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.

So this is about what you would lik to see happen during the upcoming 6th edition era. This isn't just about the rules, but also about the release of models and GW policies and marketing mechanics. So I'll start :

1. I'd like to see units who don't have yet a model finally get it. For example, I'd would like to finally see my Space Wolves get their Thunder Wolf cavalry model instead to having to do conversions.

2.I'd like GW to update only the codex from 4th ed, plus the SM one from the 5th ed. For the rest, just put online FAQ and Errata updates.

3. I 'd like to see less vehicule spamming and see the game focus more on Special Characters or on the HQ choices. For example, like when you choose Belial or Astorath who let you choose special or restricted units as troops, or Ragnar Blackmane who give your troops special abilities. However, I'd like to see these as options for generic characters. Exemple, have a chaos lord, take an option named (for example) chosen of the blood god, who let you put mark of khorne for free on all your infantry units (something like that)

4. I'd like to see GW communicate more with its customers to know what they want rule and model-wise. Maybe do something like WotC and run some weekly survey.

5.I'd like GW to offer reduction if we buy more than one type of product (ex : buying two termie squads, gain 5% reduction)

6. I'd like GW to stick with one edition for a while. A good while.

7. I'd like GW to put a leash on one of their employee when he's writing codexes.

So what do you want all of you???

Cheaper models. Only GW can get away with something stupid and unnecessary like a 220% inflation in model price

Khornate25 wrote:So this is about what you would lik to see happen during the upcoming 6th edition era. This isn't just about the rules, but also about the release of models and GW policies and marketing mechanics. So I'll start :

1. I'd like to see units who don't have yet a model finally get it. For example, I'd would like to finally see my Space Wolves get their Thunder Wolf cavalry model instead to having to do conversions.

2.I'd like GW to update only the codex from 4th ed, plus the SM one from the 5th ed. For the rest, just put online FAQ and Errata updates.

3. I 'd like to see less vehicule spamming and see the game focus more on Special Characters or on the HQ choices. For example, like when you choose Belial or Astorath who let you choose special or restricted units as troops, or Ragnar Blackmane who give your troops special abilities. However, I'd like to see these as options for generic characters. Exemple, have a chaos lord, take an option named (for example) chosen of the blood god, who let you put mark of khorne for free on all your infantry units (something like that)

4. I'd like to see GW communicate more with its customers to know what they want rule and model-wise. Maybe do something like WotC and run some weekly survey.

5.I'd like GW to offer reduction if we buy more than one type of product (ex : buying two termie squads, gain 5% reduction)

6. I'd like GW to stick with one edition for a while. A good while.

7. I'd like GW to put a leash on one of their employee when he's writing codexes.

So what do you want all of you???

Umm not one of your wants has anything to do with *6th edition 40k* and are just generic rants against GW's business practices. While I agree with a bunch of them, why not name the thread what it really is: "Wishlist for the future of GW"?

I remember many, MANY years ago my local GW store moved into a different store front in the local mall from their original one. They had a 20% off sale that day and the store was packed and people in line, including myself, each had 10+ different boxes of stuff to buy. I have never seen another sale in that store in the intervening 12 years and have never seen the store that crowded again. GW really needs to understand the concept of sales. Don't they realize how effective it would be to have their stores rotate sales on lines for specific armies? Especially those that aren't as popular? Pick the least popular army and put everything for it on sale for 15% for the month and watch the sales increase dramatically. Once the sale is over you'll have more people into the army and still needing to buy more minis for it in the future. Just a sale on a rotating army for each game each month could increase sales: This month 10% off high elves for WFB, Space marines for 40k, and dwarves for LotR.

As for 6th edition my biggest wish is that GW actually *improves* the existing rules and makes them better, filling in holes, rewording confusing rules and making them clear and only making changes that truly make the game better. My biggest wish is that they act completely unGW-like and don't just completely change the rules because someone thought the new way would be so much cooooooooler....

Skriker

Shooting > close combat. While I appreciate the over-the-top feel and craziness of 40k and see the place for melee combat (particularly for Orks/Tyranids), this is still sci-fi.

Harriticus wrote:Shooting > close combat. While I appreciate the over-the-top feel and craziness of 40k and see the place for melee combat (particularly for Orks/Tyranids), this is still sci-fi.

Um, no. Do you know if in the future that melee combat is going to be as uselss as it is now? There's plenty of other sci-fi series were melee is just as important as shooting. This whole Shooting > Close Combat stems from people think that Sci-fi is just a modern setting with fancier gubbins. Not to mention it'd feth over the previously mentioned Orks and Nids. And Chaos. And half the Eldar and Dark Eldar codex. Or anyone who isn't Guard or Tau

Doing my part to spread the word http://www.beastsofwar.com/warhammer-40k/leaked40k-heretics-rulebook-real/

Big Mek Wurrzog wrote:Doing my part to spread the word http://www.beastsofwar.com/warhammer-40k/leaked40k-heretics-rulebook-real/

So after all that, the final word is that nothing is changing? EV was a dumb idea, sure, but Assault before Shooting sped the game up a whole lot. And the death of I-GO-U-GO would have been fantastic.

Here's to hoping that Evasion 'returns' as shooting modifiers

Dark Angels Codex.................thats all

Now sales would be nice, it works for a hobby like airsoft I really can't see why it wouldnt work for GW. E.g. I only ever spend about 200$ when airsoft stuff is on sale, yet if the stuff is on sale for 20% off I will and have spent $600 on airsoft stuff....well worth it for the company

Wardragoon wrote:Dark Angels Codex.................thats all

Why...? Move the 2 special characters from DA to C:SM and you save yourself an entire book.

Huron Blackheart to be buffed. New Chaos Space Marine book. More plastic kits for chaos. Dead Tau heads in all Chaos Space Marine boxes.

Plastic meganobs...

Dribble Joy wrote:Plastic meganobs...

This X 1000000

Lormax wrote:Here's to hoping that Evasion 'returns' as shooting modifiers

'Evasion' as presented in the so-called leaked rules is a horribly clumsy mechanic. To-hit modifiers, or better still a table (as below) with column shifts to account for things like Shrouding would be the way to implement it (and to get rid of cover saves, which are a pretty awful mechanic of themselves).

DarkHound wrote:

Wardragoon wrote:Dark Angels Codex.................thats all

Why...? Move the 2 special characters from DA to C:SM and you save yourself an entire book.

Wait, you're saying GW won't milk more money by releasing a Dark Angels Codex? HERETIC

English Assassin wrote:

Lormax wrote:Here's to hoping that Evasion 'returns' as shooting modifiers

'Evasion' as presented in the so-called leaked rules is a horribly clumsy mechanic. To-hit modifiers, or better still a table (as below) with column shifts to account for things like Shrouding would be the way to implement it (and to get rid of cover saves, which are a pretty awful mechanic of themselves).

Uhg. As a BFG player, no reference tables with column shifts in my 40k.

All SM's to be retconned as having been killed in a climactic battle for Terra, which they lost...

Then i might get to play against something other than power armour for a change..

(kidding..but not that much..)


How about all codexes being written with equatable, standardized points values based on the statline, abilities etc of the unit concerned. That way you don't ebd up paying less in some codexes for the exact same bit of kit.

All 'missing' models made and released.

A couple of new writers for the codexes, and fire or transfer a couple of the old ones..

All new fluff checked against older fluff, to prevent jarring shifts in the settings history..


A price drop would be nice too.

None of the above is ever likely to happen, though.

Dribble Joy wrote:Plastic meganobs...

agreed, with new styles to them!

1) Write a new codex for orks near the release of 6th while keeping their flavor without excessively boosting their power.

2) Release a starter box with either CSM, Tau or DE.

3) Write a new codex for whatever non imperial army that is included in the starter box if it hasn't had one recently

4) More emphasis on good plastic kits. Less emphasis on finecast.

Harriticus wrote:Shooting > close combat. While I appreciate the over-the-top feel and craziness of 40k and see the place for melee combat (particularly for Orks/Tyranids), this is still sci-fi.

You realize this is already true, right? Shooting is way better in the TT.

Stop using my beloved Ultramarines as the poster boys. I get berated for using them all the time because of the stupid fluff and annoying children that use them also.

I would also like Chaos forces to be more cultist and daemon centric (I would release one extra big codex). Encounters with CSM I always assumed would be low due to the small number of them in comparison to Imperial Space Marines, and I suspect that most encounters with Chaos would be heretics and cultists uprising on Imperial planets.

Models for all units in the codexes.

Less units that appear to serve no purpose. I hate that every army list appears to be the same.

This thread has been done like 3 times.

So for 6th ed. I'd like these threads to end.

Also Valkyries as Dedicated Transports.

1. Return to the old LoS rules for allocating wounds. While I realize that it was possible to snipe individuals in a squad by positioning a transport for mobile LoS blocking, the ability now to see one model and obliterate the entire squad as they walk out into the line of fire like lemmings is stupid.

2. Either make transports a risk/reward type mechanism by adding some risk to the transported unit (like the old entanglement rules), or make vehicles easier to kill. I'd prefer a slight nerf to transports over a blanket nerf to vehicles though - there just really needs to be a little risk to meching up.

Make shooting armies (ie TAU) better than armies who have assault abilities (Space Wolves) at shooting.

For the folks high up in this PLC to see what small teams of dedicated folks have come up with in terms of innovative rulesets and stunning sculpts (eg Infinty, Malifaux) and be shamed into providing something at least as good (better ideally, but they've got their work cut out). To realise that in the net age, fat and happy ignorance and mediocrity won't last.

Given the hole that they've dug for themselves, maybe a two-tier system: Kewl kidz; Boring old farts (latter probably won't mind being referred to as such if they get quality).

Give the gifted eight year oldz collectable pre-painted plastic and Cardz and comix, (or whatevz... I don't care) with rulez pamphletz by Ward (make him run around Nottingham in a Repentia outfit if he tries to write anything for the adults). The fluff for kidz, where Calgar single-handedly trashes a Craftworld or whatever feverish nonsense Ward comes up with, is considered to be set in a parallel universe, with some 'For Younger Readerz' novels too. Everything else is clearly labelled as 'For Adults' and gifted eight year olds and their mothers can eff off. Give the adults more subtlety, complexity, grimdark and more beautiful minis.

Scale-ability in rules complexity and minis beauty: Skirmish game for those who want to focus their time and love on a small number of the most beautiful minis on the face of the planet (made by GW, ie unlike now) and complex and realistic (intuitive) rules for shortish games - try to win the Infinity and Malifaux players back into the 40k fold (also requires major GW attitude adjustment - wind the unbridled contemptuous arrogance dial back from 11), since most would actually like to come back; scales up to less complex rules for using larger numbers of minis (mostly made up of the normal quality GW plastics for cheaper bulk, but the beautiful collectors' pieces can also be used obviously).

Playtest properly and pay free-lance sculptors and rules writers if their in-house ones can't come up with the goods. More quality control on the fluff (studio and BL). Discerning adults will pay more for quality.

tsz52 wrote: try to win the Infinity and Malifaux players back into the 40k fold (also requires major GW attitude adjustment - wind the unbridled contemptuous arrogance dial back from 11), since most would actually like to come back.

Not sure I agree with this belief. In my local store FoW and Warmachine are the most played games in the store. Malifaux is picking up a following. Some of those people already play 40k and stopped, not because of scalability, but because of poorly written rules that always lead to rules arguments during games along with GW's annoying sales techniques and inability to learn from its mistakes.

Making a set of rules scalable from a single squad up to larger number of minis (they do already have kill team *and* apocalypse rules that enable 40k to do these things, btw) is only going to bring those people back to playing 40k more regularly *if* the rules are well written and play well. That is the only thing that is going to bring people back. I enjoy playing Flames of War and occasionally a rules question will come up because someone forgets a rule, but everyone in earshot readily and easily agrees with how the rule works because it is generally well written. Malifaux is getting a following for doing similar things. Haven't played Warmachine myself yet and still need to read the rulebook so comment one way or the other on that one.

No amount of scalability is going to fix that problem. You can scale from 1 figure to 1000 on the table top, but if the rules cause arguments *every* game then people won't want to play them.

Skriker

Skriker: Yup, that was what the rest of my post (particularly the first part of the sentence before what you quoted) was attempting to convey: Scale-abilty combined with quality. One or the other simply won't do in this era of 'next-gen' rulesets (and sculpts).

If Infinity's like having a flying car then if 6th Ed ends up being just another tweaked 1980's Ford Escort then the gamers that moved on won't come back, however much they might want to (like folks tend to have a soft spot for their first love, however badly it turned out). That's the money that GW's missing out on and could easily have if it wanted.

tsz52 wrote:Skriker: Yup, that was what the rest of my post (particularly the first part of the sentence before what you quoted) was attempting to convey: Scale-abilty combined with quality. One or the other simply won't do in this era of 'next-gen' rulesets (and sculpts).

If Infinity's like having a flying car then if 6th Ed ends up being just another tweaked 1980's Ford Escort then the gamers that moved on won't come back, however much they might want to (like folks tend to have a soft spot for their first love, however badly it turned out). That's the money that GW's missing out on and could easily have if it wanted.

Apologies, I apparently completely missed the "quality" vibe from the first part of your post. Doh!

I play Flames of War the most regularly, but still love to play 40k, warts and all. I just realize that the rules will get in the way of the game at some point and deal with it. Otherwise it is more entertaining to watch my regular 40k opponents roll as badly as they do. I am thinking that it is probably about time to stop upgrading 40k rules, *unless* they are actually a real improvement this time around.

Also doesn't hurt that Battlefront is coming out with version 3 of the Flames of War rules and offering free complete softbound rulebooks to all players with a current copy of the the hardback version 2 rulebook. It is things like that that really show that battlefront is interested in both improving the rules for the game *and* caring about their current players as well. GW comes out with a new version that usually doesn't improve anything and then comes on fullbore with the "The new version is AWESOME, DUDE!!!!" marketing campaign to convince established players to buy into the new version. By getting the free mini rulebook for version 3, battlefront makes me want to keep investing in their game and their products.

Skriker

I want 6th edtion where units do not hide in vehicles all the time.

I love the idea of scoring every turn and having to be outside of the vehicles to do it. I really hate the last turn vehcile rush to win the game.

The Powerfull Allmight Space Marines hiding and cowering in vehicles and some people calling it tactically sound. I would like the game to be played more fluffy so this wouldn't happen. Actually make rules that fit the fluff.

Please just keep 'line of sight' makes so much sense