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.

Everyone has a different idea of what "forward" is. But I've played the game for about 14 years now, and I think it has always been improving. Slowly but surely. From Rogue Trader, to 2nd edition, to the massive change of 3rd edition, to the revised rules of 4th edition. Every new edition has always been a little more clearly written, and the games have run a little more smoothly.

But the rumored 5th edition changes seem like a step backwards. Vehicle ramming is something like 3 paragraphs long and takes multiple calculations just to figure out simple values? The exact same effect can be made much simpler and written in just a couple of sentences. Other changes are just strange (but that's for another thread). To me, a game is moving forward if every new edition is a little better than the last and the rules are clear, well written, make sense, and flow easily.

Other people may want a more detailed game. Personally I think highly detailed games are better suited for expansions like Apocalypse, and campaign style events. I think the core game should be quick, easy, and adapted for high levels of competition and tournament game. Then the extra rules can be added to expansions for those who want a more D&D flavor game.

I might be totally off base. Maybe the new rules really will be a great leap forward. I don’t see it. But perhaps others do. And perhaps they can voice their opinion.

Note: This is not another "do you like 5th edition" thread. I just wanted to know if people think the game is improving or moving backwards.

~Logic

If designing the game to appeal to 8 year olds is forward then yes.

I say its a step back because they are bringing back tweaked versions of old 2nd and 3rd edition rules that should not have come back.

They are also making 40K into somthing akin to a "light" version of fantasy. -run, emphasis on infantry formations, lack of blocking LOS area terrain, static heavy support, screening-these are all halmarks of fantasy equivalents.

From the supposed 5th edition pre-release .pdf that's going around it looks like GW is trying to be more concise with their rules. That said, and acknowledging it's a rough copy,it sure looks like it'll spark some rows about how the rules work.

I think it's just revisions.

I'm not sure what I think about the vehicle rules but I like the better use of reserves.

Aside from Infiltrators and Scouts outflanking the reserve rules just seem like a more carefully detailed version of 4th edition.

I think it is taking a step (or three) backwards and that IS an improvement.

Sincity

The game never moves forward, it just side steps.

As a "living" game to perfect it would be a stupid financial move on GWs part. Ever notice how they fix some stuff but break other things? If they leave the game in a constant state of repair that means you can update it until the end of time.

Monopoly for example you only ever need one of (short of wearing it out) and is a "perfected" system.

GW like other companies (DnD, Magic, WoD etc) design their games as subscriptions, and they constantly change it for the sake of change not to make it better or more player friendly. Sure they will say that its better and more efficient but in the end its the same subscription game that you gullibly dish out stupid amounts of cash for.

The real difference between GW and the others is that they go above and beyond to royaly screw you over and force you to re-buy everything.

The relationship we all have with GW can be describe as masochistic at best, we give them money and they lay the boots to us and say its awesome and we'll love the next big kick.

If GW was a street gang I would go to war with it using broken bottles and chains.

I would have to say the fiction seems quite stagnant.

Now I'm only fairly new to 40k, but from what I hear from the people that I game againts, the game's fiction hasn't changed much since 3rd ed.

The world wide events seem to be a good way to drive the fiction, but that doesn't seem to be happening.

I guess I'll have to wait for the 5th ed book to come out to see if there's any movement in the game fiction.

As for are the rules getting better (which is what I gather this thread is actually about) .... I'm going to reseve my answer until I've got the real book in my hands.

Rumors & leaked documents don't make for enough of the rules set to make an informed decision. And IMO we can't do that until we've read the rules 3 or 4 times and played at least 10 games under the 5th ed rules set.

5th is truly a significant improvement over 4th Ed - the game will certainly be more 'fun' - but the vehicle rules are just shameful. It's always a case of two steps forward and one and a half steps back with GW. Then there are the 'Kill Points'. What were they thinking?

Meep: Their intention is that the fiction will not move.

milesteg: How can you say now that the game will be more fun? I certainly hope that it will be more fun.

Without having any hangovers from third edition (I came to the hobby about a month before 4th came out – so I’ve never read the 3rd edition rules); I think that 4th edition is pretty fun as it stands right now. I'm finding it even more fun now that I've gotten in with a group where almost every player has an army other than Space Marines (most of them have a marine army too).

Don't get me wrong. I don't hate the marines (though sometimes I sound like I do, or even say that I do). The thing I hate (and find unfun) is the 4 fest that is a marine army v another marine army. That's the main reason I only played marines for about 3 months; every other player I came up against played marines and it bored me to death.

malfred: That seems sad. Considering that there's a whole galaxy to play with, surely there's some room for movement in the fiction. I don't want to see something akin to the mech warrior fiction movement. The clans were cool & provided a much needed revitalisation into the MW universe, however the fall & dark ages stuff is stupid (IMO). Static fiction is better than screwed up fiction I guess.

I suppose that’s what the novels are for (I can’t find a single retailer that carries BL stuff). But it’d be nice to see some fiction in WD, something driving (and I guess we’ve all got an opportunity to do something on our own). And now that I think about it the world wide campaigns are a nice way to provide some fiction movement … it’s a shame that GW doesn’t seem to capitalise on the opportunity that they provide.

Hell, even a campaign book would be nice. Not something like the old campaign books where you get new armies and the such. But something like the Medusa V stuff. A big section of battle background & motivation for all the races, then a chunk of missions / scenarios that we could use …. Or a map & some nodal stuff – like what’s in the back of the BGB & COD but in more detail.

I guess I’m just an old RPGer that wants to see his battles mean something. I’ll have to start working on it for myself I guess (no one else is going to do it).

The galaxy is big enough for people to make their own campaigns and have a great time without it upsetting the overall "official" timeline.

I agree the annual world campaign is a chance to drive the whole narrative forwards however I don't think GW want to do that. So much of their backstory and associated stuff are heavily focussed on the last -- Horus Heresy, Armaggedon, Ultramarines vs Nids.

The Eye of Terror campaign provided new fluff even if it didn't end with Chaos burning Terra to the ground.

When you look at how fast the Warmachine Iron Kingdoms fluff is moving then there is a stark comparison.

The moving fluff is engaging and really gives a live feel to gaming. Like you are playing with real characters who have a life of their own, not just historical 2-dimensional has-beens.

Tacobake wrote:The Eye of Terror campaign provided new fluff even if it didn't end with Chaos burning Terra to the ground.

Yes, they need to do more like that.

I'd say that not only is 40k not moving forward, it is positively moving backwards and will continue to do so for some time.

No one can say what 5th will be (forward or backward) until it hits the shelves.

My opinion, based on codices DA, CSM and Orks, is that yes the game is moving forward. I agree with the OP that clean, simple and easy to follow is the way to go, with more complex options and rules being the domain of Apoc, CoD and other compendiums.

Guess we'll just have to wait and see.

I'm more in favour of sideways, or outwards myself.

dark-hamish wrote:No one can say what 5th will be (forward or backward) until it hits the shelves.

My opinion, based on codices DA, CSM and Orks, is that yes the game is moving forward. I agree with the OP that clean, simple and easy to follow is the way to go, with more complex options and rules being the domain of Apoc, CoD and other compendiums.

Guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Hit the nail on the head there I think.

I would say if things get fixed it'll probably be a step forwards, if they don't address the problems in the preview then it'll be backwards.

... as long as it's twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom...

KIL KIL KIL wrote:... as long as it's twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom...

Replace freedom with indentured servitude.

That reflects GWs goal a bit better

Seeing a 5th edition, I am reminded as to how old I am getting, and how I think that GW has lost its way. The fact that I still have all of my stuff is a bad case of Karma, and even though I sell enough to fund small countries, I still like the damn game, even though the !@#$%^ that continue to jack up the rules have no idea how to play thier own products.

The simple no BS thing that I want out of the 5th edition is to just fix whats broken, so I don't have to continue to play a game and say !@#$ like, " Back in 1st edition, we had Overwatch, back in second, we had sustained fire dice, back in third, we had squad on squad combat, back in fourth, we had more varieties of vehicles...."

All they need to do is fix whats broken, and seriously promote the game with a vision, a direction, and a focus.

its whats for fifth edition...