meant. I just like to deal in facts rather than total theory  

I will look over the links with interest. Always open to debating and finding a joint outcome

Cheers....  

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

Hena, I know you are partial to a simple rule using hackdowns etc, but sadly, it's a bit drab. I'd prefer to go with a distinctive rule for the list if we can sort one out.
This latest proposal is definitely different and has possibilities. Could you see it working at all - aside from your own views of just having a basic hackdown rule?

And in answer to your comment on the WEs having a liability with this proposal, I look at it that the entire WEs combat doctrine has them in line for a liability. At least with this proposal there's an up side and a downside if the play doesn't come off. i.e they either kill the enemy or break off/disintegrate after losing a fairly spirited close assault (first round draw if the WE lose) - having to fight them again would be scary for the enemy but also heartening if you can defeat them in the subsequent round. The challenge then comes for the WE to make sure they win the assault first round or run the risk of going completely potty to the Blood Rage and breaking away etc.

I do wonder the effect of replacing fearless with this as fearless is defence ability and this is offence.

There is a difficulty involved if the WE list allows for units with/without BRoK in them. However, I think that taking the Fearless rule as inspiration might help to solve this eventuality units not suffering BRoK could be 'carried along' but not actually fight again?). See how it works out.

EDIT: After reading some other posts in other threads, I see that some people have a problem implementing a rule that does not use established mechanics (is that the phrase you would use?). I dont see why this is such a problem, both the Eldar and the Tyranids break a lot of established rules in order to make their lists flavoursome. I would also like to ask what you mean when you what you use an established mechanic? Perhapse I am missing something but I dont understand this objection; it would help me understand if you explain, please?

How does this sound to people?

Formations containing World Eaters units are Initiative 2 when attempting Advance actions and may not take Sustained Fire action tests.

World Eaters units may ignore enemy zones of control when they charge. This represents them using their heedless fury to get to grips with the enemy in close combat. Note that the unit coherency rules still apply however.

World Eaters units do not suffer hack down hits for losing an assault and it requires 2 Blast Markers to kill broken World Eaters units

So ignore scout screens, always double/charge/overwatch, and a combination of aspects of ATSKNF and Fearless when they lose an assault?

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x