Concerned about?

As long as the 15cm issue is retained, and the broken wiped out is kept in consideration, I don't see a big issue with it. And it's the compromise that helps solve the concept of 'all-Fearless'. Without something like this, it's doubtful just removing Fearless would be accepted by the Chaos fans.

Personally, I see it as a weaker form of ATSKNF, for the most part. In a couple of circumstances, it slews towards Indomitable, but for the most part, on average, the relevant portion of ATSKNF is better.

Morgan Vening
- Anything that reduces Fearless in an army is a good thing.

Read all my posts

Replacing Fearless, while commendable, means little if the new rule stooges the assault rules too. I'm not convinced that saves for all eventualtities in assault is fair.

I understand that. It's just a matter of compromise. There's only so much you can change things before people won't accept it. Personally, I'd rather see Fearless restricted to Characters, and Indomitable replace it in most circumstances where it's currently used, and Indomitable only be applied to the true elites or otherwise of any specific faction. But I'm a realist, and don't see that happening.

While it stooges Assault, only in a small way. Assuming a 4+ Save (4+RA does disrupt this, but *shrug*).

Losing an assault. Take 1/2 casualties (on average).
Losing an assault when broken. Take standard casualties (all) or half, depending on rules.
Being shot at when broken. A sliding scale, but it's about half there, as well.

It'll stop the picket lines I would face when playing against heavy Fearless armies, and that's a good thing. I dunno. It reminds me of a Simpsons episode.

*eagle attacks Moe's face*
Moe : Not the face! Not the face!
*eagle attacks Moe's crotch*
Moe : The face! The face!
*eagle attacks Moe's face again*
Moe : *sighs with relief*

Morgan Vening
- Fearless is like an eagle attacking the crotch.

So there's still possibilites of other options to explore surely? Invulnerable save instead? You get the bonus chance to avoid death but it's a lot less than a 50% chance....

It's still only half as powerful as fearless, a 4+ (for most marine equivs) save instead of ignoring the killing entirely.

Basically fearless is has always been overpowered and a halfway house is fine. It represents the same thing but it much more palatable at an army scale.

Don't worry about it.

Why does it have to be such a high chance for that save? Couldn't it be 5 or 6+ instead?

Fixing it to the unit's armour save is much simpler and more elegant.

Epic:A does not have a system for varied saves on parts of a special ability. It is an all or nothing as is the normal case with a 1/300th scale system.

I personally think that the game would be fairer if it did open up possibilities of varied saves based on situation, yet as it stands, we have reinforced Armour and Invulnerable Save as 'over-reaching' abilities.

While the idea may appear fair, it is not in line with the current rule structure. It would have to be changed, and you have seen how hard it is to get any changes outside of the existant rule set - and I do not think that this would necessarily be a good thing. Due to this, I do not see a change in this going into playtests.

Ovearll I still fail to see the issue here. The forces are priced just below Fearless formations of the same type and do far less in surviving assaults than their pre-decessors. The rule does not take away nearly as much as what Fearless did from an opponent.

"Sniper" overreaches.