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.

 Wyldhunt wrote:
Wow. I think I agree with just about every suggestion in this thread. Good ideas, guys.

 Gibblets wrote:

2) Get back to something closer to 6th ed missions.

Interesting. I don't see people ask for a return to 6th edition elements very often. My memory on 6th's missions is a little hazy. What specifically do you want to bring back? All I really remember is having to roll for mysterious objectives (and then promptly forgetting to bother with them 9 times out of 10.)

The 6th ed missions brought in objectives (before was kill everything) that had very little if any turn by turn scoring; almost everything was scored at the end of the game. So you had 5 turns to figure out how best to negotiate the terrain, your dice and your opponents army to be the last one on objectives. The relic mission was fun, subject to bad match ups, I've been on both sides of that. But generally there was a theme with the mission beyond stand on this circle for 5 turns.

Stop the points adjustments! You can't adjust a unit vs the field anyway.

Stop catering to the tournament crowd , they are the ones breaking the game.

Use a point % ADJUSTMENT , army vs army. example: Army A +2% Vs Army B.

We all have lives outside of the nerdverse of GW. Stop making us relearn the freaking game every 4 to 6 months.

Points adjustments aren’t relearning the game.
It’s tweaking your army a bit.

 Gibblets wrote:

 Wyldhunt wrote:
Wow. I think I agree with just about every suggestion in this thread. Good ideas, guys.

 Gibblets wrote:

2) Get back to something closer to 6th ed missions.

Interesting. I don't see people ask for a return to 6th edition elements very often. My memory on 6th's missions is a little hazy. What specifically do you want to bring back? All I really remember is having to roll for mysterious objectives (and then promptly forgetting to bother with them 9 times out of 10.)

The 6th ed missions brought in objectives (before was kill everything) that had very little if any turn by turn scoring; almost everything was scored at the end of the game. So you had 5 turns to figure out how best to negotiate the terrain, your dice and your opponents army to be the last one on objectives. The relic mission was fun, subject to bad match ups, I've been on both sides of that.

Ah, gotcha. To each their own. I remember one of the complaints at the time being that the all-or-nothing (non-progressive) objectives meant that you were encouraged to spend the first 5 turns just killing stuff without really thinking about the mission. Whereas progressive scoring better reflects who spent more time controlling the battlefield over the course of the game.

But generally there was a theme with the mission beyond stand on this circle for 5 turns.

I do agree with you there. 10th's secondary missions tell a story, but the primary objectives feel very abstract and gamey. I'm not advocating a return to the all-or-nothing objectives, but they did make a bit more narrative sense to me. Like, if the mission was to seize control of an area, then measuring who has more control of the area at the end of the fight makes more sense than measuring who had more control in the middle of the battle. The progressive scoring for standing in circles is very much something that evolved out of tournament style games.

 Gibblets wrote:

 Wyldhunt wrote:
Wow. I think I agree with just about every suggestion in this thread. Good ideas, guys.

 Gibblets wrote:

2) Get back to something closer to 6th ed missions.

Interesting. I don't see people ask for a return to 6th edition elements very often. My memory on 6th's missions is a little hazy. What specifically do you want to bring back? All I really remember is having to roll for mysterious objectives (and then promptly forgetting to bother with them 9 times out of 10.)

The 6th ed missions brought in objectives (before was kill everything) that had very little if any turn by turn scoring; almost everything was scored at the end of the game. So you had 5 turns to figure out how best to negotiate the terrain, your dice and your opponents army to be the last one on objectives. The relic mission was fun, subject to bad match ups, I've been on both sides of that. But generally there was a theme with the mission beyond stand on this circle for 5 turns.

In that period the game was frequently dominated by fast moving units like jetbikes which could hide behind terrain or in reserve for as much of the game as possible, before jumping out and grabbing objectives on the last turn. Making everything before the last turn jetbike rush nearly meaningless to the outcome of the game. Didn't matter if you killed practically everything else they had, a bunch of hidden jetbikes emerged and that was it.

The shift to scoring over time came with its share of issues too, but I vastly prefer it to that old system of scoring only on the final turn.

Toyzdeziner wrote:

You have an opportunity--- Tell Games Workshop the 3 BEST things to explore/create in 40K.....


I will guarantee they see the 3 BEST ideas...


You never know ... if your idea(s) are used.. you may be immortalized as a 40K FIGURE !!!!!!

What i want to see?

I'm fed up with seeing the same "so augmented they are barely human" Magos models.
What about the ones which look like a porcelain-doll/mannequin (the ghost in the shell 2: innocence look but without the hair), with gold alloys for the articulation/joints, jewels for eye lenses and a long scarlet hooded cloaks?
You know, the ones which if they stood still for a while you'd think they were a statue?

Them and Jokaero.

Who built the blackstone fortresses?
The orangutans.
You know you want it to be so...

 Wyldhunt wrote:

I do agree with you there. 10th's secondary missions tell a story, but the primary objectives feel very abstract and gamey.

I'm not disagreeing, but I think GW used vague language, knowing that we would fill in the blanks.

If I tell you to control an objective for five turns, you can decide that the objective is a data file that you're trying to upload, a relic that you're digging for, or an Agent that you have to protect, or any of a dozen other things that it could be based on your narrative.

But if I tell you in the mission that the objective is an Agent, then that's all it can ever be, and if that doesn't suit your narrative, tough.

PenitentJake wrote:

 Wyldhunt wrote:

I do agree with you there. 10th's secondary missions tell a story, but the primary objectives feel very abstract and gamey.

I'm not disagreeing, but I think GW used vague language, knowing that we would fill in the blanks.

If I tell you to control an objective for five turns, you can decide that the objective is a data file that you're trying to upload, a relic that you're digging for, or an Agent that you have to protect, or any of a dozen other things that it could be based on your narrative.

But if I tell you in the mission that the objective is an Agent, then that's all it can ever be, and if that doesn't suit your narrative, tough.

Yeah, that's fair. I think part of it is that I play a lot of mobile armies that aren't normally all that interested in standing in one place during a battle. That, and it takes a little (just a little) mental stretching to have a time sensitive element like a file upload be central to every single battle. While the old all-or-nothing objectives made for a worse game, it was more intuitive to look at the aftermath of the battle and say, "See? At the end of the battle, your guys don't have control of the objectives they needed. I shot you off of them."

A fair response as well. And after all, mission variety is really what people are craving- missions that feel different.

If you like mobile armies, I can definitely see wanting more missions that are about securing table quarters or getting into the enemy DZ.

As a Crusader, I frequently play Agendas harder than objectives. I don't mind losing a game to level three units and capture a territory, or to havve a Repentia unit find redemption and a hero complete a trial of Sainthood.

I'm also using Crusade missions too- I've heard others say those have more narrative elements, but I wouldn't know because I don't play matched and have no basis for comparrison.

Scoring in the game has zero interest to me.


I rarely look at the scoring criteria and when I do it's more of a "oh I completed that objective, neat" rather than "MUST SCORE OBJECTIVE".

The only thing I could suggest is to make 40k playable, like 30k!

It's not a hard to figure out skill to understand what you need to leave in reserve for a turn 3 or 4 blitz towards a few objectives to hold them; with enough bodies or durability to keep a pack of scat bikes away for a turn. Being forced to be in the middle for objectives was good for melee armies as did the shrinking table size. I'm all for helping melee armies in 40K, they usually (6th ed) got the short end of the stick. On the flip side the shrinking table size hurt the movement options of evasive armies so it was a wash. I'm more interested in the flow of the battle then I am in scribing stats and snapshots of granular game states. That stuff gets sports fanatics or excel turbo nerds hard; not me. For reference I play lots of Chess, HoMM and RTSs. Frankly I'd rather play Chess then what they tried to do with the terrain setups and missions for 10th.

1. Try something new, release an alternative marine variant, something like this: Ultimarus Marines, named after John Ultima. They can be bigger, have harder hitting guns and maybe even an extra wound or toughness.

2. Just stop exploring canon and stories for things that just don't matter, Ghazgkull? Who cares, ynnari? Ynnori. Just focus on the Ultimarus as they recreate cadia by punching Trazyn hard or something

3. Add Ultimarus marines to the old world, they should probably be there anyway.

4. More splat books for marines too, with additional stratagems that only work while inside official Games workshop stores

5. Why stop at The Lion, just bring all the primarchs back except primarisised and finally ultimarusised

Permanently release Space Hulk.
Slowly work through all of the old extra stuff (chaos terminators etc.), perhaps an annual re-release with a different chapter of marines.

The_Real_Chris wrote:
Permanently release Space Hulk.
Slowly work through all of the old extra stuff (chaos terminators etc.), perhaps an annual re-release with a different chapter of marines.

I still think that Warhammer Quest was going to do that when it went from AoS back to 40K; but whatever the heck happened with Cursed City seems to have killed quest beyond just keeping the core boxed sets in stock

1. take the 40k rulebook, bin it
2. take the MESBG rulebook, remove the cover and scribble "warhammer 40,000 11th edition" on the front
3. adapt the 40k models to the MESBG rules, which given thats going to be basically adding two unit types [vehicle] & [flier] as a sub type, basically as monsters that don't get the monstrous special attacks (or maybe get different ones)

then call it a day, no formation, no strategems, heros that feel heroic, free form army building on a model by model basis, points for weapon upgrades (imagine that!)

makes 40k into a skirmish game the way a 28mm game really should be, but allows keeping the big toys

The prompt is about actual product ideas, like models.

1. Right now Leontus the horse general is a must-have for guard armies, so there should be two rival must-have models for each faction. Each faction contains its own antagonist and protagonist character, for example Leontus and Inquisitor Karamozov. Each of them is an excuse for [regiment of kriegers] to fight [company of black templars] that they accuse of conspiring against the Imperium.

Somehow there needs to be an Evil Antagonist to Your Dudes main character in the Imperial model line. You could go very straight forward and have that be an obviously explicitly evil guy like Cardinal Bucharis, or have two characters who might be wrong and might be right, like Leontus vs Karamozov.

2. Terrorist Dire Avengers. Goodguy craftworlders are never going to be a big faction as long as the starter box is Marines vs Bad Guys, and in a setting that's all bad guys it's contradictory to have evil and friendly versions of elves. Aspect Warriors can be sinister looking as it is, so their updated versions should be anti-human crusaders with a new optional wargear the same way that the newest chaos havocs and thousand son rubrics brought a optional but must-take cannon. The starter box should be Space Marines fighting a combined army of anti-human aspect warriors and anti-chaos kabalites.

vipoid wrote:
3) I hear there's a faction called "Drew Kari", or something like that. Perhaps you could remember that they exist and that it's been ~12 years since they last got a new unit? Perhaps, in between releasing Primaris Lieutenants #4857294-4857463, you could manage to give them a few new units?

Yeah having Manichean divisions between elves was a crappy Andy Chambers version of 40k that's effectively LotR or Warcraft which he worked for anyway or even WHFB. Archons can be champions putting down a daemonic incursion, and aspect warriors can herd off humans to work off their sins in the slave pits.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
3. On that last one? For heaven’s sake Give Us Lost And The Damned.

The main chaos army currently has four LatD units: a LatD HQ, LatD mutants, LatD cultists/traitors/amrymans, and LatD big mutants. It means LatD is less of a new idea and more just any other army asking for more releases and stronger rules.

catbarf wrote:I would like to see GW explore

1.

2.

3.

Beyond that I'm not very picky. Getting away from designing games like it's still 1980 is really the important thing.

That sounds like a thread about fixing the infield fly rule, or for penitentjake to say he likes playing crusade

40k already has models, indeed it has some downright jaw dropping models, it also with the plastic kits of more recent design have some technically amazing models

40k doesn't need "models" to make it better, it needs a better understanding of what its trying to be, then to try and be it better

e.g. is this a skirmish game? squad level? (KT does that better), platoon level (sort of where is started), company level? higher level?

they seem to be erring towards company level and above by removing the focus really on what the actual weapons a unit carries are in ways a higher level commander almost doesn't need to care about - the squad leaders etc take care of that

but does a 28mm scale game really need an ICBM? superheavy walkers?

joking about rebading MESBG aside, what GW need to do is decide what the heck they want 40k, the game, to actually be, and this could well involve splitting into several games using the same models for different "scales" and then trying to make each game good

Yes 40k does need all those things and we have two threads per week about it. We can make one right now and talk about how MESBG is much better. The question we're all responding to is about "things to explore/create" and purportedly to pitch as new products to GW by a user dubiously called toyzdeziner.

The tone somewhat reminds me of those posts in dakka by former studio staffer Space McQuirk where he had a big argument with everyone. This just isn't the the rules tweaks thread. The things GW "creates" or sells are models, and it also writes new rules to promote new model launches.


Which like you point out is the problem with game size. With the physical parameters of 28mm scale models and a 44"x60" board, we need to have a top limit of 90 models total on the board to have a challenging game of maneuver. Overhead points out that 40k is not about the game though uts about the collection:

There's so many cool models and in a game that takes hours where you might only get one game a week at best; I think formats that let you bring more to the table are always going ot win out.

So that's a conflict, you say that the current half-company sized game is too crowded to be good. Most of the customers and GW use the game as a way to line up their collections and show that they're good collections, and not as a game like chess or a one-act drama.

Can that fit into the thread, is there a model release, physical models, that would cause the standard game size to become 24 Marines fighting 60 tyranids? I think it's maybe.

pelicaniforce wrote:

Yeah having Manichean divisions between elves was a crappy Andy Chambers version of 40k that's effectively LotR or Warcraft which he worked for anyway or even WHFB. Archons can be champions putting down a daemonic incursion, and aspect warriors can herd off humans to work off their sins in the slave pits.

I'd honestly be fine with this. 40k has always been about which factions are the least depraved, rather than which ones are good.

Hell, GW has had Ynnari since 7th if they wanted a way to blend the various Eldar factions together more.

My issue is that for over a decade now, they've done absolutely nothing with Dark Eldar except delete units and options.

I still want the porcelain doll/mannequin magos and new jokaero models (and their attendants/specialists to keep them away from important things using gifts of fruit and nuts) but ive had some more ideas.

A Rogue Trader. I know there was some old artwork depicting them (memory says a model was produced once upon a time) and i think a small range of different types of Rogue Trader would be awesome. Maybe all the model designers can depict themselves as their Rogue Trading alter-selves?

An ork runtherder/big mek with sniper-grots. Presumably with a janky/impossible fire-control system to stop the grots targeting other orks with a direct brain-to-brain 'konekter sistum'..
Inaccuracy isnt a problem if you beleive its 'goin ta hit enuf'..

Iron horses. Its ludicrous that the DCoK would use actual animals to ride on -give us mechanical horses. Roughriders could use them as well.
Space marines can upgrade to bikes, let IG upgrade to an iron horse of their own.

A general one here; design the components of models so we can fit LEDs inside the completed models easily. The standard LED design has a rim to it which would make physically securing one without glue in a bi-parted model quite simple. Just make sure there is an internal gap which allows a channel from the base through the model for wiring.

Plastic Primus Redoubt. The tile for the resin one was always bowed and mis-shapen. The Primus Redoubt is supposed to be everywhere in Imperium defence networks and are a great counter to IK armies if they were available in any GW store like the Imperial Knights are.

Would the legions of chaos have issue with fitting imperium bomb-collars to xenos units? No? Would be cool to see the chaos version of penal legions. Maybe the bomb collars have gained sentience and started worming their way into the captives nervous system?

You can buy a Rogue Trader with her retinue currently, just saying
https://www.warhammer.com/de-DE/shop/kill-team-elucidian-starstriders-2022?queryID=4daef2946b688641a757a805f2c9f5ac

The AdMech also has mechanical horses, don't know how easy they'd be to kitbash, but they're there.

I think there's a great opportunity to explore Imperium Nihilus and the under-supplied maybe-not-even-properly-imperial forces stranded there.

I'd love to see some more fiction set in that area, and some ideas for forces fighting out there - battered imperial equipment, forced alliances with factions the Imperium would normally scorn, and the general waste and decay of that entire theatre.

Give us battered Space Marines with half functional armour. I would eat that right up, primaris or not.

 Da Boss wrote:
I think there's a great opportunity to explore Imperium Nihilus and the under-supplied maybe-not-even-properly-imperial forces stranded there.

I'd love to see some more fiction set in that area, and some ideas for forces fighting out there - battered imperial equipment, forced alliances with factions the Imperium would normally scorn, and the general waste and decay of that entire theatre.

Give us battered Space Marines with half functional armour. I would eat that right up, primaris or not.

You might enjoy The Emperor's Spears if you haven't read it already.

Sgt. Cortez wrote:

Spoiler:

 SirDonlad wrote:
I still want the porcelain doll/mannequin magos and new jokaero models (and their attendants/specialists to keep them away from important things using gifts of fruit and nuts) but ive had some more ideas.

A Rogue Trader. I know there was some old artwork depicting them (memory says a model was produced once upon a time) and i think a small range of different types of Rogue Trader would be awesome. Maybe all the model designers can depict themselves as their Rogue Trading alter-selves?

An ork runtherder/big mek with sniper-grots. Presumably with a janky/impossible fire-control system to stop the grots targeting other orks with a direct brain-to-brain 'konekter sistum'..
Inaccuracy isnt a problem if you beleive its 'goin ta hit enuf'..

Iron horses. Its ludicrous that the DCoK would use actual animals to ride on -give us mechanical horses. Roughriders could use them as well.
Space marines can upgrade to bikes, let IG upgrade to an iron horse of their own.

A general one here; design the components of models so we can fit LEDs inside the completed models easily. The standard LED design has a rim to it which would make physically securing one without glue in a bi-parted model quite simple. Just make sure there is an internal gap which allows a channel from the base through the model for wiring.

Plastic Primus Redoubt. The tile for the resin one was always bowed and mis-shapen. The Primus Redoubt is supposed to be everywhere in Imperium defence networks and are a great counter to IK armies if they were available in any GW store like the Imperial Knights are.

Would the legions of chaos have issue with fitting imperium bomb-collars to xenos units? No? Would be cool to see the chaos version of penal legions. Maybe the bomb collars have gained sentience and started worming their way into the captives nervous system?

You can buy a Rogue Trader with her retinue currently, just saying
https://www.warhammer.com/de-DE/shop/kill-team-elucidian-starstriders-2022?queryID=4daef2946b688641a757a805f2c9f5ac

The AdMech also has mechanical horses, don't know how easy they'd be to kitbash, but they're there.

Huh. I hadnt seen those till now; its right for you to bring them up.
Liking the henchmen but the rogue trader is almost completely lacking character - like a re-purposed assassin asset to please the ESG assessor.
Id still like to see the model designers re-imaginings of themselves as rogue traders in one set - no henchmen getting in the way, just their view of their alter-selves in non-dynamic poses; like they are standing for a painting or something. We can decide who goes in their retinue!

You know what i mean with the iron horse thing though - a different version of those two-part horse models from WHF, not sulphurhounds.


I like DaBoss's suggestion of degraded power armour marines from a long tour of duty; It looked good and got praise all-round on the Endryd Haar model a few weeks back so run with it!
I always liked the iron hands upgrade pack from years ago because of that "been in the gak for too long" vibe the bits gave to a marine and would love to see more of that - in upgrade kit format ideally.

1) Support for Blackstone Fortress. For those of us who enjoy solo-coop, its the only 40K game available and its not had any support since 2020. Not a single article on Warcom or in White Dwarf.

2) Knights need the addition of foot soliders, to make them more playable and acceptable in small-to-medium games. We need this fixing before thinking of any more Space Marines with T-Shirt launchers...

3) Space Marines aren't boring, and have their place, and yet shouldn't be over-highlighted to the point where FlashGits takes the piss out of them. Craftworlds are another iconic 40K faction that are painfully underused, and could have stepped in for the odd edition as the "hero" faction. Star Trek is just as famous for Mr Spock as it is Captain Kirk, and Elves are damn popular in LOTR and D&D. And I'm sure a Harlequin Troupe could visit Necromunda once in a while...

SamusDrake wrote:
1) Support for Blackstone Fortress. For those of us who enjoy solo-coop, its the only 40K game available and its not had any support since 2020. Not a single article on Warcom or in White Dwarf.

2) Knights need the addition of foot soliders, to make them more playable and acceptable in small-to-medium games. We need this fixing before thinking of any more Space Marines with T-Shirt launchers...

Technically they have them in the Mechanicus. Heck knights as an army wasn't a thing until fairly recently. I think if GW wanted to start adding smaller models to their range then the best way would just be to roll Knights back into Mechanicus as a core force (probably also rolling knights with slightly altered stats into other Imperial armies as well)

 Overread wrote:


Technically they have them in the Mechanicus. Heck knights as an army wasn't a thing until fairly recently. I think if GW wanted to start adding smaller models to their range then the best way would just be to roll Knights back into Mechanicus as a core force (probably also rolling knights with slightly altered stats into other Imperial armies as well)

For Imperial Knights this would be ideal, as it would be a single codex for both. I suppose Chaos Knights could be incorporated into the Chaos Marines or Chaos Daemons codices?

SamusDrake wrote:

 Overread wrote:


Technically they have them in the Mechanicus. Heck knights as an army wasn't a thing until fairly recently. I think if GW wanted to start adding smaller models to their range then the best way would just be to roll Knights back into Mechanicus as a core force (probably also rolling knights with slightly altered stats into other Imperial armies as well)

For Imperial Knights this would be ideal, as it would be a single codex for both. I suppose Chaos Knights could be incorporated into the Chaos Marines or Chaos Daemons codices?

Chaos Marines is where I'd expect they'd go. Unless GW is waiting on making this choice after they do a full dark mechanicus set. Chaos Marines already have a few models that would qualify for that and could jump over

 Sincity wrote:
Stop the points adjustments! You can't adjust a unit vs the field anyway.

Stop catering to the tournament crowd , they are the ones breaking the game.

Use a point % ADJUSTMENT , army vs army. example: Army A +2% Vs Army B.

We all have lives outside of the nerdverse of GW. Stop making us relearn the freaking game every 4 to 6 months.

Well there is a problem with that for marines, because how GW shows and counts their win rates. On one hand there would be ultramarines and BT with their 50%+ win rates, in specific detachments of course, while armies like WS or RG are so rare to see played that it is hard to even say what their win rates are.

The tournament crowd is not breaking the game. GW is breaking the game, because they write and pre build armies in specific ways. It wasn't the players that cheated other players or used loopholes to get 70% win rates with eldar, and on the flip side it is not the players that are making ad mecha a bad faction, it is GW which makes the army cost like 1200$ with a boring game play for the player and hard to grasp rules for the opponents. In an ideal world each codex would give people 1-2 core builds, and maybe something on the side too. But that is not how GW writes their books and rules.

The three things I would like to see regarding rules in w40k (which probably can't happen till a rules reset)
1. Get rid of True Line of sight

2. Add unit hight/size to everything in in the game. Some stuff can have fixed size, and some stuff can have size based on actual hight. No more shoting at banners or models standing on scenic base or a rock .

3. Limit the whole "teleportation thing". Right now regular movment doesn't really matter, you either have to have a M value so great that you may as well be teleporting or you go up and down every turn. This always will create problems in a game with one player activiation phases.

"Iterate on your rules instead of burning them down and starting over every three years."

"Armies other than Space Marines exist."

"You're allowed to release resculpts of models instead of bloating your range with new models that are the old ones, only better."