News: No news is good news...

Login  |  Register

Author Topic: 8th ed wish list  (Read 5816 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Saim-Dann

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 852
  • Country: au
8th ed wish list
« on: April 16, 2017, 08:10:22 AM »
G'day gamer's!

Wish the new rules would just get here already. I know my luck with these things. I'll buy big on a particular unit, then GW will nerf them in the new edition.

My wish list.

- Being able to assault when deploying from vehicles or infiltration.

- That not being aloud, then at least make Wave Serpents assault vehicles

- Bring back the original overwatch from 2nd ed.

- Make Banchies bad buttocks again

Don't want much. How about you guys. Give us your thoughts. Who knows, GW could be reading.

                                             Be well!

-


 

Offline dog_of_war

  • Aspect Warrior
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 862
  • Country: ca
  • Armies: Orks, Chaos Space Marines, Eldar, Dark Eldar
Re: 8th ed wish list
« Reply #1 on: April 16, 2017, 08:38:20 AM »
Assault from outflank for sure. Completely brings assault units back to the forefront and takes away the dominance of some gun line armies. Assault from deep strike should still be forbidden, except maybe for web way portals. It just makes sense in both scenarios. Teleporting in or jumping down from the stratosphere would cause a delay from jumping right into combat where sneaking up behind someone shouldn't disallow you from charging him.

Overwatch from 2nd is what I thought it always should have been. You need to sacrifice something to be able to take actions on someone else's turn. You could maybe have special unit rules that can overwatch without sacrificing their current turn action.

Walkers need to be tested differently than vehicles. There was some good talk on the latest Splintermind podcast about this. Treating them more as monstrous creatures and/or like in AOS having them slowly degrade in ability as they take wounds. It makes way more sense and I think walkers really need to see a resurgence in prominence.

Offline Saim-Dann

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 852
  • Country: au
Re: 8th ed wish list
« Reply #2 on: April 16, 2017, 09:04:16 AM »
Hey, Dog of War!

Agreed with all three opinions,mate. Your spot on with no assaulting from deep strike and the tweaking needed to the walkers. Forgot one more thing on my list.Get rid of the hull point horse pucky. Tanks aren't that fragile. I listened to the 32nd podcast as well. They had a lot of interesting things to say. Then again, when don't they? I really miss the old overwatch. It put a lot more strategy into the game.

Thanks for clicking in!

Offline Wyddr

  • Author Eminence: Hereticus Liber Daemonica | Fio'shas Shi
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5258
  • Country: us
    • My blog about SF/F stuff
  • Armies: Daemons, Imperial Fists, Tau, Ksons, Vostroyans
Re: 8th ed wish list
« Reply #3 on: April 16, 2017, 09:17:48 AM »
I've got a couple wishes:

1) Severely Restrict Allies

The only allied forces you should be able to take are what we currently call "Battle Brothers." Furthermore, they should be treated as we currently treat "Allies of Convenience." Let's put a stop to those ridiculous "Inquisitor w/Daemons and Eldar" nonsense armies.

2) Streamline the Psychic Phase
Right now the psychic phase is pointlessly complicated and random. Let psykers choose powers, let powers go off automatically (with a certain investment of points, perhaps), and so on. Nerf certain blatantly broken powers (Invisibility is idiotic), boost certain blatantly weak ones (Tzeentch's Firestorm?).

3) Stop Rolling for Warlord Traits
Again, as an attempt to cut down on all the pre-game rolling, just let people pick their Warlord Trait. This might require Warlord Traits to be more balanced than they are currently, but that's not a bad thing.

4) Nerf Gargantuan Creatures/Superheavies
There's just no reason a Baneblade or Imperial Knight or Stormsurge should be that damned fast. There is no good reason snipers can't do anything to a Wraithknight or Bio-Titan. Stomp is a little ridiculous, too. Scale it back--they've already got crazy toughness and good armor saves and buckets of wounds and Strength D weapons. No reason to add insult to injury.   

5) Let Everyone Use Grenades in Assault Again
That was a super dumb ruling and remains a super dumb ruling. Let Swooping Hawks use all them Haywires. Let Guardsmen attach Krak grenades if they pay for them. 

Beyond that, I'm mostly okay. I'd like to see some new missions (and I could live without the needless complication of Maelstrom cards and so on). I've no problem with overwatch as-is, but I would like to see armies gain ways to prevent or limit it. The only place it really becomes a problem is with the Tau, frankly.

I don't like the idea of Overwatch from 2nd Ed. That just led to a game of everybody holding still and waiting for some fool to walk out in the open. I know this; I played that way. I rarely lost. It was dull.

Hull Points MUST stay! Dude, 5th Edition was *awful* from the perspective of balance. Vehicles were virtually unkillable. Or, the alternative was the way they did vehicles in 4th Edition, which made them literal deathtraps. Hull points are a great mechanic and there is nothing wrong with them. 

Offline Lord of Winter and War

  • The Cause of Diabetes -Captain- Necrontyr Immortal - KoN Veteran - Master of All Diplomacy | Wi-Fi Nomad |
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8901
  • Country: ca
  • Armies: Harlequins, Spiderfang, Bonereapers, Space Wolves
Re: 8th ed wish list
« Reply #4 on: April 16, 2017, 09:42:28 AM »
I'm fine with super heavies as they are. Imperial knights are pretty terrible in the competitive scene anyway, way too fragile for their cost. If they couldn't move 12", you'd never see them on the table.

Stormsurge is also fine for its cost, but the wraithknight should be 50-100pts more expensive. I think they should tone down stomps though. The 6 shouldn't just remove models.

I'd love to see a rehaul of army construction and the psychic phase. Army construction is too confusing, and the psychic phase takes too long.

I'd also love to see templates and the scatter dice gone too. That'd also help prevent ambiguity and speed up the game.

Also, yeah, hullpoints are good. Unless glances can wreck thanks again.

Harlequin Army Blog

That's not blatant, this is blatant: I'm super happy that I'm playing Austria, the greatest nation in all of Diplomacy!

Azore of Austria

Offline dog_of_war

  • Aspect Warrior
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 862
  • Country: ca
  • Armies: Orks, Chaos Space Marines, Eldar, Dark Eldar
Re: 8th ed wish list
« Reply #5 on: April 16, 2017, 10:40:18 AM »
I see your point about the second edition overwatch. We want to speed up the game, not slow it down. Maybe keep overwatch in the assault phase, but make you have to give up an action on your previous turn to have the opportunity and fire at regular BS or something better than snapshot. It gives some deterrence to assault, but not to movement and it forces them to give up a previous action. Would help balance things out if you allow assault from outflank/reserves again.

Offline Wyddr

  • Author Eminence: Hereticus Liber Daemonica | Fio'shas Shi
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5258
  • Country: us
    • My blog about SF/F stuff
  • Armies: Daemons, Imperial Fists, Tau, Ksons, Vostroyans
Re: 8th ed wish list
« Reply #6 on: April 16, 2017, 10:45:50 AM »
I'm okay if Overwatch causes you to give up your next turn's shooting, but it would have to be at full BS.

Of course, that makes assault *harder,* not easier.

As usual, I'm not really sure why people hate overwatch so much as it is, with the exception being the Tau and the occasional unit full of flamers.

Offline Grand Master Lomandalis

  • Grand Master of the Deathwing | Oh the lolmanity! | 40kOnline's Care Bear of LOL!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11372
  • Country: ca
  • We were murderers first, last, and always!
  • Armies: Dark Angels, Custodes, Knights, Night Lords
Re: 8th ed wish list
« Reply #7 on: April 16, 2017, 12:08:47 PM »
I'm fine with overwatch the way it is.  As Wyddr said, aside from Tay and Dark Angels, it isn't that extreme.  Forcing units to give up parts of their turn to fire at full bs is going too far.

The biggest change I want to see is for all vehicles to go from having an armour value to being based on toughness, with AV14 translating to T10.  You could even have different toughnesses depending on the arc they are in.  Then have the damage results be based on the amount of damage the vehicle has taken.  So say if it is down to its last 2 or 3 wounds / Bill points, it gets immobilized, Or that it loses a randomly selected weapon at 50% damage. 

The best example for this working is to compare the Imperial knight with the Wraithknight.  As it stands now, the Imperial knight is vastly inferior to the wraith, while costing more.  Make that change, and the IK becomes worth their points in comparison to the WK.

As it stands, vehicles are simply not comparable to monstrous creatures.
If there is anything that recent politics has taught us, it is that quotes taken out of context can mean what ever you want them to.
Well I always liked the globals...
I knew I had fans!!!

Quote
"Dark Angels are Traitors" is the 40k equivalent of Flat Earthers.  You can provide all of the proof you want that says otherwise, but people just can't let it go...

Offline Saim-Dann

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 852
  • Country: au
Re: 8th ed wish list
« Reply #8 on: April 16, 2017, 01:25:28 PM »
Hey Wyddr! Thanks for clicking in. Totally agree with you on a few things.
Allies: Have seen some blatant cheese with the current format. I like your version.
Psychic/WL traits: The random selection of these abilities has always been a regular complaint around our table.
Overwatch: It's not that I don't like the current OW. One, I just reeeally miss the 2nd editions, and two , the rule itself is fine. The word is wrong. Snipers overwatch. Units laying in wait for an ambush is overwatch. Reaction to a charging unit is not overwatch.

Hello agaian, Killer!
Taking away the glancing damage would be a fair compromise. The thing that really frustrated me was a unit of bolters or shurikens could take out a Rhino.
Good call, mate!

Dog of War: Wow; you really get around in here don't you, mate.
Nice touch with overwatch in the assault phase. Have always felt the game became a little routine with the way it is. Doesn't matter what the unit is. If their in range to charge after shooting then they are obligated to to do so. Or lose the plus one attack when the unit fired upon counters with their own charge.
With your Idea, the player would would be in to minds... Niiice!

Grand Master Lomandalis: Have never used Knights in any of my armies, so didn't know of huge gap in points. That's very strange but not uncommon with GW. Could be their way of forcing the Imperial knight to be mainly used in Apoc... I don't know, but I do agree with you. There needs to be a change.

Thank you all for joining in this discussion. 
 

Offline Irisado

  • A Light in The Grim-Darkness ~ Guns Don't Kill People, Copyright Stats Do | Farseer | Reporting Live! from the Crime Scene | Somewhat behind the times
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11483
  • Country: gb
  • Soñando debajo del arco iris
  • Armies: Administrators must not play 40K
Re: 8th ed wish list
« Reply #9 on: April 16, 2017, 02:16:48 PM »
I would like a major overhaul of the rules.  These changes fall into the following categories:

Scale:

I would like to see the removal of titans, superheavies, flyers, knights, and anything else which was previously confined to Apocalypse or, for those old enough to remember, Epic.  All of these unit types are too large for the 28-30mm scale that 40K uses, make a mockery of the range and armour system, and cannot be accurately represented in 40K without causing major issues with internal and external balance.  If players want to field these units, play Apocalypse or Epic.  The latter, in particular, is much better suited to them, and it's a lot more fun using these units at that scale.

Army List Building and Force Organisation:

I would like to see a return to one Force Organisation Chat and one way to build armies.  All these different ways of building army lists, formations, detachments, or whatever else they are called these days are confusing, make it difficult to play spontaneous games, and do not, in my opinion, improve the quality of the game.

Reduce Dice Rolling and Randomisation:

This applies to psychic powers, rolling for traits, and anything else which involves unnecessary randomisation.  I'd like to see a return of points values to pay for abilities such as these, rather than randomising them.  It would speed the game up and bring back the tactical element of choosing the right power or abilities, rather than being at the mercy of the D6.

Psychic Phase and Powers:

I agree with those calling for this to be revised.  Powers need a major overhaul, in particular, as some are way too powerful, while others are very ineffective.

Stop using the D6:

This is controversial, as it goes against the founding philosophy of Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000.  The idea was that the game could be played by anyone who had six-sided dice lying around the house or from any boardgames that they own.  The problem with the D6, however, is that it makes it very difficult to accurate respresent the differences between units.  D10s or D12s would be able to achieve this more effectively.  Even better, however, would be to convert to a percentile dice based system and state.  That really would make it much easier to represent elite and regular units, for example.

Reduce the number of special rules and overall complexity:

The rules are too long.  I would like to see their number reduced by adopting an Age of Sigmar type approach, although possibly not quite as reductionist, to 40K.  My view is that 40K needed this kind of treatment far more than Fantasy did, so GW missed a trick in not implementing this approach with 40K.

Allies:

I would prefer this system to be removed completely, but if it were to be kept it at least needs to make sense.  There needs to be a table governing which armies can ally with each other and it needs to make sense from a background perspective.



That's about it for now, but I'm sure that I'll think of some more ideas.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2017, 05:52:54 AM by Irisado »
You haunt my in-box like an ex-girl friend could only dream of.

The Forum Rules - Please Read and Remember Them.

Soñando con una playa donde brilla el sol, un arco iris ilumina el cielo, y el mar espejea iridescentemente

Offline Grand Master Lomandalis

  • Grand Master of the Deathwing | Oh the lolmanity! | 40kOnline's Care Bear of LOL!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11372
  • Country: ca
  • We were murderers first, last, and always!
  • Armies: Dark Angels, Custodes, Knights, Night Lords
Re: 8th ed wish list
« Reply #10 on: April 16, 2017, 02:49:56 PM »
Grand Master Lomandalis: Have never used Knights in any of my armies, so didn't know of huge gap in points. That's very strange but not uncommon with GW. Could be their way of forcing the Imperial knight to be mainly used in Apoc... I don't know, but I do agree with you. There needs to be a change.

Thank you all for joining in this discussion. 
 
Imperial Knights are more than 100pts more expensive than a Wraith Knight, and yet no where near as survivable.  A St7 AP2 weapon can cause 4 hullpoints, or one wound to a GMC.  They also suffer greatly in the flexibility of the fire arcs for their weapons.  Wraith Knights can fire 360o with each weapon, whereas IKs are restricted to 90o straight forward and to the side with no overlapping field of fire.

Back in the day when Monstrous Creatures were on the less common spectrum, vehicles were pretty damned good for their survivability.  But now that there are units like Dreadknights, Riptides, Wraith Knights, and Stormsurges, then a vehicle of equal points is no where near as competitive because it is much easier to destroy.
If there is anything that recent politics has taught us, it is that quotes taken out of context can mean what ever you want them to.
Well I always liked the globals...
I knew I had fans!!!

Quote
"Dark Angels are Traitors" is the 40k equivalent of Flat Earthers.  You can provide all of the proof you want that says otherwise, but people just can't let it go...

Offline Saim-Dann

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 852
  • Country: au
Re: 8th ed wish list
« Reply #11 on: April 16, 2017, 03:05:17 PM »
G'day Irisado!
You mentioned in another thread that the conversation was changing into an 8th ed wish list. So you inspired this one. Still have an Eldar army in Epic. That game is a hoot. Agree with most of your list. Have never heard or thought about a change in the dice system. Very interesting...Be well!

Grand Master Lomandalis: That's crazy. Hopefully that will change in 8th. Did you read Irisado's thoughts on the subject?

Offline Wyddr

  • Author Eminence: Hereticus Liber Daemonica | Fio'shas Shi
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5258
  • Country: us
    • My blog about SF/F stuff
  • Armies: Daemons, Imperial Fists, Tau, Ksons, Vostroyans
Re: 8th ed wish list
« Reply #12 on: April 16, 2017, 07:54:49 PM »
I would be loosely okay with Vehicles getting statlines akin to MCs. Give them a bunch of wounds, and armor save, and a good T.

I'd arrange it like this, were I in charge (which I'm not):

Wounds = Hull Points x 2
Armor Save: AV10 = 4+, AV11/12 = 3+, AV13/14 = 2+
Toughness: Base 7, +1 for Tank and/or Heavy, -1 for Open-topped. +2 for Superheavy. Most Tanks would be T8, lightweight stuff like Raiders/Trukks/Piranha would be T6. Baneblades are T10.

Of course, if you do this, you gotta give AP1/2 weapons the ability to do more than 1 wound in damage. Perhaps D3 wounds for AP2, D6 wounds for AP1.

Offline Cavalier

  • One Archon to Rules Test Them All | High Corsair Prince of Painting | Warlock
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2585
  • Country: us
  • Corsair Prince
  • Armies: Eldar, Dark Angels, World Eaters
Re: 8th ed wish list
« Reply #13 on: April 17, 2017, 07:10:06 AM »
Great thread Saim-Dann. Wishlist threads are the best! Their was a monster 60+ page wishlist for the new Eldar codex before it dropped in 6th. Lets see how far this one goes  ;D

My #1 wish is FASTER games. Playing one hour games with lots of models like in AoS is like a dream to me. Thats the number one thing I want... Irisado hit on it in a post from a couple months ago. Eliminate as many dice dependent randomness as possible. Get rid of rolling for difficult terrain, charge distances, run distances, warp charges, psychic powers, effects of psychic powers, vehicle damage chart. Give set values for all these things and we'd be so much better off.

Like AoS print the rules and how they work for each unit and their weapons on their datasheet. All the cross referencing is another major drag factor on the game.

As far is in game mechanics....

ASSAULT! Make assaults easier... Assault from stationary transports, assault out of reserve, assault from outflank and limited assault from Deep Strike would be fantastic. I think it would speed up the game to a fantastic extent, and would shift the power away from ridiculous shooting armies.

Finally, make vehicles tougher. Like the rest of you guys hit on... Soulgrinders have like 16 wounds in AoS. If thats any indicator of where 40k is gonna go, I'm very excited.

Anyway those are the big things that sprang to mind for me. Faster games, less dice determined results (more fixed stats for various in-game actions), easier assaults, tougher vehicles.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2017, 07:11:14 AM by Cavalier »
Check out my army! Eldar Corsair Army

I'm also on the Splintermind Podcast! http://www.facebook.com/splintermindpodcast/

Offline Saim-Dann

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 852
  • Country: au
Re: 8th ed wish list
« Reply #14 on: April 17, 2017, 07:31:04 AM »
Wyddr: A D3 wounds roll, haven't seen that since 2nd Ed. I'm meeting everybody halfway and wanting to keep the hull point system, just get rid of the glance damage. You've put a loy of thought into this, mate. Definitely a strong Eldar player.

Cavalier: Hopefully the thread will last till 8th shows up. If you want big but fast games, mate, you should have a crack at Epic. It's truly a hoot!

 
« Last Edit: April 17, 2017, 09:59:42 AM by Saim-dann »

Offline Wyddr

  • Author Eminence: Hereticus Liber Daemonica | Fio'shas Shi
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5258
  • Country: us
    • My blog about SF/F stuff
  • Armies: Daemons, Imperial Fists, Tau, Ksons, Vostroyans
Re: 8th ed wish list
« Reply #15 on: April 17, 2017, 02:43:47 PM »
ASSAULT! Make assaults easier... Assault from stationary transports, assault out of reserve, assault from outflank and limited assault from Deep Strike would be fantastic. I think it would speed up the game to a fantastic extent, and would shift the power away from ridiculous shooting armies.

But then that just shifts things *towards* ridiculous assault armies. I think assaulting from reserve is totally fine--infiltrators, scouts, outflanking, etc.. Deep strike? No way! My Khornate daemons are good enough as is. Let me assault from deepstrike, and I'll literally never lose another game.

Quote
Finally, make vehicles tougher. Like the rest of you guys hit on... Soulgrinders have like 16 wounds in AoS. If thats any indicator of where 40k is gonna go, I'm very excited.

I don't really agree that vehicles aren't tough enough. Yeah, Rhinos blow up easy, but they aren't supposed to be unassailable castles. Don't we remember 5th edition? Don't we remember how beslubbered up that was?

Honestly, not a lot wrong with vehicles now. The only reason people don't take them is that footsloggers are too good for certain armies and dropping meltaguns or grav weapons from the sky is just too damned easy. Also, once rapid fire weapons could be fired from the hip, infantry became the best way to put firepower on the board. The durability of vehicles isn't really the problem, it's the easy availability of antitank.

A lot of those problems would go away with fixes in other areas. That said, if you want to make them tougher, give them T/W/Sv and just forget the vehicle damage table was ever a thing. There, we're back in 5th ed (unless they bring back multiple wound damage from certain weapons). Enjoy your Rhino Rush guys, just don't start complaining to me when it gets really old. 

Offline Saim-Dann

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 852
  • Country: au
Re: 8th ed wish list
« Reply #16 on: April 17, 2017, 04:47:29 PM »
Agree that shouldn't be unassailable castles, however. They shouldn't be able to be take taken out by bolters or shurikens either. There is a balance. 

Offline Irisado

  • A Light in The Grim-Darkness ~ Guns Don't Kill People, Copyright Stats Do | Farseer | Reporting Live! from the Crime Scene | Somewhat behind the times
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11483
  • Country: gb
  • Soñando debajo del arco iris
  • Armies: Administrators must not play 40K
Re: 8th ed wish list
« Reply #17 on: April 17, 2017, 05:07:53 PM »
It depends on the type of vehicle.  The Eldar Vyper and Space Marine Land Speeder, for example, ought to be both be vulnerable to mass small arms fire.  By contrast, a Land Raider would be almost, but not completely, impervious to such weapons.  It's difficult to balance this correctly when using such a narrow set of values as offered by AV having only five possible values (for regular vehicles) and relying on the D6 to work out the chances of causing damage.

Based on the battle reports that I have read since the current edition came out, vehicles seem tough enough to me.  I'd be wary of boosting their defences for the reasons that Wyddr has given.  Fifth edition was the era of mechanised armies, which resulted in some very boring forces being fielded.  I'd never like to see a return to anything akin to that.
You haunt my in-box like an ex-girl friend could only dream of.

The Forum Rules - Please Read and Remember Them.

Soñando con una playa donde brilla el sol, un arco iris ilumina el cielo, y el mar espejea iridescentemente

Offline Saim-Dann

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 852
  • Country: au
Re: 8th ed wish list
« Reply #18 on: April 17, 2017, 05:16:32 PM »
Agree with everything you say, Irisado, but removing the glance rule wouldn't be a repeat of 5th. Non opened topped transports should not be able to be taken out by cannon fodder. 

Offline Irisado

  • A Light in The Grim-Darkness ~ Guns Don't Kill People, Copyright Stats Do | Farseer | Reporting Live! from the Crime Scene | Somewhat behind the times
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11483
  • Country: gb
  • Soñando debajo del arco iris
  • Armies: Administrators must not play 40K
Re: 8th ed wish list
« Reply #19 on: April 17, 2017, 05:22:27 PM »
There's always a chance that basic weapons can take out a vehicle though.  Imagine a rogue bullet finding its way through a vision slit and killing the driver, or ending up in an intake pipe or exhaust, causing critical damage.  The chance ought to be low, but it ought to be there.  It just isn't easy to balance properly within the mechanics that 40K uses for the reasons I've already given.
You haunt my in-box like an ex-girl friend could only dream of.

The Forum Rules - Please Read and Remember Them.

Soñando con una playa donde brilla el sol, un arco iris ilumina el cielo, y el mar espejea iridescentemente

 


Powered by EzPortal