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.

 Just Tony wrote:

If you're playing 7th, you're basically playing 2nd.

Lol, what? I've never fumbled a melee attack in 7th, never rolled on a damage chart for SM bikers in 7th, never had a game end after 4 turns in 7th, never won a game with a virus outbreak in 7th either.

Did you actually play 2nd edition?

It was a flippantly sarcastic reply, lamenting that all the BS rules from 2nd Ed that were culled for 3rd seem to be weaseling their way back. I need a sarcasm indicator. Green text, maybe?

I, for one, look forward to the return of the random movement phase. I would like nothing better than to spend a substantial portion of each game spend randomly moving Vortex Grenades and On Fire models about the tabletop.

Didn't vortex grenades get reintroduced in Apocalypse?

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I, for one, look forward to the return of the random movement phase. I would like nothing better than to spend a substantial portion of each game spend randomly moving Vortex Grenades and On Fire models about the tabletop.

And the blind grenades, oh FFS the half hour blind grenade phase!

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I, for one, look forward to the return of the random movement phase. I would like nothing better than to spend a substantial portion of each game spend randomly moving Vortex Grenades and On Fire models about the tabletop.

And the blind grenades, oh FFS the half hour blind grenade phase!

This guy gets it!

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I, for one, look forward to the return of the random movement phase. I would like nothing better than to spend a substantial portion of each game spend randomly moving Vortex Grenades and On Fire models about the tabletop.

And the blind grenades, oh FFS the half hour blind grenade phase!

This guy gets it!

At least the armies were smaller back then. Think about how much fun resolving that gak would be now?

 Lammikkovalas wrote:


At least the armies were smaller back then. Think about how much fun resolving that gak would be now?

All I can think is how much your avatar needs a santa hat. It's very distracting.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 Lammikkovalas wrote:


At least the armies were smaller back then. Think about how much fun resolving that gak would be now?

All I can think is how much your avatar needs a santa hat. It's very distracting.

I'm at work so can't photoshop. If you can provide me with a new avatar I'll change it right away!

If I were rewriting the rules, I'd think about the following:

No challenges, dog-fight phase, look-out sir, or any other unnecessary rule. Even if something is sometimes fun, if it slows down the game, it should be removed.

Turn sequence completely changed to that of LOTR SBG I.e. both players move, then both players shoot, etc. Roll for priority each turn to see who gets to go first. This makes things more tactical and adds an element of unpredictability. You could do away with overwatch.

If you've done the above, it means you can use your warp charge pool to use powers or deny, or split it between the two.

Get rid of armour saves. Make armour increase toughness instead. Cover or invun saves can still be taken (would need a lot of rebalancing, but it'd be better IMO). You wouldn't need AP at all - it's all on strength. Most low AP weapons have high strength anyway - only a few would need changing e.g. hot-shot lasguns.

Greycoat wrote:
If I were rewriting the rules, I'd think about the following:

No challenges, dog-fight phase, look-out sir, or any other unnecessary rule. Even if something is sometimes fun, if it slows down the game, it should be removed.

Turn sequence completely changed to that of LOTR SBG I.e. both players move, then both players shoot, etc. Roll for priority each turn to see who gets to go first. This makes things more tactical and adds an element of unpredictability. You could do away with overwatch.

If you've done the above, it means you can use your warp charge pool to use powers or deny, or split it between the two.

Get rid of armour saves. Make armour increase toughness instead. Cover or invun saves can still be taken (would need a lot of rebalancing, but it'd be better IMO). You wouldn't need AP at all - it's all on strength. Most low AP weapons have high strength anyway - only a few would need changing e.g. hot-shot lasguns.

The game you're describing isn't Warhammer 40k.

Getting rid of challenges returns us to the 5th edition 'Hidden Power Fist', where you can have one powerful guy sit in the back of a squad and punch out all of your enemies, while everyone around him dies. (The worst case was when you got one Ork Nob with a Power Klaw, slapping away at enemies while his 30-boy Retinue slowly died.) Dog-fighting, nobody actually uses anyways, because it's optional.
Changing the turn sequence that dramatically would completely change the design and balance of the game, and give a big advantage to shooty armies because you'd be able to see exactly how your opponent was moving before he charges, letting every single gunline take advantage of Tau's super-overwatch abilities.
Splitting warp charges effectively means that armies with weaker Psychics are going to get steamrolled over. At least how it currently stands, a lone psyker against a dozen has a chance of getting off a blessing or protecting his squad - By forcing everyone to play double duty, you're giving advantage to stronger armies while kicking weaker armies in the teeth.

Lastly, though, dropping armor saves completely and utterly changes almost everything about 40k balance. Huge amounts of the game revolve around the narrow line between AP, Strength, and other sources of defense. Most notably are Power Weapons, you can either have good AP and decent strength but low initiative, decent AP low strength and good initiative, or bad AP and good initiative and strength. If you want really high strength and AP, you have to take an initiative hit, or buy expensive and rare options.
At range, most high-AP guns either fire very slowly (EG lascannons) or else have some other drawback (Plasmaguns get hot, Grav-Guns at least theoretically are bad against hordes, even if that rarely comes into play.) Poisoned weapons ignore Toughness entirely, but still bounce off of armor. High strength weapons with crappy AP can still hurt tanks, but you need high strength weapons with good AP if you want an explodes result - Low strength weapons with good AP do absolutely nothing. Battle cannons (And battle cannon equivalents) can't hurt Terminators, but blow apart anything even remotely less protected. The list goes on and on.

If you want to incorporate armor saves and toughness, you're going to have to all-but-completely rewrite the balance and design of 40k. 3/4s of the game involve either mind bulleting, shooting or chopping, and every bit of those 3/4s would need to be adjusted in order to work properly again.

Waaaghpower wrote:
The game you're describing isn't Warhammer 40k.

What a silly argument. For a lot of players, 7th edition isn't Warhammer 40k either.

I don't disagree with the counter arguments really. I'm just musing on what might make the game better. I doubt GW would ever change things to this extent!

The reason I dislike AP is because it's so situational.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:
I expect 8th edition will be the most disappointing thing since my son.

Brutal.


But I think 8th edition will be more sensually satisfying than anything Slaanesh has to offer. I think that GW are improving slightly and this is their chance to grab life by the buzzwangers and make something of it. After all, they can't really get much worse.

And yeah, not many positive choices to choose from.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
The game you're describing isn't Warhammer 40k.

What a silly argument. For a lot of players, 7th edition isn't Warhammer 40k either.

This. 6E / 7E was a *huge* break from 3E-5E. Challenges and Flyers and such. I really hope 8E is more 5E than 7E.

Just the metric ton of special rules that make the game slow down. Me and a new guy played a 1500 point game the other day, and we were pretty well versed in the basic rules. But because we had to flip through this codex or another ever 5 seconds, the game stretched out to about 2/3 hours, and we didn't even make it to turn 4 by the time the store closed.

Remove the unnecessary stupid redundant rules, and the game would instantly lighten up.

Also I feel like shooting has too many steps and variables. The fact I can fire 40 shots at a squad, and due to To Hit, To Wound, Armour saves, Cover Saves, Invulnerability Saves, Feel No Pain Saves, It Will Not Die Saves, Armour Penetration Rolls, Vehicle Damage Rolls and Look Out Sir!; nothing can happen. It just leads to time wasting and frustration.

Waaaghpower wrote:

Getting rid of challenges returns us to the 5th edition 'Hidden Power Fist', where you can have one powerful guy sit in the back of a squad and punch out all of your enemies, while everyone around him dies. (The worst case was when you got one Ork Nob with a Power Klaw, slapping away at enemies while his 30-boy Retinue slowly died.) Dog-fighting, nobody actually uses anyways, because it's optional.
Changing the turn sequence that dramatically would completely change the design and balance of the game, and give a big advantage to shooty armies because you'd be able to see exactly how your opponent was moving before he charges, letting every single gunline take advantage of Tau's super-overwatch abilities.
Splitting warp charges effectively means that armies with weaker Psychics are going to get steamrolled over. At least how it currently stands, a lone psyker against a dozen has a chance of getting off a blessing or protecting his squad - By forcing everyone to play double duty, you're giving advantage to stronger armies while kicking weaker armies in the teeth.

Squad A has the option to get the PF only on the sergeant, Squad B has the option to get it on a random marine. Example of A: CSM, SM. Example of B: Space Furries.

I can make ineffective the marine/CSM sergeant with a challenge, but not a Grey Hunter with the fist. Where is the coherence?

Also, this in an edition in which almost everybody pays 25 points for a fist. And make it too melee is not a joke.

Am I supposed to take this argument seriously?

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

Getting rid of challenges returns us to the 5th edition 'Hidden Power Fist', where you can have one powerful guy sit in the back of a squad and punch out all of your enemies, while everyone around him dies. (The worst case was when you got one Ork Nob with a Power Klaw, slapping away at enemies while his 30-boy Retinue slowly died.) Dog-fighting, nobody actually uses anyways, because it's optional.
Changing the turn sequence that dramatically would completely change the design and balance of the game, and give a big advantage to shooty armies because you'd be able to see exactly how your opponent was moving before he charges, letting every single gunline take advantage of Tau's super-overwatch abilities.
Splitting warp charges effectively means that armies with weaker Psychics are going to get steamrolled over. At least how it currently stands, a lone psyker against a dozen has a chance of getting off a blessing or protecting his squad - By forcing everyone to play double duty, you're giving advantage to stronger armies while kicking weaker armies in the teeth.

Squad A has the option to get the PF only on the sergeant, Squad B has the option to get it on a random marine. Example of A: CSM, SM. Example of B: Space Furries.

I can make ineffective the marine/CSM sergeant with a challenge, but not a Grey Hunter with the fist. Where is the coherence?

Also, this in an edition in which almost everybody pays 25 points for a fist. And make it too melee is not a joke.

Am I supposed to take this argument seriously?

Just wanted to point out the irony of someone named "Waaaaghpower" trying to keep challenges a thing, the rule that helped (with other factors) destroy the usefulness of Ork Nobz in the game

Granted, I only play retro so I haven't even cracked open the codices of the newest edtion, but in the older editions as long as the model with the PF had at least one stat different on their stat line, they could be targeted out. For example, a Nob or a Veteran Sgt. or an Exarch or a Sybarite all had at least one stat number difference from their unit, so could be targeted out. It wasn't until SW and BT that PFs became an upgrade for a basic troop. Therein was the problem. If targeting rules are the same for CC, you wouldn't even NEED challenges.

Where is the option for more random tables where a 1 = nothing happens and a 6 = win the game?

 Jaxler wrote:
Where is the option for more random tables where a 1 = nothing happens and a 6 = win the game?

That's playing Maelstrom, RAW.

Greycoat wrote:

The reason I dislike AP is because it's so situational.

Which is exactly why it is good mechanic. It allows one weapon to be good in one situation and another one in a different situation. In system like AOS it pretty much doesn't matter which weapon you use to attack which foe.

40K sure could use some streamlining, but I'm afraid that they go overboard with it an end up losing most of the tactical depth.

BIGGEST CHANGE IN 8TH EDITION: Walkers phased out and replaced with MCs. All codexes with Walkers, are the first 8th edition codexes.

Codex Space Marines: Has Dreadnaughts, and get's updated EVERY edition
Codex Chaos Space Marines: Has Hellbrutes updated, and all the Traitors Hate Material incorporated.
Codex Orks: Has Dreds and Kans updated, and is sorely in need of an update anyways.
Codex Astra Militarum: has Sentinels, and possibly sees additions from Imperial Agents supplement.

Expect =/= wishlisting.

I expect business as usual. Some things change, some don't, lots of upset people on Dakka.

 jreilly89 wrote:
I expect business as usual. Some things change, some don't, lots of upset people on Dakka.

But that's our secret. We are always upset.

I do agree with you, a few things will get reworked (hopefully vehicles) but overall the systems will be mostly same and not a total gutting of the game mechanics like they did with AoS.

I got into 40k a little over a year ago with a group of friends all in our early 20s, some played since they were young but I never did. The point is I was the only one who actually really got into the hobby, started with as little as I could and grew from staying as cheap as possible to ebaying rare old obscure models and spending hours painting them. I have only ever played 7th edition and there is a HIGH tax to get into the game and I mean really get an introduction into the game outside of meeting strangers at your local game store. Here's issues that AOS solved. they made the rules free for game and army and simplified the armies to good, evil and in between. That was smart and that's what they will take into 40k so my other buddies who only bought 1 troops box can actually go home and play and hopefully continue to play. After all this is about keeping sales increasing not keeping people who bought in 10 years ago happy. The brutal truth is if you already own GWs models your going to play with whatever rules the majority of players play with.


OK that being said here's what I think needs to be addressed/ is here to stay about 7th. some basic changes more likely than others.

Rulebooks/codexes: simple game mechanics should be free. Noobs shouldn't have to go to miniwargaming tutorials to learn to play before investing in a hard copy. Army special rules should be found in thier codexes not half in codex and half in brb. so all we need is our free basic knowledge of game mechanics and our codexes to play. Let's be honest if gw wants to get with the times their digital codexes need to be better as well as include a battlescribe like feature so we can again stop going 3rd party for jobs they should do. That last part is unlikley

Formations and forced organization: formations are here to stay and kind of proof that forced organization needs to be different for different armies. Some more vehicle or elite based armies need to be able to bring more elites/vehicles and shouldn't have to pay a tax of troops or be hurt by objective secured bs.

Movement: should be different for different armies! Tyranids should run farther than guardsmen/marines. Also rolling for run distance is just annoying and anti tactical (you can't bet on getting in range). This adds a different aspect to points values which aren't going anywhere. A big problem in 40k is flanking takes to long to do with out deep striking.

Resurves: they should come in when you say so. Seriously how many times have you gone an entire game with your resurves not showing up until turn 4? It's stupid and by turn 4 the games pretty much done. That argument that there is risk to reserving is rediculous. being reserved shouldn't be risky....

Tanks and MCs: first off tank shocking needs to be completely rethought out. this is grim dark people should be being run over, this would adress static parking lots. Secondly a huge problem with MCs is you can't get lucky against them and instant kill them like tanks and walkers. It gives them a huge advantage not just over tanks but generally everything. If your tank gets a penetrating hit your sweating there's a good chance somthing terrible will happen. MC should feel the same fear. No list should be sure fire won't die. Loosing a baneblade to a tau riptide list before my turn 1 made me realize this.

unnecessary rules: if your "special rule" = multiple other special rules it just makes it annoying to look up and harder for noobs to understand. Some of them don't even need a name! Example "stupid named rule" page5000 in brb definition = re roll your armor save. For God sake just write that in the codex save me some time.


Fact is I think 8th edition will be the same game just more intuitive noob friendly. This will anger those who played 1st edition but ultimately create a new generation who will later be angry about 18th edition. I played and loved halo 1 but halo 6 was not intended to keep me playing, it's there for my 13 year old cuzin to play.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
The game you're describing isn't Warhammer 40k.

What a silly argument. For a lot of players, 7th edition isn't Warhammer 40k either.

This. 6E / 7E was a *huge* break from 3E-5E. Challenges and Flyers and such. I really hope 8E is more 5E than 7E.

I PLAYED in 5th edition, you know. And yeah, current 7th edition is a pretty big departure from the 5th edition rules, but it's still recognizably the same game. The psychic phase has obviously been vastly expanded, Fliers are a completely new edition, (Compared to 5th,) and so are Challenges. Character rules aren't entirely new, but the have also been greatly expanded.

But, on the whole? It's still very obviously, very recognizably Warhammer 40k. You can slap down a unit from a 4th edition Codex (Or even a 3rd edition codex, if my memory of the 3rd ed Orks codex stands) and unless it's a Psyker, the only things you'll need to change are adding "Character" to relevant models and maybe tossing out a few old or redundant special rules. Those models might not be balanced very well anymore, but the stats and function are still going to play just fine. The movement phase, shooting phase, and assault phase still work almost identically to how they used to, with the only major change being randomized assault range.

If you drop challenges, look-out sir, or any of the other Character rules, it's still recognizably 40k. Admittedly, that takes a big chunk of strategy out in my opinion, but it would still function. But anything else that Greycoat recommended? That isn't a rebalance or a change or even a major alteration like randomized charge ranges - It's completely reinventing the game from the ground up, Age of Sigmar style. Dropping armor saves entirely removes a vast, huge, enormous amount of gameplay and rules and, completely rewriting the balance of 40k from the ground up. Changing the way that turns work also completely reinvents the game - It might be better in one persons opinion, it might not be, but it completely changes how the game runs, since you can no longer reliably cover any distance in the game before getting shot down. Transports would need to be reworked, because you would no longer be able to trust them to keep your units protected - Can you imagine the nerf that a lot of melee units would take if getting out of an Assault vehicle still means getting shot at for a turn before charging, and getting out of a non-assault vehicle means two turns of shooting before they can try to charge?

This isn't 'We've added a new type of unit to the game' or 'We've increased a phase to add more depth, at the cost of making the rules more complex', or even 'We've changed the way leader-type models work so that they can't be protected indefinitely', it's 'We decided that we didn't want to keep making 40k anymore, have an entirely different game'.

 TheoreticalFish wrote:
Just the metric ton of special rules that make the game slow down. Me and a new guy played a 1500 point game the other day, and we were pretty well versed in the basic rules. But because we had to flip through this codex or another ever 5 seconds, the game stretched out to about 2/3 hours, and we didn't even make it to turn 4 by the time the store closed.

Remove the unnecessary stupid redundant rules, and the game would instantly lighten up.

Also I feel like shooting has too many steps and variables. The fact I can fire 40 shots at a squad, and due to To Hit, To Wound, Armour saves, Cover Saves, Invulnerability Saves, Feel No Pain Saves, It Will Not Die Saves, Armour Penetration Rolls, Vehicle Damage Rolls and Look Out Sir!; nothing can happen. It just leads to time wasting and frustration.

While I agree that there are too many steps sometimes, your list really isn't fair. You only take Armor, Cover, or an invuln, not all 3. You don't take them at the same time as taking armor pen and vehicle damage. Look Out, Sir! doesn't nullify damage, either, it just means that you're damaging someone else.

The most steps I can think of in any given phase is trying to use a Psychic Power witchfire from Tzeentch - You roll to manifest the power, they deny, then you roll to hit, to wound, a save of their choice, and Feel No Pain. Finally, you have to roll for Soul Blaze and Flickering Fire. That's 8 rolls in total, with at least 3 of these being standard for everything, three of them being constant no matter who you're shooting at, and two steps that are optional - You can't play the game without to-hit, to-wound, and armor saves, you can't cast the power without manifesting, soul blaze, and flickering fire, but Feel No Pain and Deny the Witch might not always happen.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

Getting rid of challenges returns us to the 5th edition 'Hidden Power Fist', where you can have one powerful guy sit in the back of a squad and punch out all of your enemies, while everyone around him dies. (The worst case was when you got one Ork Nob with a Power Klaw, slapping away at enemies while his 30-boy Retinue slowly died.) Dog-fighting, nobody actually uses anyways, because it's optional.
Changing the turn sequence that dramatically would completely change the design and balance of the game, and give a big advantage to shooty armies because you'd be able to see exactly how your opponent was moving before he charges, letting every single gunline take advantage of Tau's super-overwatch abilities.
Splitting warp charges effectively means that armies with weaker Psychics are going to get steamrolled over. At least how it currently stands, a lone psyker against a dozen has a chance of getting off a blessing or protecting his squad - By forcing everyone to play double duty, you're giving advantage to stronger armies while kicking weaker armies in the teeth.

Squad A has the option to get the PF only on the sergeant, Squad B has the option to get it on a random marine. Example of A: CSM, SM. Example of B: Space Furries.

I can make ineffective the marine/CSM sergeant with a challenge, but not a Grey Hunter with the fist. Where is the coherence?

Also, this in an edition in which almost everybody pays 25 points for a fist. And make it too melee is not a joke.

Am I supposed to take this argument seriously?

Okay, but in option B, you're putting the fist on a model with one attack. A Sergeant can get two attacks, making him more efficient, at the cost of getting caught in challenges. (Also, option A can't Look Out, Sir! against sniper rounds or other directional fire.)
Also, as someone else pointed out: I play Orks, and as I pointed out above, I remember 5th edition. No, 5th ed Orks weren't the strongest army ever, but the wound shenanigans we could pull off were absolute cheese, and if you had a squad of Honour Guard or Terminators, having to hack through 30 Ork Boys before you could get to the one or two models that were actually killing you was entirely ridiculous - You think regular Terminators are bad now, but back then they were even worse for having no way to get rid of the models that could actually hurt them. Biker Nobz weren't just king because they had a lot of wounds and could spread them around, they were king because you had to kill every single Nob in the squad before getting to the Warboss or the Painboy, the two most important models in the squad.

And in a more modern note - Can you imagine having to deal with a deathstar build including, say, Smashf***er, but in addition to killing him, you also have to kill his entire squad before you even get to strike blows? Or, worse - Having to kill all the body shields in his squad, but not getting to hurt the valuable models toting special gear until you killed the tanky guy? You might as well pack up your Monstrous Creatures and specialist close combat units and go home, because Herohammer is back.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nateprati wrote:

Rulebooks/codexes: simple game mechanics should be free. Noobs shouldn't have to go to miniwargaming tutorials to learn to play before investing in a hard copy. Army special rules should be found in thier codexes not half in codex and half in brb. so all we need is our free basic knowledge of game mechanics and our codexes to play. Let's be honest if gw wants to get with the times their digital codexes need to be better as well as include a battlescribe like feature so we can again stop going 3rd party for jobs they should do. That last part is unlikley

Formations and forced organization: formations are here to stay and kind of proof that forced organization needs to be different for different armies. Some more vehicle or elite based armies need to be able to bring more elites/vehicles and shouldn't have to pay a tax of troops or be hurt by objective secured bs.

Movement: should be different for different armies! Tyranids should run farther than guardsmen/marines. Also rolling for run distance is just annoying and anti tactical (you can't bet on getting in range). This adds a different aspect to points values which aren't going anywhere. A big problem in 40k is flanking takes to long to do with out deep striking.

Resurves: they should come in when you say so. Seriously how many times have you gone an entire game with your resurves not showing up until turn 4? It's stupid and by turn 4 the games pretty much done. That argument that there is risk to reserving is rediculous. being reserved shouldn't be risky....

Tanks and MCs: first off tank shocking needs to be completely rethought out. this is grim dark people should be being run over, this would adress static parking lots. Secondly a huge problem with MCs is you can't get lucky against them and instant kill them like tanks and walkers. It gives them a huge advantage not just over tanks but generally everything. If your tank gets a penetrating hit your sweating there's a good chance somthing terrible will happen. MC should feel the same fear. No list should be sure fire won't die. Loosing a baneblade to a tau riptide list before my turn 1 made me realize this.

unnecessary rules: if your "special rule" = multiple other special rules it just makes it annoying to look up and harder for noobs to understand. Some of them don't even need a name! Example "stupid named rule" page5000 in brb definition = re roll your armor save. For God sake just write that in the codex save me some time.


Fact is I think 8th edition will be the same game just more intuitive noob friendly. This will anger those who played 1st edition but ultimately create a new generation who will later be angry about 18th edition. I played and loved halo 1 but halo 6 was not intended to keep me playing, it's there for my 13 year old cuzin to play.

I pretty much agree with all of this. I do think that randomized run movement is fine, and there should be *some* level of randomization to bringing in Reserves, but you're right that it shouldn't be completely unreliable.

Spring-loaded transports that make models jump out kick back whip around and spin.

Waaaghpower wrote:

Lastly, though, dropping armor saves completely and utterly changes almost everything about 40k balance. Huge amounts of the game revolve around the narrow line between AP, Strength, and other sources of defense.

If you want to incorporate armor saves and toughness, you're going to have to all-but-completely rewrite the balance and design of 40k. 3/4s of the game involve either mind bulleting, shooting or chopping, and every bit of those 3/4s would need to be adjusted in order to work properly again.

Aren't armor saves practically redundant now anyways?

I'm expecting it to be a lot like AoS, but with more complex rules (more on cover and vehicle rules, at least).

I'm more sure that the way it will be published will be very much like AoS (not how it was released, GW isn't doing that again, how it is made available). With the short, simple and free core rules plus a system like warscrolls ("dataslates" probably) and not free but optional extra books with extra army rules and ways to play.