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.

 Arschbombe wrote:
I'd put the apocalypse stuff back in Apocalypse where it belongs.

ditto and exalted

Yeah I would like the cost of books to come down. It's very annoying for people like me that cannot afford to buy every single book, or to go to a LGS and read them.

I would encourage fuller use of the BS and WS spectrum to differentiate warrior skill a little bit better than currently. Especially if BS directly worked against cover saves when you went above BS 4.

I'd like to see the old armories come back, when each army had pages and pages of personal wargear characters of all different ranks could bring.

Improve troops across the board. As it is now, people generally don't like taking their troops. This got a little better in 5th and 6th, then got nerfed again in all the new codexes. Don't bend over backwards with obsec or whatever else to make troops chug less wang, just make them better in general.

Get rid of First Blood. Instead give 3-5 points for the player who tables his opponent. Takes the focus off of killing stuff over playing the mission.

Activate units within the game turn according to initiative, leadership or some additional/different stat so that they work like units in X-Wing. It's never your turn then your opponents turn, its just "the" turn.

Personally I like unbound, though I don't go crazy with it. But the mechanic of losing ObjSec for using it would be appropriate if it was applied to other objectionable slots in peoples armies.

If you stick to the traditional Battle-forged FoC you lose nothing and gain nothing.
If you go unbound you lose ObjSec.
If you bring a Superheavy your opponent gains "X".
If you bring a Lord of War your opponent gains "Y".
If you bring a Formation your opponent gains "Z".

Most of all, I'd rewrite the Raven Guard chapter traits to allow their command squads to take jump packs. Mostly that.

Boniface wrote:
So my question is if you were to rebuild the 40k game or fluff what would you change and what would you keep?

Game-wise, I'd roll the rule design and Codexes back to early 3rd Edition, when armies and units were characterized by (maybe) 1 or 2 (simple) special rules, and the rules themselves emphasized unit vs unit play over model vs model play. Smooth and fast.

Fluff-wise, I'd probably leave things well enough alone - the Fluff informs the rules, but it's not necessary for Fluff to drive the rules at a micro level. Keep the abstraction high.

 dracpanzer wrote:
Get rid of First Blood. Instead give 3-5 points for the player who tables his opponent. Takes the focus off of killing stuff over playing the mission.

Activate units within the game turn according to initiative, leadership or some additional/different stat so that they work like units in X-Wing. It's never your turn then your opponents turn, its just "the" turn.

Personally I like unbound, though I don't go crazy with it. But the mechanic of losing ObjSec for using it would be appropriate if it was applied to other objectionable slots in peoples armies.

If you stick to the traditional Battle-forged FoC you lose nothing and gain nothing.
If you go unbound you lose ObjSec.
If you bring a Superheavy your opponent gains "X".
If you bring a Lord of War your opponent gains "Y".
If you bring a Formation your opponent gains "Z".

Most of all, I'd rewrite the Raven Guard chapter traits to allow their command squads to take jump packs. Mostly that.

This. Except the bit about Raven Guard. Not a bad idea, I just don't care

First of all, lower the prices. Second of all, bring back Battlefleet Gothic. Finally, advance the plotline.

Re-scale the stats.
While the stats theoretically range from 1-10, they practically only range from 2-5 (except LD).

1: Change the absoluteness of the system. Right now there's too much "this always happens" or "this always happens except when you have a thing that ignores it and then it doesn't happen at all" (armour saves are my favourite example), change things that are all-or-nothing to partial ranges (armour save and to-hit penalties from WHFB instead of ignores-or-doesn't and hits-normally-or-on-6s the way the rules do now). The primary intent of this is to remove the rock-paper-scissors-ness of the system and make models more interactive; I don't want to have to take Flyers or AA that can't shoot at ground targets just in case the other guy brought Flyers, I want some sort of unit that can deal with Flyers but can do other things if it turns out my opponent didn't bring any.

2: Shorten the turn. Four phases in which a given model can attack people four times in one game turn is long, needlessly complicated, and gets boring quickly when it isn't your turn. My rewrite project linked to below deleted the Assault phase entirely and split psychic powers back into their own phases, but a less chopped-down turn order might be P1 Move/P2 Move/P1 Shoot/P2 Shoot/Combined Assault phase.

3: Army list variations. The 3e/4e SM/CSM/Guard/Craftworlds books had one core army list and had a variety of variant lists in the appendices that let you play the army different ways, do that, don't charge people for an extra Codex that's really just something that ought to have been two pages in the end of the main Codex anyway.

4: More missions. The battle missions in the rulebook are catered to specific approaches to the game that everyone ends up playing; try doing asymmetrical objectives.

Simples, make it a default 3-4 layer system.
Rules tailored for with restrictions on units
Sqaud/patrol level ie less, no big hevey armour etc. No super expensive units.
Company level, normal
Enhanced level, super hevies, mini apoc
Apoc

Each one is slightly different and designed to work at certain levels and a rough points range, so rules alter abit but core game is same.
So at every level its fair, balanced and adjusted to better work as required.

No rules for one, all and if they do not fit.

But the shocker, all in ONE book . The army book, rule book, extra options like add ones for one fair price that is worked out by doing all the survays, maths, comparison etc. If new supplement made, download for free, print or tablet.
Limited fluff and pics, if yp want that more expensive version is for sale . ie the real money maker.

Its cheaper as you only ever need one book to play game with that army.
Yes some with 2 or more may get extra game rule chunks but for one army all you even need is one book. No carrying 3-4.

I'd make some minor rule tweaks and clarifications. I'd reintroduce rules FAQ and errata.

Furthermore, i'd love to introduce some sort of mechanism of changing unit's stats over time and not just with the codex releases. That'd add A LOT to the ballance as most of the complaints are about ballance. People would even deal with such cost of a product. And this sort of assurance that nothing would be too underwhelming or over the top for longer than a month would inspire more sales. Here's how i'd do it if i were responsible for it on the GW part:

Make a full list of active units with their current per-model point cost and introduce changes to the per-model cost when needed.

Why not full model stats and changes to gear rules? That'd invalidate codex sales and GW doesn't want to loose money. Furthermore, a person might buy a unit for it's specific ability and than it gets redone and he's left with something he doesn't need. But if all the stats and abilities are left as per codex and only point cost changes, the model still does what it's supposed to do but there'd be no situations like: "I love warp talon models! But for 25 ppm they're totally not worth it!". So, you make it 20-22 ppm and they see more use without being over the top.

That might cause the issue of a model being alwayz worth it and people not needing to spend money on new FOTM stuff. However, i have a feeling that it's gona ballance out by more people actually joining and actively buying models due to the same fact! Besides, it'd open the gate to more variable playstiles - meaning more units sales cause people generally want to expand and change something about their gameplay a bit.

How would you test if a model's price is good or not? Leave it to gamers. Seriously, 1-2 people responsible for hearing the constructive feedbacks of their customers-playtesters and the problem's solved. How to get constructive feedbacks? Make a strict format for them. Feedbacks like: "This unit SUX!!!!1" wouldn't do. Constructive feedbacks are needed. With actual reasons why they think that the point cost is unreasonable. For example:

Statement:
Wave serpent is undercosted

Reasons:
- It has ability to get 3+cover save in the open still maintaining good firepower because most of the weapons are twinlinked and high ROF
- Outstanding serpent shield, which combined with scatter laser and ignore cover, is a deadly weapon that, for the current cost makes something like a falcon unimportant
- It's a dedicated transport, thus is often objective secured and quite easilly spammable

Proposal:
I think it should cost 20-30 pts more.


After recieving such feedbacks from many playtesters, the dev team has lots of food for thought and direction to go.

I will add a good skirmich system for game between 100 and 250 pts.

Another thing I would do is make sure I had a rules framework to add things without unbalancing things. Then I could have all the basic armies in a single book, and focus on producing supplements for variations (e.g. SM Chapters) that change things up a bit for people who want something different.

For instance, you would have your regular vanilla Space Marines (e.g. Ultramarines) in the main book. Then I would have supplements (not full Codexes) for other major chapters and their successors that allowed them to do things a bit differently than normal Space Marines, but still enough to be balanced. I would basically get rid of the FOC and go back to percentages like 2nd edition, with the idea that you should have the freedom to do other types of companies without adding special rules that are open to abuse.

@WaynTheGame.
Rather than clunky '% per slot' I would rather just use a simple ratio.

HQ unit allows 2 to 8 common units.
For every 2 Common units a Specialized unit can be taken.
For every 2 Specialized units a Restricted unit can be taken.

Then each codex can list several themed armies,(representing Klans, Chapters, Regiments, etc.)

That tell the player which HQs can be taken, and what units are Common, Specialized and Rare in each themed list.

The stats and equipment and PV for units do not change , just how 'rare' they are in each list type.

I hope you understand what I mean?

Abandon the d6, move to a d10 or d20 based system so there can actually be some variation between the models in reasonable increments.

An activation system of some sort to break the turn sequence up - but suggest you activate using 'command points' generated by characters - so a well led army could and would activate generally fully before a less well led one even if it was smaller

+lots on sort out what scale of game you have, indeed write a skirmish, platoon and company (apoc) set of rules that are different but use the same models

Lanrak wrote:
@WaynTheGame.
Rather than clunky '% per slot' I would rather just use a simple ratio.

HQ unit allows 2 to 8 common units.
For every 2 Common units a Specialized unit can be taken.
For every 2 Specialized units a Restricted unit can be taken.

Then each codex can list several themed armies,(representing Klans, Chapters, Regiments, etc.)

That tell the player which HQs can be taken, and what units are Common, Specialized and Rare in each themed list.

The stats and equipment and PV for units do not change , just how 'rare' they are in each list type.

I hope you understand what I mean?

That could work too. Reminds me kind of like Kings of War where for every core choice you could take a hero, war machine or monster.

Really though, Bolt Action is basically a better 40k and the "right" way in which 40k should be balanced. Or possibly Beyond the Gates of Antares, which looks to be a sci-fi Bolt Action so essentially 40k 2.0 (or I guess 4.0 if 1.0 = RT, 2.0 = 2nd, 3.0 = 3rd and everything since then has been a patch) since it's written by Rick Priestley himself.

leopard wrote:
Abandon the d6, move to a d10 or d20 based system so there can actually be some variation between the models in reasonable increments.

I don't want to throw 120 d20 dice on the charge

Make it a D12 system so that the lonely D12 can finely get some love.

I've got a whole lot of changes i'd implement if it were up to me. There's even a started document in my cloud with some first outlines but I just can't find the time.

Well, the core ideas are thus:

Simpler combat system. A unit has only one combined armor/toughness value. Combat works like this:
Attacker throws his attack value (WS or BS). If he hits, he hits. Defender needs to roll with his "Toughness" against the strenght value of the attack. Terrain, cover etc. increase the T value while unit is eligible for the benefit. If he saves, he saves, otherwise he's wounded.

Moar charge. All transport vehicles are considered "assault"-vehicles (why the hell would you ride anything into battle that prevents you from dismounting fast?). You can charge after coming from reserves, deep striking, whatever.

An almost complete genocide of special rules. Unit strenghts are based on their statline and warger, ballanced through points. No confusing "may reroll to hit when using the pistol instead of ccw in the first round of cc against dark eldar in pink light armor before the 5th turn" on every second unit anymore.
The only units that may have some special rules are unique characters.

Work in progress but I think there's potential here:
Only two phases that can be used up in any combination of shoot, moove and charge. May need some carefull rethinking here.

if you use more modern resolution methods there is not need to change from the standard D6 we all have and like to use.

Only if you use restrictive game resolution methods like 40k does does dice size seem limiting.

If we are redesigning 40k I would use stats directly ,with modern resoluition methods , and get rid of pointless complication!

The only special rules needed are for actual special abilities , which make the ODD unit/weapon /equipment actually special.
Eg chemical weapons ignore cover, amphibious units count water features as open ground.

However, some people are only comfortable with 2nd -3rd ed re working.(Rather than a complete re write.)This could still be used to de clutter the 40k rules somewhat.

Change the way missions are discarded. No d3 or d6VP, but fixed numbers for all. Change skimer rules to make them fast,but vunerable and not super fast land raiders as resilience goes.

Plasma is ap 3 ,melta is ap 2 ,las ap 2, MM is ap 1.

And do something to stop alfa strike being super strong against non meq armies.

Charge has a fix range depending on unit that is charging. Overwatch is actualy useful for someone other then tau. Hits on 6, but slow the charging unit down . Fearless unit would not be slowed, but they would also get hit on +5 for not zigg zagging.

Just fix cover to the point that it helps all types of units and not just low armored ones.

I'd make stats go to 20, and die rolls would be D10s.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Just fix cover to the point that it helps all types of units and not just low armored ones.

The whole cover vs armor thing is terrible. Maybe my #1 gripe with the core rules.

If I were to re-do things, I'd start with one really small, insignificant thing that bugs me far too much than it should.


I would ban tufts of grass on the bases of models. Nothing ruins the idea of Superhuman Space Marines fighting on alien planets with lava-flows and blood rivers and skulls more than tufty grass.

I'd also reduce the amount of dice you have to roll. It's obscene how many you need at times.

First thing I would try is changing turn sequence. I think it should be: P1 moves > P2 moves, P1 shoots > P2 shoots, P1 assaults > P2 assaults.

 SickSix wrote:
First thing I would try is changing turn sequence. I think it should be: P1 moves > P2 moves, P1 shoots > P2 shoots, P1 assaults > P2 assaults.

That would be an improvement that's not too drastic.

 SickSix wrote:
First thing I would try is changing turn sequence. I think it should be: P1 moves > P2 moves, P1 shoots > P2 shoots, P1 assaults > P2 assaults.

This. Plus either a tournament rule set or simply a better written one - the latter benefits everyone but non-tournament players rage against the idea so...

Crazy Jay wrote:Make it a D12 system so that the lonely D12 can finely get some love.

Let's use all the D&D dice D4, D6, D10, D12, D20! Then we can go into a 40k game carrying, like, 200 dice rofl.

hellpato wrote:I will add a good skirmich system for game between 100 and 250 pts.

Kill Team is a 200 point game, and the rules are pretty good. You should check it out -- a cheap buy on Black Library ($6 or something)

cosmicsoybean wrote:Yeah I would like the cost of books to come down. It's very annoying for people like me that cannot afford to buy every single book, or to go to a LGS and read them.

I agree. I've said this before, but there should be ONE compendium with all the codex lists, produced, every year, for $100. Then, separate fluff books that are optional priced at, whatever (since they're optional). Fluff books can have some scenarios to give them a game-reason to exist.

All the Dataslate stuff that once-upon-a-time would have been free in White Dwarf but is now not free on Black Library, should be free. Paying money to buy one formation is stupid. In the next year, the formation should just be added to the codex compendium.