Switch Theme:

Pretend you are the Game Designer! How do you make 6th?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Sword-Bearing Inquisitorial Crusader






Yep, the subject heading. I suggest, though, when writing that you think of how GW does their work and the limitations game designers face. Mechanics cannot be too unusual or offthewall, and the new system would need to work with currently released codecies. Imagine you are at a business meeting and you have fifteen minutes to say/write what you think should happen.

I will simply list what I see are the major problems of 4th edition.

1. The first turn in the I go/You go system is still extremely dominant. It's definitely better in this edition than any other, but i still feel this mechanic has problems. The person who goes first shoots first, and it is possible to completely eliminate armies before the other player gets to go.

2. Vehicles and monsters dominate 40k...mostly by being essentially invulnerable to basic shots.

3. Because of #2, the game revolves heavily around special and heavy weapons, be it shooting or hth, or weapons that ignore special and heavy weapons, like the storm shield. This says something about why IG is so dominant.

4. There is still no unified system of terrain...and I find this area still causes the greatest amount of arguments.

"There is no limit to the human spirit, but sometimes I wish there was."
Customers ask me what army I play in 40k. Wrong Question. The only army I've never played is orks.

The Connoisseur of Crap.
Knowing is half the battle. But it is only half. Execution...application...performance...now that is the other half.
 
   
Made in us
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle





Hell Hole Washington

If i worked for GW i would throw out any logical rules changes and go with whatever will make people buy the most models possible. THen i would plan codex that make those models way better than old models. Then in 7th ed i would reverse the trend. Hmmm.

This would lead to disposable armies so that you couldnt stick to one army because each time a codex came out it would make use of some new and uncharted game mechanic to make the newer codex and models way outperform the old ones. Rinse and repeat. This is what i think they were trying to do with the nids codex. Make all of the older models less desirable than the new ones. They also seem to have been trying to get people to buy more hordes of expensive figures. Boost profit margins and then pocket more dough.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/08/29 23:37:37


Pestilence Provides.  
   
Made in gb
Excited Doom Diver






Shrewsbury

1. It might be possible to go to a system of Player 1 move - player 2 fire - player 1 assault -player 2 move - player 1 fire - player 2 assault, but I'm not sure that would actually improve the game overall. Personally I don't mucjh fret over first turn but I do agree for most armies it's a problem.

2. Reduce most monstrous creatures to T6. Allow vehicles to be stunned by any fire directed at them (not quite sure how this mechanic would easily work but plastering a vehicle with small arms fire is often effective in 'real life'.

3. It's possible that a solution would see vehicles and heavy weapons rise in cost and basic infantry perhaps drop.

4. All terrain should be 4+ cover. That's simple and where I play almost universal.

Follow these two simple rules to ensure a happy Dakka experience:

Rule 1 - to be a proper 40K player you must cry whenever a new edition of the game is released, and always call opposing armies broken when you don't win.

Rule 2 - Games Workshop are always wrong and have been heading for bankrupcy within 5 years since the early 90s.  
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Master with Gauntlets of Macragge





Boston, MA

Blood and Slaughter wrote:1. It might be possible to go to a system of Player 1 move - player 2 fire - player 1 assault -player 2 move - player 1 fire - player 2 assault, but I'm not sure that would actually improve the game overall. Personally I don't mucjh fret over first turn but I do agree for most armies it's a problem.

2. Reduce most monstrous creatures to T6. Allow vehicles to be stunned by any fire directed at them (not quite sure how this mechanic would easily work but plastering a vehicle with small arms fire is often effective in 'real life'.

3. It's possible that a solution would see vehicles and heavy weapons rise in cost and basic infantry perhaps drop.

4. All terrain should be 4+ cover. That's simple and where I play almost universal.

1. Who knows what that would do for game balance, but it's confusing as hell in practice. That doesn't flow well at all.

2. If all vehicles can be stunned by small arms fire, then people won't take vehicles anymore. The reason to take them is because it keeps that fire off your guys. Monstrous Creatures are fine as is.

3. Basic infantry don't need a price drop, heavy weapons are already more expensive than they were in 4th.

4. Most terrain is 4+ cover - the only distinctions are for hedges and fences, and fortified bunkers. There's decidedly little that isn't 4+ anyway, which I actually think is a bit of a problem.

Personally, I would put more danger into riding in vehicles but by no stretch make them the rolling coffins they were in 4th. I would love to revamp the vehicle damage chart to include things like damaged drive (can only move half speed) damaged optics (-1 BS to a minimum of 1) out of control results, and more dangerous explosions. You could do this on a 2D6 system, or a D6 system as is but with more modifiers.

I think an interesting change to the instant death rule would be that it had to be target's toughness x2 +1 for instant death to take effect. In other words, a Tyranid Warrior with toughness of 4 can only be instant killed by something of strength 9 or 10. Adding in multiple levels of rules like Feel No Pain would be cool too, like FnP on a 6+ for some units, 5+ for others, etc. In addition, I would like some kind of suppression mechanic. If a unit has to take a number of saves equal to it's number, it must take a LD test regardless of whether or not it's fearless. If it fails, it has to move at half speed/shoot at half range for the round or something like that.

Generally I'd like to see the game become a little more complex, but not by a whole lot.

Check out my Youtube channel!
 
   
Made in us
Purposeful Hammerhead Pilot





Pullman, WA

For the I-goU-go mechanic, I personally love Firestorm Armada/Uncharted Seas mechanic of picking one unit, doing all their moving/shooting/assaulting, and then the opponnent does the same for one of their models, and rinsing and repeating until everyone has moved their models. It'd be a bit messy with MSU, but I'd prefer that any day over the Alpha-Strike that is 40K today...

Imagine the feeling when you position your tanks, engines idling, landing gear deployed for a low profile, with firing solutions along a key bottleneck. Then some fether lands a dreadnought behind them in a giant heat shielded coke can.

The Ironwatch Magazine

My personal blog 
   
Made in ca
Hubcap




Spiral Mountain

If I was a game designer, I wouldn't make a new edition. Simply because I would realize that people are tired of forking over money for things like this, and it is increasingly frustrating for new players.


 
   
Made in ca
Perturbed Blood Angel Tactical Marine




Toronto, Canada

Flaming Troll wrote:If I was a game designer, I wouldn't make a new edition. Simply because I would realize that people are tired of forking over money for things like this, and it is increasingly frustrating for new players.


I'd disagree, to an extent. I think most people who play 40k would be willing to fork over a little bit of cash for rule fixes. The problem is that with every new edition, for every rule fix, five others break, and then you're out the $75 or whatever it is for the new rule book.

Ecce Homo Ergo Elk 
   
Made in gb
Strider






if you take a rhino/transport you become fast attack and only allowed to take a rhino at the capacity of 10 and razor at 6 so on.

Allow any unit to break and run from combat it they choose. (needing to regroup)

Give every piece of terrain a standard unit of cover. 4+ on everything is silly.

Smoke launchers etc giving results on the the glancing chart and a 5+ cover instead of 4+ - heavy Ap 1 weapons would be still good against them and they would weather the storm of small arms just fine.

Make power weapons rarer.

Terminators and equals get +T2 ups and 2+/5+ save

http://turnbasedtarpit.blogspot.co.uk/
http://www.youtube.com/user/ArtfulUnderachiever?feature=mhee
http://4acrossisemu.deviantart.com/
https://sites.google.com/site/techincallyterrain/ 
   
Made in us
Sinewy Scourge







I want to see less of a reason to take vehicles out the ass while keeping them still effective. Don't you dare nerf Mechdar.

Kabal of the Void Dominator - now with more purple!

"And the moral of the story is: Appreciate what you've got, because basically, I'm fantastic." 
   
Made in us
Zealous Sin-Eater



Chico, CA

I start by tossing it all out.
Next rework the core and codex all at one time, this should only take 5 or so year. All the time playtesting (I know it's GW so it a new idea) to makes sure its balanced (yet one more new idea for GW). So no matter what you bring to the table, it tactic that decide the winner and not who has the baddest dude on the table.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/08/30 00:24:34


Peter: As we all know, Christmas is that mystical time of year when the ghost of Jesus rises from the grave to feast on the flesh of the living! So we all sing Christmas Carols to lull him back to sleep.
Bob: Outrageous, How dare he say such blasphemy. I've got to do something.
Man #1: Bob, there's nothing you can do.
Bob: Well, I guess I'll just have to develop a sense of humor.  
   
Made in us
Manhunter




Eastern PA

agreed

start from scratch, rework all the books at once, no more 10 year old codexes!

- bonuses for standing still and shooting
- race specific movement
- emphasis on HQ choices and their influence over their armies
- some sort of "combined" ranged attack that can be used against heavier targets, something similar could be used in melee as well.
- the ability to LEAVE combat.

just a few things

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/08/30 00:45:01


There ain't nearly enough Salvage in this thread!

DS:80+S++G+M++++B++I++pwmhd05+D++A++/fWD88R+++T(S)DM+

Catyrpelius wrote:War Machine is broken to the point of being balanced.

sourclams wrote:I play Warmahordes. It's simply a better game.


 
   
Made in fk
Longtime Dakkanaut





Wishing I was back at the South Atlantic, closer to ice than the sun

There are three things I'd like to see;

1. Get rid of run.
2. Make terrain a concious choice by giving each item a points cost and allowing you to buy it as part of your army. {Several things from that, GW sells more kits, TOs don't need to populate tables for competitions, players can't complain that terrain favoured the opposition when they can buy their own.}
3. Reissue the old Wargear book with all the items annoted for 6th ed.

Cheers

Andrew

I don't care what the flag says, I'm SCOTTISH!!!

Best definition of the word Battleship?
Mr Nobody wrote:
Does a canoe with a machine gun count?
 
   
Made in us
Long-Range Land Speeder Pilot





I would give all infantry units +1 to hit vehicles and monstrous creatures in the shooting phase (even a guardsman should be able to hit a big Carnifex).

Space Marines, Orks, Imperial Guard, Chaos, Tau, Necrons, Germans (LW), Protectorate of Menoth

 
   
Made in us
Wraith






studderingdave wrote:agreed

start from scratch, rework all the books at once, no more 10 year old codexes!

- bonuses for standing still and shooting
- race specific movement
- emphasis on HQ choices and their influence over their armies
- some sort of "combined" ranged attack that can be used against heavier targets, something similar could be used in melee as well.
- the ability to LEAVE combat.

just a few things




So you want to play Warmachine.


I honestly have no idea how I'd fix 40K. I haven't played a game of 40K in quite some time so I don't even remember what's broken all that well. I'd try to find some way to de-emphasize vehicles without making them useless, but I have no idea how to do that, and try to standardize terrain in some way, in terms of cover saves. Don't know how I'd to that. It'd require some thought.

I also have some other ideas that I personally would like to see, but I'm sure would not be very popular with everyone else, IE reducing the number of models in a game, either by emphasizing 1000 to 1500 point games or doubling the points cost of everything across the board. This goes against everything GW is doing at this time. Assuming the game is still around in five years, I imagine 2000 points of Guard won't even fit on the board. In fact, my idea would probably be terrible from a financial standpoint, but perhaps I could come up with some other way to entice people to buy more stuff.
   
Made in us
Manhunter




Eastern PA

RatBot wrote: So you want to play Warmachine.


someone sensed where i was going with it. yeah. warmachine already covers all the bases i like in a game. 6th edition wont fix 40k.

There ain't nearly enough Salvage in this thread!

DS:80+S++G+M++++B++I++pwmhd05+D++A++/fWD88R+++T(S)DM+

Catyrpelius wrote:War Machine is broken to the point of being balanced.

sourclams wrote:I play Warmahordes. It's simply a better game.


 
   
Made in gb
Stubborn Dark Angels Veteran Sergeant





Teesside

The only big fix I would want to make to the game design process (sorry if you've already heard me rant on this subject) is iterate, iterate, iterate.

That is -- it really doesn't matter how off-the-wall your design first draft is. You playtest the hell out of that first draft, then write your 2nd draft, then playtest a load more, etc. By the time you've done your 5th or 6th draft you should have a pretty good game.

(And no, calling each draft "an edition", and selling your entire playerbase each new draft, doesn't count as playtesting.)

My painting & modelling blog: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/699224.page

Serpent King Games: Dragon Warriors Reborn!
http://serpentking.com/

 
   
Made in us
Wraith






studderingdave wrote:
RatBot wrote: So you want to play Warmachine.


someone sensed where i was going with it. yeah. warmachine already covers all the bases i like in a game. 6th edition wont fix 40k.



I love Warmachine, though sometimes I miss throwing fistfuls of dice... But Dystopian Wars fills that void, as will Warpath when it's released.
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut





London, UK

scuddman wrote:Yep, the subject heading. I suggest, though, when writing that you think of how GW does their work and the limitations game designers face. Mechanics cannot be too unusual or offthewall, and the new system would need to work with currently released codecies. Imagine you are at a business meeting and you have fifteen minutes to say/write what you think should happen.

I will simply list what I see are the major problems of 4th edition.

1. The first turn in the I go/You go system is still extremely dominant. It's definitely better in this edition than any other, but i still feel this mechanic has problems. The person who goes first shoots first, and it is possible to completely eliminate armies before the other player gets to go.

2. Vehicles and monsters dominate 40k...mostly by being essentially invulnerable to basic shots.

3. Because of #2, the game revolves heavily around special and heavy weapons, be it shooting or hth, or weapons that ignore special and heavy weapons, like the storm shield. This says something about why IG is so dominant.

4. There is still no unified system of terrain...and I find this area still causes the greatest amount of arguments.


I would try to make the models less expensive....i mean 50 bucks for the valkyrie model.....bloody hell!

RSO 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






I-Go-You-Go has been the format of 40k since Rogue Trader and it should continue to be the staple. More complicated systems typically involve less miniatures. A great example was Warzone. It revolved around "Activation", whereby players take turns activating individual units and doing all of their actions at once. Warzone was a skirmish game, so it worked well, but one of the great strengths of 40k is the ability to have battles at more or less company level or battalion level rather than squad level. The Turn system also allows for better full-army integration: your entire army moves and acts at once, so it actually works together. In practice, in Warzone and other activation-based games, it's more focused on individuals.

That said, 40k could use a little work. I don't have a problem with heavy mechanization as it's actually quite realistic. Here's what I'd like to see:

The game starts as a "battle in motion". IE: deployment is done from the table edge and distances are reflected by the movement characteristic of that unit. For example, Fast vehicles and Bikes may deploy up to 18" from the table edge. Infantry may deploy up to 6" from the table edge, and regular vehicles may deploy up to 12" from the table edge. Vehicles count as moving >6" on the first turn.


Tier 1 is the new Tactical.

My IDF-Themed Guard Army P&M Blog:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/355940.page 
   
Made in us
Krazed Killa Kan






South NJ/Philly

I see it as nearly impossible to make all vehicles worthwhile (4th Ed Problem) while at the same time making them not completely dominate the game (5th Ed Problem).

Really, the major problem is transports being ubiquitous, which is negating small arms fire being useful. Maybe go back to having the 6 destroy a vehicle on a Glancing hit?
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Omadon's Realm

I'd bring back overwatch.

Also, remove the prohibition on charging from deepstriking or disembarking units.



 
   
Made in gb
Joined the Military for Authentic Experience






Nuremberg

I'd make some slight changes to vehicles to make them less dominant, primarily giving them a weaponskill based on their movement rather than a flat to hit. This would allow assault based armies like Daemons, Tyranids and Orks to have a decent chance of hitting moving vehicles. Something that would mean WS5 hit the fastest on a 5+ and the mid level on a 3+ I think would not be too limiting.
I'd try and fix kill points a bit too, possibly bringing back victory points.
I'd also get rid of TLOS and bring in a system somewhat like Warmachine where there is a detailed but slightly more abstracted cover system that works better in practice.

Apart from those two niggles I think 5th ed is one of the best editions they've released, miles better than 4th. The problem with the game is really the codex books, not the editions. That's why I think they should not do a new edition for another few years, and focus on updating as much as possible and keeping a consistent design philosophy over the books.

   
Made in us
Thunderhawk Pilot Dropping From Orbit





United States

Yes, deepstriking is supposed to be fast and bloody, getting into assault right away would make sense instead of,"Oh, we teleported! Lets sit for a while as high valued targets!"
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Making Stuff






Under the couch

scuddman wrote:1. The first turn in the I go/You go system is still extremely dominant. It's definitely better in this edition than any other, but i still feel this mechanic has problems. The person who goes first shoots first, and it is possible to completely eliminate armies before the other player gets to go.

This is far more a problem with people just not putting enough terrain on the table rather than a failing of the rules specifically.


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Make these changes and watch the game shine.

1. Get rid of the wound allocation shannigans. Go back to torrent of fire from last edition. That was good enough to put the wound on the lascannon guy if you shot enough and it would speed up the game.

2. Give units a stand and shoot ability that works like this. If a unit gets assaulted it can choose to "make a last stand". The unit will not make close combat attacks at all and will be auto-hit in HtH by the enemy, however the unit gets to make a shooting attack at double their initiative and a -1 to BS. The unit that makes a last stand is considered moving when making the shots (usually no heavy weapon fire and the -1 to BS makes it not to powerful, while getting auto-hit will make it more likely the unit will get wiped out). These shots do not add to combat resolution and they do not trigger a morale check.

3. To offset this I would bring back the rule that says if you consolidate into an enemy unit you are considered in assault with them. This will prevent other enemy units from shooting that assaulting unit, but the unit they just consolidated into can choose to make a "Last Stand" themselves in the next assault phase. This will help to mitigate a shooting foot army from becoming assault proof.


4. Vehicles. Leave the rules as is, but make a change to transports. Bring back entanglement for embarked units whose transport is destroyed. (they always get pinned coming out of a destroyed vehicle) Entanglement was a hassle last edition, but now the damage table favors vehicles more and there are cover saves everywhere. Non-transports won't be affected, but if Bugs or Daemons have to chase down a rhino, then they won't have to eat rapid fired weapons on the following turn from whatever was inside. It makes transports moving around the enemy a little more dangerous, but it doesn't kill the all tank army and it gives Foot lists a chance against tank lists.


These are good changes which have a chance to do the following things.

1. Speed up the game with the removal of wound allocation.
2. Encourage mech/foot hybrid lists which offer more variety than spam, spam, spam.
3. Encourage larger squad sizes who can withstand a "Last Stand" attack.
4. Gives all foot armies, such as daemons and Tyranids, a better chance against all mech lists.
5. Keeps every current army list option viable

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/08/30 02:26:25


 
   
Made in us
Sinewy Scourge






Flaming Troll wrote:If I was a game designer, I wouldn't make a new edition. Simply because I would realize that people are tired of forking over money for things like this, and it is increasingly frustrating for new players.
This exactly. You need to completely re learn half the rules, and if thts not bad enough, you need to shell out another 50$ for a new set of rules.

"Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons."
 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Master with Gauntlets of Macragge





Boston, MA

AndrewC wrote:
1. Get rid of run.

Why for the love of god would you ever want this? This is literally the only thing keeping foot-based armies mobile in any capacity whatsoever. The game is mech enough as is.

Check out my Youtube channel!
 
   
Made in us
Grim Rune Priest in the Eye of the Storm





Riverside CA

A posible salution to Vehicles
1] Make Tank Hunters more common
Example:
Marine Devistor Sargent Auspex can choose [just before deployment] to give the BS 5 or Give one [or more] Weapon[s] Tank Hunter.

Space Wolf Player Since 1989
My First Impression Threads:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/727226.page;jsessionid=3BCA26863DCC17CF82F647B2839DA6E5

I am a Furry that plays with little Toy Soldiers; if you are taking me too seriously I am not the only one with Issues.

IEGA Web Site”: http://www.meetup.com/IEGA-InlandEmpireGamersAssociation/ 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Master with Gauntlets of Macragge





Boston, MA

Anpu42 wrote:A posible salution to Vehicles
1] Make Tank Hunters more common
Example:
Marine Devistor Sargent Auspex can choose [just before deployment] to give the BS 5 or Give one [or more] Weapon[s] Tank Hunter.

I like this idea lots. If an auspex on a dev sergeant could give them Tank Hunters or some cover reducing ability each turn, they could be much more viable.

Check out my Youtube channel!
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Gulf Breeze Florida

Make Rapid Fire Range 1/2 of the Weapon's normal range.



 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: