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.

 OldMate wrote:
Slim it down, add tactical, fluff, strategical and just sensible depth. Was my idea.
But yeah, to slim it down I'd go for:
A I pick a unit, you pick a unit turn for turn. And when every unit has done it's thing cycle back to the start. I guess this would then be a 'round?' At the start of each round you can pick whatever unit you want to lead with.
I'd add a cover mechanic like cities of death.
I'd remove stratagems.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
These units would be based on units on your list. Combat squadding would be doable.

Main issues there are:
AA by unit is all well and good until you face a knight list with only 3 units, and have 0 chance of pulling off the first-turn bombardment to kill or cripple one - though that's perhaps an issue with the scale in 40k.
Better cover is better, I'll agree.
Stratagems are a key part of making an army work these days - like auras and that stuff. It would be a huge task to get rid of them now.

Streamlining does not necessarily mean to remove stuff or reduce mechanics

it just means that everything that has a similar outcome uses the same mechanics, and rules that add nothing to the game are removed

so if you need to add rules to have all similar things work the same, and also changing things so that they are more in line with other rules are still streamlining


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 some bloke wrote:

Main issues there are:
AA by unit is all well and good until you face a knight list with only 3 units, and have 0 chance of pulling off the first-turn bombardment to kill or cripple one - though that's perhaps an issue with the scale in 40k.

yeah, Knight lists would have a hard time with unit activations and would need some additional rules to have a chance against them
although we have already "baby" Knights so maybe it would just need to change lists and play more than 3 models

Bring in knightly men at arms as a guard/knight supplement? Basically guard without the tanks, and artillery and perhaps rhinos instead of chimeras and taurox.

 OldMate wrote:
Bring in knightly men at arms as a guard/knight supplement? Basically guard without the tanks, and artillery and perhaps rhinos instead of chimeras and taurox.

Well, that would be neat, but it wouldn't really address the issue at hand. If your army can contain a trio of knights and you're taking turns activating one unit at a time, the knight player can just activate his knights first, functionally alpha striking with 1200 points of his army in the time his opponent might only be able to activate, say, 600 points.

This is one of the issues my "Fire Team" AA proposal hoped to solve, but I'm sure the mods would rather I not keep link to that thread every time AA comes up.

The knight player probably has to activate one knight at a time. with the other person taking turns in between. When the 3 knights have complete their turns the other person gets to control the rest of their army, as if it were their turn in a normal game. The knight player then has to wait till all units have used their turn before they can do anything.

Saying this I'd not count 3x knights as a formation (outside apocalypse) and in a normal game I'd count maybe a knight and 2x armigers could be a formation. So they'd be able to share a turn.

I think it would be best to remove super heavies, flyers, and gargantuan creatures from "regular" 40k, and instead focus on infantry.

That would streamline the game lol

8th was supposed to be the streamlined version...
Then they piled crap on it and kept going, again.

GW does not want to "fix" any of their games, the current model works. Having loads of crazy rules and new models with more crazy works for what they're actually interested in (making the game itself good is not it).

I hear that Grimdark Future form one page rules is simple and fun though.

 DarkBlack wrote:
8th was supposed to be the streamlined version...
Then they piled crap on it and kept going, again.

Because they interpreted the requests from costumers the wrong way

GW asked what players want, and they answered "streamlined and easy to understand rules", so GW did exactly that, made the 8th Core Rules as streamlined and easy as possible
without feeling the need to change anything regarding the Codex Books as those are not "the rules"

misunderstanding as most players talk about the rules, meaning everything available and not just the core rules

 kodos wrote:

 DarkBlack wrote:
8th was supposed to be the streamlined version...
Then they piled crap on it and kept going, again.

Because they interpreted the requests from costumers the wrong way

GW asked what players want, and they answered "streamlined and easy to understand rules", so GW did exactly that, made the 8th Core Rules as streamlined and easy as possible
without feeling the need to change anything regarding the Codex Books as those are not "the rules"

misunderstanding as most players talk about the rules, meaning everything available and not just the core rules

That is giving them a lot of credit.
I doubt that GW care that much about what players want. I think it was more a case of Gw realising that the rules were hampering people getting into 40k.

 DarkBlack wrote:
8th was supposed to be the streamlined version...
Then they piled crap on it and kept going, again.

GW does not want to "fix" any of their games, the current model works. Having loads of crazy rules and new models with more crazy works for what they're actually interested in (making the game itself good is not it).

I hear that Grimdark Future form one page rules is simple and fun though.

Eh. I feel like you might be forgetting just how many superfluous rules and dice rolls 8th edition did away with. Sure, we have a bunch of options that go into the warlord trait and chapter tactic slots of an army. Sure, mono-codex abilities like doctrines add a bit to that. Sure, a vigilus detachment potentially adds even more.

But, we don't have to...
* roll for difficult terrain
* roll for dangerous terrain
* roll for reserves on a number that changes based on the turn number
* a random number of explosion hit/wound/save rolls on units when a vehicle blows up
* resolve a similar process for the unit inside that vehicle
* keep track of all the rules an dexceptions for having a character attached to a unit
* duels
* fall back rolls and resolutions
* track individual vehicle damage results, some of which went away after a turn
* track whether a vehicle moved combat/cruising/flat out speed

I'm sure I'm missing a few things, and I intentionally didn't include several items that weren't necessarily quicker to resolve in ideal circumstances but which did tend to slow down the game when their resolutions were unclear. 8th has gotten a little bloated, but it's still nowhere near as bloated as 7th was. Even without taking formations into account.

 DarkBlack wrote:

 kodos wrote:

 DarkBlack wrote:
8th was supposed to be the streamlined version...
Then they piled crap on it and kept going, again.

Because they interpreted the requests from costumers the wrong way

GW asked what players want, and they answered "streamlined and easy to understand rules", so GW did exactly that, made the 8th Core Rules as streamlined and easy as possible
without feeling the need to change anything regarding the Codex Books as those are not "the rules"

misunderstanding as most players talk about the rules, meaning everything available and not just the core rules

That is giving them a lot of credit.
I doubt that GW care that much about what players want. I think it was more a case of Gw realising that the rules were hampering people getting into 40k.

GW as a company, no
GW as the design team doing it, yes

and all good designers left long ago (or died in case of Horus Heresy) or are only there for short projects (like boxed games) while the new team is also not allowed to make a new game but to carry stuff over from legacy versions if the game were no one is left who knew why those rules were a thing

also a reason why AoS has the better ruleset at the moment

Just play an older edition...
There you go. Fixed.

BUT NOT 7TH!!!!

I'd be pretty alright if 40k followed the turn structure of Kill Team. But, that'd be a pretty drastic change.

I'm pretty happy with 40k right now, personally. If the core rules get a bit of a tweaking (like Aos 1st edition -> Aos 2nd edition), the game will be in a really good place.

 ValentineGames wrote:
Just play an older edition...
There you go. Fixed.

BUT NOT 7TH!!!!

Not really. I only played 5th, 6th, and 7th, but each of those had major problems as well. From what I have read and heard, this is the norm for 40k.

Wyldhunt wrote:

 DarkBlack wrote:
8th was supposed to be the streamlined version...
Then they piled crap on it and kept going, again.

GW does not want to "fix" any of their games, the current model works. Having loads of crazy rules and new models with more crazy works for what they're actually interested in (making the game itself good is not it).

I hear that Grimdark Future form one page rules is simple and fun though.

Eh. I feel like you might be forgetting just how many superfluous rules and dice rolls 8th edition did away with. Sure, we have a bunch of options that go into the warlord trait and chapter tactic slots of an army. Sure, mono-codex abilities like doctrines add a bit to that. Sure, a vigilus detachment potentially adds even more.

But, we don't have to...
* roll for difficult terrain
* roll for dangerous terrain
* roll for reserves on a number that changes based on the turn number
* a random number of explosion hit/wound/save rolls on units when a vehicle blows up
* resolve a similar process for the unit inside that vehicle
* keep track of all the rules an dexceptions for having a character attached to a unit
* duels
* fall back rolls and resolutions
* track individual vehicle damage results, some of which went away after a turn
* track whether a vehicle moved combat/cruising/flat out speed

I'm sure I'm missing a few things, and I intentionally didn't include several items that weren't necessarily quicker to resolve in ideal circumstances but which did tend to slow down the game when their resolutions were unclear. 8th has gotten a little bloated, but it's still nowhere near as bloated as 7th was. Even without taking formations into account.

8th is certainly a massive improvement over 7th, but that isn't exactly an achievement. 8th was better before GW decided to pile on the bloat that I had hoped they had learnt not to do.

If you compare 40k to other games, rather than terrible versions of 40k, then even 8th edition still looks pretty bad.

some bloke wrote:Main issues there are:
AA by unit is all well and good until you face a knight list with only 3 units, and have 0 chance of pulling off the first-turn bombardment to kill or cripple one - though that's perhaps an issue with the scale in 40k.
Better cover is better, I'll agree.
Stratagems are a key part of making an army work these days - like auras and that stuff. It would be a huge task to get rid of them now.

Bolt Action's activation system helps with this particular AA issue; if you only have 3 units on the board and your opponent has 18, statistically they'll get six successive activations between each of yours.

It does incentivize taking cheap troops to get extra activation tokens in the pool, though.

Wyldhunt wrote:Eh. I feel like you might be forgetting just how many superfluous rules and dice rolls 8th edition did away with. Sure, we have a bunch of options that go into the warlord trait and chapter tactic slots of an army. Sure, mono-codex abilities like doctrines add a bit to that. Sure, a vigilus detachment potentially adds even more.

But, we don't have to...
* roll for difficult terrain
* roll for dangerous terrain
* roll for reserves on a number that changes based on the turn number
* a random number of explosion hit/wound/save rolls on units when a vehicle blows up
* resolve a similar process for the unit inside that vehicle
* keep track of all the rules an dexceptions for having a character attached to a unit
* duels
* fall back rolls and resolutions
* track individual vehicle damage results, some of which went away after a turn
* track whether a vehicle moved combat/cruising/flat out speed

I'm sure I'm missing a few things, and I intentionally didn't include several items that weren't necessarily quicker to resolve in ideal circumstances but which did tend to slow down the game when their resolutions were unclear. 8th has gotten a little bloated, but it's still nowhere near as bloated as 7th was. Even without taking formations into account.

I find that all of those removed rolls are more than completely offset by what seems like every single attack involving re-rolls to hit, re-rolls to wound, armor saves (lots more fishing for 5s and 6s due to the new AP system, and invulns are all over the place), and rolling for damage. Plus thanks to rules like Bolter Discipline or various shoot-twice abilities, everything makes more attacks to begin with.

Do one round of shooting with a 40pt, ten-man squad of Cadian Guardsmen under FRFSRF throwing 40 shots to kill maybe one Marine and it starts to feel quite tedious. Apocalypse is a perfect example of how a streamlined system can get rid of lots of the mindless dice-rolling.

Wyldhunt wrote:

 DarkBlack wrote:
8th was supposed to be the streamlined version...
Then they piled crap on it and kept going, again.

GW does not want to "fix" any of their games, the current model works. Having loads of crazy rules and new models with more crazy works for what they're actually interested in (making the game itself good is not it).

I hear that Grimdark Future form one page rules is simple and fun though.

Eh. I feel like you might be forgetting just how many superfluous rules and dice rolls 8th edition did away with. Sure, we have a bunch of options that go into the warlord trait and chapter tactic slots of an army. Sure, mono-codex abilities like doctrines add a bit to that. Sure, a vigilus detachment potentially adds even more.

But, we don't have to...
* roll for difficult terrain
* roll for dangerous terrain
* roll for reserves on a number that changes based on the turn number
* a random number of explosion hit/wound/save rolls on units when a vehicle blows up
* resolve a similar process for the unit inside that vehicle
* keep track of all the rules an dexceptions for having a character attached to a unit
* duels
* fall back rolls and resolutions
* track individual vehicle damage results, some of which went away after a turn
* track whether a vehicle moved combat/cruising/flat out speed

I'm sure I'm missing a few things, and I intentionally didn't include several items that weren't necessarily quicker to resolve in ideal circumstances but which did tend to slow down the game when their resolutions were unclear. 8th has gotten a little bloated, but it's still nowhere near as bloated as 7th was. Even without taking formations into account.

The thing with each of those rolls is they were mostly exceptions (you didn't always move through terrain, only very few units exploded or needed damage tracking, etc). Also, things like explosions and units being blown out of transports still exist in 8th edition. In general the basic flow of combat was "select unit, roll to hit, roll to wound, make saves" with an optional "take FNP save" step for some units. Now it's much more common to go "select unit, roll to hit, re-roll to hit, roll to wound-reroll to wound, make saves, roll for damage". Even then, you have selective re-rolling of 1s rather than all dice, possible rolling for number of shots before you get to your hit rolls, the clumsy way you need to roll damage individually and apply it one at a time to models with more than one wound or those with FNP.

It's the bloat in the core gameplay sequence that's the problem with 8th edition. It's simply ridiculous how many dice rolls are required to resolve attacks nowadays.

Rocinante wrote:
Alternate activation.

Get rid of all cards and strategems.

Cities othf Death terrain rules.

How do you think this would affect the game?

In its current form 8th edition is an arcade game with few strategy in it.

The main problem is the core rules are constantly broken by stratagems, which the game overly relies on.

Imo, the game would be better by making stratagem something of exceptional use (1 per turn).

Siegfriedfr wrote:

Rocinante wrote:
Alternate activation.

Get rid of all cards and strategems.

Cities othf Death terrain rules.

How do you think this would affect the game?

In its current form 8th edition is an arcade game with few strategy in it.

The main problem is the core rules are constantly broken by stratagems, which the game overly relies on.

Imo, the game would be better by making stratagem something of exceptional use (1 per turn).

At that point why bother with them at all? Just toss the things.

pm713 wrote:

At that point why bother with them at all? Just toss the things.

GW's business model, after spending a 1000$ for an army to play with, throwing it in the bin and playing something else is difficult, specially if nothing else is played in the shops near you

Psychological it is easier to try to get it somehow working (and maybe spend more money to do so) than give it up and acknowledge it as expensive mistake

 kodos wrote:

pm713 wrote:

At that point why bother with them at all? Just toss the things.

GW's business model, after spending a 1000$ for an army to play with, throwing it in the bin and playing something else is difficult, specially if nothing else is played in the shops near you

Psychological it is easier to try to get it somehow working (and maybe spend more money to do so) than give it up and acknowledge it as expensive mistake

They're given up on at things of similar or bigger importance at least three times since I started playing.

there is nothing as big or important as your little toy soldiers