What should 11th look like?

[Redcomet]

14 hours ago, DuskRaider said:

 Bring back AV, facing, TLoS and templates as well and stop writing rules like we’re 7 years old. 
 

Then again, the 40K-For-Dummies rules have crept a bit into HHv2.0 so I doubt it’ll ever happen. 

Very rude to call people who like current 40k children or stupid 

[DuskRaider]

2 hours ago, Redcomet said:

Very rude to call people who like current 40k children or stupid 

I’m not calling anyone a child or stupid, I’m saying GW dumbed the rules down dramatically from the days of 4th / 5th. To make things worse, they then dropped points on literally everything, causing you to buy more models to be able to play a game. 
 

It’s all about making money. Make the rules easier to bring in a larger audience and then get them to buy double the kits they would have needed previously at a now higher price. 
 

The problem is, the quality of the game went down IMO. For players who liked the old system, we still had 30K for a little while until GW Main took over and has begun to inject post-8th rules into that now as well. 

[DemonGSides]

3 hours ago, Redcomet said:

Very rude to call people who like current 40k children or stupid 

 

It's about the norm around here.

 

For all the moderations calls that we try to treat each other fairly, there's definitely some people who cannot let go that some people are having fun currently.

[DuskRaider]

I seriously can’t tell if you folks are misconstruing what I said or you’re so dead set on defending the post-8th rules… very strange either way. 

[SkimaskMohawk]

9 hours ago, HeadlessCross said:

And what does "they don't like having restrictions on which toys they can bring and needing to turn them around properly before making pew pew noises" have to do with AV and templates/blast markers?

 

I can go and and see a post on this very thread that is both anti AV and anti list building restriction lol.

 

Its pretty simple. There was an original vision for 40k being a small scale tabletop wargame. Some people really enjoyed it and were able to understand the rules. Some people just liked putting all their models on the table and didn't really know the rules  (literally would only play in mega battles and apocalypse games where other people would tell them where to move and what they needed to roll). The latter tended to spend way more money and GW has changed the rules over time to attract more of those people; any frustration point that came up in game from people not reading the rules and not being familiar with the game got removed. 

 

@DuskRaider ya that reaction is honestly kinda sad. 10th was quite literally marketed as a simplified ruleset. That was the point. I get that for a lot of people, they only started in 8th and can't compare it all the way back. But you can compare 10th to 9th; the marketing is barely a year old lol. It's not hidden in the annals of history or anything.

 

Also, the people saying "go play 30k, that's the game for you now" aren't really right. Maybe 1st was, but 2nd is a weird amalgamation for people who wanted more of those 8th+ mechanics. Old World completely scratches my WHFB itch if I'm not satisfied with AoS, but there isn't a system that does the same thing for 4th/5th/dawn of 6th.

Edited July 10 by SkimaskMohawk

[Halandaar]

Tough question for me; I can't decide whether I prefer the idea of a ground-up rewrite of the whole game with alternating activations or a reversion to the basic ruleset that drove every edition between 3rd and 7th.

 

It's like the current iteration of 40k has just drifted far enough from it's origins to make it feel like a different game, but hasn't been bold enough to make it feel like a good different game.

[DuskRaider]

I would love to see GW re-release the old play system ala The Old World, but updates with the armies that have been released since then. They wouldn’t even have to create a new model range and it would scratch an itch the Old Hammer folks would love. 

[Scribe]

2 hours ago, DemonGSides said:

For all the moderations calls that we try to treat each other fairly, there's definitely some people who cannot let go that some people are having fun currently.

 

Nobody is saying you cant be having fun.

 

That is completely unrelated to the quality of 10th.

 

I've had fun throwing flammable things into fires, that doesnt make it a 'good game' or particularly intelligent (it wasnt!) activity.

[Schurge]

1 hour ago, Halandaar said:

Tough question for me; I can't decide whether I prefer the idea of a ground-up rewrite of the whole game with alternating activations or a reversion to the basic ruleset that drove every edition between 3rd and 7th.

 

It's like the current iteration of 40k has just drifted far enough from it's origins to make it feel like a different game, but hasn't been bold enough to make it feel like a good different game.

 

I'm all in on them rebuilding it with alternating activations. What is the worst that could happen...? ... and how much worse could that possibly be than what we got?

[SkimaskMohawk]

4 minutes ago, Schurge said:

 

I'm all in on them rebuilding it with alternating activations. What is the worst that could happen...? ... and how much worse could that possibly be than what we got?

 

Alternating activations play very nicely with low activation counts. Players aren't overwhelmed with choices they need to preempt and make themselves, and you can get through a turn pretty quickly. This is why skirmish games work so well with AA; it's why AT2018 had a disclaimer about functional points limits to prevent the mechanics from breaking down. And it's absolutely part of why legions imperialis is more than a little clunky to play, as the activation counts are huge.

 

40k already has a ton of units. We saw deployment balloon when it went to alternating in 8th, contract when it went IGUGO with one of the tournament packs, and then balloon back out when they returned to AA in 9th. Its basically a recipe for disaster with the current amount of units you can take imo. 

[Scribe]

9 minutes ago, SkimaskMohawk said:

40k already has a ton of units. We saw deployment balloon when it went to alternating in 8th, contract when it went IGUGO with one of the tournament packs, and then balloon back out when they returned to AA in 9th. Its basically a recipe for disaster with the current amount of units you can take imo. 

 

Yep, just imagine how long games would go if the turn was passing back and forth for every unit.

 

I mean sure Alternating COULD be done, if they went back to points values that made sense (5th) and game size made sense again (5th) under 2K.

 

Anything post...8th? Yeah right.

[DuskRaider]

19 minutes ago, SkimaskMohawk said:

 

Alternating activations play very nicely with low activation counts. Players aren't overwhelmed with choices they need to preempt and make themselves, and you can get through a turn pretty quickly. This is why skirmish games work so well with AA; it's why AT2018 had a disclaimer about functional points limits to prevent the mechanics from breaking down. And it's absolutely part of why legions imperialis is more than a little clunky to play, as the activation counts are huge.

One of the many reasons why LI is clunky, but yeah that’s certainly a large part of it. GW release peak rules for AT18 and what little of it was unbalanced or bad was fixed within a year or two with the Compendiums. It’s going to be a while before LI gets that treatment, if at all. 

[Scribe]

34 minutes ago, DuskRaider said:

GW release peak rules for AT18 and what little of it was unbalanced or bad was fixed within a year or two with the Compendiums.

 

I'm insanely annoyed that AT didnt take off here. It seems like its actually GW's best game.

[DuskRaider]

11 minutes ago, Scribe said:

 

I'm insanely annoyed that AT didnt take off here. It seems like its actually GW's best game.

It really is and quite frankly I’m more than a little disappointed that it is most likely discontinued in favor of a very flawed game system in LI. 

[Scribe]

15 minutes ago, DuskRaider said:

It really is and quite frankly I’m more than a little disappointed that it is most likely discontinued in favor of a very flawed game system in LI. 

 

It still interests me as a 'finished' game system, but there's just nobody here playing it, and my old crew have all moved away from GW because of 8th/9th/10th, AND I'm not putting $1000's into GW's account for stuff that would get packed into boxes.

[DuskRaider]

8 minutes ago, Scribe said:

 

It still interests me as a 'finished' game system, but there's just nobody here playing it, and my old crew have all moved away from GW because of 8th/9th/10th, AND I'm not putting $1000's into GW's account for stuff that would get packed into boxes.

You could always jump into Legions Imperialis and try to get folks to play AT in that group. Many would probably have enough in Titans and Knights to play at least small games and see if it takes off from there. 
 

8th / 9th also drove me from 40K, but it brought me to AT18 and now LI (which seems to be pushing me back to AT lol). I enjoyed that my army got their own codex in 8th and was given some more character, but 9th and especially 10th completely stripped Death Guard of all their fun, a lot of their options and most importantly the USR that made them what they are. It’s garbage. Same goes for Chaos Knights, they’re now devoid of all character and overall just trash. The first codex was a bit chunky with the rules and tables, but it was still a lot of fun considering the Edition it was created for. Now most players are rocking boring garbage Indexes that are completely useless but will still defend it to the death apparently. 
 

Edit: I will say that you can grab the Starter Box for AT for around $170USD and that includes 4 Titans and a couple Knights, which is a nice jumping off point and can help get you most of a Ferrox Maniple at the very least, which is a lot of fun to play. 

Edited July 10 by DuskRaider

[WrathOfTheLion]

For me, there's endless they should change this, or go back to that. But the big thing I'd want with 11th is for it to stabilize. None of the simplicity or complexity matters all that much when it changes up so frequently. A three-year edition cycle is too frequent, and one of the reasons why I much prefer HH (both 1E and now 2E) to 40k, is that the rules remained mostly stable, even if there were some gripes in both on how certain things were handled. I can come back to the game after a few months and still know what I'm dealing with.

Both ToW and MESBG, which I think are handled by the same team, have the rules pacing down solid with their biannual schedule for updates, something I hope 30k ends up stabilizing on and a thing that would do 40k very well if they could get it to smaller, more deliberate changes.

[Evil Eye]

Re: Alternating activation, I'd actually argue for a middle ground; alternating phases. One side moves, other side moves. One side shoots, other side shoots. You get it. I think it'd allow some of the advantages of AA without being unbearably slow.

[HeadlessCross]

2 hours ago, SkimaskMohawk said:

 

Alternating activations play very nicely with low activation counts. Players aren't overwhelmed with choices they need to preempt and make themselves, and you can get through a turn pretty quickly. This is why skirmish games work so well with AA; it's why AT2018 had a disclaimer about functional points limits to prevent the mechanics from breaking down. And it's absolutely part of why legions imperialis is more than a little clunky to play, as the activation counts are huge.

 

40k already has a ton of units. We saw deployment balloon when it went to alternating in 8th, contract when it went IGUGO with one of the tournament packs, and then balloon back out when they returned to AA in 9th. Its basically a recipe for disaster with the current amount of units you can take imo. 

The Apocalypse route handles this in a way. By making it so units aren't removed until both players go, it gives an opportunity for counterplay. It'd be super easy to implement and I'm not sure why it hasn't been made standard. 

[HeadlessCross]

4 hours ago, SkimaskMohawk said:

 

I can go and and see a post on this very thread that is both anti AV and anti list building restriction lol.

 

Its pretty simple. There was an original vision for 40k being a small scale tabletop wargame. Some people really enjoyed it and were able to understand the rules. Some people just liked putting all their models on the table and didn't really know the rules  (literally would only play in mega battles and apocalypse games where other people would tell them where to move and what they needed to roll). The latter tended to spend way more money and GW has changed the rules over time to attract more of those people; any frustration point that came up in game from people not reading the rules and not being familiar with the game got removed. 

This post is the epitome of "Source: Trust me, bro"

It is possible to consider that MAYBE, just MAYBE, blast markers and templates are just bad design despite your desperation for that "immersion" for you specifically?

[ThePenitentOne]

1 hour ago, Scribe said:

 

I'm insanely annoyed that AT didnt take off here. It seems like its actually GW's best game.

 

If it hadn't been Heresy era, I would have played it. It wasn't. No matter how good the rules are, a game of marines vs marines will always bore me.

 

I NEED aliens and women for games to be interesting. The worst rules set for a sci-fi game that includes aliens is still prefereable to the best rules set for a sci-fi game that does not. Obviously, this is personal preference- there are a ton of people, especially here at B&C that only care about marines. But GW should never expect a game that includes 3-4 factions to have as broad a player base as a game that has 20.

[Aarik]

My biggest hope is that 11th is just an iteration of 10th, rather than another ground-up rewrite.  Second biggest hope is that points for individual models, and at least some upgrades, come back.  I wouldn't mind if the points cost of basic upgrades is still built into the base cost, but being able to increase the cost for certain, better upgrades would help balance a lot.  And also remove the need for splitting units into multiple datasheets.

[Deus_Ex_Machina]

I have started playing missions in 40K with alternating activations (aa) since the early 2000s. Rulesets being used were 2nd to 5th 40K. It runs as smoothly as games designed with aa in mind like Necromunda 18 and LI.

 

If you don´t intentionally design armies which try to break the system then you will be fine although this can be said for every edition of the game.

[SkimaskMohawk]

17 minutes ago, HeadlessCross said:

This post is the epitome of "Source: Trust me, bro"

It is possible to consider that MAYBE, just MAYBE, blast markers and templates are just bad design despite your desperation for that "immersion" for you specifically?

 

I mean, maybe, just maybe I'd be inclined to consider them being bad game design if...any arguments were ever advanced about them being bad design lol. Instead we have issues rolling the scatter die close by, not placing the template on top of the affected models and idk, playing people you wouldn't want to play in general. 

 

Idk, the "trust me bro, the old mechanics were actually bad  design for reasons I will never elaborate on, and the new ones are better, for equally unexplained reasons" falls flat every time I see it. Guess it doesn't help that most people vehemently defending modern 40k against the older editions never played those old editions lol.

[DuskRaider]

One of my friends started playing 40K after the launch of 8th. He was over one day and I was talking about 4th Edition but he had never seen the rules, so I broke out the old BRB. It blew his mind how different the game used to be, how GW actually pushed for people to customize their armies and minis to make them their own (with literal rules, pictures and campaigns) and how the rules were written so you could really go wild and make your army your own. Chaos 3.5 was a trip for him, lol. 
 

Now everything is so ridged and cookie cutter. 

Edited July 10 by DuskRaider