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've always thought that the 40k will go the way of AoS. I think GW are heading towards one core ruleset so the basic rules will be the same for both 40K and AoS. In effect you can then stop endlessly cycling editions and the differences in the settings will be purely how they set up the armies with either a 40k/Warcraft vibe going on.

The special rules will be all included within the unit stats.

GW are also moving away from large armies that people collect one or two of and instead want people to own multiple small armies so they can maximise profits/sales from as many sets as possible. We have already seen this in some ways with the Admech, Skitarii, Harlequins, and probably future genestealer cult.

I full expect for example elder split into multiple small factions (raiders, harlequins, wraith). It's the one reason I think we have not seen plastic aspects because I think many of them will be going the way of the dodo. I also expect marines to be factionised (so might get heavy bias, assault bias, speed bias etc).

Edit: Not in response to a specific post

No rumors from reliable sources are saying so.

40k is - despite its obvious flaws - the most played and best sold tabletop wargame.

And GW is not able to redo all 40 or so factions - GW and FW - at once or anything similiar. A more conservative approach to whats happening with 40k would be they will release an 8th edition rule set that has not that many bad written rules. A complete overhaul of main rules and codex/campaign books at once is not likely.

And a year before the first Warhammer Fantasy End Times Campaign rumors surfaced several sources (most prominent the spanish ones) said WFB is dead and there is going to be a replacement. This is the opposite of what we have in this rumor set from Atia.

Warhams-77 wrote:
40k is - despite its obvious flaws - the most played and best sold tabletop wargame.

It's also by far the most difficult for new players to pick up and relies heavily on a shrinking base of long-time addicts. It is the only major wargame whose player base is shrinking while the hobby industry as a whole is rapidly expanding. Even GW has stopped sticking its head in the sand.

So hopefully they've learned from their mistakes and will blandify simplify everything and tone down the power creep going forward. Just in time for the new CSM codex.

Overall it may be the most played, but that is due to the plethora of other games available. I have gone from exclusively playing 40k 18 years ago to selling most and rarely playing it in 7th (I did play a lot in 6th). I now play wwx, infinity, mercs, relicblade, aos, and many miniature based board games.

I have learned most other games are far cheaper, less time inclusive, and easier to store as less is needed.

From what I've seen, 40k is slipping fast (no more flgs games being played, replaced by x wing). Maybe the end times or a new edition would help. I know smaller armies and no formations would help.

I don't mind an end times, or the return of the primarchs, as long as it doesn't make the game larger scale or create more balance issues. I wonder what xenoshyft armies will get to balance primarchs and demons?

Don't move the story forward anymore than you have GW, please... Just expand on the infinite things within the timeline we know! Many lifetimes of content there - leave this part to our individual groups and imaginations, please!

I don't really want the game to change too much. I would be fine with them keeping the game mostly as is. With a rulebook that isn't riddled with ambiguity and random choice. Something that most definitely requires a new edition. They could completely change the rules in detail, but still offer much the same game we have now. Even if that requires a simple version and an advanced ruleset that goes into all the gritty detail.
Maybe some changes to activation or at least a chance to react and some actual strategic layer.
I would hate to have the rules all over the place like AoS. My USR section is starting to get all frayed, but it takes me seconds to look up a rule.
The other maybe most important, thing 40k NEEDS to do, is make the games play faster and to give the player more control over their army. Such as choosing spells and traits, which would also remove needless rolling and management at the start of a game. You should be able to set up and play right away. Oh and put all that D back into apocalypse where it belongs.
The game doesn't feel bloated to me at all. It just needs to have a serious facelift to modernize it. It doesn't need to/shouldn't become a differernt game.

I hope they move the story forward, move to 8th edition, and keep the rules bloat, just to see all the salty responses on here.

 adamsouza wrote:
You know what i don't see on those warscrolls ? Options.

If you can't pick unit sizes, weapon options, upgrades etc.. you might as well be playing Warmachine with their neat little stat cards.

If I wanted to play War Machine I can already do that.
Don't make 40K War Machine.
Don't make 40K Kings of War in Space.
Don't make 40K Age of Sigmar in Space.
Don't make 40K Anything that automaticaly invalidates every codex.

Pretty much this.
This approach of "Hey, I don't really like how 40k is played, I want it to be just like X!" that many people take pisses me off to no end.
Well how about no? How about we don't turn 40k into X just because you love X so much? How about you just go and play X?
I have nothing against just trimming points values, changing OP/UP special rules and formations. That's balancing work. Moving all the special rules to datasheets is also fine, scince it literally changes nothing, just makes stuff more convenient. Hell, it's like the only good thing to come out of AoS.
But that's not all people are suggesting, is it? Oh no. For some reason it never occurs to them that there are others that do like having a buttload of special rules and how they synergise with each other, the mechanic of formations and how they allow for more playstiles, etc., etc.
Why did we come to a point where people think it's acceptable to compromise the fun of Y for others just so they could get more of their beloved X which they already have?

 455_PWR wrote:
Overall it may be the most played, but that is due to the plethora of other games available. I have gone from exclusively playing 40k 18 years ago to selling most and rarely playing it in 7th (I did play a lot in 6th). I now play wwx, infinity, mercs, relicblade, aos, and many miniature based board games.

I have learned most other games are far cheaper, less time inclusive, and easier to store as less is needed.

From what I've seen, 40k is slipping fast (no more flgs games being played, replaced by x wing). Maybe the end times or a new edition would help. I know smaller armies and no formations would help.

I don't mind an end times, or the return of the primarchs, as long as it doesn't make the game larger scale or create more balance issues. I wonder what xenoshyft armies will get to balance primarchs and demons?

At my FLGS, 40k night has the biggest turn out of any tabletop game other than the random D&D games going on. X-Wing only has an overall membership of like 5 people at most, and the 3 people that showed up to play Maulifaux eventually just stopped coming. Meanwhile, 40k is getting new players with regularity.

And the two monthly tourneys I go to are doing well. Always high turnout, always some of the same crowd but almost always there's at least one new person or a returning player who hasn't played since X edition and really wants to get back into it.

See? Anecdotal evidence doesn't mean anything.

Couldn't they further separate FW's 30k and GW's 40k by using different core rules? Let Forgeworld publish their own "7th edition" ruleset to work with all the current 30k content, and Games Workshop can do whatever they want with their own core rules?

From what I understand isn't 30k mostly balanced against other 30k stuff already? If balance is a goal it might make sense to let FW continue with the current ruleset while GW revamps their codex system.

Pie in the sky I know, but it makes sense to me that of there's a big edition change it might be better for all the current FW products to stay in the 6-7th era rules.

If FW wrote their own core rule set, we'd be in 10 edition before they get all the kinks fixed XD

Roknar wrote:
I don't really want the game to change too much. I would be fine with them keeping the game mostly as is. With a rulebook that isn't riddled with ambiguity and random choice. Something that most definitely requires a new edition. They could completely change the rules in detail, but still offer much the same game we have now. Even if that requires a simple version and an advanced ruleset that goes into all the gritty detail.
Maybe some changes to activation or at least a chance to react and some actual strategic layer.
I would hate to have the rules all over the place like AoS. My USR section is starting to get all frayed, but it takes me seconds to look up a rule.
The other maybe most important, thing 40k NEEDS to do, is make the games play faster and to give the player more control over their army. Such as choosing spells and traits, which would also remove needless rolling and management at the start of a game. You should be able to set up and play right away. Oh and put all that D back into apocalypse where it belongs.
The game doesn't feel bloated to me at all. It just needs to have a serious facelift to modernize it. It doesn't need to/shouldn't become a differernt game.

Actually 40k is the game where you have the rules all over the place, not AoS. If you want to look up the rules for one unit you might have to look at their Codex entry, the equipment and weapons section of the codex or the rulebook (or both), the Unit Type section in the rulebook, the USR section, a formation, possibly a spell card, maybe even a Warlord Trait table... whereas in AoS you have the Warscroll and possibly a batallion (formation) and that's it. Much easier and player-friendly, and an approach I wish 40k would take.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:

 adamsouza wrote:
You know what i don't see on those warscrolls ? Options.

If you can't pick unit sizes, weapon options, upgrades etc.. you might as well be playing Warmachine with their neat little stat cards.

If I wanted to play War Machine I can already do that.
Don't make 40K War Machine.
Don't make 40K Kings of War in Space.
Don't make 40K Age of Sigmar in Space.
Don't make 40K Anything that automaticaly invalidates every codex.

Pretty much this.
This approach of "Hey, I don't really like how 40k is played, I want it to be just like X!" that many people take pisses me off to no end.
Well how about no? How about we don't turn 40k into X just because you love X so much? How about you just go and play X?
I have nothing against just trimming points values, changing OP/UP special rules and formations. That's balancing work. Moving all the special rules to datasheets is also fine, scince it literally changes nothing, just makes stuff more convenient. Hell, it's like the only good thing to come out of AoS.
But that's not all people are suggesting, is it? Oh no. For some reason it never occurs to them that there are others that do like having a buttload of special rules and how they synergise with each other, the mechanic of formations and how they allow for more playstiles, etc., etc.
Why did we come to a point where people think it's acceptable to compromise the fun of Y for others just so they could get more of their beloved X which they already have?

The problem for me personally is that 40k is often complicated for its own sake, with complicated rules and interactions that add very little or nothing to the tactical considerations a player has to make. You could trim SO much fat from 40k without decreasing the tactical aspect of the game, in fact you could easily increase it.

40k needs to be purged and whfb shows us they are making big changes and pushing in new directions. Hell the gold sigmarine outside hq shows that 40k is not untouchable.

I say by most marine dexes, by sisters,

It will be
Tyranids
Chaos
Marines ( sups to play your own)
Ncron
Orks
Eldar ( sup to play dark)
Add mech
Guard

But dont worry they will gove out free data sheets to never use.

OgreChubbs wrote:
40k needs to be purged and whfb shows us they are making big changes and pushing in new directions. Hell the gold sigmarine outside hq shows that 40k is not untouchable.

I say by most marine dexes, by sisters,

It will be
Tyranids
Chaos
Marines ( sups to play your own)
Ncron
Orks
Eldar ( sup to play dark)
Add mech
Guard

But dont worry they will gove out free data sheets to never use.

Was this... English?

They aren't going to AoS 40k. That's been confirmed multiple times.

 Mymearan wrote:

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:

 adamsouza wrote:
You know what i don't see on those warscrolls ? Options.

If you can't pick unit sizes, weapon options, upgrades etc.. you might as well be playing Warmachine with their neat little stat cards.

If I wanted to play War Machine I can already do that.
Don't make 40K War Machine.
Don't make 40K Kings of War in Space.
Don't make 40K Age of Sigmar in Space.
Don't make 40K Anything that automaticaly invalidates every codex.

Pretty much this.
This approach of "Hey, I don't really like how 40k is played, I want it to be just like X!" that many people take pisses me off to no end.
Well how about no? How about we don't turn 40k into X just because you love X so much? How about you just go and play X?
I have nothing against just trimming points values, changing OP/UP special rules and formations. That's balancing work. Moving all the special rules to datasheets is also fine, scince it literally changes nothing, just makes stuff more convenient. Hell, it's like the only good thing to come out of AoS.
But that's not all people are suggesting, is it? Oh no. For some reason it never occurs to them that there are others that do like having a buttload of special rules and how they synergise with each other, the mechanic of formations and how they allow for more playstiles, etc., etc.
Why did we come to a point where people think it's acceptable to compromise the fun of Y for others just so they could get more of their beloved X which they already have?

The problem for me personally is that 40k is often complicated for its own sake, with complicated rules and interactions that add very little or nothing to the tactical considerations a player has to make. You could trim SO much fat from 40k without decreasing the tactical aspect of the game, in fact you could easily increase it.

I'm not going to argue that there are a lot of bad ruling, vague ruling, blatantly unintuitive stuff, things that don't really make a lot of sence or could have the same effect just via tweaking the stats to be found in 40k in it's current state. But those are just particular instances in systems and mechanics that are not inherently flawed. I mean yes, there is a big amount of it, but that's because there is a big amount of everything in 40k. These things can easily be fixed inside the borders of those mechanics without the need to fundamentally change the game itself if GW could be bothered to do so.
Sadly, it's GW so yeah…

The 40k end times have been going on for a while now.

Give it a read.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/625518.page

I can agree on the codex side. The universal rules are a good thing and once you know them , they apply to all codices. The codex design is still lacking, but I find the newer codices like KDK even worse than 6th. I prefer to have the entire army summarized in the back like the 6ed codices and a nice wargear section. I can somewhat deal with the unit rules being somewhere else if they're elaborate like the possessed rules, it's not ideal but not a huge distraction either. I haven't had to look up a unit entry proper in a long time, but having the traits somewhere at the beginning an some special rules too, is annoying, as is having most of the rules somewhere in the middle.

I still think the formations are in theory a good idea, but they need to make them more adaptable. Something closer to rites of war, or even just different detachments. That means managing more rules, sure, but they add more than they hurt if done right.

Same for spells, though I would like to see the psychic phase simplified, there's too much rolling involved. Like I dunno, remove warp charges alltogether and tie perils to empowered versions of spells or something, and tie the amount of spells and power you can cast to your psyker level...something. But yea, spells add complexity but they add more to the game than you loose.
Obviously, they'd need to type them rather than having that be part of the text. IE, Shrouding would have the type blessing and nova with a range of 6. Then the spell text itself could be something like, Gain shrouded. The limitation of friendlies and the Aoe would be encoded in the range and type. But functionally nothing changed. You still get to boost mid game with spells, can deny and can suffer perils, it's just more streamlined. And not the kind of streamlined where you just remove everything that is interesting.

Requizen wrote:
And the two monthly tourneys I go to are doing well. Always high turnout, always some of the same crowd but almost always there's at least one new person or a returning player who hasn't played since X edition and really wants to get back into it.

See? Anecdotal evidence doesn't mean anything.

Yes but dropping sales mean something.

Yes 40k still sells well but it does not sell as well as it used to. Only thing that's been keeping GW profits at least around same is cost cutting and price increases. Units of sales are dropping. So either people are buying less boxes or there's less players.

While it can be OK for a while dropping sales is not sustainable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mymearan wrote:

Actually 40k is the game where you have the rules all over the place, not AoS. If you want to look up the rules for one unit you might have to look at their Codex entry, the equipment and weapons section of the codex or the rulebook (or both), the Unit Type section in the rulebook, the USR section, a formation, possibly a spell card, maybe even a Warlord Trait table... whereas in AoS you have the Warscroll and possibly a batallion (formation) and that's it. Much easier and player-friendly, and an approach I wish 40k would take.
.

Which will then result in bazillion slightly different rules from what could easily have been simply same rule. And updating them is major pain. Say hello to smoke launchers that work differently based on what army you happen to use.

I think 40K will get the AOS treatment as far as rules and gameplay go. There may be differences, for instance, I think there will be points included from the start. I know that people like Attia have stated that it won't be AOS, but it will be a more simple version. I think it will end up more like AOS and less as it is now for several reasons. The first is barriers to game play. The current 40K rulebook is daunting. It discourages a lot of potential customers. GW is competing against pre-painted mini games like X-wing. A recent X-wing tournament at my store had 117 players. That's larger than any 40K tournament that I've seen locally. X-wing has maybe 10 pages of rules, including illustrations. AOS has 4 pages. The new Mk.3 Warmachine has big rulebooks, but rules don't take up that many pages. I think mass combat games are being replaced by skirmish games, and skirmish games are getting fewer rules. That's the trend. The second reason I think it will be more like AOS is something that a lot of the posters on this site feel upset about: simplification. In AOS I don't need cross reference charts, I don't need to spend hours min/maxing my army, I don't need templates and deviation dice. I like variety, but as a former WFB player, I really don't miss that part much. And GW has moved towards simplification in 40K before. Psyker phase used to be a lot more complicated, and everyone didn't used to move 6". There used to be shooting modifiers for cover, movement, etc. People complained when those things were changed, but 40 K is still drawing players. GW made the decision to change 40K two years ago, and it will take time for them to correct problems that are identified by the community, so they have to roll out the new version first. Changing the story line can be a good thing. 40K has been at 1 minute to midnight for a long time, it's time to shake things up! Maybe the emperor can't reincarnate himself because his well meaning subjects have been keeping him alive. Maybe the emperors' offspring will come out of the shadows once he dies to help save the universe (they actually used to be a thing). Maybe chaos will break the empire apart and each space marine chapter will found its' own feudal empire. If you like the Grimdark, things can get darker. If you are looking for hope, the seeds of hope are out there. So for ease of play, growing their customer base, and shaking up the storyline, I think the next 40K will look more like AOS.

The meta story is already in there. They've been teasing it for years.

I just want reasonable prices, and a desire to play a game that doesn't want to shaft me at every turn.

The sham that is AOS is another nail in their coffin, if they want to keep it up, they can just start shutting more stores to keep the shareholders paid.

I like the new starter sets, they are a step in the right direction. They need to tie in some other factions in starters, such as Nids- Eldar, or Admech- Necrons, and sell smaller starters of 2 squads and a small vehicle/ walker and some scenery. Metaq story can add in some more tease, and at least push product, while adding to the story.

Its not nessesary to kill everything and end up with starjammer part 2.

Smaller sets, sell them cheaper, and generate interest.

tneva82 wrote:

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
To be honest, plastic primarchs with 40K rules (daemon or otherwise) is a license to print money, so I'm kind of shocked its taken them this long to get around to it. They've kept the loyalist primarchs' fluff so shrouded in mystery that pretty much all but one of them could return with an easy explanation (sorry Iron Hands players). With the daemon primarchs, they open the door to traitor legion rules, which would crank the fan frenzy to 11.

Well BA primarch got killed by Horus so if he comes back so too can Iron hands primarch

His killing got confirmed by Emperor and Dorn and his death scarred his legion by psychic effect enough that otherwise noblest and best space marines have ever since been plagued by that memory that can turn them to lunatics.

Oh yeah, I keep forgetting about Sanguinius. Apologies to Blood Angels players as well, no returning primarch for you either.

Angry mobs of players always agree that the game needs an overhaul. But it's only when changes actually occur that it's revealed that they don't agree even a little on WHAT needs to change.

This forum has seen voluminous amounts of teeth-gnashing with each 40K edition change, and yet it's a game that's only evolved a little with each update since 3rd edition.

Imagine if they were to REALLY overhaul the system. It'd be like the AOS reaction squared, no matter the quality of the new ruleset.

There is some good info about the Warzone Fenris developments from the author of the 2nd novel/ebook series in this ~1 1/2 h podcast. I'm halfway through his part and it gets surprisingly interesting. Good stuff to listen to during a paint session - although the sound quality could be better (it is an voip interview).


Robbie MacNiven - Combat Phase podcast (spoiler warning)

The WZF part starts at ~32:35 min.

http://faeit212communitynews.blogspot.de/2016/06/ep-151-combat-phase-legacy-of-russ.html

Warhams-77 wrote:
There is some good info about the Warzone Fenris developments from the author of the 2nd novel/ebook series in this ~1 1/2 h podcast. I'm halfway through his part and it gets surprisingly interesting. Good stuff to listen to during a paint session - although the sound quality could be better (it is an voip interview).


Robbie MacNiven - Combat Phase podcast (spoiler warning)

The WZF part starts at ~32:35 min.

http://faeit212communitynews.blogspot.de/2016/06/ep-151-combat-phase-legacy-of-russ.html

Can you give tl;dr version?

 gorgon wrote:
Angry mobs of players always agree that the game needs an overhaul. But it's only when changes actually occur that it's revealed that they don't agree even a little on WHAT needs to change.

This forum has seen voluminous amounts of teeth-gnashing with each 40K edition change, and yet it's a game that's only evolved a little with each update since 3rd edition.

Imagine if they were to REALLY overhaul the system. It'd be like the AOS reaction squared, no matter the quality of the new ruleset.

Except Pancake edition largely makes that whole statement a lie. That's because it largely addressed the issues people had with the current edition (5th at the time) and added some new and interesting throwback stuff.

While I'm sure there was some criticism, my recollection of that "leak" was largely one of positivity and excitement, which only went south when it became apparent it wasn't real, and then when actual 6th landed it was extra disappointing.

This whole "yeah, but even if they gave you a free puppy you'd still wail on it" rubbish is just tired and inaccurate. Examine any thread where people largely think good things about a release and it will be populated with largely positive posts, the reverse also applies. If you think people are negative about this stuff, maybe it's because they don't like it? Not because they're being deliberately negative?

No matter what will happen, GW did not learn from their mistakes.

If the 8th is just 6.2 oder Age of Whatever, they will not stick to a design or game style for the whole edition but change it soon after release.
They will carry over the problems of the game even with a complete restart.

That's cool and all, but if you've got your crystal ball out I'd rather have this week's Euromillions numbers?

Or are you just making assumptions that fly in the face of the fact that GW have been repeatedly doing stuff differently for some time now, and are showing real signs of reengagement and actually listening?

 Azreal13 wrote:
TGW have been repeatedly doing stuff differently for some time now, and are showing real signs of reengagement and actually listening?

Yeah, they listen now and yes they make things different regarding how to treat their customers.
But I have not seen any change how they care about their rules or that the quality of writing improved.

I really hope that I am wrong, but I just don't see any sign that the next edition will not change its design style every 6th month.

Ronnie Renton is probably busy writing uncharted galaxies somewhere right now...