6th ed , reshuffle or re boot?

[wittdooley]

So if GW made drastic changes for 6th edition, it still would be 40K, so not sure what you mean if it changes too much it's not 40K.

I guess I disagree on this point. One of the only drastic changes I could see being made that would result in the system still being "40K" would be diversion from the typical IGOUGO. Doing so would obviously open up lots of strategic possibilities.

If they changed the game from a large battle game to more of a skirmish game, it would not be 40k. That's a drastic change. If they went a more "warmachine" route and had fixed units, with unit cards, abilities, that would be a drastic change that would make it quite "un-40k."

I personally think your comparision to BattleTech is really disheartening. I don't want anything near that amout of paperwork involved in 40k. It works with BattleTech because of the number of models; it would be a nightmare with a larger format game.

You seem to want a complete rules overhaul, and I don't know the system even needs that. I don't know if people consider TLOS to have been a major rule change. I don't. The problem with all of the rules changes will be addressing the inherent rules loophole search that goes on with the game, and the subsequent FAQing. My group isn't that hardcore with the rules, so those types of things have never been an issue.

[Deadlift]

I still think that if GW were to offer free downloadable quick start rules it wouldn't do them any financial harm. Just a basic beginners rule set with some cut out templates. Nothing too complicated but just the basics. I know other war gaming companys do the same and I think it's a great way to get people into their games.

That's what I like to see change, a free set of rules and players will hopefully learn to love the game and want to expand their games. They would then buy either the starter set with the mini rule book or the full sized hardback one.

I would also like to see army starter sets that include a basic HQ and two troop choices, included would be a
mini codex with a brief bit of fluff and enough rules to play these basic choices. Say for £40 would be a good price.

My 2 cents. I think this would make the hobby more accessible to everyone on a lower budget and would introduce many more players which must be good for everyone.

They could introduce this at the same time they release 6ed

[Wildeybeast]

I'm surprised that no one has suggested option e) there isn't a huge amount wrong with the current edition, get all the bloody codexes (EDIT: and I mean proper codexes, not half baked, 2 part magazine ones) and minature ranges UTD before you start mucking around with the main rules.

[Gir]

I vote d. It is easily going to be the most correct answer.

[wkz]

D) doesnt matter cause everybody will still complain about it

sorry im a little cynical today

This. Because of two reasons: (1) it is true. GW could release 6th as a 5th with better worded rules and all rules ambiguity fixed, on a $2 tomb weighing in at a hundred pages... ... and people will still complain.

And (2) because I hate the crap out of biased polls. Why don't you post the poll "Am I awesome?" with the options "(a) Yes, (b) Eat crap and die you GW fanboy" next time?



ps:

Or C) Builds on what is already there but makes enough changes to make it quite different and improve all the problems but not being so cynical as seeing those choices as a "short term marketing" ploy

This.

[Mauglum.]

Hi all.
Do you not agree with my objective assesment of the current 40k rules and codexes?
Fair enough.
What other rules sets and game systems are you comparing 40k to?

Can you point out the references where Jervis Johnson, Rick Priestley , Tom Kirby say that the 40k game play issues, game mechnaics and game support is top priority ?

Tom kirby '....GW is in the buisness of selling toy soldiers to children...'

Jervis Johnson'...the games are just the icing on the cake....'

'....only about 1/3 of our customers play the games...' (I wonder why...)

'....of course we dont play test every concevable option, but the level of imballance wont be worse than 60/40..'(WTF)

Rick priestley '...(40k game mechanics )...are rather old fashioned and clunky...'
'...(40k) is specificaly written to appeal to teenagers , who absorb data, but have a limited grasp of the over arching tactical conciderations...''

And concidering the Codex release shedule is set by coperate finance ,NOT the studio staff...

If you were offended by the term 'short term marketing ploy'.
I apologise for causing offence.

But as ther is NO evidence to counter this assumption , shouldnt you be more offended by GW plcs disreguard for the importance of its own games?

I realy like the 40k universe game setting .
I would like the rules to be written specificaly for the 40k game.
NOT STILL use the WHFB game mechanics that just dont work that well with modern unit types.
(Skirmishing infantry armed with ranged weapons and amoured vehicles.)

Most modern rule sets have far more complexity in the game play, and far less complication in the rules.

40k rules are not difficult to understand, but there is about 60 pages too many of them!IMO.

More suitable game mechanics would allow for more game play covered by less pages of rules.

What is wrong with that?

[Melissia]

Frankly unless they release a new Ork, Guard, or Sisters codex within a year of 6th edition I probably won't notice anyway....

[Lord Azaghul]

i am going with c)

qft

[HsojVvad]

Frankly unless they release a new Ork, Guard, or Sisters codex within a year of 6th edition I probably won't notice anyway....

Why do you need a new Guard codex? You do not like the 5th edtion IG codex?

[Lexington]

I'd rather see a "reboot" of the game, with major changes to the basic game mechanics, and all-new Codexes (or even a different release system!) which could be used to build a game system that's more stable and expandable in the long-term, rather than one with a narrowly-defined "meta" that changes with the winds of Codex releases.

So...I dunno. Option W? Let's go with W. It's a fun letter.