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.

Personally, I don't have too many problems with the current edition other than too much reliance on mech, and in turn lots of melta.

I do think Sweeping Advance and No Retreat are just plain silly

Would also be cool if they added a shoot into melee mechanic.

@Carnage43, I agree. It seems that the 5th edition thing is to give units the ability to break the rules. That's where the arguments always happen.

My biggest problem right now is that you have less control over reserves and outflankers than you should. For example:

I feel like I should be able to hold off on certain units coming in early because it is much more strategically sound to bring them in late. Or maybe I want my opponents stuff to come in early. An example of a balanced way to fix this in my opinion is say... for the Astropath, instead of it being a +1 for your units, and a -1 for his, you should be given the choice of + or - 1 for either roll.

A tyranid player should be able to keep units in reserve specifically to come out of the trygon hole. They are controlled by the hive mind for god's sake.

Bring back the transport costs of previous edition (looking at you Marines and IG), but keep the toughness of vehicles from 5th.

At the moment, vehicles are waay too cheap for their survivability.

1. Kill Points gone or adjusted. Perhaps 3 points for HQs, 2 for Elites and so on.

2. Vehicle Damage Table adjusted to make vehicles slightly more vulnerable.

3. Wound Allocation adjusted or removed simply because too many people aren't smart enough to understand them fully. Perhaps a rule forcing wounds to be allocated from lowest AP to highest AP.

4. No Retreat adjusted.

5. Introduction of pre-measuring.

The above isn't necessarily what I WANT to have changed, but rather what I PREDICT will be changed.

@Steelmage99: I understand the wound allocation rules fully, which is why I hate them so much. It's the intelligence of the game developers that you should be questioning.

Well, I like the wound allocation rule. I like how it moves away from "the-special-heavy-and-sergeant-always-survives-to-the-end" thing.

I understand that some people argue that "marine B just picks up the gun that marine A dropped". But this is IMO a very narrow and fluff inspired (ie worthless) argument.
The rules need to work across all codexes.
If we are to move into fluff territory (which I really don't like as the basic rules should be governed primarily by game balance) think of Guardsmen (not trained to use the weapon), Guardians (ritualized roles not easily exchanged) and Tyranids (does he suddenly grow a new gun?).

The reason why I think it will be changed is because there are too many questions posted all over about it.
Add the fact that a lot of people whine about it being "tricks", "shenanigans" and "cheese".

All this means that I believe it will change. Much to my regret, I might add.

The problem is that it makes sniping upgrades too easy, and often results in situations where more shooting=fewer casualties. For example, a Leman Russ hits a full squad of SM's with a battlecannon and wounds all 10. Normally this would kill them all, but it also declared (since shooting is simultaneous) that it would fire its three heavy bolters as well. 9 shots, 5 hit, 3 wound, and now we've got 10 AP3 wounds and 3 AP4 wounds. The AP4 wounds go on the Missile Launcher, Flamer and Sergeant, and the 10 AP3 wounds go on the 7 putz guys. So the 7 putz guys die, and one of the other three dies, but two remain, whereas had the HB's not shot, all 10 would be dead. That's a *bad* mechanic. In some ways it helps mitigate upgrade sniping, but *not* in a good way.

Brother SRM wrote:Rejigger the damage table. A 2d6 table or something of the sort with more results between "paint scratched" and "nuclear explosion" would be a start. Damaged drives, damaged optics, and so on.

I think this should be rending. For the explosion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Guitardian wrote:Dear GW santa. For xmas this year, please release the 5th ed. Codex for the Tau, Inquisition, Necrons and Eldar in a timely fashion a month or two before 6th edition is released, so that half of our rules will once again remain outdated. We players are so used to being obsolete that if we were to actually coincide with a new rules edition, we would feel overwhelmed.

Sigged

Brother SRM wrote:Rejigger the damage table. A 2d6 table or something of the sort with more results between "paint scratched" and "nuclear explosion" would be a start. Damaged drives, damaged optics, and so on.

I really like this idea. Have multiple shaken or stunned results, some of which carry penalties like -1 bs and ws for the rest of the game or halved movement speed or always counts as moving through dangerous terrain from a damaged track or drive mechanism. A little more interest and depth to the chart, with boxcars (12) generating an actually dangerous explosion (strength 6 rending or something.)

How big a change to the game do you think it would be if they simply made Glances only a -1 on the damage charrt?

I'd like to see Rapid Fire change to something that makes sense. It should be simple:

If I move, I can fire once to my max range.

If I don't move, I can fire twice to my max range.

I also agree that hitting vehicles in CC should change.

And dear lord yes, change the WS to-hit numbers. If I'm WS 9 and you are WS 2, I should probably hit you more than 2/3rds of the time. I really shouldn't be able to miss.

The 5th edition rules set is great I think they'll keep this one around for atleast six years before moving onto a new edition. The problem with the 5th edition environment isn't the core rules, it's the codexes. They're horribly unbalanced.

I love kill points, I would like to keep those very much as they provide fantastic balance. Keep victory points as a tie breaker, as victory points are a not a good indicator of a military victory. Imagine if modern war was based off $ cost of target... the US would lose a battle just based on the cost of bombs and fuel, and the loss of just one fighter would potentially lose a war. Same applies to 40k, elite units cost more, but are not necessarilly worried about a single unit in the grand scheme of things. If they were, then Space Marines would not take the field, as the risk of losing a marine would outweigh the benefit of using them.

I like objectives in principle, but there should be a bit more variety in objective types. First, there should be 'Secret Document' style objectives, that must be captured and moved into deployment zones. Second, there should be destroyable objectives, that earn more points captured than destroyed, but more points destroyed than contested. Third, there should be length of time objectives, where you earn a point each turn you hold them. This allows king of the hill style objectives, and gradual victory over several turns like Warsong in WoW. Finally, there should be objectives like there are now, where at the end of the game those who have the objective gain the full benefit.

Cover should be based on the to-hit roll. Roll to hit, roll cover, roll to wound, roll armor/invuln. If you hit the cover, then the cover takes the damage. Terrain can be destructable without any trouble at all, just give it a toughness of 5, and a # of wounds = to the length of the terrain. It would have an armor save = to its cover value. So a 6 inch long base of trees would be toughness 5 with 6 wounds and a 4+ armor save. So if you hide in the terrain versus heavy bolters, half the heavy bolters will be hitting the trees, and the trees will only stop about 12 heavy bolter hits, as a heavy bolter can blow a tree right in half. Destroyed terrain will still be difficult/dangerous, but it wont provide cover any longer. Certian cover will be indestructable, like hills (too much mass) or areas of fog/smoke (nothing to destroy). Also, screening enemy units now take the hits (while screening friendly units cause you to hold your shot on a successful save). So if 2 units of infantry screen each other, all they succede in doing is taking the hits between each other, as the attacker is still going to be taking the shot.

Finally, vehicles or monstrous creatures should be changed. Currently all MCs do is get move through cover, the ability to shoot 2 weapons if they have them and +1d6 to vehicle penetration in CC. In terms of special rules a SM scout with a meltabomb has almost all of a MCs special rules. MCs should be changed so that each wound they suffer causes a 1d6 roll, where a 6 causes 2 wounds (massive hemorage for example) a 5 causes 1 wound, a 4 makes them slow and purposeful instead of move through cover, a 3 makes them lose 1 attack or the bonus +1d6 armor pen, a 2 is no shooting, and a 1 is only 1 shot. Also, you can use grenades against MCs like against walkers (hit on a 6) Same amount of work as vehicles.

As for vehicles, if a vehicle takes a Pen troops inside must make a leadership (not a morale) check or be forced to disembark with a subsequent pinning check. Likewise, if a squad in a vehicle needs to make a morale check if they fail then they must do the same as when the vehicle takes a pen. Vehicles can fire defensive weapons in assault at init 2.

Destruct-able terrain would be ridiculously complicated.

Oh crap you killed my hill! now my entire army is exposed!

A more simple way would be to make it harder to hit like in fantasy.

I could see the No Retreat wounds/moral tests for units in a multiple combat thing altered to only apply if the unit itself suffered at least one wound. If not wounded at all, that unit doesn't take it.

I do kind of miss the 4E area terrain rules. There was a lot more LOS-blocking with the old woods.

Given the pendulum swing which made vehicles better in 5E, what if they ruled that a Dedicated Transport cannot, by itself, contest an Objective? That wouldn't be too big a swing in the opposite direction, but would make them a little less awesome.

Destruct-able terrain would be ridiculously complicated.
Oh crap you killed my hill! now my entire army is exposed!

As I mentioned destructible terrain would not be ridiculously complicated but infact very simple and intuitive. Measure the terrain. Put a die next to the terrain = to the # of inches long it is. Each time it takes a wound, remove 1 from the die. Also, the hill was a specific example of indestructable terrain. Finally, the terrain doesnt go away, it just doesnt provide cover anymore--it still remains as an area of difficult ground.

If you want to understand the changes that can reasonably be expected in 6th edition, you need to understand the history of Warhammer 40,000.

Firstly, the move from 2nd to 3rd edition, as well as the move from Epic Space Marine/Titan Legions 2nd edition to Epic 40,000, showed GW that radical change is a bad idea. Hence the move from 3rd to 4th edition 40,000 and 4th to 5th edition has been one of gradual change according to ~3 different design philosophies (Chambers, then Haines, and finally Johnson to name names).

Note how many rules changed on the move from 4th to 5th edition: Fleet (move 1D6" in shooting phase as alternative to running, charge in assault phase) became Run (move 1D6" in shooting phase as alternative to running), Fleet (charge in assault phase if run). Hit and Run, Counter-Attack, Preferred Enemy and so on were changed so that they depended, in true Warhammer fashion, on the quality of the units possessing them (an Initiative test, a Leadership test, and a re-roll of the usual to hit).

Secondly, GW has traditionally transplanted successful rules from other games into their main lines. WOTR charge movement, for example, is now standard in WFB 8th edition. Similarly the 'wound allocation' from the fantastic Epic Armageddon was moved to Warhammer 40,000 and despite people's complaints it has been phenomenally successful in promoting complex units. It has been less successful in promoting the tactics and formations necessary to maximize a unit's effectiveness, but let's face it, Rome wasn't build in a day even if Constantinople was.

Things I expect in the 6th edition

- Hit and Run, and Counter-Attack to be divided like Fleet was in the transition from 4th to 5th.

- The intact building and vehicle rules to be integrated so that both the passengers in vehicles and the occupants of buildings can be affected by a template weapon through the fire point.

-The 1+/4+/6 of hitting immobilized/combat/cruising speed vehicles to be converted to 1+/3+/5+.

- Vehicle wargear items being destructible via Damage results like movement and weapons.

- Sweeping Advance to be converted to be like No Retreat for units following the normal morale rules: instead of losing an entire unit to a Sweeping Advance, you'll take a number of saves like No Retreat and survivors Fall Back as normal.

- Combat will no longer be figured strictly according to the wounds caused, with wounds being modified by outnumbering and other factors (as we've seen with the Instruments of Chaos). No Retreat/Sweeping Advance modified accordingly.

- Pinning will be adjusted so that the changes made by the FAQ will be made explicit in the rules.

- The changes made by the FAQ to the relationship of Tank Shock and Ramming will be integrated into the rules.

- More Nullzone-like rules whereby successes can be re-rolled as well as failures.

Things I don't expect in 6th edition, but possibly 7th or 8th:

- The Epic Armageddon turn sequence, with integrated flyer, war engine, and orbital/off-board artillery assets.

- Blast marker based persistant morale and pinning

- Shooting with Assault weapons integrated into close combat

- The Assault/Rapid Fire/Heavy/Ordnance 40k weapons integrated with the Anti-Infantry, Anti-Tank, and Mega Weapon categories used in Epic: Armageddon.

- Implementation of Blood Bowl-style Block dice to govern close combat.

I would like to see the game move away from the mech-era, where every army needs dedicated transports to do well. I know its a business thing, so GW can sell more products, but it also makes the game less diverse, when the majority of armies all have transports that have different rules..

Also, some changes to the vehicle damage chart.. so 1's on glancing hits won't make the tank incapable of shooting...

And some editing to cover and when you get it. It really puts armies like tau at a disadvantage, but also having your foot behind a rock is annoying when you recieve a 4+ save, or even worse when your right in front of a squad but you can't see 5 of the ten guys, even if thier 2'' away, and they get saves -___- . kind of annoying...

What I would like to see for vehicle damage is something like this:

0-Shaken
1-Stunned
2-Weapon Destroyed
3-Immobilized

4-Heavy damage. Roll d3+1 times on the Heavy damage table. 1-2 Weapon Destroyed. 3-4 Weapon Destroyed and stunned. 5 Immobilized. 6 Immobilized and Stunned.

5-Wrecked. In addition, Transported units take d6 hits at 1/2 the strength of the weapon that destroyed this vehicle.

6-Set on Fire: The vehicle is destroyed and counts as immpassable terrain. models in the vehicle each take a S5 AP6 hit. During the destroying players next shooting phase, roll a d6. 1: continues burning. 2-5 Fire goes out. Treat it as a wreck. 6: Explodes.

7-Explodes. Models inside take S5 AP6 Hits, unless it is open topped, when they take S4 AP- Hits.

8-Collossal Explosion: All units within 2d6" take 2d6 S4 AP6 hits. Models inside the transport may not take armour saves, and take 3d6 hits.

The idea here is to increase the damage dealt without significantly reduceing vehicles durability. Thus the nastier destroyed results, the move of shaken to the 0- slot, and the addition of the heavy damage result.

Crazy_Carnifex wrote:What I would like to see for vehicle damage is something like this:

0-Shaken
1-Stunned
2-Weapon Destroyed
3-Immobilized

4-Heavy damage. Roll d3+1 times on the Heavy damage table. 1-2 Weapon Destroyed. 3-4 Weapon Destroyed and stunned. 5 Immobilized. 6 Immobilized and Stunned.

5-Wrecked. In addition, Transported units take d6 hits at 1/2 the strength of the weapon that destroyed this vehicle.

6-Set on Fire: The vehicle is destroyed and counts as immpassable terrain. models in the vehicle each take a S5 AP6 hit. During the destroying players next shooting phase, roll a d6. 1: continues burning. 2-5 Fire goes out. Treat it as a wreck. 6: Explodes.

7-Explodes. Models inside take S5 AP6 Hits, unless it is open topped, when they take S4 AP- Hits.

8-Collossal Explosion: All units within 2d6" take 2d6 S4 AP6 hits. Models inside the transport may not take armour saves, and take 3d6 hits.

The idea here is to increase the damage dealt without significantly reduceing vehicles durability. Thus the nastier destroyed results, the move of shaken to the 0- slot, and the addition of the heavy damage result.

how can you roll a 0, 7 or 8?

Overall, I think we can agree 5thed is pretty solid as compared to past rulebooks. Personally, I would like to see a progressive character development for captains, exarchs, surviving models, etc. to give a more unique feel to an army. All in favor?

aye!

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

shrike wrote:

Crazy_Carnifex wrote:What I would like to see for vehicle damage is something like this:

0-Shaken
1-Stunned
2-Weapon Destroyed
3-Immobilized

4-Heavy damage. Roll d3+1 times on the Heavy damage table. 1-2 Weapon Destroyed. 3-4 Weapon Destroyed and stunned. 5 Immobilized. 6 Immobilized and Stunned.

5-Wrecked. In addition, Transported units take d6 hits at 1/2 the strength of the weapon that destroyed this vehicle.

6-Set on Fire: The vehicle is destroyed and counts as immpassable terrain. models in the vehicle each take a S5 AP6 hit. During the destroying players next shooting phase, roll a d6. 1: continues burning. 2-5 Fire goes out. Treat it as a wreck. 6: Explodes.

7-Explodes. Models inside take S5 AP6 Hits, unless it is open topped, when they take S4 AP- Hits.

8-Collossal Explosion: All units within 2d6" take 2d6 S4 AP6 hits. Models inside the transport may not take armour saves, and take 3d6 hits.

The idea here is to increase the damage dealt without significantly reduceing vehicles durability. Thus the nastier destroyed results, the move of shaken to the 0- slot, and the addition of the heavy damage result.

how can you roll a 0, 7 or 8?

Glances, AP-, AP1, Open Topped all change the die roll up or down.

So the only way to roll and 8 would be to get an AP1 shot on an open topped vehicle?

ChrisWWII wrote:So the only way to roll and 8 would be to get an AP1 shot on an open topped vehicle?

sorry, but that rule is pretty pointless. There are few open-topped tanks, and the likelihood of getting hit by an AP1 weapon on an open-topped vehicle is low. Might as well stick with 1-6.
and how do you intend rolling a 0?

In general, there are parts of the game which are far too complicated and should be simplified, and there are other parts which are too simplistic, don’t work, and would benefit from being replaced with a cleverer (arguably more complicated) system.

1. Wound Allocation, especially in multi-unit melee, is insane. There has to be a better way.

2. TLoS is simplistic, stupid, and doesn’t work. Replace it with a table of standard height levels, with To Hit modifiers. That gets rid of cover saves too.

3. There are too many special rules. Some of my Tyranid creatures have as many as 15! I just can’t remember them all, and it takes too long to look up during games because they are spread out over a dozen widely separate pages of two books.

4. Leadership and Morale is pretty much a joke. It could be replaced with a table and modifiers.

5. There are too many dice.

6. The codexes really, really, really need to be better thought out, better laid out, and better balanced against each other. You will sell more models if you make all of them worth having in an army. You will sell more armies if you make all the armies worth playing.

Kilkrazy wrote:2. TLoS is simplistic, stupid, and doesn’t work. Replace it with a table of standard height levels, with To Hit modifiers. That gets rid of cover saves too.

I am SO fed up of the LoS and cover saves rule:
5 deverstators about 12" up a building.
a 40k barricade about 4" away from building.
5 wolf scouts about 2" from barricade on opposite side from the devestators.
THEY GET COVER?! I could see the entire squad's whole model's bases, and they get cover.
No fair! those wolf scouts proceeded to kill the devestators in CC (power weapon and 1 more attack than me).
Did'nt matter though- the devestators were my only units on that half of the board- they were a good 4 feet away from the rest of my army!
the rest of my army went and tabled him over the next 3 turns.

I haven't had too many problems with tlos, but I can see why gw put it in the rules. Honestly, I think models need to be in base contact with cover to get any bonuses out of it, on top of that, its a pain in the a$$ to bend down and squint.

I would love to see them bring back the Ork special rule for Choppas. They still count as CC weapons, but reduce the armor save of the unit to 4+ if they had better.