What would you like to see for 3rd edition?

[Sleboda]

1 hour ago, Overread said:

What's interesting is that 40K's Apoc rule set actually delays all damage dealt until the end of the game round, not the phase. This means your opponent gets to "reply" with attacks from their models during their turn because the whole round isn't over.

This really is one of the best game mechanics GW has ever created. I just wish they had not treated that game as fire and forget.

 

It's so hard to know which GW games to get into. Which ones will they maintain? Which ones are one shot cash grabs? I passed on Blackstone, thankfully (since it's ending). I have resisted Aeronautica so far (until they add Necrons). I've only dropped about $2000 on Titanicus (if they add other races and infantry, I'm doomed though). Somehow I've stayed away from Necromunda this time around (but dayyyum, those ogryns!). Blood Bowl has taken way too much of my cash, and I have all the Underworlds stuff, often in doubles. It'****** or miss.

 

Even main games like AoS and 40k are hard to predict. Do you get the limited edition version of a book, knowing that it's gonna be, um, "updated" in a month or replaced in a year or two? I dunno.

I love GW and the hobby they sell me, but it's often hard to go in on anything but the absolute most sure things they make.

[Kyriakin]

1 hour ago, Sleboda said:

This really is one of the best game mechanics GW has ever created. I just wish they had not treated that game as fire and forget.

It's so hard to know which GW games to get into. Which ones will they maintain? Which ones are one shot cash grabs? I passed on Blackstone, thankfully (since it's ending). I have resisted Aeronautica so far (until they add Necrons). I've only dropped about $2000 on Titanicus (if they add other races and infantry, I'm doomed though). Somehow I've stayed away from Necromunda this time around (but dayyyum, those ogryns!). Blood Bowl has taken way too much of my cash, and I have all the Underworlds stuff, often in doubles. It'****** or miss.

Even main games like AoS and 40k are hard to predict. Do you get the limited edition version of a book, knowing that it's gonna be, um, "updated" in a month or replaced in a year or two? I dunno.

I love GW and the hobby they sell me, but it's often hard to go in on anything but the absolute most sure things they make.

I also feel sad when new sculpts just disappear - especially ones that could have remained in the main game(s) and added flavour to armies that maybe needed it. For example, some of those Warhammer Quest models (the Skaven doppleganger, etc.). Maybe they still have the moulds to tie them in with a future release, but who knows.

And don't get me started one the Forgeworld Monsters. It still makes me annoyed that awesome sculpts and/or concepts like the Dreadmaw, Preyton and Basilisk were never properly brought into the game (i.e. faction-specific KEYWORDS), and given the chance to sell.

I have 12 unassembled Skin Wolves that I look at longingly. I was going to turn them into Beasts of Chaos Crypt Haunter Mercenaries, but ironically Mercenaries were dropped too! (I think they were, anyway...)

It makes me not want to buy or convert anything other than the absolute railroaded and "safest" options, and has even made me steer well clear of Cities of Sigmar - a concept that I would have otherwise been my ideal army.

Edited August 20, 2020 by Kyriakin

[Kramer]

On 8/19/2020 at 10:44 AM, Beliman said:

people play with the double turn in mind, but there are armies that don’t have the tools to play around that

Doesn’t that make it a problem with those armies not the core rule? 
 

[Maddpainting]

3 hours ago, Sleboda said:

This really is one of the best game mechanics GW has ever created. I just wish they had not treated that game as fire and forget.

 

It's so hard to know which GW games to get into. Which ones will they maintain? Which ones are one shot cash grabs? I passed on Blackstone, thankfully (since it's ending). I have resisted Aeronautica so far (until they add Necrons). I've only dropped about $2000 on Titanicus (if they add other races and infantry, I'm doomed though). Somehow I've stayed away from Necromunda this time around (but dayyyum, those ogryns!). Blood Bowl has taken way too much of my cash, and I have all the Underworlds stuff, often in doubles. It'****** or miss.

 

Even main games like AoS and 40k are hard to predict. Do you get the limited edition version of a book, knowing that it's gonna be, um, "updated" in a month or replaced in a year or two? I dunno.

I love GW and the hobby they sell me, but it's often hard to go in on anything but the absolute most sure things they make.

I love new Apoc, i tried to get everyone i now to play it (just normal 40k with it but take at least 3 detachments) and no one wanted to play, not b.c it was good but b.c it has some taboo to it, even online when talking about it, 90% the players that says it bad admits they never played it or looked at the rules (was spear running posts about it asking these questions, had hundreds talk about it). 

Its a great system, and the damage at the end was AMAZING. I was really hoping that becomes the norm, but b.c Apoc failed it GW will do what GW does best and think its the rules fault when it was their terrible marketing and making it a $100 entry just to try it out.

[Wired4War]

Has no one mentioned smaller table size yet? I like the direction 40k just went with that.

[jeremym]

My primary wants are to make endless spells just better. improve them overall. There's too many chances to stop or eliminate them and they cost lots of points. 

 

In unpopular opinion land, keep the double turn. if you change the chance of it happening make it 100%. ie player that goes 2nd gets the first double turn, player than goes first gets the 2nd double turn. it would make for an entirely different meta shift where late game armies can slow play their plans, while still having to deal with deviating alpha strikes. 

 

I truly like imbalance in the game because it feels more like... a game ? 

[Beliman]

7 hours ago, Kramer said:

Doesn’t that make it a problem with those armies not the core rule? 
 

Yes, but in the end, we have two options: change these armies or remove double turn.

I picked the second one.

[Kramer]

18 minutes ago, Beliman said:

Yes, but in the end, we have two options: change these armies or remove double turn.

I picked the second one.

To me that's utterly alien. It's fine and shouldn't be a huge discussion. We also have armies that with the coming of Lumineth, Seraphon Tzeentch don't have the tools to play around the magic phase. So in the end, we have two options: change these armies or remove the magic phase. 

I doubt anyone will pick the second one. 

But in general the arguments against the priority roll, because that's what it is let's not use a 'negative' term for it, usually come across as: 'I'm playing a dice game, but I want it to be as predictable as possible'. That just doesn't vibe for me. But again that's all fine, and everybody has their own experiences that form their opinion of the mechanic. 

[Beliman]

34 minutes ago, Kramer said:

To me that's utterly alien. It's fine and shouldn't be a huge discussion. We also have armies that with the coming of Lumineth, Seraphon Tzeentch don't have the tools to play around the magic phase. So in the end, we have two options: change these armies or remove the magic phase. 

I doubt anyone will pick the second one. 

But in general the arguments against the priority roll, because that's what it is let's not use a 'negative' term for it, usually come across as: 'I'm playing a dice game, but I want it to be as predictable as possible'. That just doesn't vibe for me. But again that's all fine, and everybody has their own experiences that form their opinion of the mechanic. 

I respect your opinion, but that's not what I was saying (imo, magic and double turn are apples to oranges).

And it's just my opinion btw. Feel free to disagree and move on.

Edited August 21, 2020 by Beliman

[Bayul]

46 minutes ago, Kramer said:

But in general the arguments against the priority roll, because that's what it is let's not use a 'negative' term for it, usually come across as: 'I'm playing a dice game, but I want it to be as predictable as possible'. That just doesn't vibe for me.

I am with @Beliman here. That's not what he said. It isn't helpful if you trivialize this issue. Furthermore it's not about the priority roll, but the consequences to the structure of the game.

[RuneBrush]

*nudges back onto wishlist discussion*

[Kramer]

18 minutes ago, Bayul said:

I am with @Beliman here. That's not what he said. It isn't helpful if you trivialize this issue. Furthermore it's not about the priority roll, but the consequences to the structure of the game.

I don’t understand how I trivialised it. But sure, I’ll drop it as I apparently misunderstood the argument. 

@Beliman

[El Syf]

ABHORASH.

[Bayul]

4 hours ago, El Syf said:

ABHORASH.

Gesundheit.

[Skreech Verminking]

7 hours ago, Beliman said:

Yes, but in the end, we have two options: change these armies or remove double turn.

I picked the second one.

I think we should wait till the giants arrive.

either they will shake the meta up, or will be a reason for Gw to release am faQ nerve for certain armies

[mojojojo101]

- Tidy up on some rules stuff and clean up the wierd bits that have cropped up as they have tried new stuff. Going to include GW being clearer on what books are and arent legal for matched play and where battaliins and rules are published outside of the normal battletome/ campaign book they should be in easy accesible pdf's.

- Sort out monsters and come up with some way for them to be both valuable and not feel OP or disheartening to play against.

- Big clean up for points. As a general rule points up, especially for thematically elite armies like Stormcast. Of course warcsroll changes to accommodate this.

 

- To throw in a curveball: Chaos Dawrves cut from FW, given new models, updated lore and fully integrated as a mainline army in AoS.

[Fairbanks]

Wishlist:

1. All monsters currently under 250/300 points; Double their health, damage, give +1 to hit on each attack and increase their points by 100.

2. Make Path to Glory a serious Campaign format with a few additions: a.) Provide small/medium armies (Fyreslayers for sure, but Sylvaneth size and/or fewer units) a proper ally chart to roll on. b.) Unit Advancement/Injury Table.

3. General’s Handbook/Chapter Approved: Update rules for armies that aren’t getting a book anytime soon that are not competitive (Sylvaneth, Beasts, Gloomspite), or missing fluffy bits (The Syll’Esske Subfaction is a perfect example).

4. Introduce a tournament season/points rotation. Don’t update points outside of these times, and do a better job of getting the points right with each update.

5. Individual Army Changes to shoot for within a year/two:

Stormcast: Internal Balance to give everything a profile that make them worth their points (Liberators should be back up to 5 at 100 points). Allow them to take everyone Order as allies, but drop them from being an Ally for everything in Order (replace these allegiances with unique Battalions instead).

Fyreslayers: Make a unit out of Molten Infernoth and add a unit of mini-Magmadroth Riders.

Sylvaneth: Make the Wildwood a pre-deployment drop, anywhere that has at least one tree while within player’s territory. Make Treelords count as wildwoods, make Alarielle great again.

Daughters: Fix the Sub-factions.

Seraphon: Give us a plastic Slann model or boot it from the faction. Make Lord Kroak properly pointed.

Idoneth: Nerf Eels, Buff Everything Else.

Cities: Cities II Electric Boogaloo

Nighthaunt: Rework the faction abilities, Female NH subfaction/battalion (Anything Banshee, Harridan, and Olynder)

Legions of Nagash: Proper army redo from updated models up, or can the whole thing.

Bonereapers: Give Petrifex back the +1 to save, remove the rend.

Ogor Mawtribes: Buff Gutbusters, points adjustments on Beastclaw.

Gloomspite: Make bigger things a little better, better moon abilities.

Tzeentch: Nerf Subfactions, points up on Horrors, make everything else a little better.

Khorne: Should play as push-forward  as Ironjawz.

Nurgle: Bin the metal/resin heroes, give the buffs to the other plastic heroes that are ******, make the Maggoth Riders good and/or change statblock to a non-unique hero with weapon options (or both), make Beasts better, Make Blightlords Min 1.

Slaves to Darkness: Make Marauders less good or give them sculpt updates. Make a new Tzeentch Mark.

Beasts of Chaos: If you do #1 above, it’s fine. If you don’t, do it for this army alone.

Everything else is fine enough.

[Bayul]

@Fairbanks This is a wishlist for 2.0. Almost none of this needs a new edition.

[Fairbanks]

8 hours ago, Bayul said:

@Fairbanks This is a wishlist for 2.0. Almost none of this needs a new edition.

Because we don’t really need a new edition. That’s GW’s 40K new edition advertising making you squirm. Be better, break the cycle.

[Bayul]

[Belper]

The only aspect of the game that needs an overhaul is the Magic Phase, in my opinion. As it is it's fundamentally pretty broken on the simple basis that a handful of armies (Nagash, Tzeentch, Lumineth) both dominate casting and can completely shut down a non-magic focused armies only casters with no meaningful counterplay. Running a Medusa or other small caster to support your forces becomes almost a liability against the magic heavy factions because you're never realistically going to get a power off unless you manipulate ranges like crazy. You're also not likely to STOP any casts with a single mage because of all the bonuses Nagash and the others have kicking around.

[PlasticCraic]

My wishlist:

1) Roll off for first turn (win the drops and get +1 to this roll)

2) Define a "big thing" quantitatively (wound count) in all cases, and without any reference to the qualitative Monster keyword (no more Lookout Sir for Plague Furnaces)

3) A list of valid publications for Matched Play to be created and updated online, including the likes of White Dwarf issues, current Battletomes, Wrath of the Everchosen (but not Firestorm), and so on

4) Keep the priority roll

5) Drop the Pitched Battle Profiles booklet from the GH, and make points updates via pdf, rendering them timely and relevant

[MKsmash]

I want Destruction to take a major role in the lore, and I want Destruction armies to be more competitive.

Nothin else.

[JPjr]

this came up in another thread but it's relevant here, personally I hope they bin the Grand Alliance system. 

it's a vestigial organ that had a purpose at the dawn of AoS and does nothing for the game now but either confuses people narratively or create false, and frankly impossible to implement, ideas that each Grand Allegiance needs to be balanced in terms of factions and models.

in the sea with it.

replace it with something akin to the big coalition matrix from GHB 2020 and it will be both more narratively satisfying and open up some more interesting, not thought about or seen, army builds whilst also possibly creating a better role for some factions with smaller unit counts (especially if you tied it in to an idea of making it so that allies get some kind of allegiance ability, maybe depending on how friendly they are,  so they have more potential anyway)

could be a total boon for model ranges like Fyreslayers, I think they're quite interesting in small groups but would be incredibly dull to collect and paint an entire army of so never would, but open them up to nearly all armies as allies and I'd be more tempted to pick up a unit or 2 to have around for specific occasions.

[Kirby]

4 hours ago, JPjr said:

bin the Grand Alliance system. 

I appreciate the simplicity of the GA system, but also the depth of matricies. Matricies  are a less elegant solution, however, and perhaps less accessible for new players.   Also, trading one set of restrictions may feel good in the short term, but once the dust settles we‘ll crave more freedom again.  So why not discard both?

Atm, there’s no reason not to pick from across different GA in open or narrative games.  This problem only applies to matched play.  If we must have form of restrictions, GA or matrix, GHB: Matched Play is the right place for them.
 

Personally, if i wanted to shake up list building,  i’d start by getting rid of battleline requirements.  I mean, how do battleline requirements benefit players’ enjoyment?  

If we really do need battleline, GW could add a battleline keyword to warscrolls and incentivise their inclusion with something like command points.  An even easier solution would be to simply cut their point/monetary cost.  If they were cheaper players would be more likely, but not compelled to use them.

I dont think this would be game-breaking. 

Edited August 24, 2020 by Kirby
Spelling