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.

Slipspace wrote:


What a ridiculous argument. All the things listed there are relatively new, some as new as 8th edition. There were multiple editions of 40k that included none of those things, or very heavily curtailed versions of them and they worked just fine.

You are absolutely right, prior to stratagems there was never an ability called the Power Of The Machine Spirit that allowed damaged... oh I don't know, lets say Land Raiders to shoot better after it had been damaged. I've definitely never heard of a Subterranean Burst with a Tremor effect for Thunderfire Canons either. What is Skilled Riders? What are these new-fangled things called meltabombs? Hunter Killer Missiles? And who ever heard of giving a veteran sergeant a relic (i.e. Wargear Card)? Many of these things are not new. Doctrines definitely aren't. They started with the Generic Space Marines in what, 5th? 6th? Moved to All Marines an edition later? The Dial-A-Doctrine strat was originally the bonus given to Generic Marines for having to share Doctrines with the Bespoke Marines. Stealth Suits hopping out of sight after shooting in some sort of Strike And Fade?Endless Swarm for 2CP that used to be 3 points per model? The names change. Sometimes. Everything else gets recycled.

The list was:

(doctrines,protocols, whatever) Stratagems need to be dialed back significantly. Cutting sub-faction relics and warlord traits would be nice

So aside from where they move/attack, what's left for you to have options after list building?

There is a very clear and distinct difference between current Strategems and the rules many of them derive from.

Same can be said of doctrines and purity bonuses.

In a proper wargame moving and attacking (and morale, a useful mechanic in those games) is interesting enough that they don't need lots of special gak layered on top to create some semblence of gameplay.

Cyel wrote:
l]

Strawman is not a valid argument.

Reducing the number of dumb rules doesn't dumb the game down, it's quite the opposite. If a rule doesn't ask players to make an interesting and relevant decision it should be cut, plain and simple.

It was Reductio Ad Absurdum. Did you mean Interesting and relevant choices like whether to spend 1 or more precious command points on a reroll or an extra movement, or a defensive hail mary? Or even to spend them pregame to stack an Everybody gets ObSec, and Core with Obsec count as +1 models warlord traits? The abilities to change the course of the game are some of the most interesting and relevant decisions.

Personally, as much as I know it will never happen, I'd like them to move away from the d6 and into either the d10 or d12.

And, way way way less Strats.

I want them to make the game into One Page Rules... oh wait, i already have been playing my ideal 10th edition then hah

 kirotheavenger wrote:
There is a very clear and distinct difference between current Strategems and the rules many of them derive from.

Same can be said of doctrines and purity bonuses.

In a proper wargame moving and attacking (and morale, a useful mechanic in those games) is interesting enough that they don't need lots of special gak layered on top to create some semblence of gameplay.

Is that clear and distinct difference more clear and distinct than 3 Points per model out of 2000 or so vs 2 CP out of 15 or so? Or Move, shoot, move vs move, Pay CP, shoot, move?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lord Clinto wrote:
Personally, as much as I know it will never happen, I'd like them to move away from the d6 and into either the d10 or d12.

And, way way way less Strats.

They used to do that. The rumor is/was they went away from it due to some sort of Dungeons and Dragons Satanic Parental fears. But I'd load that up with a grain of salt. Still, it could get pretty comical. A medium armor rating (for vehicles) might be 20. And a set of powerfists had an armor penetration of D6+D20+8 or some such. Rolling a 6 on the D6 and a 1 on the D20 was memorable. If you're ever bored, try looking for something called a Thudd Gun Template. They made a template just for the one gun. Maybe there was another like it out there. Well they gave you most of the materials, and you had to get some brass pins/tacks and put it together.

Breton wrote:

Is that clear and distinct difference more clear and distinct than 3 Points per model out of 2000 or so vs 2 CP out of 15 or so? Or Move, shoot, move vs move, Pay CP, shoot, move?

Yes, because one of those is derived from an inherent ability of the unit and the other is derived from a limited use overarching "meta currency"

If I run two units of stealthsuits; only one of them can move shoot move. Is the second all tuckered out just watching first lot go?

Maybe the Horus Heresy game is a preview of 10th edition, depending what works (and what doesn't).

Breton wrote:
Still, it could get pretty comical. A medium armor rating (for vehicles) might be 20. And a set of powerfists had an armor penetration of D6+D20+8 or some such. Rolling a 6 on the D6 and a 1 on the D20 was memorable. If you're ever bored, try looking for something called a Thudd Gun Template. They made a template just for the one gun. Maybe there was another like it out there. Well they gave you most of the materials, and you had to get some brass pins/tacks and put it together.

Spoiler:

Thudd gun. Awesome stuff. The above was 2nd edition (of course the best edition...), but using different dice for damage was a holdover of the games roleplay roots and was in 1st and 2nd edition (was it in 3rd?) before they decided to standardise on D6 (lots of D6 - but that is Andy Chamber's fault).

Nomeny wrote:
Maybe the Horus Heresy game is a preview of 10th edition, depending what works (and what doesn't).

Doubtful, they'll probably steal stuff back and forth, but even when Fantasy and 40K were running at the same time most of the basic rules were different - for example 40K dumped Psychology rules in a hurry.

Breton wrote:

It was Reductio Ad Absurdum. Did you mean Interesting and relevant choices like whether to spend 1 or more precious command points on a reroll or an extra movement, or a defensive hail mary? Or even to spend them pregame to stack an Everybody gets ObSec, and Core with Obsec count as +1 models warlord traits? The abilities to change the course of the game are some of the most interesting and relevant decisions.

So 40k lacks a lot of what wargames good/fun/challenging at its core. The use of strategems/CPs/list building is to put a tactical framework over that so players have choices to make in game.

It seems to be popular - as I and others have said it is like many modern card games and a departure from a more wargaming background, which is also fine because 40k grew out of roleplay skirmish. I just think the more the game become about what you have in your hand and the less about what models can predictably do on the tabletop the more you push those that like the wargaming approach away. Now GW has good wargame systems (Warmaster has probably been ported into more settings than anything else), and the Heresy game is more like the older style of model statelines and abilities being important, not strategic use of cards and gotcha's. So maybe you will see the two camps be offered something different and be happy, or maybe they will double down on pushing 40k underworlds and see where it gets them.

Breton wrote:

Slipspace wrote:


What a ridiculous argument. All the things listed there are relatively new, some as new as 8th edition. There were multiple editions of 40k that included none of those things, or very heavily curtailed versions of them and they worked just fine.

You are absolutely right, prior to stratagems there was never an ability called the Power Of The Machine Spirit that allowed damaged... oh I don't know, lets say Land Raiders to shoot better after it had been damaged. I've definitely never heard of a Subterranean Burst with a Tremor effect for Thunderfire Canons either. What is Skilled Riders? What are these new-fangled things called meltabombs? Hunter Killer Missiles? And who ever heard of giving a veteran sergeant a relic (i.e. Wargear Card)? Many of these things are not new. Doctrines definitely aren't. They started with the Generic Space Marines in what, 5th? 6th? Moved to All Marines an edition later? The Dial-A-Doctrine strat was originally the bonus given to Generic Marines for having to share Doctrines with the Bespoke Marines. Stealth Suits hopping out of sight after shooting in some sort of Strike And Fade?Endless Swarm for 2CP that used to be 3 points per model? The names change. Sometimes. Everything else gets recycled.

The list was:

(doctrines,protocols, whatever) Stratagems need to be dialed back significantly. Cutting sub-faction relics and warlord traits would be nice

So aside from where they move/attack, what's left for you to have options after list building?

Right, so you just don't understand the difference between strats/WL traits/relics etc and...rules with the same or similar names? Seems like you've spectacularly missed the point. All the things you mention are distinctly different to the things being complained about. Free WL traits and relics, are a very different beast to big wargear lists or wargear cards you have to pay for, for example. I could go on but I get the feeling there's not much point.

I want the following:

Less balance.
No points.
More marines.
More expensive models.
More bloat.

Expectations managed. Go on GW. disappoint me.

But seriously, all I want for 10th is codex: primaris lieutenant.

I think the point is that in ye olden days a marine with a boltgun was a marine with a boltgun.

Now he's a [Chapter A] Marine with a boltgun - benefiting also from [Doctrine B] and [Super Doctrine C] with [Character Aura D] and [Warlord Trait/Relic E] and [Stratagems F, G and/or H.] (Marines actually are perhaps not the most complicated - but working out all the possible buffs up with say Ad Mech need cards or a flowchart.)

Personally this doesn't hugely bother me at a mechanics level - I just dislike that the above results everything killing everything in 2 turns - unless you in turn break out defensive buffs J, K and L.

At this point I feel like stratagems need to be completely expelled from the game.

Power Levels also need to go. This continues to be a lost cause.

The Command Point system should be for army construction, unit requisition and perhaps also for triggering character abilities.


Most Aura's (e.g. ones buffing or de-buffing units) should be an ability used in the Command Phase that selects/targets a single unit and maybe costs CP's.

Breton wrote:

Slipspace wrote:


What a ridiculous argument. All the things listed there are relatively new, some as new as 8th edition. There were multiple editions of 40k that included none of those things, or very heavily curtailed versions of them and they worked just fine.

You are absolutely right, prior to stratagems there was never an ability called the Power Of The Machine Spirit that allowed damaged... oh I don't know, lets say Land Raiders to shoot better after it had been damaged. I've definitely never heard of a Subterranean Burst with a Tremor effect for Thunderfire Canons either. What is Skilled Riders? What are these new-fangled things called meltabombs? Hunter Killer Missiles? And who ever heard of giving a veteran sergeant a relic (i.e. Wargear Card)? Many of these things are not new. Doctrines definitely aren't. They started with the Generic Space Marines in what, 5th? 6th? Moved to All Marines an edition later? The Dial-A-Doctrine strat was originally the bonus given to Generic Marines for having to share Doctrines with the Bespoke Marines. Stealth Suits hopping out of sight after shooting in some sort of Strike And Fade?Endless Swarm for 2CP that used to be 3 points per model? The names change. Sometimes. Everything else gets recycled.

The list was:

(doctrines,protocols, whatever) Stratagems need to be dialed back significantly. Cutting sub-faction relics and warlord traits would be nice

So aside from where they move/attack, what's left for you to have options after list building?

The game worked perfectly well for over a decade with the only choices at the table being where to move or attack.

40k doesn't need to pretend to be MtG to survive and thrive.

I'd like to see stratagems get changed to being bought before the game, during list building phase. a Normal 2,000 pts game has 12 CP, you use that pool to buy detachments for your list, and stratagems to use during the battle. Take away all the CP generation stuff, or make it a special ability for a character that would give like 2 or 3 extra points during list building. This would basically give another stratagem to the player. With most strats costing 2 to 3 CP most players would end up with 4 maybe 5. Leave the main rulebook ones in there for free, so every player has access to those. Keep the 1 time use per phase limit to prevent spaming them in one go, but they're available the entire game, not just 1 use and they're gone ( a 1 time use per game would be a hard-core version of this). Make sure both players can see/read the other's choices to help eliminate "gotcha!" moments. I think that would take away a lot of, "let me check" moments that slow down games, and also help with the massive amounts of reading materials each player has to go through. Digital rules would be the 2nd big thing I'd ask from 10th. Why doesn't GW license tablet shells that use the GW stuff, like an Stormcast or Slaves to Darkness shell for a tablet? How about something simple like Space Marine Chapter symbols/reliefs on those fold out triangle stands/screen protectors? I'm not sure how the logistics/licensing would work on that though.

Tyel wrote:
I think the point is that in ye olden days a marine with a boltgun was a marine with a boltgun.

Now he's a [Chapter A] Marine with a boltgun - benefiting also from [Doctrine B] and [Super Doctrine C] with [Character Aura D] and [Warlord Trait/Relic E] and [Stratagems F, G and/or H.] (Marines actually are perhaps not the most complicated - but working out all the possible buffs up with say Ad Mech need cards or a flowchart.)

I can't even say that's complicated at all. Especially given how rarely all of those come into play at the same time.

Personally this doesn't hugely bother me at a mechanics level - I just dislike that the above results everything killing everything in 2 turns - unless you in turn break out defensive buffs J, K and L.

I kind of suspect it's because we're all packing into the same "threat range" - likely because varied builds don't have the same oomph. The things you take for Marines are the same things you take for Meganobs, Warbikers, Tyranid Warriors, Most of the Tau suits. Basically all the heavy infantry and light vehicles with T4-5, and 2-6 wounds along with a bunch of close-enough outliers. If Harlequins shape up like people are expecting maybe that changes. Priorities for them are much different than Marines. Vs Marines you want a medium number of S5-7 shots with high AP and 2D. If I'm going against Harlequins I want Whirlwinds, Thunderfires, Assault Canons, Hurricane Bolters, and so on - I want to max as many S4+ shots as I can - and I don't care if it has AP or not. This would have been accomplished if the "horde" builds were more valid, but sadly they're not really. Harlequins, improving Green Tide, Bug Rugs, Guard, Vehicle/Cover and Blast would do far more for the health of the game. I think it started with Knights, a skew army, which made other especially large vehicles less attractive - and then snowballed from there. No big tanks/transports means more bikes, speeders, and other fast movers(think Jump Packs and small vehicles). Bikes are generally +1T +1W, Speeders/etc are light vehicles usually T5-6 6-8 wounds Blast punches down on large units without giving an offsetting bonus. This pushes people into the good small size units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mr.Pickels wrote:
I'd like to see stratagems get changed to being bought before the game, during list building phase. a Normal 2,000 pts game has 12 CP,

17 - you get 1 per Command Phase for being Battle Forged.

you use that pool to buy detachments for your list,

I'd like it if they finally learned their Loyal 32 lesson and totally detached Command Points from List Building via Detachments: neither Paying nor Earning

and stratagems to use during the battle. Take away all the CP generation stuff, or make it a special ability for a character that would give like 2 or 3 extra points during list building. This would basically give another stratagem to the player. With most strats costing 2 to 3 CP most players would end up with 4 maybe 5. Leave the main rulebook ones in there for free, so every player has access to those. Keep the 1 time use per phase limit to prevent spaming them in one go, but they're available the entire game, not just 1 use and they're gone ( a 1 time use per game would be a hard-core version of this). Make sure both players can see/read the other's choices to help eliminate "gotcha!" moments. I think that would take away a lot of, "let me check" moments that slow down games, and also help with the massive amounts of reading materials each player has to go through. Digital rules would be the 2nd big thing I'd ask from 10th. Why doesn't GW license tablet shells that use the GW stuff, like an Stormcast or Slaves to Darkness shell for a tablet? How about something simple like Space Marine Chapter symbols/reliefs on those fold out triangle stands/screen protectors? I'm not sure how the logistics/licensing would work on that though.

They did E-books but I'm not sure why they stopped. Well technically they didn't stop, now you can put a code into their system but it's not very good and their history suggests they won't have the patience to fix it and see it through to a success.

I would like to see Stratagems gone entirely from the game because they are antithetical to the whole idea of a wargame.

The units on the table and their respective positions should be the important factor - not a pile of what might as well be spell cards, which exist entirely independently of anything happening on the battlefield.

Not only are they a horrible mechanic to begin with, they're also devouring other, better mechanics. We've already seen weapons and wargear disappear into the globular mass of stratagems, where good game design goes to die. And with every codex it seems even more weapons, wargear etc. is fed into the ever-expanding mass, that increasingly resembles the blob-monster from an 80s B-movie.

Strategems are one of the things that make 40k not a wargame, but a war-themed "game".

Its GW tapping into the magic the gathering crowds' appeal. And it makes them a dump truck's worth of cash regularly so I don't see it go away.

The_Real_Chris wrote:

Breton wrote:
Still, it could get pretty comical. A medium armor rating (for vehicles) might be 20. And a set of powerfists had an armor penetration of D6+D20+8 or some such. Rolling a 6 on the D6 and a 1 on the D20 was memorable. If you're ever bored, try looking for something called a Thudd Gun Template. They made a template just for the one gun. Maybe there was another like it out there. Well they gave you most of the materials, and you had to get some brass pins/tacks and put it together.

Spoiler:

Thudd gun. Awesome stuff. The above was 2nd edition (of course the best edition...), but using different dice for damage was a holdover of the games roleplay roots and was in 1st and 2nd edition (was it in 3rd?) before they decided to standardise on D6 (lots of D6 - but that is Andy Chamber's fault).

3rd edition was when things went to being all the D6...

 vipoid wrote:
I would like to see Stratagems gone entirely from the game because they are antithetical to the whole idea of a wargame.

The units on the table and their respective positions should be the important factor - not a pile of what might as well be spell cards, which exist entirely independently of anything happening on the battlefield.

Not only are they a horrible mechanic to begin with, they're also devouring other, better mechanics. We've already seen weapons and wargear disappear into the globular mass of stratagems, where good game design goes to die. And with every codex it seems even more weapons, wargear etc. is fed into the ever-expanding mass, that increasingly resembles the blob-monster from an 80s B-movie.

I agree that the current implementation is hot garbage, but I wonder if there might be a way to make Stratagems worth including if GW completely reworked them to be...well, actual stratagems. Maybe something where you have to write down a plan ahead of time, and then pay a cost to implement it or choose to forgo it - ie, "I will pay 2 Command and Control Points to have Squads Pliny and Tertullian feign a withdrawal from Hill 218 if assaulted, only to turn and re-engage their assailants on their next game turn (provided they pass a Ld test [and assuming that the game would not normally allow this])."

There's no way you can rules lawyer something as vague as that, unfortunately.

Closest you could get is something like "Squads Pliny and Tertullian may fall back and still charge once per game" would be as close as you'd get.

Ultimately that's more pre-battle planning, which I want to avoid.
No plan survives contact with the enemy, so what I want to wargame is how I handle that friction. Setting it all up before hand is homework I don't want to do.

Too early for this conversation.

CSM, Daemons, Chaos Knights and possibly World Eaters need to be released before we can understand what the real problems are.

The main things I'd like to see improved are charge / combat mechanics. Bring back multicharges, don't make units fail a charge because they can't hit both units. Charging units should always fight first. And allow all units to add +3" to charge rolls. This last one is because (IMHO) mid-range melee armies depend on it so much compared to shooting armies, it should be easier to get them into combat.

The problem is stratagems are tied to such a gamey mechanic at this point its hard to think of them *not* as a unit in an rts game with a cool down.

When in my minds eye I think of a stratagem I think more of an overarching plan, not "unit X can shoot harder suddenly so units Y and Z cannot do that now." It doesn't help that things that would actually make sense as strategies either already exist in the game (a forced march is basically advancing - the unit gives up certain actions to move up farther) or don't exist at all (digging into a defensive position), or are under the domain of a single faction (crossfire). If "stratagems" were reconceptualized in the context of...blanking on an actually good term so for lack of a better one demeanor, of a unit, that could at least make some sense. Say like "standard", "offensive", "defensive" and "forced march" as just examples. You declare the strategy of each unit at the start of your turn, then begin implementing your actions based on what your plan is. Could work with both I go you go and alternate activation - maybe if command points must still be a thing, they can be used to force change a demeanor mid turn in reaction to what your opponent does in an AA setting, but with the limit of command points you can only do it so often.

 kurhanik wrote:
The problem is stratagems are tied to such a gamey mechanic at this point its hard to think of them *not* as a unit in an rts game with a cool down.

When in my minds eye I think of a stratagem I think more of an overarching plan, not "unit X can shoot harder suddenly so units Y and Z cannot do that now." It doesn't help that things that would actually make sense as strategies either already exist in the game (a forced march is basically advancing - the unit gives up certain actions to move up farther) or don't exist at all (digging into a defensive position), or are under the domain of a single faction (crossfire). If "stratagems" were reconceptualized in the context of...blanking on an actually good term so for lack of a better one demeanor, of a unit, that could at least make some sense. Say like "standard", "offensive", "defensive" and "forced march" as just examples. You declare the strategy of each unit at the start of your turn, then begin implementing your actions based on what your plan is. Could work with both I go you go and alternate activation - maybe if command points must still be a thing, they can be used to force change a demeanor mid turn in reaction to what your opponent does in an AA setting, but with the limit of command points you can only do it so often.

Quite a lot of games have that sort of thing. Call it "stances", "orders", or "actions" or whatever.
There's lots of directions you can take it.

In Titanicus, you need to take a command test to issue a titan an order other than the default. When a titan fails their command test, you've lost your grip and can't attempt to issue any more that phase. Orders modify how they act. They might get to shoot a gun in the movement phase at the penalty of not moving at all, or they might get to repair extra at the penalty of not shooting.

In Epic, (I think), you issue every unit an order at the beginning of the phase, then alternating activating a unit to carry out their order. Orders might be to move twice, move and shoot, or even triple move (but be vulnerable to attack).

It's definitely something that could work well for 40k I feel. Ripping from titanicus would be the best option without overhauling the turn sequence.

I feel that there should be less Stratagems available during the game - give people access to core Stratagems, then pick 4-6 to have access to from your faction's list, and you can't use the rest during your game. That way people aren't overwhelmed with options. You could even have certain Stratagems be mutually exclusive with each other. Make what Stratagems you bring to the field an actual choice with tradeoffs.

You can port Epic to 40k scale easily enough. Call cm's inches, each base of infantry is one figure, a unit of (number) vehicles is one/more vehicles with (number) 'hit points'.

The Epic 'orders' system works a treat.

Hecaton wrote:
I feel that there should be less Stratagems available during the game - give people access to core Stratagems, then pick 4-6 to have access to from your faction's list, and you can't use the rest during your game. That way people aren't overwhelmed with options. You could even have certain Stratagems be mutually exclusive with each other. Make what Stratagems you bring to the field an actual choice with tradeoffs.

I had a similar thought. something like one stratagem for ever 500 points in your army. If that's too much than maybe something like every stratagem in a once per game use no exceptions.
Honestly this edition is extremely overwhelming once all the layers ar in use. the rules are easy enough but there's just too much extra stuff.


What I want for 10th.

I don't exactly know but I'll know it when I see it.

If I add more I'd just end up complaining about 9th.

 techsoldaten wrote:
Too early for this conversation.

CSM, Daemons, Chaos Knights and possibly World Eaters need to be released before we can understand what the real problems are.

Man, that's doing the Guard dirty...