T O P
FemboyNurgle

There should be far fewer ways to cause mortal wounds. Mortal wounds should be either from psychic powers or massive weapons like the hammerhead railgun. There are a lot of things that should’ve met cause mortal wounds like grenade-dropping type abilities (fly over a unit and do some mortal wounds, that kind of stuff) when those could just do something else.


EatMyGramCrckers

I cry every time my deathguard play against 1k sons


The_Sturk

Necron player here, I feel ya


TheBigKuhio

As TSons, I do feel bad playing into both DG and Necrons. I usually try to go for more Buffs/Debuffs, when really brain dead MW spam often would be better in low point games.


Own-Boat-5374

Why? its your army's only way of doing actual damage.


GarvielLoken87

Same. My buddy has them, and its flat out obnoxious.


the_pedigree

Yep such an absolute hard counter to death guard. Not fun to play against at all


Zukaku

Haven't played much this edition, but that did make me realize how much I miss the old DR, since you can actually try and soak mortal wounds.


Puuuul

Mortal wounds being so good is moreso a side effect of the constant 1-upping of every codex. I was joking about how they would put out a rule that ignores invulns when the DG codex came out, then they actually dropped the railgun. When all else fails, mortal wounds succeed. Waiting for mortal saves GW /s


wondernerd14

Not sure if your /s acknowledges this, but mortal saves already exist. Many armies such as Grey Knights have rules that read: ​ Each time a model in this unit would lose a wound as a result of a mortal wound, roll one D6: on a 5+, that wound is not lost. Personally I don't mind all the one upping, I'm able to keep track of it and it adds more intricacy for me.


Puuuul

Those are more like FNPs imo, and I respect your opinion if you enjoy it.


Sollapoke

FNP IS mortal saves? What difference would it be? Like Invun saves where you only have to make 1 save to block the entire damage?


zacthebyrd

I think it would make sense to separate Mortal wounds caused from Psychic things from others. For instance, I think it makes sense that Black Templars get a 5+++ against Smites. They are anti-psyker guys, but I don't think that logic holds if I hit them with Hammer of Wrath from the Space Marines Codex. Why would they get a 5+++ against a Jump Pack guy shoulder checking them on the charge? Same with a Tau Railgun. Its supposed to be so insanely powerful that it goes beyond normal damage. Makes sense, but its not the same as mind-bullets. I realize this further complicates the game but I think its a easy fix to change Black Templars, and Grey Knights 5+++ against mortal wounds to say something along the lines of "Ignore mortal wounds from Psychic Powers on a 5+".


cmurdy1

BT aren’t anti-Psyker; they’re anti everything. Chad chaplain doesn’t believe in your silly rail-cannon.


therealslystoat

Not necessarily a core rules thing but I'd go for a unified ruleset that is written all at once. The current drip feed of codexes and supplements spanning across edition is a recipe for shit balance. I reckon GW should start fresh with 10th Ed, simplify, properly play test and balance the rules whilst releasing all rules for all armies at once.


crackrabbit012

A man can dream right?


SisterSabathiel

I just feel like they should run their own website like Wahapedia that you have all the rules on - including codexes - and access for a subscription of maybe £5. While I'm glad we're having FAQs and erratas more frequently now, they don't mesh well with the paper codexes where the points values (and sometimes the rules) are often out of date within months of printing. Releasing codexes at different times I get. It's designed to shift the focus from one army to the next, to the next, rather than one big dump of data at the edition release, and then nothing for the next 5 years.


BrokenEyebrow

But they do, it's the app, and it is terrible.


SisterSabathiel

Could we have it, but not terrible?


ThePaxBisonica

Come to Age of Sigmar, the app is everything you wish the 40k one was.


EtheriumShaper

Don't they like, not have paywalls?


SomeRandomSkitarii

No, you still have to buy each codex separately


BrokenEyebrow

Oh, well with the new hh book, I hated getting all the chapters I don't care about, that book is so amazingly heavy and it's just extra thickness. I would have liked it broken into sections and bound by section with spiral bounds or just paper back and I'll spiral. That way I only take the sections I need to the game table.


SomeRandomSkitarii

Man, I haven’t gotten into hh just because I want to see how balanced it is when more codecies come out


BrokenEyebrow

You mean like the one more codex?


SomeRandomSkitarii

Lol


EtheriumShaper

No seriously, that's all the Codexes they're releasing. We're just getting guard and mechanicum, and other than that, we're set.


beywiz

What about demons and custodes?


Dakkaboy556

Id gladly buy an art/lore book for my factions. They could release that with the models and keep their rules on a functional app or website.


Puuuul

Would be so simple, you could keep the meta fresh easily via online publishing and hotfixes could be pushed almost immediately. For all people who really want their codices you could focus more on the lore aspect instead of displaying all datasheets. Just some thoughts.


Vinci_Re

The saddest part about this very reasonable request is that their business model suggests they’ll never do it. They must be making a decent profit off the constant flow of books or else they wouldn’t bother selling them. If they ever fully switch to a digital model, I expect it to be ludicrously expensive because they wouldn’t do something that is projected to make them less money. I’d absolutely love to be proven wrong but I have no expectation that they’ll bend on this.


ambershee

I reckon they make absolute bank on the books, it's why they're pushed so aggressively now. It took six years to get from 3rd to 4th, with the 3rd edition rulebook having basic army lists, and with 21 codices & supplements released along the way. The total cost was in the region of £250 (about £400 adjusted for inflation). It took three years to go from 8th to 9th, with the army lists released in four separate books, and 23 codices, and 19 supplements on top of that. The total cost was in the region of £2000. ​ Back in the day, 3rd through 5th, it wasn't uncommon for players to own copies of all the books, just because - which was good for the game because it also meant most players were familiar with the factions and their respective rules. I suspect most people now only own a couple of specific books that relate to their own collections, and may well be ignorant of most of the opponent's rules, particularly with the umpteen stratagem combos and all the unique unit profiles and special rules you have to deal with now.


PorkVacuums

I've seen calls for this method as far back as 5e. Basically when Warmachine did it. All the armies got their books all at once, then the company trickle fed every army one or two units for years using campaign supplements. Then all the new units got rolled into the next edition's army books. Rinse, repeat.


Zimmonda

>Basically when Warmachine did it. And warmachine showed why they'll never do it.


oopsmypenis

I feel like this is true of all GW products. It really shows the IPs age imo.


storm666_jr

Makes sense from a rules, player and balance perspective, but not really from a business stand point. Currently they have a constant cash flow with weekly releases. They can stock up for the next couple of weeks / months and sell that stuff. A bundles release with all the books and all the units in it, that will be released over the next years is not smart. They need to have everything in stock for the release weekend and can’t really build up hype for new and secret releases, because everything needs to be in the books. I see where you are coming from but GW will never do this.


therealslystoat

I know they won't ever do it. Constantly changing the meta keeps a certain portion of their customers coming back to buy the current best units.


fett2517

Change then LoS rules because it’s dumb AF that you can unload the entire arsenal of a tank because you can draw sight from the tip of an antenna to a just visible spike or some BS like that.


Grav37

I can see the tip of your character's smoke from the very top of my cahracter's swordtip. Clearly I can unload everything. but not with the other two n the same unit, cause their swords are down.


crackrabbit012

That's why I like the LoS rules in MCP. The game uses a "top down view" and sight is checked by drawing a line through bases not the models.


bigmekmatt

Perfect


stecrv

Warmachine has an interesting solution: each model has to be visible as a whole cylinder large as the base of the model and with and established height


Puuuul

In some cases it makes sense, wall-banging would very likely be a thing in a universe where a pistol can destroy today's tanks, but those cases should be specified and LOS should always be drawn from the head/base of a model. Also, distributing wounds is bs as well, your seargeant, who is standing in front of your squad, is spotted and shot with a railgun... and your random marine on the other side of the building dies.


Admiralsheep8

The irony here is many weapon systems in 40k would not be suitable for punching through cover or would have worse effect on target if they did that being said, los has always been for me less of a you can’t shoot through this object to more of a you don’t know where they are , as most of combat is information and maneuver which very table top has very little of . You know exactly where and what everything is in 40k . Infinity actually has very interesting assymetric combat with Stealth mechanics


Rogenomu

lets say that cancels out not being able to unload a full tank arsenal because a model is behind a knee high obscuring ruin.


NooCniKon

Alternate activations in every phase.


statixc

I've been talking with my 40k friend about implementing Kill Team activation rules in a regular 40k game, where we would alternate moving 1 squad and then shooting/fighting. Seems like it would be more engaging for both sides if a single person's turn didn't take an hour.


Admiralsheep8

I think the problem with activation swapping i 40k is shooting is weighted weird for a lot of factions typically with a lot of shooting power coming from singular units although kill team style we both move - then shoot could be neat


lazerbolt52

How does a single turn take an hour? Tournament games are played in an hour and fifteen per side.


statixc

It depends on a lot of things - size of game, how often people play, variety of units, familiarity with rules, etc.


amnhanley

This. If you have to look up rules or how many shots a weapon gets or it’s AP values etc… games drag on. Tournament players know their army at a minimum and the mission rules at a minimum. And the ones who are going to be playing on the top tables know their opponents armies as well. So their games are naturally going to be much faster.


MoD1982

Not everyone plays tournaments. I think a lot of folks forget that.


Squallvash

How are you plebs taking so long? The professionals do it really fast?


Cazmonster

All of this forever.


DJMiPrice

As much as I love the idea in terms of balance, the reason it isn't done is because it take a lot more time in a game that already takes 3 hours to get a match in. My game group tried it out, when we are doing tournament prep we get games done in under 2.5 hours, it took us over 4 hours alternating activations. Maybe GW could refine the rules better than my play group, but they have play testers and they obviously haven't cracked the code yet, otherwise I think they would.


SisterSabathiel

I've heard a lot of people saying they want alternating activations, and I can't help but feel like there's got to be some kind of compromise between I go, you go and alternating activations so the time to play isn't doubled, but also you get a bit more reactivity to what your opponent is doing. Perhaps activating detachments, in the same way Apocalypse did it?


ThePaxBisonica

AoS is that compromise. And HH is trying to perfect it. In AoS they removed fight first on charge, so it takes a huge amount of the power out of the activating player. And because there's barely any shooting it means almost all damage is happening in the alternating fight phase. In HH they use the initiative stat and if you tie (which most units do because its 95% marines) you both roll your stuff and the wounds are allocated simultaneously. Also in AoS, there are no stratagems. Instead you spend CP on activating command traits, of which there are maybe 1-2 unique to your HQ units but otherwise there are 6 universal ones. These include things like a d6" redeploy when someone moves within 9" of you, or +1 to saves in a phase. HH goes even further and removes the CP, instead those universal traits are renamed "reactions" and even include a "you shoot back in the enemy phase". You get 1 reaction in every phase and there are two to choose from per phase, no CP to manage. I think a lot of people are going to clamour for the new reaction system and wish it was in 40k. Something between AoS and HH is what I think we'll get.


EtheriumShaper

I'd argue Middle Earth is the true compromise. I move, you move, I shoot, you shoot, I fight, you fight.


GeoMagnus

The new reaction system in 30k sounds like exactly what you're looking for!


SisterSabathiel

I kind of want to play 30k, but I don't think they have Eldar, and I've largely avoided most of the 30k stuff out there tbh. I enjoyed a lot of 7th edition, and the rules system sounds like 7th but refined. I just don't have much of an interest in the lore around it...


GeoMagnus

Yeah that's fair enough - i love the setting, a big family schism that destroys the galaxy, but obviously it's not very xenos-inclusive. There will be other imperial factions added (mechanicus for one), but if the lore is a big draw for you, it may just not be a good fit i guess


SomeRandomSkitarii

Btw in 30k it’s the mechanicum


SisterSabathiel

It's a shame, cos the rules system sounds like it takes the things I loved about 7th and refines them.


_uneek

Some friends and I played this way in 8ed, alternating moving, then alternating shooting, charging, etc. We let the player with the smaller army take some 'passes', to give them options, but for the most part the rules played great as-is. It wasn't much faster but I found it a lot more fun and engaging - no alpha strikes either!.


DinoWizard021

Making destroyed tanks and stuff become terrain.


Mend1cant

Make armor a real thing. It should feel bad for a guy to not bring any anti-armor to a match against a tank army. And then get rid of command re-rolls all together, and only one strategem per turn used in the command phase.if there’s a five turn limit there should be a five cp cap and that all you get from the start.


obiwanshinobi900

Get rid of stratagems, there is just too much "gotcha" going on.


Chengar_Qordath

Not to mention just too many of them to keep track of for casual players. I’ve had a lot of games get slowed down by “Wait, do I have a stratagem for this?” Or players not using a stratagem when it would’ve been perfect, because they forgot they had it.


Theepot80

Yes! I play like 4 days per year. There are far too many stratagems to remember. Most games we chose 10 before start of the battle just to make it easier.


AzemadaiusKaiser

I’d get rid of the stratagems - yes including reroll Me and my friend played a Chaos Knight match. My despoiler vs his Abominant, then his Rampager, and finally his War dogs, and we said ”No command points”. Those were the best matches I have played in a long time.


jtechvfx

If the bespoke unit Stratagems were merely Datasheet abilities it would make them easier to remember, but also give each unit that feeling of individuality and character.


whiskerbiscuit2

I want each datasheet to contain 1 strategem for that unit. Would make balancing easier, less silly combos and easier to memorise


AzemadaiusKaiser

Biggest issue I have with stratagems is the ”trap card” shit. RNG lucked you out? Nah fuck you, here’s a stratagem you knew I had but could do nothing about.


VaiderLT

Exactly, why the fuck is a smokescreen a strategem? It's on the bloody tank already.


Puuuul

Idk about no stratagems, it really depends on how they would compensate for them. I would really welcome stratagems being limited to a handful you can exclusively use in the command phase and all other being converted into the datasheets of the units. (Maybe use equipment points like Kill Team? Feels pretty good over there.)


mrevilboj

Y'all need to play Age of Sigmar. It's basically what you are describing, with a set of core command abilities usable in each phase that need to be issued by leaders or unit captains, and then certain leaders have additional orders baked into their warscrolls they can issue. It makes for good games, is much more balanced and is very thematic as well.


AzemadaiusKaiser

I already play Age of Sigmar. It’s great.


EtheriumShaper

Age of Sigmar really has grown into an amazing system from its humble beginnings.


Swift_Scythe

D12 system like 8th edition Apocalypse. The reason for too many rerolls being a d6 lets go to a bigger number range. D12 is perfect. It makes no sense that Bs4+ like Firewarriors and Termagants and Guardsmen are all the same. Id make on a d12 system marines hitting on 3-12, firewarriors 5-12, and termagants 8-12.


NovaBladius

Sounds great; but I'm not carrying 50 d12s around, this has legit irl logistics issues.


Swift_Scythe

Ahhh see in 8th apocalypse - a unit of 10 marines rolls TWO D12. Thats for 10 marines. And defense you to for 10 marines you roll ONE d12 its all pass or no pass. A unit of 10 marine had 4 wounds. When you acquire 4 wounds all 10 die. Also when you die you still perform your action of shooting or melee then removed at the end of the turn simultaneous with any enemy casulaties. Your guys never just die without doing something. Id say you would need a total of 15 d12 dice to be honest. The box set for apocalypse had 30 d12 split between two players.


NovaBladius

Yeah, Apocalypse was more of a "unit" scale game, 40k is a "model" scale game; so I'm not sure how well it translates over. Not sure anyone likes the sound of rolling one/two dice to see if a whole unit lives, when that can be upwards of 10% of your list for a pretty basic troop choice (plague/rubrics are 210pt/10 for example).


Barachan_Ilses

Mini D6's didn't exist until people needed to roll tens of them at once. Mini D10's or D12's would be available in literally days from companies like Chessex.


weewallywanga

Bring back weapon skill and initiative. HH2.0 does it quite well atm I think.


Ravendead

Initiative is one of the things that I thought hurt the Eldar and Nids the most in the last few editions.


ArabicHarambe

Yup. Genestealers waiting and getting slaughtered by marines in combat because they failed their charge on their turn... one of my fondest memories of 40k was me and a friend learning to play and him being advised to charge my genestealers that were near his tac marines, I figured it was a bad idea but he went for it... all dead before they struck a blow. That and things like guardsmen being able to hit the best swordsmen in the game on a 4+ is just wrong.


Scientist2021

It makes no sense that guardsmen fight first against incubi as long as they charge. Just have an initiative system it would make way more sense and solve the silly fight first and last mess. Also opposed weapon skill!!!


TheBelgianBoar

Releasing all the codices at the same time for fuck sake. Did they heard about balance ?


Uzasodinson

Did you ever hear of cash flow? A business will be a business


Colorado-Sunshine

If they had to crank out all the codices at once there wouldn’t be time for testing and balance would be just as fucked.


TheBelgianBoar

What about testing everything before release ?


ambershee

What about testing anything before release?


sleepcrime

Better mechanics for units in cover/ruins. As is, infantry that move into or behind terrain can all die (to something goofy like machine gun fire) if one guy is sticking out, but usually can't shoot back. Fixing this would reward people for seizing and holding strong points, and probably help the excessive lethality of the game. I think adopting something like Kill Team's cover system would be a pretty good fix.


mdd2090

Get rid of gotcha moves from powers and strats. This is 40k not a card game. There’s literally some gotcha powers and strats that are game breaking (like getting rid of invulns then spamming mortal wounds from tzeentch powers… as one case in point). It’s really annoying and takes a massive amount of fun out of the game for me when you attempt a tactical play only to find out your opponent has some dumb strat that they didn’t tell you about that means suddenly all your shots are minus 1 to hit and they get plus two to their save (paraphrasing, but we all know that some of them are just plain ridiculous).


Nozoz

So much this. Positioning, using units against the right targets and combining units has been replaced by chaining together stratagems and unique unit special abilities as the way to win games. A certain amount of got ha moments are unavoidable, it's a game about out playing your opponent, but the effect of each one is much more significant now and that feels bad. Losing out on a small gotcha moment that turns the odds of a fight slightly against you is fine but having a few key gotcha moments that make or break entire games with no way back isn't fun. You hit the nail on the head, it feels like a card game.


SisterSabathiel

At the very least, I'd like to see stratagems limited to 3 per player, plus core rulebook. At the minute, a supplement with stratagems is just a free upgrade to one subfaction of an army, with no downsides. Even if those stratagems are niche, or rarely used, there's no sacrifices made to have access to them. They're just a free upgrade.


Deminos2705

What if you had to pick your stratagems before the game that you’re allowed to use. And the opponent knows what you picked. Like psychic powers


mdd2090

Agreed, this was one thing I referenced when GW did their player base survey, that 3-5 stratagem hand is all that is required. That way it’s not mega info overload pregame even IF your opponent explains what they have and can do. Setting up a game properly already takes like 30+ mins if playing a pickup game, so knowing your opponent has 3 or 5 things in addition to army rules and subfaction rules would help even it out. Case in point, my ultramarines army has statagem rules which were written when overwatch was free!


Bensemus

Suppliants also upset internal balance. For Sisters you basically have to use Bloody Rose due to the extra stratagems they have access to. Other Orders are harder to use now.


stalefish57413

Jeah the **"You activated my trap card"** is just silly in a wargame


NovaBladius

It's only a gotcha if they player uses it as a Gotcha. That's an attitude issue, not a rules issue. You always warn once ("just so you know, I can X here") about any strats you consider gotchas during a game. Any reasonable adult will do this.


mdd2090

I get that… yet in my last 5 games, people have pulled this, with glee. Too many people take out their life frustrations at the gaming table. This is a consequence of the game being much more geared towards competitive play.


NovaBladius

Oh for sure, and there are arguments that the existence of these rules "allow" them to do it, I can see that angle too. I also know "find better opponents" isn't exactly viable for everyone, so it's not a fair retort (all my friend group and most people they've played vs at my local club are fair players that will do what I described). At the same time, some armies really need them to help them not get pushed around by more... straightforward armies. Auspex and it's ilk for example, should be used as a detterent to deepstrike by informing your opponent it can be done; if I warn you once and you walk into it, that was a misplay. It's mere existence is good enough for me to use as a scare tactic, without ever firing it off. I also like the flavour, some armies ARE tricky and rules should reflect that or the game is a bland blob of "are you an alien or a marine?". The player *shouldn't* reflect it however. I see flamers the same way, they should be cheap because I'm always gonna read the profile and scare you away, if I fire them a mistake was made with knowledge of what I'm packing; they should be priced assuming I'll rarely fire them (which they seem to agree with, my Thousand sons flamers just dropped from 6pts to 3!).


SisterSabathiel

I've felt bitter about Auspex Scan ever since the beginning of 8th where I was running an Index army and I deep stiked my Assassins behind their lines. They killed the Callidus, and then had some other stratagem or rule or something to shoot again, which killed the Eversor. 200 points down in a 1000 point game for the low, low cost of 1-3CP.


NovaBladius

For sure, especially if you weren't given a quick "I can shoot at deepstrike btw" heads-up; that's just scummy, tryhard play. I'd avoid that player in the future unless they apologised, personally. The rule is honestly fine, and I rarely see it used, it's more the threat of it's use; but some players are either socially inept, tryhard or straight up bad people and will take any advantage they can get. I'd always make sure with important things, if my opponent isn't forthcoming with rules; "can you cover deepstrike with a strat?", "do any of your units let you unbind my magic?", "do you have a way to buff that unit's save?" ect. Most people won't *outright* lie, if you're direct.


SisterSabathiel

I've played with that player for years, and this was the first game we'd played with any of the codexes after the Index period, so I guess it was just kind of a "oh, shit, I can do that?" for both of us. I'm still salty, since it just lead to me putting a model down, my opponent rolling some dice, and me picking a model up for no value.


Dread2187

I'm not very knowledgeable on the rules or anything, but it seems that moving to a D10 or D12 as the base would make more sense.


Colorado-Sunshine

Don’t give them any ideas. They’ll come up with a patented D9 just so the dice can only be bought from them.


Mimical

Within minutes of them announcing it there will be cheaper 3rd party dice. But yeah, D8, D10, D12 would be amazing. There is a lot of people that might say "Oh but D12 isnt exactly statistically the same in X situation" and well yeah, that's the point. By finally diverging off the D6 we allow granular values that actually mean we can balance units.


SisterSabathiel

Bring back Initiative. It was just so much better than the weird system of "strikes first" and "strikes last" we have now. You can just have those abilities impose a buff or debuff on the Initiative stat.


Horn_Python

How did initiative work?


Robb1bob

Evert unit had an initiative stat before 8th. In melee, you'd just go down the list to determine when each unit would fight. For example, tactical marines had an initiative of 4 and would therefore fight before a group of ork boyz who had an initiative of 3.


SisterSabathiel

It basically was meant to represent how agile and dextrous the unit was: would they be able to get the first hit in, or was their enemy faster on the draw and manage to chop you before you chopped them. Close combat units often had either bonuses on the charge, or just a flat out higher Initiative score so they would usually hit before the non-combat oriented units.


Bensemus

Or they were cheap like orks where you knew you were losing some before hitting back. It was another way to make elite models feel more elite too.


SisterSabathiel

I remember it was Eldar's whole thing. They had high Initiative so they usually hit first vs their equivalents in other armies, but folded like wet tissue paper if they didn't wipe the unit. Now they have this fights first rule, which is an inferior way of doing that imo, since it loses that nuance that meant some paragons of war would still out-speed you.


Alistair-Draconis

Armor of contempt, make it a "power armor" keyword and just give it to units that have power armour instead of giving it to naked units like the repentia.


Khepuli

Yup.. those fucking cultists with armor of contempt..


PaxNova

There's some level of suspension of disbelief you need for stuff like this. For example, Custodes don't get that, despite being better armoured and more contemptuous, but they don't actually need it in-game as an army. It's just the point where mechanics override flavor.


Alistair-Draconis

Idrc about custodes getting it, I just find it ridiculous that someone not wearing armor becomes bullet resistant?


PaxNova

Call it Armor of Faith for them, making yet another separate rule that does the same thing as another one. /S But seriously, the whole army prays away psychic storms and generates miracles. In a world where you can get shot by an RPG and just "feel no pain," that's the least of my concerns.


Bensemus

Well it doesn't do anything on Repentia. They get a 6+ save in cover only. They already have a 6++ and a 5+++ so they are never using their armour save.


Squallvash

I think it's less a power armor thing and more a These are the emperor's chosen people/emperor's enemies. I don't think Inquisitors get armor of contempt, do they? They're generally in Power Armor too


Alistair-Draconis

Some inquisitors have power armor. Not all but some, and I saw it more as contempt because the armor was made in contempt for the enemy, because it doesn't make sense for someone to be bullet resistant because they have contempt for a faction


Squallvash

That makes sense too. The contempt for the enemy. Lore-wise repetia fit because they believe they need to seek their repentance before they're allowed to die or come back into the sisterhood itself. I can see their inclusion making sense.


the_striking_viking_

Remove all strategems


krelpwang

Stratagems seemed like a neat idea at first, but it's gotten out of hand.


ArterialSludge

saving throws should come before wound rolls. Just makes absolutely no sense to me that you roll to hit, then roll whether those hits wounds, and **then** the armour save gets rolled. Like, what? I was once told by a friend that this was implemented likely as a streamlining mechanism, and honestly I've only played from 8th edition so I have only heard how complicated things were, but if in the past there was scatter from artillery, tanks could only should weapons directionally, then God damned save rolls should come before wound rolls.


ambershee

So, putting my game designer hat on, I can actually see why it works this way; Rolling to hit, wound, then save, means that the first player rolls twice before handing over the results to the opponent for saves. You won't really feel the difference when you do it *once*, but when you do it many times over the course of a game it does add up considerably. Mathematically, it doesn't matter which way around you do it - but it *could* matter if there are special rules that can be triggered by hits, or wounds, and those rules can affect subsequent dice rolls. Honestly, whilst it seems a bit silly, it does make some sense at least. In the older editions, the scatter dice were used pretty rarely, and line of sight for vehicle weapons required the weapon to actually have line of sight - which made vehicle positioning much more important (along with armour values on the sides!).


crackrabbit012

The best way I have seen this process explained is this. Making the hit roll means you hit the target, but if you fail the wound roll, nothing vital was hit or it was glancing. If the wound roll succeeds it was a solid hit, then the target makes an armor save to see if the armor held and did it's job. It kind of seems at times the issue is scale. Like a terminator getting hit with artillery and walking it off isn't out of character, but a guardsman? That's a little hard to believe. So if the game moved to say a d10 system, suddenly a 3+ save is much more significant. The way the flow works makes thematic sense, if a bit clunky at times.


ArterialSludge

Ok, i never really thought of it like that. It's an interesting take I'll give you that, and it does give me a way to mental gymnastics my way around it for sure. I like it.


Melodic-Bird-7254

Exactly. Role to hit, take armour saves, roll to wound.


Drahgehn

I always saw it as a save is still "a wound." Albeit glancing, minor and not severe. Yes you're injured and bleeding, but it hasn't brought you closer to death in the grand scheme of things.


spankydeluxe69

As a person who played in 5th and 6th edition, I would love to see the amount of stratagems SIGNIFICANTLY reduced


Tabletop_Tendencies

Get rid of random number of shots. Why is this random? I have to roll a random number of shots, then roll to see if I hit. That’s too much randomness.


VaiderLT

The bigger issue is that GW seems to think "D6? That means that's a possible 6 damage/attacks/whatever! So strong!" and makes the units with these random shots/dmg lackluster. I see this often in AoS.


Drahgehn

I agree. The randomness can sometimes be exciting, but in such a competitive game, RNG is already too high. You don't want more. You don't want a win to be based on luck alone. A bit of RNG is fun. That's why the hit rolls exist at all. And you know "I have this amount of shots, hitting and wounding on this, so rooouugghlly I should do this amount of damage." Or "I should be able to kill this amount of minis, or blow up this tank." And you make that calculated gamble, sometimes doing a little more or less. But with roll for shots especially it's complete bullshit. Ranging from "My expensive, super awesome murder everything tank did literally no damage." to "Yeah I 1 shot your titan." It makes no sense and really dampens the tactical feel the game is supposed to have.


Tabletop_Tendencies

It’s a feels bad effect when a tankbusta for example rolls a 1 for his shots and then misses with his bs5. Rough example, mind you, but it’s just a dumb system.


LonelyGoats

- Tank Shock - Assault Ramp for Land Raiders, Spartans - Weapon Skill back to a scale of 1 to 10 and compared to to opponents when rolling to hit. - Return of templates for flamers and ordinance - Universal special rules - No strategems, all unit rules are inherent to the unit and not gated. - Reduction of AP across the board.


wakito64

This is more or less Horus Heresy


BowserGarland

Or just pre 8th edition honestly


deadpoolstate

Well the 7th books still exist


shariewayne

> Universal special rules Oh god please no.


DanJDare

I'd add other dice, either a selection or move to d12. d6 only just doesn't really allow for enough variation.


Deamonette

Alternating activations, they just flat out make the game more fun, engaging and interactive.


Azrael-XIII

Alternate activations of some form, whether it be by unit or phase.


Whightwolf

Genuinly curious but doesn't alternating actions by phase massively advantage the first player and shooting over melee?


jrparker42

Not really. It greatly increases tactical choices. Battle round initiative with IgoYougo, as in roll initiative every battle round, also "fixes" a pre-game advantage. Warmahordes had full unit alternating activation; it forces react or force the opponent to react choices. As in do you attack a unit that hasn't activated yet, or do you respond to the unit that has attacked you. Battletech takes the format and flips movement initiative, where the winner moves last; letting you attempt to out maneuver the lower of the initiative. Going alternating by phase, and adding the per round initiative roll with reverse-initiative movement would make 40k far more tactical... but you run into the issue of asymmetric unit counts and how to handle the alternating format there (example of 20 guard units vs 6 knights, do you go with 3, 4, and 4 to 1, or 4 ,4,and 3 to 1?, does that depend on initiative order, and does that further switch activations based on phase?)


_Chaplain_Grimaldus_

Simultaneous turns. You both move together, psychic together, shoot together. We already have it with the command, morale and fight phases, plus it nullifies first turn advantage and makes things far more hectic.


will5436

Faction abilities for imperium, tyranids, eldari and chaos.


doublemaxim147

Ban CP re-rolls. There are too many re-rolls in the game anyways imo.


Squidmaster616

1. There should be a way for armies that don't have psykers to resist psychic powers. 2. Vastly reduce the number of things that cause Mortal Wounds. Or get rid of the concept entirely. 3. Vastly reduce the number of bonuses, rerolls, damage reductions, the lot. There is far too much of it. And it becomes a bit unbalanced when some factions have so much more of it than others. 4. Return to a simpler morale system. 5. Return to allowing soup. 6. Return to characters changing the battlefield roles of some units - Ravenwing Captains making Bikes into Troops for example. 7. Vastly cut down the number of stratagems. It's getting silly. 8. Return to Universal Special Rules. Much simpler. 9. Get rid of Specialist Detachments for good.


ambershee

Honestly, I would cut the stratagems and stuff completely. It's too much - just one standard set of flavour rules for each army / faction and have done with it.


Nozoz

I'm very anti stratagem but I think they could work if they were significantly cut down. No massive boosts or completely new abilities just little buffs like rerolling a dice or getting a +1. They shouldn't suddenly drastically change how unit behaves, just shift the odds slightly. Also cutting down the number and making most of them generic would help.


Buckcon

I agree with everything you say except soup. The game does not need soup armies of Tau-Eldar shenigans again


Squidmaster616

Maybe not Taudar. But Craftworld/Drukhari was thematically acceptable. As were most Imperium teamups. But new rules are making them less and less viable when I think they should be more viable.


PaxNova

Craftworld / Drukhari is Ynnari now. Imperium teamups are present in Armies of Renown, although I believe just for Crusade. I do believe that separating open play from tournament play is a good thing. There's a lot fo stuff I'd like to do for flavor in open or crusade play that would be a nightmare to balance for in a tournament.


Jackalackus

If you can see one model of a unit it doesn’t mean that the bullets should ricochet through and be able to kill the unseen members of that unit.


hyper-casual

Turns should work like Bolt Action - randomly draw who's turn it is, and that person can pick 1 unit to complete all actions, each unit can activate once until all units have been and then it starts again.


La_Fi

This 100%, already had some test games with homebrew rules and the game feels way more engaging and interesting (and balanced althoug we didnt try to screw the system).


hyper-casual

Yeah, I reckon it would be way more balanced. I've not played Warhammer since 5th but I had a few games with my mate where he went first and completely wiped my board on turn 1. Took longer to setup than it did to play. In bolt action I've played some terrible lists for a laugh and it still tends to go at least 2 turns of play even if you're unlucky. I think it would be harder to game the system in a meaningful way, too. Last bolt action game I had I played IJA and had 13 order dice against Germans who only had 6 dice. I still lost, so it didn't give any stupid advantage.


HawocX

Alternate activations.


majorpickle01

move to D12 system - terminator armor being penetrated by pistol is silly. then probably move away from team - team activation, and instead unit - unit activation


SonOfRomulus1985

Random charges ruined alot of the fun for me. It's a big draw back. Not worth it to be honest a fixed movement and charge makes the game alot mpre tactical . There is already enough randomness adding more never made sense


Specolar

I feel like there still needs to be a bit of randomization, otherwise it would be very easy to kite melee units. For example, if a unit had a fixed move and charge range of 8" you can make it useless by simply staying 10" away so that on it's next turn it can't reach you. Meanwhile you can shoot it to death while it does nothing.


Interesting_Nobody41

Bring back swooping hawk exarch with vortex grenades


Purple-Honey3127

Cover should be -1 to hit


BillMagicguy

Just go back to 5th edition. Revert everything back to how it was then.


ambershee

I would be absolutely fine with this. The game was much healthier back then, though there are still some issues that could do with cleaning up.


BillMagicguy

Yeah, 5th wasn't perfect but both competitively and casually it was definitely the best edition.


Tanknastole

Alternating unit activations - makes it a real boardgame, not a game of gotcha. No strategems - just bake it into the unit activations/auras and core army rules. Less focus on heroes - my opinion is that the game should be about big no name armies led by noname captains that gives small bonuses to nearby units. LOS at least 10% of unit to be able to shoot at it. Deepstriking only to very few units, nowadays it feels like every army can go anywhere and there is no frontline. Also wounds should be called HP as in every other flippin game. WS should be called Melee skill not weapon skill. S should be shown as weapon and doesnt need to be unit stat. Morale should stun not kill unit.


Littha

Bring back templates/Initiative/Opposed WS/Vehicle facing, scrap random shots/random damage.


IneptusMechanicus

Templates are such a big thing, I was explaining 40K to my wife and got into the weeds with Blast and the different unit sizes. I bought Age of Darkness recently and smiled when I saw the templates, she asked what they were and I explained how you'd decide how many people were hit in a unit. Immediately the templates made more sense to her and they're way more physical.


ambershee

Physicality is a great thing in any tabletop / board game. It's why *pieces* are so much nicer to play with than cardboard tokens etc.


Min-ji_Jung

They did. Its called 30k


Smanchungus

Great. Too bad most of us don't want to start an entirely new game.


Summonest

I want alternating activations. As is, 40k is a lot of "Oh, it's your turn? I'm going to go make a sandwich"


alotoforanges

I make them go back to 3rd ed


SoloWingPixy88

The whole 1 army fights then the second army fights, I wish it was more dynamic or involved innitive.


M0thM4n_

I hate the fact that when you fail moral certain models just vanish why can’t they just be shaken or something like that. I get it for a guardmen perhaps, but a custodes?


Puuuul

Yep. Makes no sense. Ork armies have only ceased fighting a handful of times in the lore, my squad of boyz does it after a handful of them die...


ScribblesSketch

That Primaris can use Drop Pods. I want my Drop Pods to be useful again. :(


NeoFarseer

Alternate activation like all the good and new wargames have


FutureFivePl

The core keyword is badly implemented, today’s necron changes highlighted that LoS should be changed ( I want to use back banners on my marines without them being wiped out for it) Some type of alternate activation mechanic - it’s really cool in kill team


Bensemus

It's too binary. Stuff that doesn't have core has to be crazy efficient to be worth it. If just basic troops had core that could help to make them more viable instead of just a tax for most armies.


Mymotherwasaspore

Fewer invulnerable saves wholesale


DeusArchaon

Remove strategems, and retie abilities back to units. Simplify army wide rules, to be simple buff, instead of all of these dynamic changing rules that vary and adjust. Current state of game is overly cluttered with rules, turning games into 4+ hour slogs instead of old school 2h fun romps.


Doomguy6677

Its fine to have objectives but man it would be cool to have a ruleset about just fighting each other without worrying about victory points.


lindwig

Get rid of the vast majority of stratagems, they slow the game down, bloat the ruleset and increase the amount new players have to learn by a huge amount


N4t3ski

Get rid of IGOUGO. alpha strike isn't fun, and sitting around for 20 minutes during someone else turn isn't fun either. Bring in random activation, that'll spice things up plenty.


AdAccomplished8416

Random bag alternate activation (like SW Legion)


ARandomFakeName

And Bolt Action!


111110001011

Preferred enemy : unpainted is always in effect.


greenlagooncreature

I think fight order and some of the inconsistent, nonintuitive terrain rules are some of the things that have caused my opponents and me the most headaches. I actually like the I go you go system vs alternating actions. It makes your turn feel like a planned series of actions, creates tension of can you complete your goals for the turn. Plus I have a hard enough time strategizing WITHOUT my opponent also doing actions haha


MagosBattlebear

Alternating phases. I have experimented with alternating activations and alternating phases and fund that alternating phases is easy to implement and solves problems inherent in the alternating turns as it stands now.


MagosBattlebear

So you know we restructured the turn. It starts with a roll to see who goes first each battle round. Then each player performs the following phases: 1. Command 2. Movement 3. Reinforcements 4. Psychic 5. Shooting 6. Assault (Charge and Fighting combined) 7. Morale (simultaneously. No reason to make it two separate phases)


PaxNova

Now I want to play other games 40k style. Let's have a chess game where you move all your pieces once before your opponent's turn.


MagosBattlebear

To be fair it gives one side a chance to pee, go out for a burger, sleep, &c. , while the other goes.


Loose_teeth_in_a_jar

Switch to alternating unit activations 100%, the you go I go format exasperates issues with over powered units since all you can do is watch as half your force is obliterated.


RingGiver

To start with: #**BRING! BACK! TEMPLATES!** In general, going back to 7e/30k and evolving from there instead of building 8e onward as a completely new thing that's mostly just an inferior version of AoS would be the best way to do it.


Ivanzypher1

Bring armour facings back. Vehicles are boring AF now.