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.

NoBaconz4You wrote:

lord_blackfang wrote:Get rid of TLOS.

Why? That would just be stupid!

More skirmish game-types would be my wish. For a person who doesn't have the time/money/space for big-point games, I rarely step out of the 1000 point range.

I agree.

Am I the only person just hoping for a good game?

I'm not even setting the bar at great, or excellent, but just good.

I'd probably settle for mediocre, but good would be nice.

Ribon Fox wrote:For me its Get rid of the Run or bring back Overwatch to counter the frothing loonys that can charge 24 inches! I mean "What the hell! Thats not legel? It is...what a load of crap!"

You will get something similar if the Beasts of War rumors are true.

Taking the wounds on the front models in a squad means that killing models will make the rush to assault that much further.

That the emperor is reborn

I'm not sure what I'm hoping for. There are complains I have about 5th, but they're pretty minor. Mostly I'm just hoping that they can fine-tune the balance and points cost so that more units and strategies are viable. That's all I care about. The more viable builds and strategies, the happier I'll be. Sucks knowing that about half of every unit in your codex is basically worthless, with 4/5 of all wargear choices or upgrades also worthless.

1. Fun

2. Clear rules. CLEAR rules. Lots of Examples. Writers should have to come here to Dakka and scroll through any thread in YMDCall of more than 10 pages to see the nit-picking gak that occurs due to UNCLEAR rules and intent and RAI vs RAW BS!

3. Variation in the scenarios (Deployment and game type).

4. Hot chicks.

kronk wrote:1. Fun

2. Clear rules. CLEAR rules. Lots of Examples. Writers should have to come here to Dakka and scroll through any thread in YMDCall of more than 10 pages to see the nit-picking gak that occurs due to UNCLEAR rules and intent and RAI vs RAW BS!

3. Variation in the scenarios (Deployment and game type).

4. Hot chicks.

1, 2 and 3 shouldn't be that hard for them to get at lest partly right.
4, do I count?

4. Not my cup of tea, but best of luck to you!

More skirmish style games would be nice such as combat patrol, unfortunately i do not think that GW would support this as it means less profit

Small skirmish games are a dime a dozen these days, dunno why GW would want to compete in that arena when its main strength is that it can produce a huge range of large armies and models affordably (at least for itself if not for us)

Let demons assault out of deep strike.

Give the Orks the Choopa rule back! Min. 4+ saves!
well a fella can dream cant he

For real,.... I say No Pre-measuring (tjm). Thats it for me!

Personally, I hope half of the rumors are true and the game gets completely screwed up. With the price increases over the last three years, I can easily get most of my money back if i sell.

It's all good.

drunkorc wrote:Give the Orks the Choopa rule back! Min. 4+ saves!

As an Ork player, I can say I don't want this rule back. It was horrible and really, really unbalanced. If you play against IG, Orks, Dark Eldar or most Eldar armies, it makes no difference whatsoever. If you play against Marines of any flavor, you instantly had a ludicrously large leg up. Rules that arbitrarily favor one army or the other don't sit well with me. I love fighting Deathwing, but know that it would just be game over for him from the start if we still got the 4+ choppa rule.

Above and beyond anything else assuming one single change? Removal of Kill Points.

I'd like to see a lot of other things that actually change a lot of how the game plays, but Kill Points are just such an awful victory condition that they just shouldn't survive.

Vaktathi wrote:Above and beyond anything else assuming one single change? Removal of Kill Points.

I'd like to see a lot of other things that actually change a lot of how the game plays, but Kill Points are just such an awful victory condition that they just shouldn't survive.

While I do like that they punish MSU armies (I played an 1850 Venomspam list with 22 killpoints more than once... ugh.) I don't like that a 6 man IG heavy weapons squad is worth as much as a 10 man unit of Paladins. I'd like a return to victory points, since those don't particularly favor one kind of army or the other.

And the count is; Five.

Fix wound allocation, it needs to be done in order of weapons, as to not completely invalidate my PW attacks because I also have a squad with me.

Steelmage99 wrote:And the count is; Five.

Counting the "What do you want to see in 6th ed" threads?

Brother SRM wrote:

drunkorc wrote:Give the Orks the Choopa rule back! Min. 4+ saves!

As an Ork player, I can say I don't want this rule back. It was horrible and really, really unbalanced. If you play against IG, Orks, Dark Eldar or most Eldar armies, it makes no difference whatsoever. If you play against Marines of any flavor, you instantly had a ludicrously large leg up. Rules that arbitrarily favor one army or the other don't sit well with me. I love fighting Deathwing, but know that it would just be game over for him from the start if we still got the 4+ choppa rule.

How about for Big Choppa's than? I'd say have it just have a general decrease, 5 becomes 6, 4 becomes 5, 3 becomes 4.

I mean these special weapons that don't convey a standard benefit needs some love. (plus I still prefer the fantasy method, a big choppa that has +2 strength isn't going to be just as effective as a standard slapshod choppa in piercing armor!)

kronk wrote:1. Fun

2. Clear rules. CLEAR rules. Lots of Examples. Writers should have to come here to Dakka and scroll through any thread in YMDCall of more than 10 pages to see the nit-picking gak that occurs due to UNCLEAR rules and intent and RAI vs RAW BS!

3. Variation in the scenarios (Deployment and game type).

4. Hot chicks.

Word.

The great nurf gods come down and lay the smack down on GK.

Ribon Fox wrote:

kronk wrote:1. Fun

2. Clear rules. CLEAR rules. Lots of Examples. Writers should have to come here to Dakka and scroll through any thread in YMDCall of more than 10 pages to see the nit-picking gak that occurs due to UNCLEAR rules and intent and RAI vs RAW BS!

3. Variation in the scenarios (Deployment and game type).

4. Hot chicks.

1, 2 and 3 shouldn't be that hard for them to get at lest partly right.
4, do I count?

Uh huh.

What am I hoping for with 6th Ed? For to coincide the release of 6th ed. with a massive 50%+ price slash as they finally understand that maybe lowering prices might seduce more people back to the hobby? Yeah, I'm hoping for miracles.

That it not be the massive Power Armour Fanboy edition that 5th was.

All i want is a balanced, fun system that doesn't favour any one faction/army above the others in terms of rules, and that was written by a competent game-writer who not only has access to playtesters and copywriters but who intends to actually listen to what they say.

Probably way too much to ask, but i'm asking

More mandrakes and lictors. And a nice set of rules for multi-player games!

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
How about for Big Choppa's than? I'd say have it just have a general decrease, 5 becomes 6, 4 becomes 5, 3 becomes 4.

If Big Choppas had a -1 armor modifier I'd be down with that. I think the game could use a few more modifiers to tell you the truth; that's one WHFB/40k 2nd ed thing I could stand to see come back in one way or another!

... I don't know. I don't want to return to a day where you had to basically come up with elaborate charts just to figure out who was doing what kind of damage to who. It seems that introducing this rule would be a needless complexity. If you really want to give big choppas something, make it so that they give their wielding models +1S or something.

Ailaros wrote:... I don't know. I don't want to return to a day where you had to basically come up with elaborate charts just to figure out who was doing what kind of damage to who. It seems that introducing this rule would be a needless complexity. If you really want to give big choppas something, make it so that they give their wielding models +1S or something.

They already get +2 strength.

They are never taken except for wound allocation, as they still get armor saves against it, so you just get more klaws instead, because extra nob strength is worthless if it can't really hurt those squishies in the thicker armor, sure they can hurt tanks, but klaws do that, and still hurt those MEQ better.

Also, if you cannot do basic subtraction and addition, I really feel for you.

If one wants assaulting to become better, modifiers need to be added, as otherwise you'll either have just your basic CCW, and penetrate nothing, or power weapon, and penetrate everything. I'm asking for it on specific weapons only, rather than per ALL weapon types modifier like really want. (Down to every last combat knife, and bayonet!)

ZebioLizard2 wrote:Also, if you cannot do basic subtraction and addition, I really feel for you.

My point wasn't "math is HARDZ!!!", my point was "complex systems are worse than simple ones".

If you feel that choppas need something between being a CCW and being a power klaw, then ditch the +S and give them rending. Bloating the game with needless complexity is always a bad idea.