The perfect 9th edition wishlist

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Ishagu**

And yet this is the best edition and it has none.

**Karol**

But they do it anyway. Deep strike is a problem with BA and tyranids, they fix deep strike not the BA or tyranids.

And later one they bring back turn one deep strike, turn one charges and 9" away deployment. At the same time factions that happened to be writen with turn one deep strike in mind, get the shaft.

**Apple fox**

Ishagu wrote:
USRs are a bad idea as any adjustments affect multiple units across multiple books.

The more unique and bespoke stuff the better, even if it's very similar.

USRs are only a bad idea for bad devs and designers. Any competent game team should be able to use them quite well.

**Bharring**

We have all the downsides of USRs already:
-You have to look at multiple books, and multiple parts of those books, to know what your rules are
-More importantly, changes to rules shared across books (Deep Strike, for instance) are often changed for all books at the same time.

But we also have all the downsides of USRs already:
-Bloat and duplication on many datasheets
-More importantly, changes to rules shared across books (Gets Hot, for instance) are often changed for some books some of the time, or at different times.

8th may be the best edition, but that doesn't mean it's perfect. One area it can improve upon is intentional use of USRs. The unintentional use leads to all the negatives of having them, without most of the benefits.

**Lord Clinto**

bibotot wrote:
Please make:

Allies between all factions legal, but there are penalties for unusual combinations like Custodes with Tyranids. Aeldari and Imperium should be trusted allies.

Your army must have a Primary Detachment from which the Warlord is chosen. Only Strategems for the Codex/Index of the Primary Detachment can be used. Having 32 Guardsmen in a Knight list no longer allows you to use Astra Militarum Strategems.

I'm okay with this as long as there is a minimum points requirement for the primary faction; say require the Warlord and at least 50% of the armies points must be from the primary codex.

I've played too many games where the Loyal 32 included the army Warlord with the CP Relic and CP regen Warlord Trait and the other ~1800 points were spent on IK, Custodes, etc

**Voss**

Ishagu wrote:
And yet this is the best edition and it has none.

There's an untestable, unprovable and altogether random claim. You may like it more, that doesn't make it 'the best edition.' From a mechanics perspective its a mess of rerolls and nonsense.

Also wrong, as it does have USRs, it just doesn't call them that. Fly for one obvious example in the main rules. Deepstrike and all the 'reroll 1s' abilities- they all function like USRs despite having none of the utility of actually being USRs. All of the downside with none of the upside.

**Vankraken**

Ishagu wrote:
And yet this is the best edition and it has none.

Subjective. I find 8th to be dreadfully boring to play and thus makes it to me a bad game. Core rules are very bare bones and mechanically shallow which results in a boring game to play.

Also the Fly rule is basically a USR as its a special rule that is used across most codexes, found in the BRB, and has a mechanic or modifier assocaited to it.

**Amishprn86**

Ishagu wrote:
And yet this is the best edition and it has none.

Completely disagree.

**vict0988**

Ishagu wrote:
No it doesn't. A rule could be powerful in combination with one unit, whilst being perfectly fine with another.

That's why adjusting the rule could be punishing to units not intended, or create broken combos in others.

Chapter Approved can balance units with different stats and combos, rules should be the last solution for balancing a unit, if the rules are fluffy they should not be changed. If Drop Pods had Deep Strike in the first codex it would have been more clear that it was changed with a whole new rule name, but instead, they still have the same name. That's the problem of bespoke names for USRs instead of giving the unit the USR until you actually want to give it a bespoke rule, replacing a USR rule with a bespoke rule is something you could do and it'd be noticeable from one codex to the next.

**-Guardsman-**

I think transports should have fire points again. I don't know why they did away with them, but it greatly reduces the usefulness of non-open-topped transports.

Oh, and the unit should disembark after the transport has moved.

**Klickor**

Pointed Stick wrote:
stonehorse wrote:

I can't exalt this hard enough. It really is the hammer hitting the nail on the head.

40k has morphed into something that is unrecognisable as a wargame.

Thanks, I appreciate the kind words.

Here's a specificexample: In a recent game my opponent was looking worried about the huge blob of Orks across the table. "Don't worry, "Orks are slow." I reassured him. After all, they only have a 5" move, right?

LOL

- 5" move + 1" for being Evil sunz
- D6" advance +1" for being Evil Sunz
- Re-rollable 2D6" charge, +1" for being Evil Sunz, and I can charge after advancing from being near a Warboss who grants this aura buff

Wow, my Orks on foot are now regularly making 20-24" charges. Not so slow, huh?

It used to be that I needed a Trukk to pull this kind of long-range surprise attack. I would try to hide the Trukk behind LOS-blocking area terrain, and my opponent would try to maneuver his troops to shoot it or set up interlocking lines of fire so that it would be vulnerable once it moved out in the open. It was fun, and tactical. I felt good when I pulled it off, because it was tricky and effective.

Now I can't use a Trukk this way because the passengers can't charge after disembarking if it moves, and the Trukk is always visible now so it gets blasted off the table almost instantly. And even if these problem were fixed, there still wouldn't be any point since the Orks are already fast enough on foot now with Advance moves and charge-after-advancing and the 2D6 charge range and the Orks' re-roll charge buff and the ridiculous Evil Sunz movement buff. Nonsensically, they're faster on foot than in a transport vehicle! Also, a large footprint on the tabletop has no disadvantages because terrain no longer slows down infantry. So why not spread out and have more board control?

Just one example of how the game's core rules push people to do the same set of like 3 or 4 good tactics, making games static, boring, and predictable.

And if walking isnt fast enough you can use Da Jump or a stratagem to deploy them from behind even.

Movement in this edition is so fethed up. I could build a whole list able to be in the opponents deployment zone turn 1 if they dont have any scout/infiltrate units to push me back. And even with that I could still have a bit more than half the army charging in to their deployment zone. On long side deployment that is game over if I get to start first. Not even a game.

Instead of lowering the damage from shooting and letting terrain both slow down models and give them more protection while slowed down they went the other direction. If you cant survive a turn of 8th edition shooting they instead gave the option of charging before getting killed and made the who goes first roll even more important in certain matchups.

Half the damage and half the speed of everything would improve the game so much. I think its insane that I can do a 24" +3d6 move as BA with DC if I go first or even 24"+4d6+1" as RG if going first. Or a Librarian/Monster (libby dread and mephiston) go 18-19" and have a +3 on the charge with reroll. My normal units are faster than what my fast vehicles were a few editions ago. Said vehicles are currently crap for doing their job of getting my marines in to combat protected. Both faster, cheaper and safer to go without Rhinos and Land Raiders smh

**Serafimov86**

I really miss USRs. I feel like 8th Edition would be much better with USRs and Armor Facings brought back.

**CthuluIsSpy**

Ishagu wrote:
And yet this is the best edition and it has none.

"Best Edition"
Citation needed.

If it were the best edition, character targeting rules wouldn't be crap, there wouldn't be imbalance across codices, formerly blast weapons would actually be better than their earlier incarnations, there wouldn't be pages upon pages of stratagems that slow the game down as you have to spend time activating some snowflake ability and deduct CP and then roll to see if you generate more CP, relics wouldn't be free, units unlocked by stratagems wouldn't be a thing (so what if they cost CP? CP means nothing if you build your army right), soup wouldn't be a thing and xeno models would no longer be stuck in finecast.

8th started off as better than 7th, not as the best, which is a different thing altogether, but then GW started mucking with it, ensuring that its well on its way to be like 7th ed.

**VladimirHerzog**

For me its USRs and less lethality, either by letting IGOUGO burn in a fire, or doing a range reduction on everything. 36+" should be a rare occurence. Reward positioning on the board, don't just make the game a gloryfied dice roll-off.

Oh, and make indirect fire worse than regular guns. The thunderfire cannon has no place in this game IMO, its just too strong for the pts its costs and is a 0 thought unit (amongst others).

Automatically Appended Next Post:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

units unlocked by stratagems wouldn't be a thing (so what if they cost CP?

im blanking out right now, what units are unlocked via CP?

**CthuluIsSpy**

VladimirHerzog wrote:
For me its USRs and less lethality, either by letting IGOUGO burn in a fire, or doing a range reduction on everything. 36+" should be a rare occurence. Reward positioning on the board, don't just make the game a gloryfied dice roll-off.

Oh, and make indirect fire worse than regular guns. The thunderfire cannon has no place in this game IMO, its just too strong for the pts its costs and is a 0 thought unit (amongst others).

Automatically Appended Next Post:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

units unlocked by stratagems wouldn't be a thing (so what if they cost CP?

im blanking out right now, what units are unlocked via CP?

Skarboyz, Chapter Masters, 'ard boyz to name a few.
There's also the specialist detachment rules where you get extra abilities for CP.
I guess a more accurate term would be "upgrade", but you are still getting improved stats and units for practically nothing.

The game would be a lot better a run a lot smoother if 90% of the stratagems were changed to unit upgrades that cost points and codex entries, imo.

**Elbows**

I'm curious why so many people think USRs need to come back, or that they're not present in the game right now (which they are).

When was the last time you referred to your Feel No Pain roll as anything other than Feel No Pain? Or you referred to Deep Strike as..whatever the name is in your unit entry? The USR still exists. If someone asks "Hey, can that unit Deep Strike?" and you say "No, but it has the Orbital Platform Teleport special rule...", you're going to be laughed out of the store. USRs didn't go anywhere. The naming practice just shifted so they can change individual units rules later on - something they've actually done.

It boggles my mind that people are struggling with the rules because they're not all named the same thing...?

**Serafimov86**

Its not struggling with the rules, its that by getting rid of the USRs we lost the cool and narrative army lists in exchange for the self contained datasheets.

**VladimirHerzog**

Elbows wrote:
I'm curious why so many people think USRs need to come back, or that they're not present in the game right now (which they are).

When was the last time you referred to your Feel No Pain roll as anything other than Feel No Pain? Or you referred to Deep Strike as..whatever the name is in your unit entry? The USR still exists. If someone asks "Hey, can that unit Deep Strike?" and you say "No, but it has the Orbital Platform Teleport special rule...", you're going to be laughed out of the store. USRs didn't go anywhere. The naming practice just shifted so they can change individual units rules later on - something they've actually done.

It boggles my mind that people are struggling with the rules because they're not all named the same thing...?

Its not about all of them having the same name, the problem is that currently, not all similar rules are the same. The plasma overheating on modified vs unmodified 1's is a good example of this.
If they brought back USRs, they could easily fix all instances of these rules by changing the base rule, instead of goind in every codex and updating the rules (and inevitably missing some).

USRs make the game a lot cleaner and simpelr when properly used.

**CthuluIsSpy**

Elbows wrote:
I'm curious why so many people think USRs need to come back, or that they're not present in the game right now (which they are).

When was the last time you referred to your Feel No Pain roll as anything other than Feel No Pain? Or you referred to Deep Strike as..whatever the name is in your unit entry? The USR still exists. If someone asks "Hey, can that unit Deep Strike?" and you say "No, but it has the Orbital Platform Teleport special rule...", you're going to be laughed out of the store. USRs didn't go anywhere. The naming practice just shifted so they can change individual units rules later on - something they've actually done.

It boggles my mind that people are struggling with the rules because they're not all named the same thing...?

Isn't that because a lot of the players who played older editions are still around, and as such still use the old USR terms?
Newer players aren't going to know what those are, they are just going to refer to whatever is listed in their codex.

**VladimirHerzog**

VladimirHerzog wrote:
Elbows wrote:
I'm curious why so many people think USRs need to come back, or that they're not present in the game right now (which they are).

When was the last time you referred to your Feel No Pain roll as anything other than Feel No Pain? Or you referred to Deep Strike as..whatever the name is in your unit entry? The USR still exists. If someone asks "Hey, can that unit Deep Strike?" and you say "No, but it has the Orbital Platform Teleport special rule...", you're going to be laughed out of the store. USRs didn't go anywhere. The naming practice just shifted so they can change individual units rules later on - something they've actually done.

It boggles my mind that people are struggling with the rules because they're not all named the same thing...?

Its not about all of them having the same name, the problem is that currently, not all similar rules are the same. The plasma overheating on modified vs unmodified 1's is a good example of this.
If they brought back USRs, they could easily fix all instances of these rules by changing the base rule, instead of goind in every codex and updating the rules (and inevitably missing some).

USRs make the game a lot cleaner and simpelr when properly used.

the fact that we refer to it as feel no pain and deepstrike instead of "digustingly resilient" and "appear unbidden" is a good example of the "desire path" concept. When the target audience uses something else than what you did, its a sign that what you provide should be re-tought.

**Dumb Smart Guy**

Pointed Stick wrote:
stonehorse wrote:

I can't exalt this hard enough. It really is the hammer hitting the nail on the head.

40k has morphed into something that is unrecognisable as a wargame.

Thanks, I appreciate the kind words.

Here's a specificexample: In a recent game my opponent was looking worried about the huge blob of Orks across the table. "Don't worry, "Orks are slow." I reassured him. After all, they only have a 5" move, right?

LOL

- 5" move + 1" for being Evil sunz
- D6" advance +1" for being Evil Sunz
- Re-rollable 2D6" charge, +1" for being Evil Sunz, and I can charge after advancing from being near a Warboss who grants this aura buff

Wow, my Orks on foot are now regularly making 20-24" charges. Not so slow, huh?

It used to be that I needed a Trukk to pull this kind of long-range surprise attack. I would try to hide the Trukk behind LOS-blocking area terrain, and my opponent would try to maneuver his troops to shoot it or set up interlocking lines of fire so that it would be vulnerable once it moved out in the open. It was fun, and tactical. I felt good when I pulled it off, because it was tricky and effective.

Now I can't use a Trukk this way because the passengers can't charge after disembarking if it moves, and the Trukk is always visible now so it gets blasted off the table almost instantly. And even if these problem were fixed, there still wouldn't be any point since the Orks are already fast enough on foot now with Advance moves and charge-after-advancing and the 2D6 charge range and the Orks' re-roll charge buff and the ridiculous Evil Sunz movement buff. Nonsensically, they're faster on foot than in a transport vehicle! Also, a large footprint on the tabletop has no disadvantages because terrain no longer slows down infantry. So why not spread out and have more board control?

Just one example of how the game's core rules push people to do the same set of like 3 or 4 good tactics, making games static, boring, and predictable.

To add to this, every codex has experienced points cuts across the board, so the typical game is just clogged with models compared to the earlier editions.

The 6x4 table has never felt this small with blobs of 7ppm Boyz who can Da Jump

**Serafimov86**

Good point. The game just feels less elegant.

**stonehorse**

Elbows wrote:

It boggles my mind that people are struggling with the rules because they're not all named the same thing...?

It isn't because of this. If the game designers limit the USRs to say 15, and use only those to help make units different from units that have a similar stat line and wargear it creates a tighter design. As it is now we see a multitude of special rules that could have been summed up by either a single or a few USRs, and no restraint in adding new special rules that continue to break the game.

Kings of War has a selection of USRs, and this makes it a very elegant system.

**Ishagu**

And yet it's more elegant than it's been in the past.

Reducing the game to 10-15 USRs sounds so utterly, crushingly boring. Go play chess

**CthuluIsSpy**

Ishagu wrote:
And yet it's more elegant than it's been in the past.

Reducing the game to 10-15 USRs sounds so utterly, crushingly boring. Go play chess

What, you mean go play a game that's well designed, has persisted for centuries, and is associated with brilliance and intelligence?

Also,

>Elegant
> Consisting of hundreds of different abilities, rules and exceptions, some of which either conflict or do the same thing, just under a different name

Choose one.

8th ed as it is now is the wargame version of spaghetti code.

**Bharring**

It's more simple than it's been in the past. It's not more elegant. Those aren't the same thing.

**Amishprn86**

Ishagu wrote:
And yet it's more elegant than it's been in the past.

Reducing the game to 10-15 USRs sounds so utterly, crushingly boring. Go play chess

But the game is boring now.

**Not Online!!!**

Ishagu wrote:
And yet it's more elegant than it's been in the past.

Reducing the game to 10-15 USRs sounds so utterly, crushingly boring. Go play chess

10-15 usrs are boring.
But 6 marine supplements arent.

10-15 usr s are boring.
Yet 50 times the same but slightly diffrently worded rule is not.

**Ishagu**

Not Online!!! wrote:
Ishagu wrote:
And yet it's more elegant than it's been in the past.

Reducing the game to 10-15 USRs sounds so utterly, crushingly boring. Go play chess

10-15 usrs are boring.
But 6 marine supplements arent.

10-15 usr s are boring.
Yet 50 times the same but slightly diffrently worded rule is not.

Lol go play something else if you find it all so boring.

**CthuluIsSpy**

Ishagu wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Ishagu wrote:
And yet it's more elegant than it's been in the past.

Reducing the game to 10-15 USRs sounds so utterly, crushingly boring. Go play chess

10-15 usrs are boring.
But 6 marine supplements arent.

10-15 usr s are boring.
Yet 50 times the same but slightly diffrently worded rule is not.

Lol go play something else if you find it all so boring.

Or we could get GW to change the rules so they aren't crap. You know, get the product we paid for.
Also, 4th and 5th ed weren't boring or convoluted, and they did USR just fine. Oh sure, they had problems, but bloat and nestled USRs wasn't one of them.
Just because 6th and 7th gak the bed, doesn't mean the other editions did too.