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

[Verbal Underbelly]

It seems mental to me that they'd release a new edition of 40k next summer. World Eaters etc. are going to have very little time in 9th - that would suggest it won't be a hard reset and that the current books will remain valid into a new edition. Which would suggest that the complexity will remain. Somebody above made a good point about how the codexes are laid out. 

For my part I think I've become less invested in the game and rules or rather, less bothered that they change. I've enjoyed every edition of 40k that I've ever played (4th to 9th). Yes it changes a lot, but at its heart is friends gathered around a table with (hopefully) painted models and rolling dice. That fundamental thing never alters.

[Redcomet]

13 minutes ago, Emperor Ming said:

Because, without a full index reset, the crazy codexs will remain until they get a new one, which could be years and will be, in some cases

However, I can't see an index style reset happening now with guard/squats/WE being so close to 10th. If it's still rumoured to be around summer

That wouldn’t phase GW management much. 

[Orange Knight]

10 minutes ago, Verbal Underbelly said:

It seems mental to me that they'd release a new edition of 40k next summer. World Eaters etc. are going to have very little time in 9th - that would suggest it won't be a hard reset and that the current books will remain valid into a new edition. Which would suggest that the complexity will remain. Somebody above made a good point about how the codexes are laid out. 

For my part I think I've become less invested in the game and rules or rather, less bothered that they change. I've enjoyed every edition of 40k that I've ever played (4th to 9th). Yes it changes a lot, but at its heart is friends gathered around a table with (hopefully) painted models and rolling dice. That fundamental thing never alters.

 

Don't assume anything when it comes to GW.

They could definitely soften things up with free Index books that can be downloaded, however.

Remember this is the same company that created formations in 7th, got people to buy 15 Rhinos/Razorback because they didn't cost any points, and then shortly after released a new edition and a new range of Astartes that can't ride in them!

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

3 hours ago, Karhedron said:

As long as the discussion remains civil, I see no need to lock anything. Granted we are not likely to reach a consensus on anything but people are coming up with fresh ideas and thoughts. Not every thread needs to reach a cut-and-dried conclusion, there is room for people to just "chew the cud".

Fair enough. I know some people feel frustrated for various reasons.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

5 hours ago, Redcomet said:

10th won’t be any more balanced than 9th. The first codex will be Space Marines, and that will be underbaked and conservative compared to codexes out later in the cycle, and some codexes will be utterly broken. It is just how they work.

But I hope 10th will be less than 9th. 40k tends to seesaw between overly complex and simple. 3rd was a reboot to make 40k run smoother and since then they have bolted ok more and more to it. 9th just feels like they threw every idea they had at it, and went “that will do”.

I hope they pare the game down to a more simple system again. 

I also wish for a better codex design. Too many pages are spent on datasheets that are almost identical, and crusade has gobbled up too many pages from fluff and hobby content. AoS battletomes are far superior.

Personally i would be very happy if all relics/strats/etc all special rules were all in one section and not spread out throughout the codex.

and if they can’t fit all of that into 3-4 pages, it’s too much imho.

 

id prefer if it went in this order.

special rules, datasheets, lore, all the pretty pictures.

[Lexington]

One thing I’ve been thinking about sometimes is Actions. They were introduced sort of awkwardly into 9th, since they didn’t conform to the existing 8th Ed game structure, but I think there’s a potential for them to be expanded to the entire general GW/40K system. Every phase, a unit gets an Action, and there are several standard Actions that most anyone can take. So, in the Movement phase, you can take the Move Action or a Charge Action, but maybe you could Take Cover (for a bonus Invul save), or claim an objective. I think it’d open the system up to a lot of flexibility. Individual factions or even units and missions could have custom Actions, and it’d give a bit more structure to the fairly loose way in which the 40K turn structure has always operated. Thoughts?

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Probably the basic things to focus on are less stratagems and simpler rules overall. I know a lot of people love Crusade so I hope geedub doesn’t nuke it.

[Lexington]

2 hours ago, BLACK BLΠFLY said:

Probably the basic things to focus on are less stratagems and simpler rules overall. I know a lot of people love Crusade so I hope geedub doesn’t nuke it.

I do kind of wonder if Stratagems are going to make the cut in a theoretical full rules reset. They've never been translated directly to AOS, from what I know, which suggests that they're not seen as a phenomenally successful mechanic by the Studio folks. Instead they have some sort of Hero powers, which fits with the 'Herohammer' rumor for 10th Ed from further upthread, so it could be that they bring the same thing over to 40K. Sad to say it, but I'd bet their fate ultimately rests on how much of a cash cow those card decks are, rather than any game experience/balance considerations...

[Special Officer Doofy]

1 minute ago, Lexington said:

I do kind of wonder if Stratagems are going to make the cut in a theoretical full rules reset. They've never been translated directly to AOS, from what I know, which suggests that they're not seen as a phenomenally successful mechanic by the Studio folks. Instead they have some sort of Hero powers, which fits with the 'Herohammer' rumor for 10th Ed from further upthread, so it could be that they bring the same thing over to 40K. Sad to say it, but I'd bet their fate ultimately rests on how much of a cash cow those card decks are, rather than any game experience/balance considerations...

If they get rid of strategems I would be a happy camper. That's one less thing they can do a terrible job of balancing between codexes. 

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

AoS has CPs and the equivalent of strat support albeit not so many like 40K. Eighth edition has many of the same mechanics as AoS… it’s kind of like the 40K components were bolted on.

[MegaVolt87]

The constant updates to the rules are a non issue if you use the app which updates. I prefer the pro active approach with 40k. My problem is, these new bools like LoV and WE coming that will be lucky to have one year of relevance before 10th ed drops. While releasing all codexes at the start of an edition is ideal, the most recent codexes should be released first, then the first ones last while staying disciplined enough not to power creep above them. I consider the 2.0 SM dex of 8th the best SM dex of 8th and 9th ed. 

[phandaal]

40 minutes ago, BLACK BLΠFLY said:

AoS has CPs and the equivalent of strat support albeit not so many like 40K. Eighth edition has many of the same mechanics as AoS… it’s kind of like the 40K components were bolted on.

Whenever I have seen people playing AoS at the FLGS it is "ok this does this many mortal wounds, now this does this many mortal wounds, and now this one does this many mortal wounds."

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

So what’s the difference ? 

[Evil Eye]

50 minutes ago, MegaVolt87 said:

The constant updates to the rules are a non issue if you use the app which updates. I prefer the pro active approach with 40k. My problem is, these new bools like LoV and WE coming that will be lucky to have one year of relevance before 10th ed drops. While releasing all codexes at the start of an edition is ideal, the most recent codexes should be released first, then the first ones last while staying disciplined enough not to power creep above them. I consider the 2.0 SM dex of 8th the best SM dex of 8th and 9th ed. 

Eh, as someone who prefers not to be at the mercy of a buggy phone app (on a rather weak budget phone no less) and likes physical books I feel like "Just use the app!" is a weak crutch to excuse GW's inability to get the rules right to begin with.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Actually the app is great for rules. It’s broken down by things like data sheets, stratagems and relics so it’s much easier and a lot quicker than flicking back and forth through a book. The army builder has greatly improved and there’s also an actual change log.

[Lexington]

36 minutes ago, Evil Eye said:

Eh, as someone who prefers not to be at the mercy of a buggy phone app (on a rather weak budget phone no less) and likes physical books I feel like "Just use the app!" is a weak crutch to excuse GW's inability to get the rules right to begin with.

Apps can be very, very useful. The Infinity community more or less runs on a combination of the Comlog and Army apps. The problem with the 40K App is twofold:

1. 9th's army building process is too damned complex to be usefully app-ified, and
2. The app, as it stands right now, is just dismal from both a user experience and code standpoint - it tries to do too much with very poor information organization, and it's clearly developed from some unrealistic ideas/expectations

There was talk from the GW folks at Adepticon about how they both realize the app is currently insufficient, and that there was a major update coming "soon." Don't think we've seen the update, so maybe it's been delayed until 10th. Who knows, but one hopes.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

21 minutes ago, BLACK BLΠFLY said:

Actually the app is great for rules. It’s broken down by things like data sheets, stratagems and relics so it’s much easier and a lot quicker than flicking back and forth through a book. The army builder has greatly improved and there’s also an actual change log.

Still can’t login, so it’s a pretty poor excuse for GW not being able to get their rules right.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

The army builder has really improved - it still has a ways to go but they are definitely investing some resources.

[MegaVolt87]

3 hours ago, Evil Eye said:

Eh, as someone who prefers not to be at the mercy of a buggy phone app (on a rather weak budget phone no less) and likes physical books I feel like "Just use the app!" is a weak crutch to excuse GW's inability to get the rules right to begin with.

It's been over 20 years now GW has been like this with inconsistent rules writing. It would have been corrected by now otherwise. The more frequent updates delivered by an app is exactly the band aid fix needed for this. There is no value for most people with the dead tree model- recycled art, lore and bad editing. The digital code with a 40k codex is the best thing about a codex these days. I don't see any incentives for GW to do better when they can just fix things via an app. It's actually better this way for us to use the app instead. Make the dead trees so pointless to migrate people over to digital rules seems to be the endgame. 

The 2.0 HH books have been a disaster, they really needed an app integration ready to go for portability, FAQ's, easy reference searching etc. How are you expecting to sell the game to younger people when they are into things like the environment with a expensive dead tree that is basically unusable at release and needs a day one FAQ? Even older 40k codexes needed day one FAQ's, but we waited months/years instead. HH 2.0 meaningful FAQ's is carrying this tradition on now though for timeframe.... 

Is it really a wonder why so many people pirate GW rules these days or use the app instead? Even back in the day, 40k groups pooled membership fees to buy 40k rules + codexes and people would borrow them like a library/ photocopy them. 

 

[Ahzek451]

Unless I'm missing something, the app still doesn't cover all the rules in a codex even after unlocking the code. Which is frustrating. For example, nowhere in the app will it tell me which three warlord traits magnus has when looking at warlord traits or his datasheet. Things like this. Unless it's their and I'm just not seeing it. 

[Noserenda]

The App should be a good way of keeping things up to date, unfortunately its flaws kinda outweigh that convenience so its third parties like battlescribe or waha that fill in that hole instead for us. Id rather have the updates than a strictly accurate book though, its damn near impossible to get something as broad as a full codex well balanced and avoid all misprints or typos, and as things get increasingly complex that becomes increasingly true.

So yeah, a better app, or even better, a properly online version like waha would be nice.

[Evil Eye]

10 hours ago, MegaVolt87 said:

It's been over 20 years now GW has been like this with inconsistent rules writing. It would have been corrected by now otherwise. The more frequent updates delivered by an app is exactly the band aid fix needed for this. There is no value for most people with the dead tree model- recycled art, lore and bad editing. The digital code with a 40k codex is the best thing about a codex these days. I don't see any incentives for GW to do better when they can just fix things via an app. It's actually better this way for us to use the app instead. Make the dead trees so pointless to migrate people over to digital rules seems to be the endgame. 

The 2.0 HH books have been a disaster, they really needed an app integration ready to go for portability, FAQ's, easy reference searching etc. How are you expecting to sell the game to younger people when they are into things like the environment with a expensive dead tree that is basically unusable at release and needs a day one FAQ? Even older 40k codexes needed day one FAQ's, but we waited months/years instead. HH 2.0 meaningful FAQ's is carrying this tradition on now though for timeframe.... 

Is it really a wonder why so many people pirate GW rules these days or use the app instead? Even back in the day, 40k groups pooled membership fees to buy 40k rules + codexes and people would borrow them like a library/ photocopy them. 

 

I mean myself, I've always maintained that if a game isn't worth buying a physical book for, it's not worth playing. There's independent games made by people without the resources to get the rules in book form I'd happily buy book versions of (Turnip28 springs to mind). I can't say the same for modern 40K, and honestly, even making the rules free would smack more of GW having no confidence in their own rules than an actual solution.

As for "frequent updates" I genuinely, legitimately do not want them. I've said it before and I'll say it again- I would honestly rather GW spent more time on their rules, and released rules were final. Outside of a single page of FAQs and errata for clarifications and fixing genuine mistakes, no revisions or changes to book content. Under the current model, any type of long-term planning is impossible because by the time you've got an army together and painted it's already illegal thanks to a new rule or points change they've introduced as a sticking plaster. I don't care if the game isn't perfectly balanced, 'cause it sure isn't balanced right now either. But being imbalanced but stable and long-term planning being possible is better than being imbalanced and volatile with your army being invalidated by the time you've finished painting it.

Furthermore, I actively dislike the move to all-digital rules, especially via apps that can be discontinued and have content lost forever (just look at what happened with Final Space!). A book does not need electricity or an internet connection and cannot be removed from my possession by GW after the fact. Digital rules in order to be portable either need to be printed off (defeating the "dead tree" argument) or used via a smart device; and speaking as someone who only reluctantly uses a budget smartphone and has no desire to buy a tablet, that's not a good solution and reminds me of Blizzard with Diablo Immortal- "Don't you guys have phones?".

Regarding "how are you expecting to sell the game to younger people" here's the thing; GW's need for constant growth and attracting more and more players is at the root of most of the system's problems. Because they deduced it was more profitable to grab new players and get them to spend a lot regardless of how long they end up staying in the hobby than appealing to their core audience who have stuck with them for years, we've seen the shift to the "tabletop videogame" model, complete with pandering to metachasers, absurd powercreep and the many, many, many other problems the game has developed. Not only has the desire to attract ever larger numbers of players had a negative effect on the game, it's also completely unsustainable; GW will run out of new players before the next generation can be brought in, and that will hit them hard.

I've been in this game since 2009 as a 13 year old. I used to be one of the new players GW was seeking, and the game no longer represents what I or many others got into this hobby for. The thing is, I'm not willing to just bow out and go "Well I guess this hobby isn't for me anymore". Why shouldn't it be, after all? We were here first, we put GW where they are now. And being cast aside in favour of a hip and young audience that GW doesn't even care about maintaining as long as they dump a load of money on them first is pretty crap. Sure, it's profitable in the short term (see above) but it's not exactly good practice.

Like, GW is less relevant to Warhammer now more than ever. Most of the old guard, the people who made Warhammer great to begin with, have left. There are loads of miniature paint ranges on the market. Fan rules or conversions of other systems (available via PDF, and thus not reliant on apps) are plentiful. Even the miniatures are no longer something we have to rely on GW for with the rise of 3D printing. Between everything I've mentioned AND the secondary market, it's entirely possible to enjoy 40K without giving GW a single penny. GW needs to try harder now to get my money- and they aren't doing a great job of it. I still buy models and paints from GW because they still do a decent job with those, but with the way the rules are going, if 10th isn't a massive step in the right direction, away from the tabletop videogame model with its constant patches and inability to remain stable, I'll probably give up on GW rules for good- which also gives me far less incentive to buy anything else from them.

Oh, and one final note-

11 hours ago, MegaVolt87 said:

It would have been corrected by now otherwise.

If GW have proven themselves unable to write decent rules and are only able to make a system that's even playable with patch after patch, why are we giving them money for their terrible product?

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

A lot of the rule changes are not due to mistakes but rather trying to better balance the game and I do not fault them for that.

[Evil Eye]

And I get that, but given that A: they usually don't even do much to balance the game anyway and B: they end up invalidating the contents of the books, often after a few weeks, I wouldn't shed a tear if they abandoned that model entirely.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Altering content is not necessarily invalidating it though.