10th edition wishlisting/"How do we fix this mess?" thread

[Redcomet]

17 hours ago, ThePenitentOne said:

I've said this in another thread somewhere... But one of the things that we should try to keep in mind as we judge this version of the game is that for most of us, our view points are biased by the fact that we've been playing since Jesus was a cowboy.

No new player is starting with a 2k army, and no new player is under the illusion that the have to memorize EVERY rule in EVERY dex before they can play. On the contrary, the vast majority of new players will whip a PL list in 30 seconds and throw down the four units in the starter box in all their grey glory, and that's why they'll have a great time.

Us longbeards that want to drop down the exact same lovingly painted and converted 2k army that we've been using for the past four editions without any need to swap the heavies and specials? Not so much. 

 

You are also not the customer that GW wants. 

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

17 hours ago, ThePenitentOne said:

I've said this in another thread somewhere... But one of the things that we should try to keep in mind as we judge this version of the game is that for most of us, our view points are biased by the fact that we've been playing since Jesus was a cowboy.

No new player is starting with a 2k army, and no new player is under the illusion that the have to memorize EVERY rule in EVERY dex before they can play. On the contrary, the vast majority of new players will whip a PL list in 30 seconds and throw down the four units in the starter box in all their grey glory, and that's why they'll have a great time.

Us longbeards that want to drop down the exact same lovingly painted and converted 2k army that we've been using for the past four editions without any need to swap the heavies and specials? Not so much. 

 

 

I've sold two armies to new players, so some of them are starting with more than 2000 points. I don't know how common it is but at least with my play group we definitely give people some really good deals to get them into the hobby. That said even when it's a really good deal, people still want to use as much of that collection as possible to get a return on their investment. It would definitely be an interesting poll to see how people started their collections and how big their first games were.

 

I haven't tried to teach a new player 9th yet, and really doubt I will (40k is probably my third or fourth favorite TT game at the moment). If I were teaching someone though I would want to start small and ignore stratagems, and that is actually part of my problem with stratagems. The unit specific ones feel like they punish those units, because it's like having half a rule. As an example, if you put the Reivers Terror Troops stratagem onto their data sheet as a constant ability, Reivers would still probably be considered a bad elite choice but at least they would be interesting. At the moment terror troops is a trap for new players because you would expect a 2 CP stratagem to be impactful & important (it's a very underwhelming stratagem on unit that GW seems to hate). Most of those stratagems need to be added to the unit's rules IMO, and if the unit would be too powerful than that rule probably shouldn't exist (or maybe be a once per game ability).   

[Scribe]

On 9/17/2022 at 12:51 PM, Evil Eye said:

I'd argue the big problem is that the company is publicly traded; investors demanding ever-higher growth/profit are probably far more to blame for GW's shortcomings than GW itself.

Absolutely.

[Scribe]

22 hours ago, ThePenitentOne said:

Us longbeards that want to drop down the exact same lovingly painted and converted 2k army that we've been using for the past four editions without any need to swap the heavies and specials? Not so much. 

Is this really the case though? At my 'peak' addiction levels, when the game was its most playable, myself and my group were buying more product then ever. Those Early HH days, 5th, and 6th? If our wives only knew how much was being spent...and we had all been in the game since 2nd or 3rd edition.

The idea that long term players dont want new shiny things to buy, is a strawman. Heck I would say most of us here have quite a few things we would love to be able to justify buying.

We just want our (limited) time to be respected far more than 9th (matched play) really does.

[Slave to Darkness]

23 minutes ago, Scribe said:

IHeck I would say most of us here have quite a few things we would love to be able to justify buying.

 

Ive just screwed myself financially for the next few months buying models... only thing I got from GW is 5 paints lol. At least I know one ebay seller can feed his family this month the amount I gave him. Only problem is I have over 200 minis to build now. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

45 minutes ago, Scribe said:

Is this really the case though? At my 'peak' addiction levels, when the game was its most playable, myself and my group were buying more product then ever. Those Early HH days, 5th, and 6th? If our wives only knew how much was being spent...and we had all been in the game since 2nd or 3rd edition.

The idea that long term players dont want new shiny things to buy, is a strawman. Heck I would say most of us here have quite a few things we would love to be able to justify buying.

We just want our (limited) time to be respected far more than 9th (matched play) really does.

I think the parts about targeting new players more than old players probably is true.

repeat business(in this case long term players) is important for any business to be successful, but it’s also very important to attract new customers to a business if for no other reason to hopefully replace repeat customers that are lost each year, but also ideally to grow that repeat customer base.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

They are aware that repeat buyers do the most business. -_-

[Scribe]

I've always laughed at the idea that kids (even the parents) will buy more than the long term guys. You would need hundreds of new customers to match what some of us used to be putting away.

[Slave to Darkness]

1 hour ago, Scribe said:

I've always laughed at the idea that kids (even the parents) will buy more than the long term guys. You would need hundreds of new customers to match what some of us used to be putting away.

I got laughed at pretty much every time I asked my folks for minis, xmas and birthdays and that was it. 

[Special Officer Doofy]

3 hours ago, Black Blow Fly said:

They are aware that repeat buyers do the most business. -_-

True, the number of people who go "oof my wallet" at every other release is evidence of that. But repeat buyers will only get you so far for so long. Yes the older generation who has been around longer spend more money, but if they don't consistently attract new blood they will decline in the long run. Things in America like Baseball and Harley-Davidson are on the decline because of their inability to get newer younger support years ago and it's showing even more now. In the 1930's baseball was king. There was no real TV or internet or anything to compete with kids attention and interest then. Now there is. Unfortunately companies and or their products have to change to survive in the long run, which can make things worse for the people who liked things the previous way.

In that hot take thread that got locked down, somebody mentioned they thought gate keeping was good for the hobby. That keeps the hobby going strong now and allows people to continue to enjoy it, but doesn't attract any new customers. Eventually people that play now will quit playing for various reasons. Without someone to replace them, there is no future. Compared to Baseball or Harley-Davidson, GW is still very young. But people that were in their 20-30's in the late 80's early 90's that launched this hobby are now in their late 50's and into their 60's. Nobody is going to play forever, and they will eventually stop. And without newer, younger players to replace them, the hobby will slowly die off.

3 hours ago, Scribe said:

I've always laughed at the idea that kids (even the parents) will buy more than the long term guys. You would need hundreds of new customers to match what some of us used to be putting away.

Yeah kids don't spend more than adults when it comes to overpriced plastic miniature wargaming. Like you said, you need lots of new customers to replace some of the whales from the last few decades. That's the scary part. Not attracting new players won't make the hobby/game worse anytime soon. But in 10, 20, maybe 30 years it's definately going to show and hurt if they don't adapt and try now.

[Scribe]

12 minutes ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

Like you said, you need lots of new customers to replace some of the whales from the last few decades. That's the scary part. Not attracting new players won't make the hobby/game worse anytime soon. But in 10, 20, maybe 30 years it's definately going to show and hurt if they don't adapt and try now.

Right, so to swing us back to the thread topic?

Remove the barrier of play that the rules have become, and get back to the beer and pretzels glory age of 5th. 

[Evil Eye]

9 hours ago, Scribe said:

Right, so to swing us back to the thread topic?

Remove the barrier of play that the rules have become, and get back to the beer and pretzels glory age of 3rd

Fixed that for you

(I may be biased as I really like the sheer flexibility/"Your Dudes" potential of 3rd, also my memories of 5th- my first edition mind- were that WAAC types, netlists and codex power disparity became far more pronounced in that edition.)

[Scribe]

2 hours ago, Evil Eye said:

Fixed that for you

(I may be biased as I really like the sheer flexibility/"Your Dudes" potential of 3rd, also my memories of 5th- my first edition mind- were that WAAC types, netlists and codex power disparity became far more pronounced in that edition.)

The meaningful differences between 3rd and 5th, are just points costs in some Codex. At least thats what the dusty hallways in my brain are saying.

The basic principles run through 3rd-5th, and are by far the most accessible versions of the game.

[Karhedron]

2 hours ago, Scribe said:

The meaningful differences between 3rd and 5th, are just points costs in some Codex. At least thats what the dusty hallways in my brain are saying.

The basic principles run through 3rd-5th, and are by far the most accessible versions of the game.

There were some changes to disembarking and charging. 3rd edition was the era of the Rhino rush, 4/5th toned that down considerably. Rapid fire weapons also improved steadily across that time. It used to be that a moving model could only make 1 single shot at 12" range with a bolter in 3rd ed. Broadly speaking though you are right. The core mechanics remained pretty much the some, only the details changed.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Remember 5th edition is notoriously remembered as the parking lot edition with the infamous leaf blower list.

[Scribe]

13 minutes ago, Black Blow Fly said:

Remember 5th edition is notoriously remembered as the parking lot edition with the infamous leaf blower list.

Which was an overblown reaction to tables not having enough terrain and/or LOS blocking terrain. I played against such lists, throw some buildings in their way.

[Slave to Darkness]

2nd edition. Oohhh just think of ALL of those templates!!!! 

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

3 hours ago, Scribe said:

Which was an overblown reaction to tables not having enough terrain and/or LOS blocking terrain. I played against such lists, throw some buildings in their way.

They would just bomb you with artillery and vendettas.

[Lexington]

5 hours ago, Black Blow Fly said:

Remember 5th edition is notoriously remembered as the parking lot edition with the infamous leaf blower list.

5th had sone definite Codex problems later on, yeah, but if I were making a 40K based on existing editions, 5th is where I’d start. Definitely the height of the engine that ran 3rd-7th, sanding down 3rd and 4th’s rough edges without going to the weird granularity and bloat of 6th and 7th. It was quick, simple, and there were a lot of internal self-limiting factors that kept it from going to 9th’s excesses - say what you want about it’s armor save system, fr’ex, but it never required a blanket re-write/patch to half the game’s armies.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Back then you had to wait until the next edition for geedub to address any glaring issues in an existing editions and they had their share… rose tinted glasses.

Edited September 20, 2022 by Black Blow Fly

[Stealth_Hobo]

My wishes for the next edition would be:

Less rules
Less killy
Reworked stratagem system
More Tempest-styled missions instead of what we have now

In my opinion these current missions make the games feel samey and there's too much bookkeeping. For me, they are just not fun. I think the game should encourage to build take-all-comers list as much as possible instead of building your lists to suite certain secondaries.

But first of all, for the next edition, there should be a game design document or some sort of guideline for the rules writers of 40k, so they would be on the level what is acceptable and what is not. 40k is GW's flagship game and yet, the game now feels like a joke, even compared to GW's other games which I think have decent enough rules.

[Special Officer Doofy]

5 hours ago, Stealth_Hobo said:

My wishes for the next edition would be:

Less rules
Less killy
Reworked stratagem system
More Tempest-styled missions instead of what we have now

Those would make for a much better edition!

[Kythnos]

6 hours ago, Black Blow Fly said:

Back then you had to wait until the next edition for geedub to address any glaring issues in an existing editions and they had their share… rose tinted glasses.

Oh, you are completely right about that. There were issues as well and noone will be denying that, surely. Still, I remember my games being more enjoyable in general, quicker and most of the time not having a clear ending after T3. That seems preferable to my gaming experiences these days.

6 hours ago, Black Blow Fly said:

Back then you had to wait until the next edition for geedub to address any glaring issues in an existing editions and they had their share… rose tinted glasses.

Oh, you are completely right about that. There were issues as well and noone will be denying that, surely. Still, I remember my games being more enjoyable in general, quicker and most of the time not having a clear ending after T3. That seems preferable to my gaming experiences these days.

[Slave to Darkness]

They may have took an edition to fix things back then, but that was 'old GW', 'Nu GW' cares about us and gives us updates.

[sarabando]

honestly i think a push for smaller games (points wise) would do the game a world of good. The size of games i see played just dont fit a 28/32mm scale of mini, so the tables are packed and theres very little movement or terrain. Thats just me personally i know if we shrunk down the even 15mm it would just mean games would go from 2k to 6k and it would be the same problem. 

 

but the biggest thing i think would help 40k is a bigger focus on non imperial armies on all fronts.