# what do you want in "eight edition" 40K?



## jin (Feb 20, 2014)

I am seeing on da webz that an 8th edition is nigh,
and many are posting hopes online.

I propose that we post 1 or 3 single sentences.

Mine:

1) Cut the randomness in stuff that affects army character, e.g. psychic powers, warlord traits, and pay points instead.

2) Offer guidelines for alternate unit activation play.

3) Lost hull points should equate with lost effectiveness on the battlefield...


----------



## Old Man78 (Nov 3, 2011)

I would like the game to be much more tactically orientated, it is a table top wargame after all! Less random shit like @jin said

And the weapons/vehicles to get a "real world" review, for example the blast rule is ridiculous, and anti aircraft guns not firing at ground targets without special rule is ridiculous

Split fire for heavy weapon teams and special weapon troops


----------



## Kreuger (Aug 30, 2010)

I know this is pie in the sky, but get rid of the stupid AP system and go back so save modifiers. It made the game balance far more subtle and nuanced.


----------



## the_barwn (Jul 23, 2011)

Make apothocaries & techmaries more useful, i.e. restore lost wounds on characters, repair vehicles like weapon destroyed

bring back human bombs & frenzon for the guard in penal battalions

give bonus's to chaos forces when using patron gods magic numbers in unit sizes


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

1) Overhaul of the Psychic phase, just feels too clumsy & slow at the moment.

2) reduce the game length - the game takes entirely too long to play.

3) Alternating player unit activations - either akin to Bolt Action, X-Wing (Just use unit Initiative value instead of Pilot skill), or Dystopian Wars.

4) Less random rolls for the sake of random rolls - a la Psychic table, Warlord Table, etc - this could be included in parts 1 & 2 technically...


----------



## R_Squared (Mar 24, 2013)

I hope that 8th edition drastically streamlines the game so that 1850 points can be played in under 2 hours.
The needless complexity adds nothing to the game and TBH it needs a reset akin to AoS to get me gaming again.

I would be enthused if they they took a fresh look at the whole system and came up with something that works in a similar vein to AoS. A ruleset that allows for multiple game play options that caters for causal, narrative and competitive gameplay


----------



## Kreuger (Aug 30, 2010)

Fallen said:


> 1) Overhaul of the Psychic phase, just feels too clumsy & slow at the moment.
> 
> 2) reduce the game length - the game takes entirely too long to play.
> 
> ...


Did you ever play Target Games' *Warzone*? That game had a really nice activation system. 

And agreed less random garbage the better. 



R_Squared said:


> I hope that 8th edition drastically streamlines the game so that 1850 points can be played in under 2 hours.
> The needless complexity adds nothing to the game and TBH it needs a reset akin to AoS to get me gaming again.
> 
> I would be enthused if they they took a fresh look at the whole system and came up with something that works in a similar vein to AoS. A ruleset that allows for multiple game play options that caters for causal, narrative and competitive gameplay


I think I disagree but I want clarification first. Where do you see the needless complexity coming from? I would contend the problem isn't complexity (I actually rather like that) but the ongoing imbalances and the fragmentation of the special rules through formations. 

At the end of 6th I thought we were getting back more to a better place. But 40k in my opinion had been seriously watered down when they switched to 3rd Ed. I despise the AP system. Save modifiers are far superior. Every edition since 3rd has slowly gotten closer and closer to 2nd ed.


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

@Kreuger no I have never heard of that game "Warzone".

Although after using some Google Fu it appears that basically at the start of each turn both sides roll for initiative; the winner then chooses the first side/model to move, and then alternating afterwards.

Not a bad system, that's pretty much the same way that Dystopian Wars works (just not with a D20) without the choice factor.


----------



## Kreuger (Aug 30, 2010)

Your Google fu is good! 

Warzone was a great game. One of my favorites. Their D20 system was really good. Much greater range of skills/abilities, and all the rolls worked out very nicely as percentages. 

It might have thrived in the "I hate GW" niche, but they tried to go it the same way as GW at the height of Gw's GWness. It didn't work.


----------



## R_Squared (Mar 24, 2013)

Kreuger said:


> .....I think I disagree but I want clarification first. Where do you see the needless complexity coming from? I would contend the problem isn't complexity (I actually rather like that) but the ongoing imbalances and the fragmentation of the special rules through formations.
> 
> At the end of 6th I thought we were getting back more to a better place. But 40k in my opinion had been seriously watered down when they switched to 3rd Ed. I despise the AP system. Save modifiers are far superior. Every edition since 3rd has slowly gotten closer and closer to 2nd ed.


To me needless complexity is a number of issues,

1. Random table rolling where points could be spent for abilities. It doesn't add "flavour", its just annoying. 

2. Assault and challenges, as an ork player this has become just so laborious and off putting as to not want to bother.

3. The complete overhaul of the flyers in the game. TBH, I didn't actually bother to play this part, so it maybe more streamlined for all I know, but it seemed to me that adding another phase is not exactly going to help matters, even if its voluntary or not.

4. The Rulebook. It's just horrible to use. You can end up jumping back and forth through it for clarifications, and it just slows the whole process down. The layout is also not to my taste.

5. Multiple Codex's and supplements. Again, as an Ork player I have a number of books to use, plus FW's IA8. It's a huge pain. Lots of lovely detail and fluff, sometimes, but really just crap to use. Plus an opponent may have just as many, We shouldn't need to have to have 3-6 complete books just to play a game. This is where AoS wins out for me, Dataslates with everything you need in front of you. I also play a lot of X-Wing, and I appreciate having everything I need right in front of me and a simple game mechanic.

That's just a few that I can think of off the top of my head, I just hate rolling dice for no real benefit. Roll to hit, roll to wound, roll to save, roll for FnP, roll for Ld etc etc what a pain in the arse. That's upto 5 rolls to attempt to kill something.
X-Wing proves that a game can have complexity and strategic depth but have a simple mechanic. You roll to attack, and to defend. That's it.
I wish 40k had something similar, I'd probably come back to playing it if they do sort it out, but at the moment I cannot invest 4+ hours to play a game. Christ the last game I played at 2000 points it took over 6 hours, and we only just got to turn 5! My back was killing me towards the end.


----------



## Kreuger (Aug 30, 2010)

@R_Squared I agree with much of that though I've never been an ork player. 

1. Agreed. Random tables are stupid for almost everything. They make sense for mid game chaos mutations, but that's about it. 

2. Yeah, the challenge mechanic has always been open to abuse and much irritation. 

3. I'm not a fan of flyers in 40k. Thru should have stayed out.

4. I don't mind the rulebook actually. I think they could do a better job writing the actual rules language, but the current rulebook is probably the best one they've ever made. The fact that there's an index is amazing. Imagine playing 40k worth no index! I remember those days. 

5. Multiple books . . . Hmm. I think this par for the course. Games companies make books and sell them. That's pretty normal. To do it differently would mean either rewriting everything all at once and release books in a set order, all at once, OR maybe make the game content some sort of subscription (paid or with the purchase of models) and accessible via Web app. 

I'm personally a fan of a Web app. It allows the status of the game to be tweaked and rebalanced as and when needed. Requiring a mobile device / computer to accesses it might present a barrier for some users though. I generally think the advantages outweigh the problems though. Having a system whose points are always balanced and who never had power creep would be amazing. 

Rolling a ton of dice isn't a problem if the rolls are all clear. If you need to roll 5 times per model though, that's a problem. And in general I was a fan of the warzone system (roll to hit, roll to save, remove dead guys, done.)


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

R_Squared said:


> Christ the last game I played at 2000 points it took over 6 hours, and we only just got to turn 5! My back was killing me towards the end.


On average my pals and I play 2k in about two hours. Last time I played a match that lasted over six hours we were both pretty drunk by the end of it and that was kinda the point. It was also a 5k each side match.

It was a good day.

Point is when you play at a level that is equal to your knowledge of the game, and involving aspects of the game that you and your opponent are versed in, you get max gaming. If you bite off more than you can chew (this includes your opponent's knowledge of the game) things can get very very clunky meandering through the rules. I'm not saying you aren't smart or don't know the rules or anything like that, it's happened to me as well when I'm diving in on a 20+ mastery level point list that I'm using for the first time. It's a slippery slope sometimes with tabletop games.

As an aside, X-Wing can be fast and sleek at 100 points or it can take over an hour to play. X-Wing at 300 points you'd better have two hours and a hell of a lot of space outside of your 6x3 playing area for the mountain of cards and markers you need to know your squad. Emperor protect you if you have a cat. I love the game but it's no less clunky than 40k at times.

On topic, I would do away with Look Out Sir! rolls. God damn what a waste of a game if you're firing a big unit of artillery at a squad and it happens to land on top of the Warlord. Laborious. Aside from that stop the arms race. Every new release doesn't need to be better than the last, it needs to be as good and offer those collectors fun avenues of growth for their armies and games.


----------



## DaughterOfHorus (Sep 8, 2016)

More tactical orientated game play would be awesome.


----------



## Gret79 (May 11, 2012)

I'd like to go back to buying specific psychic powers. It made psykers so much more useful when you could plan round what they had. But nowadays, all you'd see is the most powerful powers all the time.
Electrodisplacement and writhing worldscape everywhere - So on that basis, I'd like to see a complete overhaul of the psychic powers.
Balance them all out and then be able to pay for specific ones.
If GW can manage that, I'll ask them for world peace next


----------



## diomede.80 (Sep 18, 2016)

- A flying creature that opts to jinx will make a disorderer charge on the following turn, in addition to snap fire.
- Absolutely NO kind of save that succeeds on a 2+ can be rerolled under any circumstances
- drop D weapons or rewrite them entirely
- nerf ridiculous monstrous creatures rules, esp. compared to vehicles
- publish all codex at the same time and write them all together, with real mutual playesting and balance in mind

Ok, i know that the above is pure fantasy, esp. the last point.


----------



## JAMOB (Dec 30, 2010)

I dunno mate —maybe not the last one, but the rest seem not too ridiculous (granted, this is GW)


----------



## Kreuger (Aug 30, 2010)

diomede.80 said:


> - publish all codex at the same time and write them all together, with real mutual playesting and balance in mind
> 
> Ok, i know that the above is pure fantasy, esp. the last point.


Honestly, they should have done this years ago when publishing was actually relevant. Right now GW's rules should be a free "service."

GW can publish books for illustration and fluff purposes but the rules should be available as a Web service. There's no reason GW can't manage the rules and especially the points values online. They should be in a curated database where the values are adjusted as the game changes. There should be no "meta." The points should be statistically a 0 sum game. If a new powerful army is added the relative value of other armies should be adjusted to compensate.


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

Kreuger said:


> I know this is pie in the sky, but get rid of the stupid AP system and go back so save modifiers. It made the game balance far more subtle and nuanced.


While we're at it, let's get the per-vehicle unique damage charts back.

Nothing better than sniping the driver of a Land Speeder out of his seat with a single retreating Grot who had to hit on a 7+ and the gunner failing to take over the controls (this actually happened in 2nd to me)
Likewise, it doesn't make sense for a Wraithlord to be stunned.


----------



## djpiper28 (Nov 27, 2016)

jin said:


> I am seeing on da webz that an 8th edition is nigh,
> and many are posting hopes online.
> 
> I propose that we post 1 or 3 single sentences.
> ...


I want vehicles to be stronger as a ghost ark can be one shot and still cost 105 points. So I think that when a vehicle has an explosion on the roll of a one it looses all hull points and a 2+ it looses an extra hull point as if it was glanced - no saves aloud.


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

djpiper28 said:


> I want vehicles to be stronger as a ghost ark can be one shot and still cost 105 points. So I think that when a vehicle has an explosion on the roll of a one it looses all hull points and a 2+ it looses an extra hull point as if it was glanced - no saves aloud.


WOW... getting an explosion is hard enough in 7th, and you want to make it harder? You do realize that only Lascannons and Melta weapons can one shot you right?

Just be happy that an Autocannon, or Missile Launchers, can't one shot stuff anymore.

----

If your idea does happen, I can be happy that Rhinos, chimeras, and raiders are going to be super effective.


----------



## Khorne's Fist (Jul 18, 2008)

Whatever about streamlining and removing the preponderance of random rolls, what I really want is a proper army builder app or website. A new edition would be the perfect time to roll one out. I've been playing Flames of War and Bolt Action a lot over the last few years, both of which have easy accessible army builders. If you buy a digital codex, you should get access for free, or you can buy access to a specific codex for a nominal fee.


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

Khorne's Fist said:


> what I really want is a proper army builder app or website


Battlescribe works great, is free with ads or a couple bucks without, and is constantly updated by the community. You can even manipulate the data files yourself if you'd like on your desktop, I got fed up with the lack of Angel's Blade Formations added so I did them all for myself.

It would for sure be great if GW did something as well though.


----------



## earth127 (Nov 19, 2016)

Mostly simplification reduction of rules bloat (A better tought out AoS), curbing of the excessive balance issues (I'd do this by keeping an app/list of updated points values, formation/organisation chart benefits costing points to have but you would still be battleforged even if you don't pay the points and a more evenly spread focus by GW


----------

