Sorry, the end of my post was a little pompous! Even more worrying is that I seem to have failed to make people realise I was talking about two different subjects. 1 that complex rules are not the way forward in my opinion. 2 that cover doesn't need to be reduced like people say it does.
I play Marines and have no real problems with cover... in fact usually the cover free boards are more problematic. Mainly because a board with cover will provide those guardsmen more saves... but it will also restrict their agility, and pyschologically most players will hug the cover. I'm sorry but guardsmen out of cover will never win against marines are going to be slaughtered if the Marines even play it remotely right.
No worries, I came down a little harshly on you there myself if I'm honest.
The idea of guardsmen having their "agility" restricted made me chuckle though (oh irony, what would I do without you?). Guard lists come in two distinct flavours these days. Flavour The First is affectionately known as the SAFH or Shooty Army From Hell, and consists of a big fat static element dedicated to raining firepower death on the enemy from afar, with a few mobile elements for securing or contesting objectives. Flavour Number The Two is a standard mechanised list. Neither of these lists rely on agility in a way that is terribly affected by cover. The simple truth of the matter is that Guard don't really lose anything from making use of cover, and gain a huge amount from it. Right now, that gives them a pretty huge advantage
[/quote]
Something has just sprung to mind. I was flicking through the rule book and noticed just how much cover is 4+... Things like Tank traps, Crates and what not. Another thing sprung to mind was how often my opponents at the local games workshop breeze over how many troops are in the squad after 50%. Which is quite important because the rule book suggests downgrading the level of cover if 50% of the squad is only just in cover.
You see in the small group of friends that I play the game with (Including all my brothers and my partner) we have changed cover from the rulebook. Tank traps, Crates etc all had cover dropped to 5+. Other changes where implemented as well. So I suppose that really the 5th edition view on cover is a little silly in how everything provides 4+.
So yeah, I'm going to have to eat my words and say the cover system does need to be changed. However I'm not saying a universal reduction...
Ruins should remain as powerful as ever.. Remember moving around in them requires a difficult terrain test. I also say this because a ruin is definitely a strategic and tactical asset on a battlefield and as pointed out above assaulting troops behind brick walls, with elevated positions, in a straight charge is just a silly silly idea. No war game, no matter how simple should encourage such 1-Dimensional tactics.
What fortifications are should be clarified. Going to ground behind them should provide a considerable bonus such as the one given by the Ageis Defence lines in planet strike.
Finally moving through cover should slow you down more than it does at the moment... The number of dice rolled for moving through a wood should be less than for moving through a muddy, flooded field. There are after all more places for the enemy to hide in a wood so the squad is going to move slower, not to mention the terrain being more dense.
Frag Grenages and Plasma grenades need to change... There is no way, from a fluff point of view that Frag Grenades are going to be as effective as Plasma grenades in clearing cover.
So I'll revise my opinion on cover, it needs to be changed. However I still believe cover should be a big part of any war game. Utilising it well should give your army rewards. As it is too many armies line up and charge while this is partly because of the size of the tables used it is also because charging into cover is so easy. So perhaps while the saves should be reduced in some places, changed in others... Charging into cover should be a more perilous option... Attackers should suffer more than just -1 Initiative. Perhaps Initiative should be halved (rounding up) when assaulting cover, or attacks should be lost... Maybe cover allows the enemy squad a chance to fire it's weapons before the assault takes place? I don't know...