I really like the Ghosts series. I've just finished Guns of Tanith and I think they manage to bring home the feel of the Guard in action to perfection. As I'm not a big fan of 'spin off' products this came as a big surprise.
When you finish Guns of Tanith you get the standard advert for the 40K game. It got me thinking just how bad a simulator of what I see as 40K realism the game actually is. Necromunda (and therefore the 2nd ed ruleset) seems just so much better at representing the Tanith on the battlefield, whatever the scale of the engagement. Granted it would struggle at higher point levels, but I really dislike the 3rd edition ruleset. The whole system was made too simple and then too much additional stuff was dumped into it, creating a real mess. The bias seems all wrong too. Even in the grim, war torn future, it shouldn't be more effective to hit some over the head with your bolter than to fire it at them.
I want to see vicious short range firefights, tactical manoeuvring and tanks king in the open/infantry lords in areas with lots of cover. Also the Chaos forces in the game don't seem to portray the heretical forces of the Sabbat cluster. The Lost and the Damned just seem too mutated, Chaos Marines are just too elite and the Guard (taken as traitors) are just too organised/high tech. You really need a PDF style army with a few mutants, poor quality armour/support and corrupted citizenry.
GW are missing out here IMHO. I probably would have jumped at any half decent game where I could refight some of the battles described in the books. Maybe the state of 40K is a blessing in disguise then. I have too many GW games/armies as it is
End ramble/rant
Jackhammer
) but they are by far the best BL books around that I have read.
