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.

 oni wrote:
1. SLOW THE feth DOWN!!!
2. STOP PUTTING RULES IN WHITE DWARF!!! This practice is so disastrous; such a lousy and terrible idea. 'Let's make game rules that will be published and only available for a month or two before becoming scarce and eventually unattainable.'
3. Cards... Get your gak together!
3a. Stop making gaming aids that are intrinsic to game play in limited quantities. These items must be made available 100% of the time.
3b. Don't short change us on needed cards (e.g. The AdMech pack should have contained cards for the Canticles.)
4. Despite being beautiful, please stop making models that are completely impractical to use in a game, nigh impossible to handle without breaking and even more difficult to transport.
5. Return to completely painting newly released models on WarhammerTV.
6. Be forthcoming with the fate of Space Marines.

You said, Brother. And how! Number 4 is an especially big one on my/our local list.
Spindly toothpick winged sigmarine flyers. Inceptor marines held up by guaranteed-to-not-hold micro-mini connection points to flight stands.

Agree wholeheartedly with HBMC on the minis. Far too restrictive in poses and as a result stymie conversions and cross-compatibility.

40k wise:

-Get rid of CP farming. It's a blight on the game and hurts some of 40k's biggest selling points (as the rules aren't it)
-Consistency across the ranges. Why can I not take a Nurgle Chaos Lord simply because GW do not produce one? It's petty and daft that they lack DR and T5 for no reason at all (this is an example, I'm sure there are more like that scattered across the range)
-More Xenos. A Tau auxiliary codex is a great jumping off point here. Utilize this point of their background.
-Stop removing options willy nilly. It makes a lot of armies look the same and boring to see the same stuff equipped the same way in several games.

Get rid of “No model, no rules” Yes, it might make it simple for new players, but it makes no sense from an in-game POV and restricts modeling and legacy players.
Free rules, regularly updated. People can still buy dead tree editions for the fluff and to have on the shelf, but the raw crunch should be available. I know I’d be more likely to succumb to shiny model syndrome if I didn’t need to plonk down the $40+ (or pirate) the rules to play it. This also lowers the buy in cost for new players.
Re-cut/resculpt old kits. Yes new models are nice, but things like most of the Eldar range, and SM bikes/dreads/scouts are either finecast or ancient plastics from a less advanced time. Bring the core elements of the army up to modern standards rather than just bolting new crap on. The SM codex is a bloated mess right now partially because of this.
Price. It’s always going to be an issue. What gets me is what they charge for some of those mono-pose HQs. Why am I paying the same for one guy over a full squad? I understand the economics of it, but it’s still a bitter pill to swallow.

I'm glad to see that with plastic sisters finally out of the way people start to focus on demanding plastic Eldar aspects and other finecast-to-plastic range updates.

Other than that - ease on the whole Imperium vs Chaos centrism, all Xenos need more love and GSC show that it can pay off nicely.

Game wise - make optional terrain rules mandatory for Matched Play so people stop complaining about already existing rules being nonexistent.

 Nevelon wrote:
Free rules, regularly updated. People can still buy dead tree editions for the fluff and to have on the shelf, but the raw crunch should be available. I know I’d be more likely to succumb to shiny model syndrome if I didn’t need to plonk down the $40+ (or pirate) the rules to play it. This also lowers the buy in cost for new players.

You mean like the battle primer on the downloads page of Warhammer Community https://www.warhammer-community.com/downloads/ ?

 Ghaz wrote:

 Tyranid Horde wrote:
2) I would like them to open up the comments section of their youtube channel. While you'll get the obvious trolls, having open comments to ask questions or get responses like you see on platforms such as Instagram would put a lot of faith into the community and improve things even more.

They've covered this on Facebook before. They don't have the manpower to cover the comments on over 1,100 videos. You can still ask your questions via Facebook and it's much easier for them and the rest of the community to have all of the discussion in one place..

Fair enough if it has been, I don't use Facebook to follow my hobby and doesn't stop me from asking for it. You wouldn't have to enable comments on all of the previous videos, just the ones going forward. Most of the time comments aren't replied to outside of the first few hours anyway and commenting with the video as reference actually makes it easier to respond to. There's a community of 270k subscribers on Youtube, it isn't hard to respond to couple of comments that they can cherrypick themselves.

1. A new Ghazzy model in the vein of the Primarchs and likely Abaddon. A character centrepiece for Orks instead of the mini me model we have now.
2. Replacement models for those we lost to our codex. I don't care if they have new names. 'Big Dok on Bike'. Megaboss. Big Mekaniac on bike. Whatever. Replace them GW.
3. New Boys models. They're showing their age and look poor compared to the newer sculpts. Replace the finecast garbage. A nonmetal warboss with Big Choppa and Kopta would be nice too.
4. Faster, free reactions to balance. I'm not paying for CA once a year to rebalance the meta of 6 months ago.
5. Better communication regards balance decisions. Why do 4 ppm Infantry and Castellans still exist at their points cost? Do GW know how good they are?
6. More varied boxed sets. It was refreshing to have Ad Mech vs Necrons last year. Why not go mad and have xeno vs Chaos or even xeno vs xeno sets?
7. More 40k Primarchs please.
8. Update all finecast/metal models.

 Tyranid Horde wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 Tyranid Horde wrote:
2) I would like them to open up the comments section of their youtube channel. While you'll get the obvious trolls, having open comments to ask questions or get responses like you see on platforms such as Instagram would put a lot of faith into the community and improve things even more.

They've covered this on Facebook before. They don't have the manpower to cover the comments on over 1,100 videos. You can still ask your questions via Facebook and it's much easier for them and the rest of the community to have all of the discussion in one place..

Fair enough if it has been, I don't use Facebook to follow my hobby and doesn't stop me from asking for it. You wouldn't have to enable comments on all of the previous videos, just the ones going forward. Most of the time comments aren't replied to outside of the first few hours anyway and commenting with the video as reference actually makes it easier to respond to. There's a community of 270k subscribers on Youtube, it isn't hard to respond to couple of comments that they can cherrypick themselves.

Which would still present the exact same problem. Too many individual videos for one guy to cover. If you want to comment on them then bite the bullet and do so on Facebook.

Community surveys are useless to me if they don't share the results. So I don't really have any interest in participating in this one since they never shared the results of the last one.

I'd really like Space Marine/Titan Legions/Epic to return - so I'll ask for that.

And if everyone else could too, that would be appreciated!

 Dr Coconut wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
Free rules, regularly updated. People can still buy dead tree editions for the fluff and to have on the shelf, but the raw crunch should be available. I know I’d be more likely to succumb to shiny model syndrome if I didn’t need to plonk down the $40+ (or pirate) the rules to play it. This also lowers the buy in cost for new players.

You mean like the battle primer on the downloads page of Warhammer Community https://www.warhammer-community.com/downloads/ ?

I was more thinking codexes.

You can get the core rules for free (good step, I approve)
You can get abbreviated units rules included with most models. (I’m not sure if every box comes with full dataslates, especially older kits with more options)
But that last step, the army-wide rules, stratagems, armory, and full dataslates for everything together, still requires a book.
Plus points, but that looks to be more a Chapter Approved thing now, rather than a Codex thing.

So they are almost there, but not quite. And by switching to a free/digital system, they remove barriers to play, enable easy updates and generate goodwill. They will loose some revenue from not selling them, but collectors buy the special editions, so there is a market for people paying extra for something they enjoy. I don’t think book sales would hit zero. People who were going to pirate the rules will still do so, many people who want the paper will still buy it. More people will be playing and starting new armies.

1. summarise all FAQ's over the year into the next Chapter Approved.
2. Have one location for any beta rules (e.g. a place on the community site.)
3. Don't short change us on needed cards (e.g. The AdMech pack should have contained cards for the Canticles.)
4a. Spell Check/Proofread all codexes/publications before printing.
4b. A beta codex in a white dwarf the month before (no points included, only power levels) so that any glaring issues can be fixed before the final print runs.
5. Chapter Approved should not have any artwork/stories/timeline advances - save those for campaign suppliments. rules only here please.
6. Basic infantry - e.g. marines/CSM/Guard/Skitarii/FIrewarriors these should stay as models that can be kitbashed easily - like they are at the moment (if they ever get around to updating them), I don't mind monopose models as much for non-troops choices. but it would still be nice to do so.
7. Stop making gaming aids that are intrinsic to game play in limited quantities. These items must be made available 100% of the time.
8. Stop with the multi-coloured plastic - especially red, it is a pain to paint over it. e.g. for AdMech - not everyone wants to run Mars...
9. start converting finecast models to plastic or bring out new sculpts to replace them.
10. Get rid of “No model, no rules” Yes, it might make it simple for new players, but it makes no sense from an in-game POV and restricts modeling and legacy players.
11. update really dated models to new scuplts looking at you CSM - more people will go for an army if the basic troops models look better and are in line with current modelling techniques.
12. and finally let us know the result of the quiz. if a lot of people want one particular item show us what this might be.

 The Forgemaster wrote:
4b. A beta codex in a white dwarf the month before (no points included, only power levels) so that any glaring issues can be fixed before the final print runs.

a) One month before wouldn't be anywhere near enough time to actually implement any changes.
b) White Dwarf is written four months in advance, which creates additional timing issues. You'd have to be finalising Codexes six months or more earlier than currently.
c) White Dwarf is poor enough value as it is, without it becoming a monthly paid for beta rules delivery system.
d) It shouldn't be necessary for (paying) customers to be proof reading and playtesting GW's rules for them. They literally employ people whose job that is. If they're not capable of doing that job, they should be replaced.
e) If GW want/require people to check their shoddy work for them, then the absolute least that they should do is offer those beta rules for free.

 Lord Damocles wrote:

 The Forgemaster wrote:
4b. A beta codex in a white dwarf the month before (no points included, only power levels) so that any glaring issues can be fixed before the final print runs.

a) One month before wouldn't be anywhere near enough time to actually implement any changes.
b) White Dwarf is written four months in advance, which creates additional timing issues. You'd have to be finalising Codexes six months or more earlier than currently.
c) White Dwarf is poor enough value as it is, without it becoming a monthly paid for beta rules delivery system.
d) It shouldn't be necessary for (paying) customers to be proof reading and playtesting GW's rules for them. They literally employ people whose job that is. If they're not capable of doing that job, they should be replaced.
e) If GW want/require people to check their shoddy work for them, then the absolute least that they should do is offer those beta rules for free.

How about instead they have some free rules on the community page that:

1. have "BETA" stamped accross them,
2. are not quite what the rules will be, i.e. slightly less powerful (to discourage copy&paste for free)
3. are taken down when the codex is published

the reason why I suggested this is because us as a community seem to be very good at finding ways to break the codexes/ finding loopholes in the rules. if they then had someone monitoring sites such as Dakka (or a place to feed official feedback into) they would quickly work out what rules needed changing.

 The Forgemaster wrote:

1. summarise all FAQ's over the year into the next Chapter Approved.

All non-beta matched play rules make it in already.

 The Forgemaster wrote:

5. Chapter Approved should not have any artwork/stories/timeline advances - save those for campaign suppliments. rules only here please.

I really like the current format of CA. It reminds me of the RT Compendium and Compilation expansions and the extra content means you get more for your money.

The Forgemaster wrote:2. Have one location for any beta rules (e.g. a place on the community site.)

Hopefully that's what the download section of community is for.

The Forgemaster wrote:7. Stop making gaming aids that are intrinsic to game play in limited quantities. These items must be made available 100% of the time.
8. Stop with the multi-coloured plastic - especially red, it is a pain to paint over it. e.g. for AdMech - not everyone wants to run Mars...

Agree, a basic version should be available for the life of its requirement. Special/limited/faction edition versions can come and go as often as gw want.

I hate red plastic. It's mainly Kill Team and game based figures that are the issue. E2B DG are on green plastic, Pri maris marines are on blue plastic, both of which kind of fit with the official paint colours. They can do the same sprue in grey, you get it in the "Start collecting" box. Fortunately, I like to create my own armies, so my AdMech use red, but aren't Mars. I wanted my rogue trader to wear white, but the plastic is red, so required LOTS of coats

The Forgemaster wrote:10. Get rid of “No model, no rules” Yes, it might make it simple for new players, but it makes no sense from an in-game POV and restricts modeling and legacy players.

"No model (never has been, never will be), No rules" is fine, but to wipe decades of models from the setting, pure madness. If there has been official models, and/or can be created easily from fantasy/AoS, it should stay. Rough riders are a good example... Freeguild Outriders with guard parts, simple.

 Horst wrote:

StraightSilver wrote:
One of the biggest issues for me personally with a lot of GW releases as of late is the rapid turnaround with FAQs, Errata and updated rules for Codexes/Battletomes.

As a 40K player I now have to carry around multiple books and printouts to a game and when writing an army list have to consult a minimum of 3 different publications just to work out my points.

I don't know how this would be resolved but one suggestion would be to publish a beta version of the codex in White Dwarf or online a month or so before it goes to print so that any changes brought about by community/playtester feedback can go into the publication.

I also never, ever thought I would say this but I'd like them to slow down their release schedule.... I can't keep up, lol.

Edit: ninja'd by Skineereal.

The solution unfortunately is to just use Battlescribe to make your lists, and only bother with hard copies of the rules when going to tournaments.

And then end up in errors. Plenty errors there both in army building(so better be at least well versed on how you make valid legal army) and in rules for in game usage.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 The Forgemaster wrote:
8. Stop with the multi-coloured plastic - especially red, it is a pain to paint over it. e.g. for AdMech - not everyone wants to run Mars...

We have these things called "spray paints" (or for me airbrush) for putting up whole new colour over it though ;-)

I wanted my rogue trader to wear white, but the plastic is red, so required LOTS of coats

That's what primer is for. I don't care about the colour of the plastic - my minis are all black before the first brush touches them.

 Dr Coconut wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
Free rules, regularly updated. People can still buy dead tree editions for the fluff and to have on the shelf, but the raw crunch should be available. I know I’d be more likely to succumb to shiny model syndrome if I didn’t need to plonk down the $40+ (or pirate) the rules to play it. This also lowers the buy in cost for new players.

You mean like the battle primer on the downloads page of Warhammer Community https://www.warhammer-community.com/downloads/ ?

That I didn't beleive until I DL'd it to have a look:
https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Warhammer-40k-Battle-Primer-English-3.pdf
"Warhammer 40,000 – Battle Primer - Updated 25/01/2019"
Cor! (I haven't checked it for errrata yet though)

I wish people were as motivated to ask for Tomb Kings as they were for Sisters.

 Skinnereal wrote:

 Dr Coconut wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
Free rules, regularly updated. People can still buy dead tree editions for the fluff and to have on the shelf, but the raw crunch should be available. I know I’d be more likely to succumb to shiny model syndrome if I didn’t need to plonk down the $40+ (or pirate) the rules to play it. This also lowers the buy in cost for new players.

You mean like the battle primer on the downloads page of Warhammer Community https://www.warhammer-community.com/downloads/ ?

That I didn't beleive until I DL'd it to have a look:
https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Warhammer-40k-Battle-Primer-English-3.pdf
"Warhammer 40,000 – Battle Primer - Updated 25/01/2019"
Cor! (I haven't checked it for errrata yet though)

Don't bother. It's horribly outdated. That's just the upload date, not an update date.

Longevity; nothing sucks more than finally deciding to buy something to find that it went silently OOP ages ago. Maybe not so big a deal for regular players but for the casual ones it's a deal breaker.

Like the Space Hulk re-release of a few years ago, it brought hundreds of long lapsed gamers in only to be told it's sold out. It happens with all of the boxed games, some still have expansions coming out but the core box seems to have been a single run so if you weren't in on it in the first wave or can't find it on an FLGS shelf or the used market, you've got no chance.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I wish people were as motivated to ask for Tomb Kings as they were for Sisters.

Yup, I thought I would see lots of Bretonnia and TK requests on reddit and here, guess I was wrong lol. Worst of all look at how many up votes a topic has on warhammer reddit asking for a black templar codex.

40k will always far far away bury fantasy / AOS.

I'm going to chime in here again and say...

Please stop with the kid friendly "Warhammer Adventures" nonsense. "Warahmmer Adventures" greatly and significantly undermines your core products. Catering to youngsters with heavily watered down product will not gain you customers. "Warhammer Adventures" is like giving them Duplo blocks when what they really want to play with are the cool-kid / big-boy Lego sets.



Edit: Grammar fail.

 oni wrote:
I'm going to chime in here again and say...

Please stop with the kid friendly "Warhammer Adventures" nonsense. "Warahmmer Adventures" greatly and significantly undermines your core products. Catering to youngsters with heavily watered down product will not gain you customers. "Warhammer Adventures" is like giving them Duplo blocks when what they really want to play with are the cool-kid / big-boy Lego sets.



Edit: Grammar fail.

The thing is if the customer already wants Warhammer as it is then they don't need the Adventures product; they are already under the sway of GW current marketing and are already a potential fan. Warhammer Adventures is not for them just as its not for existing fans nor adult nerds totally swept up in the whole grim-dark thing.

Warhammer Adventures is for gamers nerds who have kids to introduce them to warhammer and for new potential younger people to get them interested in the game. The whole concept of them is an outreach product designed to appeal to new potential fans at a young age and draw them into 40K and AoS and the GW games. They get in on the Duplo and eventually advance up to the "cool kid" lego and then Lego technick.

You don't start everyone with lego technick, you have stages of products designed for different markets that appeal and are suited to them. Duplo is the very young kids market (where in all honestly lego is dangerous due to swallowing risk); ideally suited to fingers not yet suited to small intricate assembly. The kids get hooked on that and as they grow up they leave it slowly behind and advance into Lego. Sure Duplo fits Lego, but steadily they leave one behind and move on. The same will happen for Adventures. The young will get hooked on that, read into it and follow that title and series and steadily advance into Warhammer and 40K proper; picking up the more mature themes as they themselves mature and grow older. Sure if Adventures does really well they'll likely make some snap-fit models for the characters; they might even make an adventures game (just like there was Space Crusade for kids back in the 80s).

Only thing I can put in the survey is that 8th edition killed my enjoyment of the game. Really dislike most of the design changes they did with the core rules and how they stack the gameplay into stratagems and faction traits. Not that it really matters when sales numbers are through the roof and 8th is treated like the best thing ever.

Also Primaris are just so much meh and feels like a marketing ploy to force obsolescence on the entire marine model line so marine players will rebuy entire new armies while gutting the usable supply of used models.

auticus wrote:
40k will always far far away bury fantasy / AOS.

Thats the thing people have been shrieking about these two armies being squatted, I expected those players to be out full force like the SOB players.

Bretonians is a bigger amount of work to bring back - Tomb Kings they can basically get away with it with just new basic troops - ergo the most high volume sales product and thus the one that should be the most easy to justify for a new mould casting.

I hope that AoS players in general get out in full force - I really thing TK have a big chance.


Bretonnians I think could happen, a human faction with a knight system focused on cavalry can happen ;but its likely goign to require new models from the ground up. There's also the subtle element that technically Brets ARE in the game - they are just Flesheater Courts.

Bretonnian battletome is on preorder right now