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.

I couldn't find a thread with this topic, so I figured I would create one. What are your wishes for the 6th edition?

I'm just returning to 40k so my wishes are mostly about stuff I miss from 4th edition.

1. Ogryns with two CCWs
2. More weapon choices for IG commanders - eg. Storm Bolters
3. Official small games rules (like 40k in 40 minutes)
4. Maybe some allowed way to mix armies (like 50 pts penalty to field a SM HQ in an IG army)

My 6th edition wish is that they don't change things just for the sake of change and I hope ALL of the 6th edition rumors I've heard are wrong.

I hope they finally deal with points so a reasonable army can be pitted against an equal opponent.

I'd like to see shooting come back. I like the rumors of shooting being changed back to move and shoot once up to full range. That was one of the changes in 3rd Edition that essentially ruined the game.

I'd like to see a balanced rule book that isn't horribly biased towards one play style.

oni wrote:My 6th edition wish is that they don't change things just for the sake of change and I hope ALL of the 6th edition rumors I've heard are wrong.

Yay, this! 5th is my favorite 40k yet. They can finetune and fix pieces, but don't just throw everything out. That's my wish: Make 6th more like 5.5. Fix the broke parts and if it isn't broken, don't touch it.

BlapBlapBlap wrote:I hope they finally deal with points so a reasonable army can be pitted against an equal opponent.

Say what now? Are you complaining about balance or the size of games or what?

Veteran Sergeant wrote:I'd like to see shooting come back. I like the rumors of shooting being changed back to move and shoot once up to full range. That was one of the changes in 3rd Edition that essentially ruined the game.

I lol'd. So you want to bring 2nd back?

Luke_Prowler wrote:I'd like to see a balanced rule book that isn't horribly biased towards one play style.

Umm. Not sure where you're going with this... Are you saying 5th is biased to shooting/assault/mech?

ChronoDK wrote:3. Official small games rules (like 40k in 40 minutes)

This. Having 40k in small skirmish games would be cool

pretre wrote:

Luke_Prowler wrote:I'd like to see a balanced rule book that isn't horribly biased towards one play style.

Umm. Not sure where you're going with this... Are you saying 5th is biased to shooting/assault/mech?

I am refering to 5th's biased to mech. The balance between shooting and assault is actually pretty good, (barring razorback/chimera spam) and don't let other people fool you on that.

A few wishes...

Game mechanics:

More missions. Not "Battle Missions", but real balanced missions. 6 rather than 3.
More deployment styles. Again, 6 rather than 3.

Cover:

All area terrain now confers a 5+ save with bunkers providing a 4+ cover save.

Tanks now follow the infantry terrain mechanism and gain advantage from area terrain just as infantry, with the exception that vehicles must be >50% in area terrain just as a squad must have 50% of its models in terrain. (This is to cut down on disputes and streamline the system...you can ask your opponent during movement if you're 50% "in" rather than arguing about it during the shooting phase).

Going to ground occurs during the movement phase only, and gives you +1 to cover, but does not prevent you from shooting. Going to ground in the open for a 6+ cover save is OK.

More focus on tactics and less hurr Iz spam X amounts of things. And I would be VERY pleased if we got more missions that acctuly makes a differende in your playstyle once all the moddels are on the board.

Also less need for a massive amount of tanks and vehicles, but not really a problem thou. Just a wsih I have.
Changes in how terrain work just as the user above stated

I hope 6th ed does for 40k what 8th ed did for Fantasy.

In 7th ed, if you didn't play one of about 4 different armies, there was little point in playing the game.
In 8th ed, while the filth still exists, any army can litterly beat any other army and the game isn't 100% predictable anymore. Sure there's still some derp moments, such as most of the #6 spells, steadfast + BSB being too good and war machines sniping both monster + rider, but overall the game has improved in leaps and bounds! (Dwarfs can even get in a charge now!!! )

Right now 5th ed is so fething stale... Mech is godly, shooting is too short ranged and we have about 4 armies that tend to roflstomp everyone else with little effort. I'd honestly like to see things like;
- Basic infantry become viable beyond objective campers.
- Basic guns given a reason to exist beyond being required for WYSIWYG purposes.
- Mech to be viable, but not the 'end all be all' it currently is
- Actual missions. (Capture & Control = most boring games of all time while KP's are all sorts of screwed up)
- Cover saves go to 5+ as the average so that ap vs armour matters beyond tank-hunting
- Psychology comes back into play. (hey, I can dream can't I?!)

I'd also like a viable Daemons codex that doesn't shoehorn me into only 1 or 2 viable lists please!

Equality among the codices, regardless of author or fluff.

pretre wrote:

Veteran Sergeant wrote:I'd like to see shooting come back. I like the rumors of shooting being changed back to move and shoot once up to full range. That was one of the changes in 3rd Edition that essentially ruined the game.

Not exactly. But I think this game lost a lot of its flavor when they gimped shooting to make it Fantasy Innnnnn Spaaaace!

In the grim darkness of the far future, the guy with a rifle is the weakest man on the battlefield, left to quake in terror, hoping the two or three shots he gets do the job before somebody runs screaming across the battlefield to hit him with an energized stick.

I’m also hoping for skirmish rules or at the very least, additional mechanics to make smaller point games (500-1000pts more viable).

Other changes that I’d like to see in 6th include:
• Wound allocation fixed.
• Vehicle damage table and cover save mechanics adjusted to de-mech 40k.
• Embarked units must disembark from a transport to claim an objective.
• Scaled points/unit restriction system similar to fantasy (where x% of army must be troops etc).

demote default cover save to 5+. I'm sick of spending 90% of my game playing Cover Hunter.

- I'd like riding in vehicles to be a bit more dangerous, and to make vehicles slightly less durable. I don't want them to be exploding death coffins like in 4th ed, but just a bit more volatile. Strength 3 blast from an explodes result is also a huge joke. Make it half the front armor, rounded up for something fun and dangerous!

- Reduced cover saves across the board. 4+ cover is entirely too prevalent, and I'm saying this as someone who frequently plays Orks. Cover should be important in any wargame, but it shouldn't be so foolproof.

- Morale and leadership to be important. I want morale modifiers, dammit! I seldom see more than one squad break per game, unless I'm rolling LD tests

To hit modifiers instead of bloody cover saves.

ChocolateGork wrote:To hit modifiers instead of bloody cover saves.

Seconded.

ChocolateGork wrote:To hit modifiers instead of bloody cover saves.

Thirded...ed?

It'd be cool to have the Auspex USR back to combat the safety net of Deep Strikers and Outflanking Units.

Troops must be disembarked to claim an objective.

Units inside a skimmer that went flat-out and gets Explodes! on the vehicle damage chart should die with the vehicle.

English Assassin wrote:

ChocolateGork wrote:To hit modifiers instead of bloody cover saves.

Seconded.

This So much, I'm so annoyed with a shrub being able to block a meltagun when it would normally slice armor.
Cover saves need to get changed in one way or the other. To hit modifiers seem like a good way to work it, though I'm not exactly sure how it would work with blast weapons and such.

Cover Saves - 5+ all around instead of 4+. Cover saves are ignored if the shooter is 6" away or less.

Glancing Damage Chart - Remove the -2 to all rolls. Make a new chart so that it looks like the following:

1-2 - Crew Shaken. Vehicle can't move or can't shoot. (Defending player's choice)
3 - Crew Stunned. Vehicle can't move or shoot.
4 - Weapon Destroyed.
5 - Immobilized.
6 - Vehicle Wrecked.

New Penetrating Damage Chart

1 - Crew Shaken. Vehicle can't move or can't shoot. (Attacking player's choice)
2 - Crew Stunned. Vehicle can't move or shoot.
3 - Weapon Destroyed.
4 - Immobilized.
5 - Vehicle Wrecked. Any models inside suffer one S3 hit with AP -.
6 - Vehicle Destroyed. Any models inside suffer one S4 hit with AP -. The unit must also take a single Pinning check. Debris from the vehicle scatters D6". Models hit by debris suffer one S3 hit with AP -.

Sunoccard wrote:This So much, I'm so annoyed with a shrub being able to block a meltagun when it would normally slice armor.
Cover saves need to get changed in one way or the other. To hit modifiers seem like a good way to work it, though I'm not exactly sure how it would work with blast weapons and such.

The modifier could add additional d3/d6 inches to the scatter roll for blast templates.

StoneRaizer wrote:

Glancing Damage Chart - Remove the -2 to all rolls. Make a new chart so that it looks like the following:

1-2 - Crew Shaken. Vehicle can't move or can't shoot. (Defending player's choice)
3 - Crew Stunned. Vehicle can't move or shoot.
4 - Weapon Destroyed.
5 - Immobilized.
6 - Vehicle Wrecked.

I disagree with this, I think the Glancing damage chart is perfectly fine as is.

However I wouldn't mind Preferred Enemy to affect shooting as well.... for obvious selfish reasons *cough* NECRON DESTROYERS AND VARIANTS *cough*

Brother SRM wrote:- I'd like riding in vehicles to be a bit more dangerous, and to make vehicles slightly less durable. I don't want them to be exploding death coffins like in 4th ed, but just a bit more volatile. Strength 3 blast from an explodes result is also a huge joke. Make it half the front armor, rounded up for something fun and dangerous!

- Reduced cover saves across the board. 4+ cover is entirely too prevalent, and I'm saying this as someone who frequently plays Orks. Cover should be important in any wargame, but it shouldn't be so foolproof.

- Morale and leadership to be important. I want morale modifiers, dammit! I seldom see more than one squad break per game, unless I'm rolling LD tests

Right here. This man knows what he's talking about.

I think I'd prefer a 2d6 damage chart, since there's a difference between the chances of something happening rather than a rockets having the same chance as exploding as doing jack all.

I'd be ok if vehicles died easier but as a trade off they should be able to shoot better on the move and can go faster than someone can run. Maybe baseline 12' move and can get 18' on the cruise for baseline while fast/skimmers get 24-28' flatouts.

it'll be a good trade off as you can buzz around the board but at higher risk of getting shot down.

Fix flyer rules. Some skimmers are skimming, others are obviously flying what with very tall bases and such. The rules need to somehow make this different as cover and the like can't be handled the same way.

IG:
1. Give Ogryns power weapons or at least rending weapons.
2. GIVE SERGEANTS LASGUNS! Sorry , bugs me...
DA
1. Make them on the same level as all other Space Marine Codex

General Rules:
1. This may not be popular, but get rid of the rule that you always strike rear armor in assault. I hate when a unit just barely reaches my front armor and then strike the armor that is a further 6 inches away. I know why, but I would prefer a rule that you strike the next arc, ie in the front, hit side.
2. Cover modifying to hit could be fun.

get rid of the rule that you always strike rear armor in assault.

To hit modifiers instead of bloody cover saves.

- I'd like riding in vehicles to be a bit more dangerous, and to make vehicles slightly less durable. I don't want them to be exploding death coffins like in 4th ed, but just a bit more volatile. Strength 3 blast from an explodes result is also a huge joke. Make it half the front armor, rounded up for something fun and dangerous!

- Reduced cover saves across the board. 4+ cover is entirely too prevalent, and I'm saying this as someone who frequently plays Orks. Cover should be important in any wargame, but it shouldn't be so foolproof.

- Morale and leadership to be important. I want morale modifiers, dammit! I seldom see more than one squad break per game, unless I'm rolling LD tests

These are all very nice. I'd also like to add this.

Sniping - Units wielding sniper weapons can move and shoot regularly. If the unit does not move weapon range is doubled.

Necroshea wrote:

get rid of the rule that you always strike rear armor in assault.

To hit modifiers instead of bloody cover saves.

- I'd like riding in vehicles to be a bit more dangerous, and to make vehicles slightly less durable. I don't want them to be exploding death coffins like in 4th ed, but just a bit more volatile. Strength 3 blast from an explodes result is also a huge joke. Make it half the front armor, rounded up for something fun and dangerous!

- Reduced cover saves across the board. 4+ cover is entirely too prevalent, and I'm saying this as someone who frequently plays Orks. Cover should be important in any wargame, but it shouldn't be so foolproof.

- Morale and leadership to be important. I want morale modifiers, dammit! I seldom see more than one squad break per game, unless I'm rolling LD tests

These are all very nice. I'd also like to add this.

Sniping - Units wielding sniper weapons can move and shoot regularly. If the unit does not move weapon range is doubled.

I like it but I think there should be a few exceptions to the sniping rule you proposed (like the Vindicare, if he could move and shoot that would be a bit op I think. Unless it was something like he can move and shoot only if in the previous turn he did not shoot, if he shot in the last turn, he can only move and not shoot or remain stationary and keep shooting)

I want less psyker powers in 6th, I think a psyker test should be failed on an 8+ though perils only occure 11+ (note I think part of this desire comes from the fact I play aganst Gk all the time and I think they need to be taken down a peg or two).