Spartan089 wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Spartan089 wrote:Allies? More flyers? Fortifications you can just plop onto the field for little points cost? Double foc after 2000+ points?! GW is turning 6th into apocalypse. Next thing you know they'll be selling us plastic titans.

And that is bad...how?

Because this is all a money ploy by GW. Allies meanes that if you collected a single army all your life you are now at a disadvantage because your not as flexible as those with two or more armies now. So now you have to buy more models to stay competitive. Worse yet now you have to get more models for the army you already have because at 2000+ points you can take up to double your foc slots. So even if you ignore allies and stick to the same armies your now still at a disadvantage because the other guy who shelled out the money can field his mega spam list (24 razor backs sure!, 18 leman russ, you got it!), include his broken allies (sucks if your not friends with Draigo), AND field a fortress.... This is not balanced at all.

Ovion wrote:OK, having hit F5 and read more, looks like THIS is the new Force Organisation Chart:

Formosa wrote:

Spartan089 wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Spartan089 wrote:Allies? More flyers? Fortifications you can just plop onto the field for little points cost? Double foc after 2000+ points?! GW is turning 6th into apocalypse. Next thing you know they'll be selling us plastic titans.

And that is bad...how?

Because this is all a money ploy by GW. Allies meanes that if you collected a single army all your life you are now at a disadvantage because your not as flexible as those with two or more armies now. So now you have to buy more models to stay competitive. Worse yet now you have to get more models for the army you already have because at 2000+ points you can take up to double your foc slots. So even if you ignore allies and stick to the same armies your now still at a disadvantage because the other guy who shelled out the money can field his mega spam list (24 razor backs sure!, 18 leman russ, you got it!), include his broken allies (sucks if your not friends with Draigo), AND field a fortress.... This is not balanced at all.

Not with that attitude its not i agree, now this attitude is fine

Want to include a stormraven in your RAVENwing army, well you can now

Want to include Cultists alongside your Chaos marines.... go ahead and take a few

its NOT, repeat NOT the rules that will be the problem, its the players.... YOU, not the rulebook, YOU are the one who will cheese it up and break the allies rules by having OVER 9000!!!!!! Spambacks, GW is not forcing you to take them or even use them, im ging to add some Stormravens to my ravenwing as its fluffy (DA will get a new flyer no doubt, but for the time being i must make do) and will add some MUCH needed punch to my overcosted underpowered army... but mainly... a black Ravenwing stormraven will look the shiz niz and what not

Note: YOU refers to the gaming community as a whole not any one person, you know who you are lol

d-usa wrote:Only 4 scoring units?

And are killpoints still a thing? Cause that army is giving up a lot of them.

Painnen wrote:
Here's a 2000 pts 6th edition army single codex no allies because it's a fluffy totally non power gamery army that likes their airplanes but doesn't like your airplanes:

-CCS + Astropath + 4 flamers
-CCS + Officer of the Fleet + 4 flamers
-Veterans + 3 meltaguns
-Veterans + 3 meltaguns
-Veterans + 3 meltaguns
-Veterans + 3 meltaguns
-Vendetta
-Vendetta
-Vendetta
-Vendetta
-Vendetta
-Vendetta
-Hydra
-Hydra
-Hydra
-Hydra
-Manticore
-Manticore

You have to fill 2000 points with your original single FoC first, then you get your second FoC.

Formosa wrote:
I disagree, carnifex with rage are a very very good tank hunter now, it can get the +d3 attacks too and as far as we know this combines with the new +2 attacks from rage making it 8 possible attacks on charge re rolling 1's, yeah its I1, but thats more attacks than a bleeding trygon, im gonna be dusting mine off to see how they do

d-usa wrote:

Formosa wrote:

Spartan089 wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Spartan089 wrote:Allies? More flyers? Fortifications you can just plop onto the field for little points cost? Double foc after 2000+ points?! GW is turning 6th into apocalypse. Next thing you know they'll be selling us plastic titans.

And that is bad...how?

Because this is all a money ploy by GW. Allies meanes that if you collected a single army all your life you are now at a disadvantage because your not as flexible as those with two or more armies now. So now you have to buy more models to stay competitive. Worse yet now you have to get more models for the army you already have because at 2000+ points you can take up to double your foc slots. So even if you ignore allies and stick to the same armies your now still at a disadvantage because the other guy who shelled out the money can field his mega spam list (24 razor backs sure!, 18 leman russ, you got it!), include his broken allies (sucks if your not friends with Draigo), AND field a fortress.... This is not balanced at all.

Not with that attitude its not i agree, now this attitude is fine

Want to include a stormraven in your RAVENwing army, well you can now

Want to include Cultists alongside your Chaos marines.... go ahead and take a few

its NOT, repeat NOT the rules that will be the problem, its the players.... YOU, not the rulebook, YOU are the one who will cheese it up and break the allies rules by having OVER 9000!!!!!! Spambacks, GW is not forcing you to take them or even use them, im ging to add some Stormravens to my ravenwing as its fluffy (DA will get a new flyer no doubt, but for the time being i must make do) and will add some MUCH needed punch to my overcosted underpowered army... but mainly... a black Ravenwing stormraven will look the shiz niz and what not

Note: YOU refers to the gaming community as a whole not any one person, you know who you are lol

Now now, it's not the players fault for playing like a douche. It's GWs fault for letting the player play like a douche.

Mandor wrote:

Painnen wrote:
Here's a 2000 pts 6th edition army single codex no allies because it's a fluffy totally non power gamery army that likes their airplanes but doesn't like your airplanes:

-CCS + Astropath + 4 flamers
-CCS + Officer of the Fleet + 4 flamers
-Veterans + 3 meltaguns
-Veterans + 3 meltaguns
-Veterans + 3 meltaguns
-Veterans + 3 meltaguns
-Vendetta
-Vendetta
-Vendetta
-Vendetta
-Vendetta
-Vendetta
-Hydra
-Hydra
-Hydra
-Hydra
-Manticore
-Manticore

How can you get 6 FA and 6 HS at 2000 points? You have to fill 2000 points with your original single FoC first, then you get your second FoC.

Mandor wrote:

Painnen wrote:
Here's a 2000 pts 6th edition army single codex no allies because it's a fluffy totally non power gamery army that likes their airplanes but doesn't like your airplanes:

Spoiler:

-CCS + Astropath + 4 flamers
-CCS + Officer of the Fleet + 4 flamers
-Veterans + 3 meltaguns
-Veterans + 3 meltaguns
-Veterans + 3 meltaguns
-Veterans + 3 meltaguns
-Vendetta
-Vendetta
-Vendetta
-Vendetta
-Vendetta
-Vendetta
-Hydra
-Hydra
-Hydra
-Hydra
-Manticore
-Manticore

How can you get 6 FA and 6 HS at 2000 points? You have to fill 2000 points with your original single FoC first, then you get your second FoC.

Mandor wrote:
How can you get 6 FA and 6 HS at 2000 points? You have to fill 2000 points with your original single FoC first, then you get your second FoC.

RiTides wrote:

Ovion wrote:OK, having hit F5 and read more, looks like THIS is the new Force Organisation Chart:

Quoting this onto the new page, since it might get lost in the shuffle.

Formosa wrote:

Spartan089 wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Spartan089 wrote:Allies? More flyers? Fortifications you can just plop onto the field for little points cost? Double foc after 2000+ points?! GW is turning 6th into apocalypse. Next thing you know they'll be selling us plastic titans.

And that is bad...how?

Because this is all a money ploy by GW. Allies meanes that if you collected a single army all your life you are now at a disadvantage because your not as flexible as those with two or more armies now. So now you have to buy more models to stay competitive. Worse yet now you have to get more models for the army you already have because at 2000+ points you can take up to double your foc slots. So even if you ignore allies and stick to the same armies your now still at a disadvantage because the other guy who shelled out the money can field his mega spam list (24 razor backs sure!, 18 leman russ, you got it!), include his broken allies (sucks if your not friends with Draigo), AND field a fortress.... This is not balanced at all.

Not with that attitude its not i agree, now this attitude is fine

Want to include a stormraven in your RAVENwing army, well you can now

Want to include Cultists alongside your Chaos marines.... go ahead and take a few

its NOT, repeat NOT the rules that will be the problem, its the players.... YOU, not the rulebook, YOU are the one who will cheese it up and break the allies rules by having OVER 9000!!!!!! Spambacks, GW is not forcing you to take them or even use them, im ging to add some Stormravens to my ravenwing as its fluffy (DA will get a new flyer no doubt, but for the time being i must make do) and will add some MUCH needed punch to my overcosted underpowered army... but mainly... a black Ravenwing stormraven will look the shiz niz and what not

Note: YOU refers to the gaming community as a whole not any one person, you know who you are lol

xttz wrote:

Formosa wrote:
I disagree, carnifex with rage are a very very good tank hunter now, it can get the +d3 attacks too and as far as we know this combines with the new +2 attacks from rage making it 8 possible attacks on charge re rolling 1's, yeah its I1, but thats more attacks than a bleeding trygon, im gonna be dusting mine off to see how they do

With 2D6 charge and two pairs of Scy Tals allowing you to re-roll all hits, it does have alot of potential. Especially as you don't need to buy any upgrades to pull it off - a vanilla fex will do this just fine. I'd still like to know if Smash makes you round your attacks up or down though.

The dakkafex could also make a return against weaker mech armies. Twelve twin-linked S6 shots has the potential to ruin anyones day via glancing.

Therion wrote:

d-usa wrote:Only 4 scoring units?

And are killpoints still a thing? Cause that army is giving up a lot of them.

Kill points have changed to 'sort of' victory points, but even so that's beside the issue. The issue is giving up to what? You (not you in particular but the enemy in general) can't even hit the flyers after they've alpha struck you on turn two (all arrive on a 2+) and destroyed all the units that can hit them with better than 6's. For the entire game you'll be reduced to just watching the Vendettas patrol the table and plink away with the lascannons. The Hydras are there to ensure the Vendettas win the battle against enemy flyer armies.

In any case that's just an example of how lame the double FOC is and you knew it.

Spartan089 wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Spartan089 wrote:Allies? More flyers? Fortifications you can just plop onto the field for little points cost? Double foc after 2000+ points?! GW is turning 6th into apocalypse. Next thing you know they'll be selling us plastic titans.

And that is bad...how?

Because this is all a money ploy by GW. Allies meanes that if you collected a single army all your life you are now at a disadvantage because your not as flexible as those with two or more armies now. So now you have to buy more models to stay competitive. Worse yet now you have to get more models for the army you already have because at 2000+ points you can take up to double your foc slots. So even if you ignore allies and stick to the same armies your now still at a disadvantage because the other guy who shelled out the money can field his mega spam list (24 razor backs sure!, 18 leman russ, you got it!), include his broken allies (sucks if your not friends with Draigo), AND field a fortress.... This is not balanced at all.

d-usa wrote:

Formosa wrote:

Spartan089 wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Spartan089 wrote:Allies? More flyers? Fortifications you can just plop onto the field for little points cost? Double foc after 2000+ points?! GW is turning 6th into apocalypse. Next thing you know they'll be selling us plastic titans.

And that is bad...how?

Because this is all a money ploy by GW. Allies meanes that if you collected a single army all your life you are now at a disadvantage because your not as flexible as those with two or more armies now. So now you have to buy more models to stay competitive. Worse yet now you have to get more models for the army you already have because at 2000+ points you can take up to double your foc slots. So even if you ignore allies and stick to the same armies your now still at a disadvantage because the other guy who shelled out the money can field his mega spam list (24 razor backs sure!, 18 leman russ, you got it!), include his broken allies (sucks if your not friends with Draigo), AND field a fortress.... This is not balanced at all.

Not with that attitude its not i agree, now this attitude is fine

Want to include a stormraven in your RAVENwing army, well you can now

Want to include Cultists alongside your Chaos marines.... go ahead and take a few

its NOT, repeat NOT the rules that will be the problem, its the players.... YOU, not the rulebook, YOU are the one who will cheese it up and break the allies rules by having OVER 9000!!!!!! Spambacks, GW is not forcing you to take them or even use them, im ging to add some Stormravens to my ravenwing as its fluffy (DA will get a new flyer no doubt, but for the time being i must make do) and will add some MUCH needed punch to my overcosted underpowered army... but mainly... a black Ravenwing stormraven will look the shiz niz and what not

Note: YOU refers to the gaming community as a whole not any one person, you know who you are lol

Now now, it's not the players fault for playing like a douche. It's GWs fault for letting the player play like a douche.

Fetterkey wrote:Again, it's not like people are actually going to play with doubled FOCs except in explicitly crazy events like the Adepticon Gladiator. They're not balanced and won't be seen in typical events. In fact, this might be the straw that breaks the back of the 2,000 points standard in the US, with events switching to 1750 or 1850 instead to avoid confusion.

If that doesn't happen, I predict we'll see a lot of "1,999" point events, perhaps with leniency allowed for armies that are one point over.

Vaktathi wrote:

Formosa wrote:

Spartan089 wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Spartan089 wrote:Allies? More flyers? Fortifications you can just plop onto the field for little points cost? Double foc after 2000+ points?! GW is turning 6th into apocalypse. Next thing you know they'll be selling us plastic titans.

And that is bad...how?

Because this is all a money ploy by GW. Allies meanes that if you collected a single army all your life you are now at a disadvantage because your not as flexible as those with two or more armies now. So now you have to buy more models to stay competitive. Worse yet now you have to get more models for the army you already have because at 2000+ points you can take up to double your foc slots. So even if you ignore allies and stick to the same armies your now still at a disadvantage because the other guy who shelled out the money can field his mega spam list (24 razor backs sure!, 18 leman russ, you got it!), include his broken allies (sucks if your not friends with Draigo), AND field a fortress.... This is not balanced at all.

Not with that attitude its not i agree, now this attitude is fine

Want to include a stormraven in your RAVENwing army, well you can now

Want to include Cultists alongside your Chaos marines.... go ahead and take a few

its NOT, repeat NOT the rules that will be the problem, its the players.... YOU, not the rulebook, YOU are the one who will cheese it up and break the allies rules by having OVER 9000!!!!!! Spambacks, GW is not forcing you to take them or even use them, im ging to add some Stormravens to my ravenwing as its fluffy (DA will get a new flyer no doubt, but for the time being i must make do) and will add some MUCH needed punch to my overcosted underpowered army... but mainly... a black Ravenwing stormraven will look the shiz niz and what not

Note: YOU refers to the gaming community as a whole not any one person, you know who you are lol

Rules should be designed with the idea in mind that players will, by their very nature, try to find ways to break/loophole them. That goes for any system, be it games, laws, etc. It is the responsibility of the designers to do their utmost to ensure that it is not abuseable. Putting that all on the players is like saying "hey, I'm going to leave $2,000 cash here on the table and not come back to this room ever again, nothing bad will ever happen to you if you take it and I have no way of knowing if you take it, but please don't take it", and then expecting the $2000 to still be there

DarthDiggler wrote:

Fetterkey wrote:Again, it's not like people are actually going to play with doubled FOCs except in explicitly crazy events like the Adepticon Gladiator. They're not balanced and won't be seen in typical events. In fact, this might be the straw that breaks the back of the 2,000 points standard in the US, with events switching to 1750 or 1850 instead to avoid confusion.

If that doesn't happen, I predict we'll see a lot of "1,999" point events, perhaps with leniency allowed for armies that are one point over.

I worry you might find the game unplayable for some books with the flyer rules they now have unless you allow allies.

You can't evade unless you zoom. If you zoom, then all you can do is snap fire.

Blink over at Warseer wrote:For Tyranid

Pros:
+ Armored Shell upgraded Hive Tyrant and Tyrannofex are now very hard to handle in close combat
+ Vector Strike makes Harpy and Flying Hive Tyrant better
+ Monstrous creatures smash (only works against vehicles?)
+ Wider range of Psychic Powers available
+ Preferred enemy, while nerfed, works for shooting too
+ Feel No Pain no longer ignored by power attacks
+ Vehicles easier to kill with glancing and massed fire
+ Charge ranges increased
+ Expanded FOC allows for more open Elite slots at higher point levels (if true)
+ Reserves benefit from arriving earlier
+ Gargoyles and Raveners have long charge ranges
+ Deep Strike more forgiving
+ The "6+" innate psychic hood + Shadow in the Warp will likely stack

Cons
- Snapshot and defensive fire makes the low armor save Nids more vulnerable than ever in assaults
- Feel No Pain is down to a 5+
- Cover is down to a 5+
- Wound allocation removing from the front can guarantee diminished odds of getting an assault
- Getting shot meaning the need to remove from the front reduces the Nids' ability to move across the board
- Random charge lengths
- No more fleet, then assault (2D6 charge, yes, but that means you won't have your extra distance from fleet like you would in 5th if you fail your charge)
- Terrain still sucks for Nids assaulting (now more than ever)
- No monstrous 2d6 against vehicles
- No allies
- Preferred enemy nerfed
- Zoanthropes no longer get to save against Perils of the Warp
- Flamers causing d3 auto hits means genestealers assaulting units with flamers is suicide
- Instant Death still wrecks Warriors, The Doom of Malantai, and other T4 MW models, still making them less playable
- Boneswords only AP3
- Less reason than ever to take a Carnifex
- Everything gets a chance to stop the Tyranid psychic powers, which tend to play a big role in the army's ranged anti tank and personal buffs

... Seems lateral benefits for Nids at best.

xttz wrote:

Formosa wrote:
I disagree, carnifex with rage are a very very good tank hunter now, it can get the +d3 attacks too and as far as we know this combines with the new +2 attacks from rage making it 8 possible attacks on charge re rolling 1's, yeah its I1, but thats more attacks than a bleeding trygon, im gonna be dusting mine off to see how they do

With 2D6 charge and two pairs of Scy Tals allowing you to re-roll all hits, it does have alot of potential. Especially as you don't need to buy any upgrades to pull it off - a vanilla fex will do this just fine. I'd still like to know if Smash makes you round your attacks up or down though.

The dakkafex could also make a return against weaker mech armies. Twelve twin-linked S6 shots has the potential to ruin anyones day via glancing.

Lockark wrote:I've been trying to follow this thread for awhile now, but the last few days it has been going so fast I've been struggling to keep up.

Is it yet known if their has been any changes to how Assaulting Vheclies works?

But realy what I want to know is.... If I assault a transport, do I get to consolidate into the unit inside like in the Pancake Edition?

Kroothawk wrote:

Blink over at Warseer wrote:For Tyranid

Pros:
+ Armored Shell upgraded Hive Tyrant and Tyrannofex are now very hard to handle in close combat
+ Vector Strike makes Harpy and Flying Hive Tyrant better
+ Monstrous creatures smash (only works against vehicles?)
+ Wider range of Psychic Powers available
+ Preferred enemy, while nerfed, works for shooting too
+ Feel No Pain no longer ignored by power attacks
+ Vehicles easier to kill with glancing and massed fire
+ Charge ranges increased
+ Expanded FOC allows for more open Elite slots at higher point levels (if true)
+ Reserves benefit from arriving earlier
+ Gargoyles and Raveners have long charge ranges
+ Deep Strike more forgiving
+ The "6+" innate psychic hood + Shadow in the Warp will likely stack

Cons
- Snapshot and defensive fire makes the low armor save Nids more vulnerable than ever in assaults
- Feel No Pain is down to a 5+
- Cover is down to a 5+
- Wound allocation removing from the front can guarantee diminished odds of getting an assault
- Getting shot meaning the need to remove from the front reduces the Nids' ability to move across the board
- Random charge lengths
- No more fleet, then assault (2D6 charge, yes, but that means you won't have your extra distance from fleet like you would in 5th if you fail your charge)
- Terrain still sucks for Nids assaulting (now more than ever)
- No monstrous 2d6 against vehicles
- No allies
- Preferred enemy nerfed
- Zoanthropes no longer get to save against Perils of the Warp
- Flamers causing d3 auto hits means genestealers assaulting units with flamers is suicide
- Instant Death still wrecks Warriors, The Doom of Malantai, and other T4 MW models, still making them less playable
- Boneswords only AP3
- Less reason than ever to take a Carnifex
- Everything gets a chance to stop the Tyranid psychic powers, which tend to play a big role in the army's ranged anti tank and personal buffs

... Seems lateral benefits for Nids at best.

Therion wrote:

You can't evade unless you zoom. If you zoom, then all you can do is snap fire.

*Annoying beeping sound* Wrong.

You can evade only when you zoom, but you haven't evaded on turn two when you came into play. When you evade your shooting is reduced to snap fire for the following turn, but zooming is the standard movement when you're in flyer mode. You zoomed into play turn two and shot all your weapons with normal BS. If something survives and shoots back, then you evade with those Vendettas that are being shot at, and then those Vendettas in particular have BS1 when they return to the field. Besides, a BS1 Vendetta still hits with one lascannon per turn. A Night Scythe with BS1 hits 3.66 times with Tesla Destructor. A Doom Scythe Death Ray hits always.

Fetterkey wrote:Again, it's not like people are actually going to play with doubled FOCs except in explicitly crazy events like the Adepticon Gladiator. They're not balanced and won't be seen in typical events. In fact, this might be the straw that breaks the back of the 2,000 points standard in the US, with events switching to 1750 or 1850 instead to avoid confusion.

If that doesn't happen, I predict we'll see a lot of "1,999" point events, perhaps with leniency allowed for armies that are one point over.

Formosa wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:

Formosa wrote:

Spartan089 wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Spartan089 wrote:Allies? More flyers? Fortifications you can just plop onto the field for little points cost? Double foc after 2000+ points?! GW is turning 6th into apocalypse. Next thing you know they'll be selling us plastic titans.

And that is bad...how?

Because this is all a money ploy by GW. Allies meanes that if you collected a single army all your life you are now at a disadvantage because your not as flexible as those with two or more armies now. So now you have to buy more models to stay competitive. Worse yet now you have to get more models for the army you already have because at 2000+ points you can take up to double your foc slots. So even if you ignore allies and stick to the same armies your now still at a disadvantage because the other guy who shelled out the money can field his mega spam list (24 razor backs sure!, 18 leman russ, you got it!), include his broken allies (sucks if your not friends with Draigo), AND field a fortress.... This is not balanced at all.

Not with that attitude its not i agree, now this attitude is fine

Want to include a stormraven in your RAVENwing army, well you can now

Want to include Cultists alongside your Chaos marines.... go ahead and take a few

its NOT, repeat NOT the rules that will be the problem, its the players.... YOU, not the rulebook, YOU are the one who will cheese it up and break the allies rules by having OVER 9000!!!!!! Spambacks, GW is not forcing you to take them or even use them, im ging to add some Stormravens to my ravenwing as its fluffy (DA will get a new flyer no doubt, but for the time being i must make do) and will add some MUCH needed punch to my overcosted underpowered army... but mainly... a black Ravenwing stormraven will look the shiz niz and what not

Note: YOU refers to the gaming community as a whole not any one person, you know who you are lol

Rules should be designed with the idea in mind that players will, by their very nature, try to find ways to break/loophole them. That goes for any system, be it games, laws, etc. It is the responsibility of the designers to do their utmost to ensure that it is not abuseable. Putting that all on the players is like saying "hey, I'm going to leave $2,000 cash here on the table and not come back to this room ever again, nothing bad will ever happen to you if you take it and I have no way of knowing if you take it, but please don't take it", and then expecting the $2000 to still be there

I see the point you are trying to make and i dont disagree with the analogy, but your saying as a comunity we have no responsibility for own actions and to hell with the reprcusions... if the comminity (in your area) says no you cant do something a certain way (like even useing allies for example) then you have to abide by it or move clubs, a big part of this game is deciding as a comminity what is correct (rules queries for example) and what is not (people being labeled TFG for playing a certain way) and if allies turns out to be one of these things that need to be house ruled or judged upon at a tourny, then we as a comminity will do so.

It has happened before and will do so again no doubt.

Therion wrote:

In the reddit thread he confirmed that the only restriction on 2 FoC is simply the doubled min (2 HQ, 4 Troops)

Here's a 2000 pts 6th edition army single codex no allies because it's a fluffy totally non power gamery army that likes their airplanes but doesn't like your airplanes:

-CCS + Astropath + 4 flamers
-CCS + Officer of the Fleet + 4 flamers
-Veterans + 3 meltaguns
-Veterans + 3 meltaguns
-Veterans + 3 meltaguns
-Veterans + 3 meltaguns
-Vendetta
-Vendetta
-Vendetta
-Vendetta
-Vendetta
-Vendetta
-Hydra
-Hydra
-Hydra
-Hydra
-Manticore
-Manticore

Formosa wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:

Formosa wrote:

Spartan089 wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Spartan089 wrote:Allies? More flyers? Fortifications you can just plop onto the field for little points cost? Double foc after 2000+ points?! GW is turning 6th into apocalypse. Next thing you know they'll be selling us plastic titans.

And that is bad...how?

Because this is all a money ploy by GW. Allies meanes that if you collected a single army all your life you are now at a disadvantage because your not as flexible as those with two or more armies now. So now you have to buy more models to stay competitive. Worse yet now you have to get more models for the army you already have because at 2000+ points you can take up to double your foc slots. So even if you ignore allies and stick to the same armies your now still at a disadvantage because the other guy who shelled out the money can field his mega spam list (24 razor backs sure!, 18 leman russ, you got it!), include his broken allies (sucks if your not friends with Draigo), AND field a fortress.... This is not balanced at all.

Not with that attitude its not i agree, now this attitude is fine

Want to include a stormraven in your RAVENwing army, well you can now

Want to include Cultists alongside your Chaos marines.... go ahead and take a few

its NOT, repeat NOT the rules that will be the problem, its the players.... YOU, not the rulebook, YOU are the one who will cheese it up and break the allies rules by having OVER 9000!!!!!! Spambacks, GW is not forcing you to take them or even use them, im ging to add some Stormravens to my ravenwing as its fluffy (DA will get a new flyer no doubt, but for the time being i must make do) and will add some MUCH needed punch to my overcosted underpowered army... but mainly... a black Ravenwing stormraven will look the shiz niz and what not

Note: YOU refers to the gaming community as a whole not any one person, you know who you are lol

Rules should be designed with the idea in mind that players will, by their very nature, try to find ways to break/loophole them. That goes for any system, be it games, laws, etc. It is the responsibility of the designers to do their utmost to ensure that it is not abuseable. Putting that all on the players is like saying "hey, I'm going to leave $2,000 cash here on the table and not come back to this room ever again, nothing bad will ever happen to you if you take it and I have no way of knowing if you take it, but please don't take it", and then expecting the $2000 to still be there

I see the point you are trying to make and i dont disagree with the analogy, but your saying as a comunity we have no responsibility for own actions and to hell with the reprcusions... if the comminity (in your area) says no you cant do something a certain way (like even useing allies for example) then you have to abide by it or move clubs, a big part of this game is deciding as a comminity what is correct (rules queries for example) and what is not (people being labeled TFG for playing a certain way) and if allies turns out to be one of these things that need to be house ruled or judged upon at a tourny, then we as a comminity will do so.

It has happened before and will do so again no doubt.

Noir wrote:

Fetterkey wrote:Again, it's not like people are actually going to play with doubled FOCs except in explicitly crazy events like the Adepticon Gladiator. They're not balanced and won't be seen in typical events. In fact, this might be the straw that breaks the back of the 2,000 points standard in the US, with events switching to 1750 or 1850 instead to avoid confusion.

If that doesn't happen, I predict we'll see a lot of "1,999" point events, perhaps with leniency allowed for armies that are one point over.

Becouse it was balanced before? GW isn't about balanced it about playing with your toy soldiers with a structured systems, so we know who won. 6th looks to be fun, unlike 5th were I felt like going to sleep. Still will not be buying models from GW, have more then I need now and other companys sell damn nice models and a better price point. But, I will be joining the next campaign my LFGS runs if 6th dosen't give my that sleeping feeling.

I don't think you have that right.

Wouldn't the Stormlord and a Chrono-tek destroy this list?

StoneRaizer wrote:I think there's too much "omg, the sky is falling!" in this thread. Until everyone gets to read the book with our own eyes instead of freaking out over a guy's blog post, can we chill out? Just because someone says something on the Internet doesn't mean it's true. I highly doubt GW would put out a radically unbalanced rule set with their ulterior motive being to sell models. If 6E stinks, rather than gamers buying more models they'll end up buying less.

Formosa wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:

Formosa wrote:

Spartan089 wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Spartan089 wrote:Allies? More flyers? Fortifications you can just plop onto the field for little points cost? Double foc after 2000+ points?! GW is turning 6th into apocalypse. Next thing you know they'll be selling us plastic titans.

And that is bad...how?

Because this is all a money ploy by GW. Allies meanes that if you collected a single army all your life you are now at a disadvantage because your not as flexible as those with two or more armies now. So now you have to buy more models to stay competitive. Worse yet now you have to get more models for the army you already have because at 2000+ points you can take up to double your foc slots. So even if you ignore allies and stick to the same armies your now still at a disadvantage because the other guy who shelled out the money can field his mega spam list (24 razor backs sure!, 18 leman russ, you got it!), include his broken allies (sucks if your not friends with Draigo), AND field a fortress.... This is not balanced at all.

Not with that attitude its not i agree, now this attitude is fine

Want to include a stormraven in your RAVENwing army, well you can now

Want to include Cultists alongside your Chaos marines.... go ahead and take a few

its NOT, repeat NOT the rules that will be the problem, its the players.... YOU, not the rulebook, YOU are the one who will cheese it up and break the allies rules by having OVER 9000!!!!!! Spambacks, GW is not forcing you to take them or even use them, im ging to add some Stormravens to my ravenwing as its fluffy (DA will get a new flyer no doubt, but for the time being i must make do) and will add some MUCH needed punch to my overcosted underpowered army... but mainly... a black Ravenwing stormraven will look the shiz niz and what not

Note: YOU refers to the gaming community as a whole not any one person, you know who you are lol

Rules should be designed with the idea in mind that players will, by their very nature, try to find ways to break/loophole them. That goes for any system, be it games, laws, etc. It is the responsibility of the designers to do their utmost to ensure that it is not abuseable. Putting that all on the players is like saying "hey, I'm going to leave $2,000 cash here on the table and not come back to this room ever again, nothing bad will ever happen to you if you take it and I have no way of knowing if you take it, but please don't take it", and then expecting the $2000 to still be there

I see the point you are trying to make and i dont disagree with the analogy, but your saying as a comunity we have no responsibility for own actions and to hell with the reprcusions... if the comminity (in your area) says no you cant do something a certain way (like even useing allies for example) then you have to abide by it or move clubs, a big part of this game is deciding as a comminity what is correct (rules queries for example) and what is not (people being labeled TFG for playing a certain way) and if allies turns out to be one of these things that need to be house ruled or judged upon at a tourny, then we as a comminity will do so.

It has happened before and will do so again no doubt.

Fetterkey wrote:Again, it's not like people are actually going to play with doubled FOCs except in explicitly crazy events like the Adepticon Gladiator. They're not balanced and won't be seen in typical events. In fact, this might be the straw that breaks the back of the 2,000 points standard in the US, with events switching to 1750 or 1850 instead to avoid confusion.

If that doesn't happen, I predict we'll see a lot of "1,999" point events, perhaps with leniency allowed for armies that are one point over.

Griever wrote:

Formosa wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:

Formosa wrote:

Spartan089 wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Spartan089 wrote:Allies? More flyers? Fortifications you can just plop onto the field for little points cost? Double foc after 2000+ points?! GW is turning 6th into apocalypse. Next thing you know they'll be selling us plastic titans.

And that is bad...how?

Because this is all a money ploy by GW. Allies meanes that if you collected a single army all your life you are now at a disadvantage because your not as flexible as those with two or more armies now. So now you have to buy more models to stay competitive. Worse yet now you have to get more models for the army you already have because at 2000+ points you can take up to double your foc slots. So even if you ignore allies and stick to the same armies your now still at a disadvantage because the other guy who shelled out the money can field his mega spam list (24 razor backs sure!, 18 leman russ, you got it!), include his broken allies (sucks if your not friends with Draigo), AND field a fortress.... This is not balanced at all.

Not with that attitude its not i agree, now this attitude is fine

Want to include a stormraven in your RAVENwing army, well you can now

Want to include Cultists alongside your Chaos marines.... go ahead and take a few

its NOT, repeat NOT the rules that will be the problem, its the players.... YOU, not the rulebook, YOU are the one who will cheese it up and break the allies rules by having OVER 9000!!!!!! Spambacks, GW is not forcing you to take them or even use them, im ging to add some Stormravens to my ravenwing as its fluffy (DA will get a new flyer no doubt, but for the time being i must make do) and will add some MUCH needed punch to my overcosted underpowered army... but mainly... a black Ravenwing stormraven will look the shiz niz and what not

Note: YOU refers to the gaming community as a whole not any one person, you know who you are lol

Rules should be designed with the idea in mind that players will, by their very nature, try to find ways to break/loophole them. That goes for any system, be it games, laws, etc. It is the responsibility of the designers to do their utmost to ensure that it is not abuseable. Putting that all on the players is like saying "hey, I'm going to leave $2,000 cash here on the table and not come back to this room ever again, nothing bad will ever happen to you if you take it and I have no way of knowing if you take it, but please don't take it", and then expecting the $2000 to still be there

I see the point you are trying to make and i dont disagree with the analogy, but your saying as a comunity we have no responsibility for own actions and to hell with the reprcusions... if the comminity (in your area) says no you cant do something a certain way (like even useing allies for example) then you have to abide by it or move clubs, a big part of this game is deciding as a comminity what is correct (rules queries for example) and what is not (people being labeled TFG for playing a certain way) and if allies turns out to be one of these things that need to be house ruled or judged upon at a tourny, then we as a comminity will do so.

It has happened before and will do so again no doubt.

Why should we as gamers (and not game designers) have to fix their own game for them? It they come out with something that's so completely nonsensical, stupid, and ultimately game breaking, why is it our responsibility.

That's like saying, it's okay that Grey Knights are overpowered, we'll just dock them 150 points and it's all good. All this does is create arguments and disputes between players and between players and TO's that we shouldn't have to have. If GW could actually write decent rules without intentionally nerfing/buffing units based on what they can sell, we wouldn't have to do this.

"It's okay if the rules suck guys, we can just fix them ourselves!"

Glad I paid $75 + $35 for a codex that I've gotta spend time figuring out how to make it playable, and then everytime I play against a new guy we have to have a debate on how he/she plays the game and come to an agreement on some really dumb rules.

Just saying, if you show up with an Imperial Guard army with a bunch of Dark Eldar models as well, I'm going to tell you I'm not interested in playing. And that's if I can't get a decent amount of $$ for my current GW stuff.

Fishboy wrote:

Lockark wrote:I've been trying to follow this thread for awhile now, but the last few days it has been going so fast I've been struggling to keep up.

Is it yet known if their has been any changes to how Assaulting Vheclies works?

But realy what I want to know is.... If I assault a transport, do I get to consolidate into the unit inside like in the Pancake Edition?

I dont recall him giving specifics on this however he did state you still hit rear armor in assult.

On a side note stop crying about how things affect your army. Remember that these rules affect everyones army so the entire meta changes. People need to stop posting negative crap just to hear themselves type...

Therion wrote:
Evading is 'going to ground' for flyers. If something shoots at your flyer, if you wish, you can decide to evade. This means you'll get a cover save against that shooting but in the following turn you can only snap fire.

So, flyers use their normal BS for shooting, unless you evaded against some firepower in the previous turn.

I hope that clarified your misunderstandings.

Let us keep the -1 to roll on the damage table for Venom Cannons

Actually, I've seen that 'evade' is only something you can do when being shot at by other flyers.

they won't maintain flyer status too long but rather go into hover mode.

Formosa wrote:its NOT, repeat NOT the rules that will be the problem, its the players.... YOU, not the rulebook, YOU are the one who will cheese it up and break the allies rules by having OVER 9000!!!!!! Spambacks, GW is not forcing you to take them or even use them, im ging to add some Stormravens to my ravenwing as its fluffy (DA will get a new flyer no doubt, but for the time being i must make do) and will add some MUCH needed punch to my overcosted underpowered army... but mainly... a black Ravenwing stormraven will look the shiz niz and what not

d-usa wrote:Now now, it's not the players fault for playing like a douche. It's GWs fault for letting the player play like a douche.

Spartan089 wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:[Snip

Becouse it was balanced before? GW isn't about balanced it about playing with your toy soldiers with a structured systems, so we know who won. 6th looks to be fun, unlike 5th were I felt like going to sleep. Still will not be buying models from GW, have more then I need now and other companys sell damn nice models and a better price point. But, I will be joining the next campaign my LFGS runs if 6th dosen't give my that sleeping feeling.

Sidstyler wrote:

Formosa wrote:its NOT, repeat NOT the rules that will be the problem, its the players.... YOU, not the rulebook, YOU are the one who will cheese it up and break the allies rules by having OVER 9000!!!!!! Spambacks, GW is not forcing you to take them or even use them, im ging to add some Stormravens to my ravenwing as its fluffy (DA will get a new flyer no doubt, but for the time being i must make do) and will add some MUCH needed punch to my overcosted underpowered army... but mainly... a black Ravenwing stormraven will look the shiz niz and what not

It is most definitely the rules that are the problem, because they allow this gak to happen. I don't know why that's so hard for people to understand. There's really no other way to explain it, you're just wrong, plain and simple.

It is not my responsibility to keep GW's game balanced, it's theirs.

Noir wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:

Formosa wrote:its NOT, repeat NOT the rules that will be the problem, its the players.... YOU, not the rulebook, YOU are the one who will cheese it up and break the allies rules by having OVER 9000!!!!!! Spambacks, GW is not forcing you to take them or even use them, im ging to add some Stormravens to my ravenwing as its fluffy (DA will get a new flyer no doubt, but for the time being i must make do) and will add some MUCH needed punch to my overcosted underpowered army... but mainly... a black Ravenwing stormraven will look the shiz niz and what not

It is most definitely the rules that are the problem, because they allow this gak to happen. I don't know why that's so hard for people to understand. There's really no other way to explain it, you're just wrong, plain and simple.

It is not my responsibility to keep GW's game balanced, it's theirs.

Why do people keep saying "keep the game balanced", it wasn't before.

Until GW starts from the ground floor up, playtesting for a 2-3 year and releases the Core Book and every Codex at the same time, 40K will never be balanced. I don't know how else to explain it, you're just wrong, plain and simply... for excepting a balanced system with there track record..

azazel the cat wrote:

6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, MH
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, JotWW
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, TW
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, SC
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
and...
1x Coteaz
7x Servitors (troops) w/ Plasma Cannons
3x Psyrifleman Dreads
3x Venerable Psyrifleman Dreads

So that's 3k points of pure broken right there.

azazel the cat wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:
It is most definitely the rules that are the problem, because they allow this gak to happen. I don't know why that's so hard for people to understand. There's really no other way to explain it, you're just wrong, plain and simple.

It is not my responsibility to keep GW's game balanced, it's theirs.

Noir wrote:Why do people keep saying "keep the game balanced", it wasn't before.

Joey wrote:GW are not a software company. They cannot release patches for games 3 times a week in order to balance them.
Try playing unpatched Warcraft 3, then lecture the community (and professional games developers) about "game balance".

Davor wrote:

azazel the cat wrote:

Is this official? Or is it still speculation of what it is? Is the ally chart seperate or included with the regular FOC so no 4 Elites/FA/HS?

azazel the cat wrote:

6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, MH
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, JotWW
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, TW
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, SC
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
and...
1x Coteaz
7x Servitors (troops) w/ Plasma Cannons
3x Psyrifleman Dreads
3x Venerable Psyrifleman Dreads

So that's 3k points of pure broken right there.

Joey wrote:GW are not a software company. They cannot release patches for games 3 times a week in order to balance them.
Try playing unpatched Warcraft 3, then lecture the community (and professional games developers) about "game balance".

Sidstyler wrote:
It is not my responsibility to keep GW's game balanced, it's theirs.

Joey wrote:Off the top of my head I could come up with a GK and an IG list that would easily squash that. Stop pretending GW have broken 40k.

So that's 3k points of pure broken right there.

Noir Eternal wrote:

Joey wrote:GW are not a software company. They cannot release patches for games 3 times a week in order to balance them.
Try playing unpatched Warcraft 3, then lecture the community (and professional games developers) about "game balance".

Maybe not to the same degree but GW can technically release patches in the form of Erratas whenever they want to.

azazel the cat wrote:

Joey wrote:Off the top of my head I could come up with a GK and an IG list that would easily squash that. Stop pretending GW have broken 40k.

That is a wildly inconsistant statement you just made there.

Therion wrote:

So that's 3k points of pure broken right there.

Biggest problem in your list is that 30 missile launchers only cause 0.55 glances and 1.1 penetrating hits against a zooming and evading Vendetta

Still thinking 5th edition. Think 6th. Think flyers...

puree wrote:GW are not writing a book aimed at the hard core WAAC tournament players

Pretty certain that I can generally just ignore the fliers and table everything else.

Joey wrote:

Noir Eternal wrote:

Joey wrote:GW are not a software company. They cannot release patches for games 3 times a week in order to balance them.
Try playing unpatched Warcraft 3, then lecture the community (and professional games developers) about "game balance".

Maybe not to the same degree but GW can technically release patches in the form of Erratas whenever they want to.

"Sup, this unit used to be WS4, now it's WS5 and costs 2 points less".
No they'd never do that (quite rightly). Errata don't rebalance the game, even if GW wanted them to.

Noir wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:

Formosa wrote:its NOT, repeat NOT the rules that will be the problem, its the players.... YOU, not the rulebook, YOU are the one who will cheese it up and break the allies rules by having OVER 9000!!!!!! Spambacks, GW is not forcing you to take them or even use them, im ging to add some Stormravens to my ravenwing as its fluffy (DA will get a new flyer no doubt, but for the time being i must make do) and will add some MUCH needed punch to my overcosted underpowered army... but mainly... a black Ravenwing stormraven will look the shiz niz and what not

It is most definitely the rules that are the problem, because they allow this gak to happen. I don't know why that's so hard for people to understand. There's really no other way to explain it, you're just wrong, plain and simple.

It is not my responsibility to keep GW's game balanced, it's theirs.

Why do people keep saying "keep the game balanced", it wasn't before.

Until GW starts from the ground floor up, playtesting for a 2-3 year and releases the Core Book and every Codex at the same time, 40K will never be balanced. I don't know how else to explain it, you're just wrong, plain and simply... for excepting a balanced system with there track record..

puree wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:
It is not my responsibility to keep GW's game balanced, it's theirs.

GW job is to write a book that works for their target audience.

It's your responsibility to play in a way that eveyone you play with finds fun.

GW are not writing a book aimed at the hard core WAAC tournament players, they are aiming at the youngsters who like shiny models, and want to have some framework to play with them. Most of them are not going to be building competitive lists or worrying about the tourney balance.

Old style role playing games were far more open ended and open to abuse, but, heh, guess what each gaming group would decide how far to go with that themselves based on what they found fun, if you didn't agree with charts handing out +99 swords of uber killyness you didn't use them.

If you don't like the idea of X and Y allying then don't do it. You don't have to play with those who do if that is not fun for you. Just as they don't have to play with you if that is what they find fun.

Therion wrote:

insaniak wrote:...but you get to move 6" after disembarking. End result is the same as now.

End result is not the same. Firstly the transport itself will be further away than before, and secondly from what we've heard disembarking isn't the same. You no longer disembark 2" away from the doors but in base to base contact with any part of the vehicle's hull or base. Someone could confirm this from the dude on reddit if they have the time.

Joey wrote:

azazel the cat wrote:

6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, MH
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, JotWW
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, TW
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, SC
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
and...
1x Coteaz
7x Servitors (troops) w/ Plasma Cannons
3x Psyrifleman Dreads
3x Venerable Psyrifleman Dreads

So that's 3k points of pure broken right there.

Off the top of my head I could come up with a GK and an IG list that would easily squash that. Stop pretending GW have broken 40k.

Chancetragedy wrote:

Joey wrote:

azazel the cat wrote:

6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, MH
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, JotWW
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, TW
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, SC
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
and...
1x Coteaz
7x Servitors (troops) w/ Plasma Cannons
3x Psyrifleman Dreads
3x Venerable Psyrifleman Dreads

So that's 3k points of pure broken right there.

Off the top of my head I could come up with a GK and an IG list that would easily squash that. Stop pretending GW have broken 40k.

And seeing as the list you posted isn't even legal. Proven by your own quote. I'm not exactly worried. Too many people lack intelligence enough too not be the sky is falling chicken littles. But the rest of us are gonna be fine. Rest assured.

Joey wrote:

Noir Eternal wrote:

Joey wrote:GW are not a software company. They cannot release patches for games 3 times a week in order to balance them.
Try playing unpatched Warcraft 3, then lecture the community (and professional games developers) about "game balance".

Maybe not to the same degree but GW can technically release patches in the form of Erratas whenever they want to.

"Sup, this unit used to be WS4, now it's WS5 and costs 2 points less".
No they'd never do that (quite rightly). Errata don't rebalance the game, even if GW wanted them to.

Sidstyler wrote:
So I just wanted to clarify, you are basically saying that it's okay for GW's games to be horribly unbalanced because it's impossible to get it done "right" the first time, even with playtesting and decades worth of experience, and because there's no way whatsoever for them to fix something after it's gone to print.

That's your argument, right? Just wanted to make sure because people always jump my ass for misinterpreting gak or "reading what I want to" or just plain getting it wrong, so...

Noir Eternal wrote:
Well you said that they did not have a way to release a patch when in fact they do and I mearly stated such.
So yes, they could technically put in an errata that a units stats has changed.

No, an errata may not be able to re-balance the entire game but a unit or a single rule that was worthless/broken, could be fixed in such a way.

The same goes for patches, a single patch is not meant to re-make an entire game, just fix a small portion of it. Erratas can work in the same way.

tetrisphreak wrote:

Chancetragedy wrote:

Joey wrote:

azazel the cat wrote:

6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, MH
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, JotWW
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, TW
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, SC
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
and...
1x Coteaz
7x Servitors (troops) w/ Plasma Cannons
3x Psyrifleman Dreads
3x Venerable Psyrifleman Dreads

So that's 3k points of pure broken right there.

Off the top of my head I could come up with a GK and an IG list that would easily squash that. Stop pretending GW have broken 40k.

And seeing as the list you posted isn't even legal. Proven by your own quote. I'm not exactly worried. Too many people lack intelligence enough too not be the sky is falling chicken littles. But the rest of us are gonna be fine. Rest assured.

Yeah that's 4 too many dreadnoughts.

Joey wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:
So I just wanted to clarify, you are basically saying that it's okay for GW's games to be horribly unbalanced because it's impossible to get it done "right" the first time, even with playtesting and decades worth of experience, and because there's no way whatsoever for them to fix something after it's gone to print.

That's your argument, right? Just wanted to make sure because people always jump my ass for misinterpreting gak or "reading what I want to" or just plain getting it wrong, so...

Editing the emotive rhetoric out of your words: "it's okay for GW's games to be somewhat unbalanced because it's impossible to get it done right the first time, even with playtesting and decades worth of experience".
Pretty much, yes.
You can't change the stats/points costs for units on the fly because it'd screw peoples' armies up.
The fact that you regard 40k as THAT unbalanced at present shows you're either really bad at 40k, or you need to stop playing against Grey Knights.

Joey wrote:"Sup, this peice of paper I printed at home says my ogryns are now 30 points a model and have FNP, so I'm fielding 30 of them. Suck it."
No. There is such a thing as continuity, constantly changing the data in codexes would wreck it, and constantly create new areas of inbalance.

Sidstyler wrote:

puree wrote:GW are not writing a book aimed at the hard core WAAC tournament players

And now you're on my ignore list, good job. Anyone who equates regular competitive play with the "WAAC" mindset is a...in the interest of not breaking Rule #1 let's just say I'm not listening to a fething word they have to say and leave it at that then.

Noir Eternal wrote:
That just shows me you basically have to result to sarcastic and completely un-realistic scenarios to show a rediculous point that makes 0 sense. Yeah, I definitely meant by using erratas to help game balance I meant constantly changing units to make them insanely powerful and that everyone should be constantly updating their rulebook.

What I meant (to clarify) is that GW, could/conceivably, use the errata to make small changes to rules that were unbalanced enough to affect the game negitively in a major way.

I never said that I thought they should, that I wanted them to, or that they were a horrible company becuase they did not use this option.

I only stated that it was a possibility, and that you saying that using an errata to fix rules being an impossibility was ludicrous.

Vladsimpaler wrote:

Noir wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:

Formosa wrote:its NOT, repeat NOT the rules that will be the problem, its the players.... YOU, not the rulebook, YOU are the one who will cheese it up and break the allies rules by having OVER 9000!!!!!! Spambacks, GW is not forcing you to take them or even use them, im ging to add some Stormravens to my ravenwing as its fluffy (DA will get a new flyer no doubt, but for the time being i must make do) and will add some MUCH needed punch to my overcosted underpowered army... but mainly... a black Ravenwing stormraven will look the shiz niz and what not

It is most definitely the rules that are the problem, because they allow this gak to happen. I don't know why that's so hard for people to understand. There's really no other way to explain it, you're just wrong, plain and simple.

It is not my responsibility to keep GW's game balanced, it's theirs.

Why do people keep saying "keep the game balanced", it wasn't before.

Until GW starts from the ground floor up, playtesting for a 2-3 year and releases the Core Book and every Codex at the same time, 40K will never be balanced. I don't know how else to explain it, you're just wrong, plain and simply... for excepting a balanced system with there track record..

Going to agree with Noir here. Plus Sidstyler you're coming off as massively abrasive, you need to calm down.

Even if Gee Dubya started from the ground up like you said, people would still find something unbalanced and people like Sidstyler would whine that it took GW 4 years to balance everything that that they still messed up. Chess is really the only game that I can think of that is truly "balanced". However on the other hand it has no flavor.

I will take an imbalanced ruleset with lots of cool, fun storytelling opportunities versus something that is highly balanced but lacks any sort of "feel" behind it.

Also I find it funny that a lot of people who disliked 5th (like myself) are really looking forward to 6th, whereas many who seemed to enjoy 5th are dreading 6th. I'm just glad that 40k is returning to its roots as opposed to becoming bland and boring.

Joey wrote:

Noir Eternal wrote:
That just shows me you basically have to result to sarcastic and completely un-realistic scenarios to show a rediculous point that makes 0 sense. Yeah, I definitely meant by using erratas to help game balance I meant constantly changing units to make them insanely powerful and that everyone should be constantly updating their rulebook.

What I meant (to clarify) is that GW, could/conceivably, use the errata to make small changes to rules that were unbalanced enough to affect the game negitively in a major way.

I never said that I thought they should, that I wanted them to, or that they were a horrible company becuase they did not use this option.

I only stated that it was a possibility, and that you saying that using an errata to fix rules being an impossibility was ludicrous.

It is ludicrous.
Most gamers don't even check the internet for information. If something has changed in their codex, how would they know?
What if they showed up for a battle and their opponent told them that their models actually cost a couple points more, or had a point less toughness? How would you know they were telling the truth?
Truth be told there's actually very few units that are so bad that they desperately need changing. Even if there are, GW fethed up, so only take them if you like them or for fluff reasons.

azazel the cat wrote:

6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
6x Long Fangs w/ 5x ML
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, MH
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, JotWW
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, TW
1x Rune Priest w/ LL, SC
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
5x Grey Hunters w/ Melta, Wolf Standard & Mark of the Wulfen in a Rhino
and...
1x Coteaz
7x Servitors (troops) w/ Plasma Cannons
3x Psyrifleman Dreads
3x Venerable Psyrifleman Dreads

So that's 3k points of pure broken right there.

Therion wrote:

Pretty certain that I can generally just ignore the fliers and table everything else.

Talk about wild presumptions. You won't ignore 6 Vendettas, just like you won't ignore 6 Doom Scythes and their Night Scythe support. Those Scythes table you with no additional help even required. Insult to injury the Necrons will keep popping night fight so you can't properly even see whatever little they have on the ground. I'm not trying to piss you off, but you'll need a plan (skyfire) about enemy flyers because you can't be sure the enemy has just one or two you might be able to ignore. Entire armies can be made out of flyers.

*Hypnotic sound* Think 6th. Think flyers...

Chancetragedy wrote:And even ASSuming the FOC for allies doubles as well at 2k. It's still 2 dreadnoughts too heavy haha.

puree wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:

puree wrote:GW are not writing a book aimed at the hard core WAAC tournament players

And now you're on my ignore list, good job. Anyone who equates regular competitive play with the "WAAC" mindset is a...in the interest of not breaking Rule #1 let's just say I'm not listening to a fething word they have to say and leave it at that then.

You probably won't see this if I'm on ignore, but...

If you want to have a 'balanced' tournament scene game then it is the hard core WAAC players who you need to aim your product at.

If it isn't balanced for them then you are still going to get hosed by overpowered lists in any regular tournement cos those players will still be there, and they will have worked out those imbalances.

Or are you saying that you are only interested in balance at some unknown intermediate point between none and hard core WAAC, in which case how would you define that level of balance in clear precise objective terms that someone could work to.

Griever wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:

Noir wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:

Formosa wrote:its NOT, repeat NOT the rules that will be the problem, its the players.... YOU, not the rulebook, YOU are the one who will cheese it up and break the allies rules by having OVER 9000!!!!!! Spambacks, GW is not forcing you to take them or even use them, im ging to add some Stormravens to my ravenwing as its fluffy (DA will get a new flyer no doubt, but for the time being i must make do) and will add some MUCH needed punch to my overcosted underpowered army... but mainly... a black Ravenwing stormraven will look the shiz niz and what not

It is most definitely the rules that are the problem, because they allow this gak to happen. I don't know why that's so hard for people to understand. There's really no other way to explain it, you're just wrong, plain and simple.

It is not my responsibility to keep GW's game balanced, it's theirs.

Why do people keep saying "keep the game balanced", it wasn't before.

Until GW starts from the ground floor up, playtesting for a 2-3 year and releases the Core Book and every Codex at the same time, 40K will never be balanced. I don't know how else to explain it, you're just wrong, plain and simply... for excepting a balanced system with there track record..

Going to agree with Noir here. Plus Sidstyler you're coming off as massively abrasive, you need to calm down.

Even if Gee Dubya started from the ground up like you said, people would still find something unbalanced and people like Sidstyler would whine that it took GW 4 years to balance everything that that they still messed up. Chess is really the only game that I can think of that is truly "balanced". However on the other hand it has no flavor.

I will take an imbalanced ruleset with lots of cool, fun storytelling opportunities versus something that is highly balanced but lacks any sort of "feel" behind it.

Also I find it funny that a lot of people who disliked 5th (like myself) are really looking forward to 6th, whereas many who seemed to enjoy 5th are dreading 6th. I'm just glad that 40k is returning to its roots as opposed to becoming bland and boring.

4th and 5th edition 40k were just fine, the games worked pretty well. The balance issues came in that they quite blatantly write codexes to make the newsst ones the strongers will all the best toys so that every wants to sell their old stuff and buy another army. I can live with that stuff, the basic deisng of the game worked well.

People who say balance doesn't matter are kidding themself. I'm sure your really "fun" army is a blast to play when you line up against an army that crushes you without losing a single model, just because of a bad matchup. That's the life of a 40k Dark Eldar player, you either get tabled or crush your oppoenent based on their list. That's not FUN for anybody, I've been on both sides of that game, nobody likes getting destroyed and most people don't like face rolling somebody in a game just because of a bad matchup.

Now that take, and then add in the fact that not only do you have to balance codexes against each other, you'll have to balance every posible combination of stupid units between codexes as well.

My 40k community is tiny. I'll show up to a local shop once a month and nobody else will be there, I'll sit for an hour before just driving 30 minutes back home. I can't afford to turn down games from the 50% of people who are just going to take the wackiest gak (Eldar + Dark Eldar) just because it looks fun and works well on the tabletop. But I also will not play them, because that's not how the 40k universe works in my head, and that was the only thing keeping me in the game.

I would have already switched to a different game by now, but nobody plays WarmaHordes either.

Guess I'll have to try my hand at fantasy, at least they haven't gone completely daft.

Noir Eternal wrote:What I meant (to clarify) is that GW, could/conceivably, use the errata to make small changes to rules that were unbalanced enough to affect the game negitively in a major way.

Joey wrote:

Noir Eternal wrote:
That just shows me you basically have to result to sarcastic and completely un-realistic scenarios to show a rediculous point that makes 0 sense. Yeah, I definitely meant by using erratas to help game balance I meant constantly changing units to make them insanely powerful and that everyone should be constantly updating their rulebook.

What I meant (to clarify) is that GW, could/conceivably, use the errata to make small changes to rules that were unbalanced enough to affect the game negitively in a major way.

I never said that I thought they should, that I wanted them to, or that they were a horrible company becuase they did not use this option.

I only stated that it was a possibility, and that you saying that using an errata to fix rules being an impossibility was ludicrous.

It is ludicrous.
Most gamers don't even check the internet for information. If something has changed in their codex, how would they know?
What if they showed up for a battle and their opponent told them that their models actually cost a couple points more, or had a point less toughness? How would you know they were telling the truth?
Truth be told there's actually very few units that are so bad that they desperately need changing. Even if there are, GW fethed up, so only take them if you like them or for fluff reasons.

Formosa wrote:
Doesnt every GW store have a computer now? it would be easy to put up a poster and say "40k update out now" and done, the better question is, if they did this wouldnt it invalidate the £20 codex i payed for?

Formosa wrote:

Griever wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:

Noir wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:

Formosa wrote:its NOT, repeat NOT the rules that will be the problem, its the players.... YOU, not the rulebook, YOU are the one who will cheese it up and break the allies rules by having OVER 9000!!!!!! Spambacks, GW is not forcing you to take them or even use them, im ging to add some Stormravens to my ravenwing as its fluffy (DA will get a new flyer no doubt, but for the time being i must make do) and will add some MUCH needed punch to my overcosted underpowered army... but mainly... a black Ravenwing stormraven will look the shiz niz and what not

It is most definitely the rules that are the problem, because they allow this gak to happen. I don't know why that's so hard for people to understand. There's really no other way to explain it, you're just wrong, plain and simple.

It is not my responsibility to keep GW's game balanced, it's theirs.

Why do people keep saying "keep the game balanced", it wasn't before.

Until GW starts from the ground floor up, playtesting for a 2-3 year and releases the Core Book and every Codex at the same time, 40K will never be balanced. I don't know how else to explain it, you're just wrong, plain and simply... for excepting a balanced system with there track record..

Going to agree with Noir here. Plus Sidstyler you're coming off as massively abrasive, you need to calm down.

Even if Gee Dubya started from the ground up like you said, people would still find something unbalanced and people like Sidstyler would whine that it took GW 4 years to balance everything that that they still messed up. Chess is really the only game that I can think of that is truly "balanced". However on the other hand it has no flavor.

I will take an imbalanced ruleset with lots of cool, fun storytelling opportunities versus something that is highly balanced but lacks any sort of "feel" behind it.

Also I find it funny that a lot of people who disliked 5th (like myself) are really looking forward to 6th, whereas many who seemed to enjoy 5th are dreading 6th. I'm just glad that 40k is returning to its roots as opposed to becoming bland and boring.

4th and 5th edition 40k were just fine, the games worked pretty well. The balance issues came in that they quite blatantly write codexes to make the newsst ones the strongers will all the best toys so that every wants to sell their old stuff and buy another army. I can live with that stuff, the basic deisng of the game worked well.

People who say balance doesn't matter are kidding themself. I'm sure your really "fun" army is a blast to play when you line up against an army that crushes you without losing a single model, just because of a bad matchup. That's the life of a 40k Dark Eldar player, you either get tabled or crush your oppoenent based on their list. That's not FUN for anybody, I've been on both sides of that game, nobody likes getting destroyed and most people don't like face rolling somebody in a game just because of a bad matchup.

Now that take, and then add in the fact that not only do you have to balance codexes against each other, you'll have to balance every posible combination of stupid units between codexes as well.

My 40k community is tiny. I'll show up to a local shop once a month and nobody else will be there, I'll sit for an hour before just driving 30 minutes back home. I can't afford to turn down games from the 50% of people who are just going to take the wackiest gak (Eldar + Dark Eldar) just because it looks fun and works well on the tabletop. But I also will not play them, because that's not how the 40k universe works in my head, and that was the only thing keeping me in the game.

I would have already switched to a different game by now, but nobody plays WarmaHordes either.

Guess I'll have to try my hand at fantasy, at least they haven't gone completely daft.

yeah the new fantasy books seem to be trying to ... ballance the game, we can but hope 40k will go the same way

Sephyr wrote:Tongue planted somewhat in cheek, I have to say so far it looks like people claiming 6Th was going to be Imperial circular wankfest have been vindicated and get to post that on their blogs and facebook pages.

Marines get to have their cake and eat it too. They get powerfists, so they have a CC option against 2+ armor in CC, unlike many other armies. They can even spam AP thunder hammers with shields on assault termis so that CC is -always- viable for them, and get to tap IG, fellow chapters and GK to fill any gaps.

Necrons have gained a lot too, but that seems to have been a casual side-effect.

Orks, Eldar and Dark Eldar get taken down considerably. Their CC specialists now either lack the means to get into combat reliably, or their best way to deal with enemy CC specialists (Have fun plinking your pretty swords against terminators and artificer armor, Banshees and Incubi!)

Tyranids...wow. To think of the bullet i dodged when I skipped picking them as my first army a year and a half ago. I came so close.

We'll see how it develops. Maybe the faq and erratas will patch much of ths over. Not expecting it, but it would be nice.

Vladsimpaler wrote:

Lysenis wrote:

Pony_law wrote:Allies is a stupid concept game balance wise but smart from a sales perspecitve. We all know which of those 2 considerations win when GW makes a decision.

It will be fun times seeing IG armies with Th/ss termis or purifiers sitting near their lines. Or draigowing armies with 90 boys as well. I just can't see a way this could work without absolutely breaking the armies theselves. If allies are allowed in tournaments i predict we will never see a pure 1 codex army win another thing ever again. (i mean sonme of the things I'm imaging are so broke, but hey at least my SM can finally take longfangs, and fast vindicators)

YES! Now my outflanking Baal Predator with a Flamestorm cannon (or normal version) will have a Storm Talon as Escort! That way I can have it flying in, Then I can have Necron warriors to back up my assault marines. . .


Shoot me now and get it over with. . . .

Will do, at least then we won't have to deal with your incessant whining and poor attempts at sarcasm

Formosa wrote:
yeah the new fantasy books seem to be trying to ... ballance the game, we can but hope 40k will go the same way

Nvs wrote:WAAC lists are only truly an issue because they don't have a dedicated rules team. Instead they have 1 guy make one book, another guy make the next, and so on. And then when these 2 guys have different design philosophies, or are encouraged to create whacked out things to sell models, well then you're left with what we have now.

GW really should be trying harder to make their game viable in the competetive scene even if that meant they balanced around a specific point value and the game went completely nuts outside of that point range.

It's silly the way things have been going the past decade. I mean we're approaching the point where they may as well stop supporting 40k in its entirety and create a 30k horus heresy game.

spaceelf wrote:

Formosa wrote:
yeah the new fantasy books seem to be trying to ... ballance the game, we can but hope 40k will go the same way

Well if they are trying, then they are failing miserably. Have you read the Ogre Kingdoms army book?

Dr. Delorean wrote:Meanwhile, I'm trying to figure out how to destroy Therion's vendetta list. A few Interceptor lascannons and quad-guns oughta do it...

Dr. Delorean wrote:and have some kind of random factor

Vaktathi wrote:

Joey wrote:

Noir Eternal wrote:
That just shows me you basically have to result to sarcastic and completely un-realistic scenarios to show a rediculous point that makes 0 sense. Yeah, I definitely meant by using erratas to help game balance I meant constantly changing units to make them insanely powerful and that everyone should be constantly updating their rulebook.

What I meant (to clarify) is that GW, could/conceivably, use the errata to make small changes to rules that were unbalanced enough to affect the game negitively in a major way.

I never said that I thought they should, that I wanted them to, or that they were a horrible company becuase they did not use this option.

I only stated that it was a possibility, and that you saying that using an errata to fix rules being an impossibility was ludicrous.

It is ludicrous.
Most gamers don't even check the internet for information. If something has changed in their codex, how would they know?
What if they showed up for a battle and their opponent told them that their models actually cost a couple points more, or had a point less toughness? How would you know they were telling the truth?
Truth be told there's actually very few units that are so bad that they desperately need changing. Even if there are, GW fethed up, so only take them if you like them or for fluff reasons.

In an age when kickstarters are showing up every week for new games, when half the population has the internet in the palm of their hand, when an email address is more permanent than a home address, when GW has been using FAQ PDF's for years, when every other major game releases FAQ and Errata as online PDF's, when every major tournament is organized almost entirely online, when people shop stores across the entire *planet* for the best prices on models, players can't be bothered with internet errata?

spaceelf wrote:

Formosa wrote:
yeah the new fantasy books seem to be trying to ... ballance the game, we can but hope 40k will go the same way

Well if they are trying, then they are failing miserably. Have you read the Ogre Kingdoms army book?

Charax wrote:those Codex FAQs are going to be BIG...

Initial thoughts:

- FnP being a 5+ kinda sucks, but being allowed Vs anything that isn't instant death is awesome. Bring on your power weapons!

- Vector Strike is nasty, but as it's not Smash it's not especially useful against vehicles unless you're using it with a very big Tyranid.

- Power axes sound fun, but nobody has the option yet. Hopefully that'll be in the FAQs rather than having to wait for a whole new codex.

- Eldar are pretty damn nasty. Warlocks in guardian units, with the power that lets you overwatch at full BS - not the squishy target they once were, and that's not getting into the four-foot distance on bikes or Ally possibilities.

StoneRaizer wrote: Yes, you can field Dark Eldar and Eldar in the same army against anybody you want, every single game you play, and the rules totally support this. It's utterly daft.

Griever wrote:
No, no it's not. I play tournaments all the time. I try to write lists that work well on the tabletop. I enjoy 40k as a game of tactics where I'm trying to out think my opponent, and I the closer and close games are, the more fun they are for me and my opponent. I am not a WAAC gamer, MOST tournament players aren't WAAC gamers. Look at the best players in the US, they're the nicest group of guys you'll ever meet. I'm sick of people who suck at tabletop games label the people who are better than them as WAAC gamers, that's insutling and completely ignoring.

Fun fact, if you balance the game for "WAAC" games, then you've just balanced the game for everybody. Like I said before, even your most laid back, beer and pretzels 40k gamers will NOT have fun if their army gets whiped off the table in two turns and they don't even get to do anything. That happened quite a bit in regular 40k, now it's going to happen even more.

puree wrote:

Griever wrote:
No, no it's not. I play tournaments all the time. I try to write lists that work well on the tabletop. I enjoy 40k as a game of tactics where I'm trying to out think my opponent, and I the closer and close games are, the more fun they are for me and my opponent. I am not a WAAC gamer, MOST tournament players aren't WAAC gamers. Look at the best players in the US, they're the nicest group of guys you'll ever meet. I'm sick of people who suck at tabletop games label the people who are better than them as WAAC gamers, that's insutling and completely ignoring.

Fun fact, if you balance the game for "WAAC" games, then you've just balanced the game for everybody. Like I said before, even your most laid back, beer and pretzels 40k gamers will NOT have fun if their army gets whiped off the table in two turns and they don't even get to do anything. That happened quite a bit in regular 40k, now it's going to happen even more.

I think we have different ideas of what WAAC means, I mean it in no negative way at all. To me it is simply meaning someone who is very competitive (and has nothing to do with whether they are nice guts or not). As opposed to someone who is less interested in the competitive aspect and just likes the fluff and background, play for the socialising/pizza and beer and doesn't really care too much if he gets hammered.

But your second point is exactly what I was referring to, if you don't design your game for the ultra hard core competitive (WAAC or whatever you want to call it) then you will not get a balanced game as those players will always find those imbalances that do exist.

So going back to my original point: GW are not, and have never, aimed at that market, they are aiming at teenagers who like shiny toys with big guns and the majority of whom will probably never go anywhere near a tourney.

If people want balance in the tourney scene then it is their responsibility to make it so, as they are the ones trying to take a game not designed with that in mind and use it in such a way. It is not GWs responsibility to make it tourney balanced if that is not where they are aiming their product.

Griever wrote:

puree wrote:

Griever wrote:
No, no it's not. I play tournaments all the time. I try to write lists that work well on the tabletop. I enjoy 40k as a game of tactics where I'm trying to out think my opponent, and I the closer and close games are, the more fun they are for me and my opponent. I am not a WAAC gamer, MOST tournament players aren't WAAC gamers. Look at the best players in the US, they're the nicest group of guys you'll ever meet. I'm sick of people who suck at tabletop games label the people who are better than them as WAAC gamers, that's insutling and completely ignoring.

Fun fact, if you balance the game for "WAAC" games, then you've just balanced the game for everybody. Like I said before, even your most laid back, beer and pretzels 40k gamers will NOT have fun if their army gets whiped off the table in two turns and they don't even get to do anything. That happened quite a bit in regular 40k, now it's going to happen even more.

I think we have different ideas of what WAAC means, I mean it in no negative way at all. To me it is simply meaning someone who is very competitive (and has nothing to do with whether they are nice guts or not). As opposed to someone who is less interested in the competitive aspect and just likes the fluff and background, play for the socialising/pizza and beer and doesn't really care too much if he gets hammered.

But your second point is exactly what I was referring to, if you don't design your game for the ultra hard core competitive (WAAC or whatever you want to call it) then you will not get a balanced game as those players will always find those imbalances that do exist.

So going back to my original point: GW are not, and have never, aimed at that market, they are aiming at teenagers who like shiny toys with big guns and the majority of whom will probably never go anywhere near a tourney.

If people want balance in the tourney scene then it is their responsibility to make it so, as they are the ones trying to take a game not designed with that in mind and use it in such a way. It is not GWs responsibility to make it tourney balanced if that is not where they are aiming their product.

The funniest part about this is that this new edition will actually make the game even more fun for competitive gamers, since they can build even better, stronger lists with way more options than they could before. And the fluff bunnies get to figure out why the hell Orks are now the galaxies best friend and Eldar/Dark Eldar decided to set aside their difference to smack around some evil Space Marines.

Griever wrote:
The funniest part about this is that this new edition will actually make the game even more fun for competitive gamers,

Fafnir wrote:

Griever wrote:
The funniest part about this is that this new edition will actually make the game even more fun for competitive gamers,

I'd argue the other way around. The new allies system will quickly be broken down into a few utterly broken combinations that completely over centralize the game to the point where only those few combinations are truly viable, causing the game to stagnate into a boring mess.

Allies brings a lot of options to the table, and being able to augment your forces in such a way has a lot of potential to be really, really cool, but GW is being far too reckless in the implementation.

Griever wrote:
The funniest part about this is that this new edition will actually make the game even more fun for competitive gamers, since they can build even better, stronger lists with way more options than they could before. And the fluff bunnies get to figure out why the hell Orks are now the galaxies best friend and Eldar/Dark Eldar decided to set aside their difference to smack around some evil Space Marines.

Joey wrote:

Fafnir wrote:

Griever wrote:
The funniest part about this is that this new edition will actually make the game even more fun for competitive gamers,

I'd argue the other way around. The new allies system will quickly be broken down into a few utterly broken combinations that completely over centralize the game to the point where only those few combinations are truly viable, causing the game to stagnate into a boring mess.

Allies brings a lot of options to the table, and being able to augment your forces in such a way has a lot of potential to be really, really cool, but GW is being far too reckless in the implementation.

I will repeat for the billianth time that this is nonsense. I've not seen a single OP list that's actually legal with the rules, and not as strong as existant one-army lists.

Lou_Cypher wrote:Huh, these new allies rules interest me. Does this mean BFFs Eldar/Dark Eldar can have combinations like casting Fortune on Wyches and Vehicles, or Doom against people being assaulted by Incubi?

Lukus83 wrote:Based on how powerful the new flier rules seem to be I am fully expecting either:

1. A wave of new releases for each faction over the next year or so - fliers for factions currently without and new units with Skyfire specifically.

2. A load of FAQ/errata granting Skyfire to specific units.

If not then it's Necrons as the new poster boys for GW. In the grim darkness of the far future there is only...Necron WARriors.

Griever wrote:And the fluff bunnies get to figure out why the hell Orks are now the galaxies best friend and Eldar/Dark Eldar decided to set aside their difference to smack around some evil Space Marines.

Lukus83 wrote:Based on how powerful the new flier rules seem to be I am fully expecting either:

1. A wave of new releases for each faction over the next year or so - fliers for factions currently without and new units with Skyfire specifically.

2. A load of FAQ/errata granting Skyfire to specific units.

If not then it's Necrons as the new poster boys for GW. In the grim darkness of the far future there is only...Necron WARriors.

GalacticDefender wrote:I hope they come out with a paperback rulebook. I am not paying 75 dollars for a rulebook.

Based on the past, is a paperback rulebook generally released?

insaniak wrote:

JB wrote:Blasts use full strength against vehicles even if the center hole isn't over the vehicle?

They always used to. It was only with 5th edition that was introduced.

Tresson wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:

Lysenis wrote:

Pony_law wrote:Allies is a stupid concept game balance wise but smart from a sales perspecitve. We all know which of those 2 considerations win when GW makes a decision.

It will be fun times seeing IG armies with Th/ss termis or purifiers sitting near their lines. Or draigowing armies with 90 boys as well. I just can't see a way this could work without absolutely breaking the armies theselves. If allies are allowed in tournaments i predict we will never see a pure 1 codex army win another thing ever again. (i mean sonme of the things I'm imaging are so broke, but hey at least my SM can finally take longfangs, and fast vindicators)

YES! Now my outflanking Baal Predator with a Flamestorm cannon (or normal version) will have a Storm Talon as Escort! That way I can have it flying in, Then I can have Necron warriors to back up my assault marines. . .


Shoot me now and get it over with. . . .

Will do, at least then we won't have to deal with your incessant whining and poor attempts at sarcasm

Can we do it to you as well so we don't have to listen to your near constant bashing of posters you disagree with?

Griever wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:[
Going to agree with Noir here. Plus Sidstyler you're coming off as massively abrasive, you need to calm down.

Even if Gee Dubya started from the ground up like you said, people would still find something unbalanced and people like Sidstyler would whine that it took GW 4 years to balance everything that that they still messed up. Chess is really the only game that I can think of that is truly "balanced". However on the other hand it has no flavor.

I will take an imbalanced ruleset with lots of cool, fun storytelling opportunities versus something that is highly balanced but lacks any sort of "feel" behind it.

Also I find it funny that a lot of people who disliked 5th (like myself) are really looking forward to 6th, whereas many who seemed to enjoy 5th are dreading 6th. I'm just glad that 40k is returning to its roots as opposed to becoming bland and boring.

4th and 5th edition 40k were just fine, the games worked pretty well. The balance issues came in that they quite blatantly write codexes to make the newsst ones the strongers will all the best toys so that every wants to sell their old stuff and buy another army. I can live with that stuff, the basic deisng of the game worked well.

People who say balance doesn't matter are kidding themself. I'm sure your really "fun" army is a blast to play when you line up against an army that crushes you without losing a single model, just because of a bad matchup. That's the life of a 40k Dark Eldar player, you either get tabled or crush your oppoenent based on their list. That's not FUN for anybody, I've been on both sides of that game, nobody likes getting destroyed and most people don't like face rolling somebody in a game just because of a bad matchup.

Now that take, and then add in the fact that not only do you have to balance codexes against each other, you'll have to balance every posible combination of stupid units between codexes as well.

My 40k community is tiny. I'll show up to a local shop once a month and nobody else will be there, I'll sit for an hour before just driving 30 minutes back home. I can't afford to turn down games from the 50% of people who are just going to take the wackiest gak (Eldar + Dark Eldar) just because it looks fun and works well on the tabletop. But I also will not play them, because that's not how the 40k universe works in my head, and that was the only thing keeping me in the game.

I would have already switched to a different game by now, but nobody plays WarmaHordes either.

Guess I'll have to try my hand at fantasy, at least they haven't gone completely daft.

GalacticDefender wrote:I hope they come out with a paperback rulebook. I am not paying 75 dollars for a rulebook.

Based on the past, is a paperback rulebook generally released?

Formosa wrote:

Ah and there you have it "if someone turns up with imperial guard and dark eldar etc." you DONT hve to play them, its YOUR hobby, sit down with your mates/club and talk it out and come to an agreement

As to the "why should we fix our own game", simply because nothing is perfect, we (community) have beendoing this since 40k began, why stop now... i mean look at the Inat FAQ, this exiss mainly because GW are so half arsed, if they did a proper job in the first place then the INATFAQ wouldnt exist at all, also look at the massive amount of Rules lawering that goes on in 5th already...
all im trying to say is, if you dont like the way the game is going do something about it and try to organise something with your local meta groups, being lazy or apathetic about something never helps.

But your point is totally valid and i understand, i just dont dislike what i have seen to the extent you do

Lukus83 wrote:Based on how powerful the new flier rules seem to be I am fully expecting either:

1. A wave of new releases for each faction over the next year or so - fliers for factions currently without and new units with Skyfire specifically.

2. A load of FAQ/errata granting Skyfire to specific units.

If not then it's Necrons as the new poster boys for GW. In the grim darkness of the far future there is only...Necron WARriors.

tetrisphreak wrote:

Joey wrote:

Fafnir wrote:

Griever wrote:
The funniest part about this is that this new edition will actually make the game even more fun for competitive gamers,

I'd argue the other way around. The new allies system will quickly be broken down into a few utterly broken combinations that completely over centralize the game to the point where only those few combinations are truly viable, causing the game to stagnate into a boring mess.

Allies brings a lot of options to the table, and being able to augment your forces in such a way has a lot of potential to be really, really cool, but GW is being far too reckless in the implementation.

I will repeat for the billianth time that this is nonsense. I've not seen a single OP list that's actually legal with the rules, and not as strong as existant one-army lists.

Homework assignments, people! Get your two best armies (or only army) and write a list with the following FOC at 2000 points (NO ALLIES at first)

2-4 HQ
4-12 Troops
0-6 Elite
0-6 Fast
0-6 Heavy

See if you can make a 2000 point list that will reliably win objective based games. Looks like 5 out of 6 games rely on some sort of objectives, so we need an even less shoot-it-to-death mentality. (side-note: tervigon tyranids do really well on objective missions).

The list has to fit the FOC and points allotment. Then look and see what you could remove, and if adding something as an ally that WON'T aid you with special abilities (no blood chalices, etc) actually makes the list harder or softer.

Let's give it a month or three before declaring the new system broken. all armies have access, all armies have a chance to counter-punch.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lou_Cypher wrote:Huh, these new allies rules interest me. Does this mean BFFs Eldar/Dark Eldar can have combinations like casting Fortune on Wyches and Vehicles, or Doom against people being assaulted by Incubi?

In a word, based on the 'allies of convenience' classification --no. You can doom the enemy, but you can't fortune wyches or guide trueborn.

Sidstyler wrote:If you play an Imperial army you should be just fine not taking allies, you already have everything you need in your own book.

Xenos on the other hand will have to ally, because not every xenos codex has access to psykers or flyers, can influence reserve rolls, etc.

Homework assignments, people!

tuiman wrote:

Lukus83 wrote:Based on how powerful the new flier rules seem to be I am fully expecting either:

1. A wave of new releases for each faction over the next year or so - fliers for factions currently without and new units with Skyfire specifically.

2. A load of FAQ/errata granting Skyfire to specific units.

If not then it's Necrons as the new poster boys for GW. In the grim darkness of the far future there is only...Necron WARriors.

1. I agree entirely, harpy model must be due for release soon, also its not fair on those who dont have flyers yet, chaos, tau, wolves etc

2. it's called the main rulebook every weapon and unit is redone to include the new rules, every single one, maybe why its so big

Ovion wrote:

tetrisphreak wrote:

Joey wrote:

Fafnir wrote:

Griever wrote:
The funniest part about this is that this new edition will actually make the game even more fun for competitive gamers,

I'd argue the other way around. The new allies system will quickly be broken down into a few utterly broken combinations that completely over centralize the game to the point where only those few combinations are truly viable, causing the game to stagnate into a boring mess.

Allies brings a lot of options to the table, and being able to augment your forces in such a way has a lot of potential to be really, really cool, but GW is being far too reckless in the implementation.

I will repeat for the billianth time that this is nonsense. I've not seen a single OP list that's actually legal with the rules, and not as strong as existant one-army lists.

Homework assignments, people! Get your two best armies (or only army) and write a list with the following FOC at 2000 points (NO ALLIES at first)

2-4 HQ
4-12 Troops
0-6 Elite
0-6 Fast
0-6 Heavy

See if you can make a 2000 point list that will reliably win objective based games. Looks like 5 out of 6 games rely on some sort of objectives, so we need an even less shoot-it-to-death mentality. (side-note: tervigon tyranids do really well on objective missions).

The list has to fit the FOC and points allotment. Then look and see what you could remove, and if adding something as an ally that WON'T aid you with special abilities (no blood chalices, etc) actually makes the list harder or softer.

Let's give it a month or three before declaring the new system broken. all armies have access, all armies have a chance to counter-punch.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lou_Cypher wrote:Huh, these new allies rules interest me. Does this mean BFFs Eldar/Dark Eldar can have combinations like casting Fortune on Wyches and Vehicles, or Doom against people being assaulted by Incubi?

In a word, based on the 'allies of convenience' classification --no. You can doom the enemy, but you can't fortune wyches or guide trueborn.

According to the suposedly confirmed allies chart, Eldar / Dark Eldar are Battle Brothers / trusted allies / the closest buddies one.

GalacticDefender wrote:Does anyone think allies will still be viable after more updates and new units? I see a lot of people using allies at first, then I bet it will die off as new stuff is released.

Also how important will the psykers be? I really like just relying on my guns, will that still be a viable option?

Reivax26 wrote:My gaming group has already declared Allies illegal in tourneys so I am not worried about it.

Fafnir wrote:
It sounds like some of the new powers will be insanely powerful.

morgendonner wrote:I'm curious what becomes the new tournament standard in points.

We could see it go to 1999 to disallow a second FOC or jump up to 2500 to allow for some allies and use of the 2nd FOC.

I think 1850 should be a good balance,

Nightbringer's Chosen wrote:Would someone with a reddit account please post in that thread asking about Heavy Vehicles/Deep Striking/Ordnance Shooting? Basically, I want to figure out if it is once again viable to Deep Strike my Monolith onto the board without worrying about it never getting to the battlefield, or if the the only benefit that tactic got is the slightly less lethal mishap table, and if it can fire all of its guns while moving or if the ordnance rule still prohibits that.

Reivax26 wrote:2000 is what we play at in my area at every tourney.

So taking a HQ and a Troop from a list is a tax for my Chaos Marines...ok I pick Fateweaver and a squad of Plaguebearers. Chosen infiltrate with an icon, first turn Fateweaver and 8 Bloodcrushers deep strike in right beside you while Obliterators and Plaguemarines crush you with combined firepower.

Gotta love that "tax"

Brother Axel wrote:there's not a facepalm meme good enough to sum this BS up.

tuiman wrote:

Reivax26 wrote:2000 is what we play at in my area at every tourney.

So taking a HQ and a Troop from a list is a tax for my Chaos Marines...ok I pick Fateweaver and a squad of Plaguebearers. Chosen infiltrate with an icon, first turn Fateweaver and 8 Bloodcrushers deep strike in right beside you while Obliterators and Plaguemarines crush you with combined firepower.

Gotta love that "tax"

Go on then, not like the other armys cant ally with grey knights and bring in some heavy hitters to take out all your daemons with ease.

Thats the thing, for every person who thinks they have just created an amazing list, 30 others can come up with another crazy combo to counter it

insaniak wrote:

Brother Axel wrote:there's not a facepalm meme good enough to sum this BS up.

How about one for people who didn't read the thread, and so missed that the chart you're complaining about isn't from the 6th ed rulebook...?

rigeld2 wrote:Wasn't the one in the book confirmed to be the same thing?
From that reddit thread iirc.

shasolenzabi wrote:Welcome to confusion-Hammer

KGatch113 wrote:

tuiman wrote:

Reivax26 wrote:2000 is what we play at in my area at every tourney.

So taking a HQ and a Troop from a list is a tax for my Chaos Marines...ok I pick Fateweaver and a squad of Plaguebearers. Chosen infiltrate with an icon, first turn Fateweaver and 8 Bloodcrushers deep strike in right beside you while Obliterators and Plaguemarines crush you with combined firepower.

Gotta love that "tax"

Go on then, not like the other armys cant ally with grey knights and bring in some heavy hitters to take out all your daemons with ease.

Thats the thing, for every person who thinks they have just created an amazing list, 30 others can come up with another crazy combo to counter it

Which is exactly what's wrong with the Allies rules.

I don't want to have to play against some crazy combo. I expect to say no to a lot of store opponents.

Brother Axel wrote:Eldar + Dark Eldar = Brothers in Arms

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT?

insaniak wrote:It was confirmed that who could ally with whom was the same. If it was also confirmed that the 'levels' of alliance are the same, I missed it.

MadCowCrazy wrote:

Lysenis wrote:HOLY FETH! You mean to say that as a BA player I can take now 6 Vindicators! Better yet I can take 6 Devastator Squads with Missiles! . . . wait. . . then this means that SW can have 6 long fang squads. . . Well that it folks SWs are still broken as gak.

Tsk tsk tsk... you think to small my child..... GKs with 12 units of Death Cults.... now THAT is broken as gak

tetrisphreak wrote:
Let's give it a month or three before declaring the new system broken. all armies have access, all armies have a chance to counter-punch.

Lysenis wrote:

MadCowCrazy wrote:

Lysenis wrote:HOLY FETH! You mean to say that as a BA player I can take now 6 Vindicators! Better yet I can take 6 Devastator Squads with Missiles! . . . wait. . . then this means that SW can have 6 long fang squads. . . Well that it folks SWs are still broken as gak.

Tsk tsk tsk... you think to small my child..... GKs with 12 units of Death Cults.... now THAT is broken as gak

*shivers* Yes you are quite right. . . . God what about all the Purifiers! 12 squads as troops!

streamdragon wrote:

tetrisphreak wrote:
Let's give it a month or three before declaring the new system broken. all armies have access, all armies have a chance to counter-punch.

My Tyranids would like a word with you...

InventionThirteen wrote:Hmmm I am struggling to see how Dark Eldar will work in this edition based off these threads and rumors etc.

I can't wait to look in the book and work out how this edition will plan out.

Fingers crossed this isn't some psychotic edition that alienates and destroys the fun of the game.

After all there are a lot of players that are just interested in social gaming and these new rules seem crazy and hell bent on massive collections, spam lists and rules loops.

tetrisphreak wrote:

Lysenis wrote:

MadCowCrazy wrote:

Lysenis wrote:HOLY FETH! You mean to say that as a BA player I can take now 6 Vindicators! Better yet I can take 6 Devastator Squads with Missiles! . . . wait. . . then this means that SW can have 6 long fang squads. . . Well that it folks SWs are still broken as gak.

Tsk tsk tsk... you think to small my child..... GKs with 12 units of Death Cults.... now THAT is broken as gak

*shivers* Yes you are quite right. . . . God what about all the Purifiers! 12 squads as troops!

If that means fewer psyflemen on the table, and rhinos die to 3 glancing hits...I"m for it!

Remember we're discussing extra SLOTS. both players still have a fixed number of POINTS to spend.

Therion wrote:

Homework assignments, people!

I already posted the IG army a page or two ago which would do absolutely brilliantly. 40 scoring IG models is easily enough at 2000 points when the fact remains they will table a vast majority of their opponents. If you don't think killing will play a large role you're only kidding yourself.

Here's a 2K Necron list for your entertainment. I think it goes rather well with the IG list that I posted. This one has allies, but just taking 5 or 6 Doom Scythes is so boring:

-Imotekh the Stormlord
-Chronotek
-Company Command Squad + Officer of the Fleet + 3 Flamers + Chimera Armoured Transport
-5 Warriors + Night Scythe
-5 Warriors + Night Scythe
-5 Warriors + Night Scythe
-5 Warriors + Night Scythe
-10 Veterans + 3 Meltaguns
-Vendetta + Heavy Bolters
-Doom Scythe
-Doom Scythe
-Doom Scythe
-Manticore

Fafnir wrote:

Nightbringer's Chosen wrote:Would someone with a reddit account please post in that thread asking about Heavy Vehicles/Deep Striking/Ordnance Shooting? Basically, I want to figure out if it is once again viable to Deep Strike my Monolith onto the board without worrying about it never getting to the battlefield, or if the the only benefit that tactic got is the slightly less lethal mishap table, and if it can fire all of its guns while moving or if the ordnance rule still prohibits that.

Guy with the book finished answering questions a long time ago.

GoDz BuZzSaW wrote:DRAIGO!!! AWW YEAH!!! TEAMING UP WITH EVERY ARMY TO SAVE THE UNIVERSE!!!

Zathras wrote:

GoDz BuZzSaW wrote:DRAIGO!!! AWW YEAH!!! TEAMING UP WITH EVERY ARMY TO SAVE THE UNIVERSE!!!

DRAIGO a-ah
Savior of the Universe
DRAIGO a-ah
He'll save every one of us

DRAIGO a-ah
He's a miracle

DRAIGO a-ah
King of the impossible

He's for every one of us
Stand for every one of us
He save with a mighty hand
Every man, every woman
Every child, with a mighty

DRAIGO

DRAIGO a-ah

DRAIGO a-ah
He'll save every one of us

Just a man
With a man's courage
You know he's
Nothing but a man
And he can never fail
No one but the pure at heart
May find the Golden Grail
...Oh..Oh........Oh..Oh ................

DRAIGO

Breotan wrote:

Brother Axel wrote:Eldar + Dark Eldar = Brothers in Arms

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT?

Actually, this one makes sense if you accept the old adage that blood is thicker than water. The differences between Eldar & Dark Eldar are basically political and not like the loyalist/chaos drama from the Horus Heresy. Think of the relationship as more "self-absorbed civilian" Eldar vs. "hard-line militant" Eldar instead of Chaos Eldar vs. Army Eldar. A member of a DE Cabal could easily have relatives, even siblings, following a path on one of the Craftworlds and vice versa. They may not like the other's decisions but I doubt they actually hate each other. Also, both can take Harlequins so there's a pretty strong connection there. I expect that when it serves their needs they'll ally up quickly, especially if Harlequins are pushing the agenda.

balsak_da_mighty wrote:So how long before 7th comes out?

This is just ridiculous.

Fafnir wrote:

Breotan wrote:

Brother Axel wrote:Eldar + Dark Eldar = Brothers in Arms

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT?

Actually, this one makes sense if you accept the old adage that blood is thicker than water. The differences between Eldar & Dark Eldar are basically political and not like the loyalist/chaos drama from the Horus Heresy. Think of the relationship as more "self-absorbed civilian" Eldar vs. "hard-line militant" Eldar instead of Chaos Eldar vs. Army Eldar. A member of a DE Cabal could easily have relatives, even siblings, following a path on one of the Craftworlds and vice versa. They may not like the other's decisions but I doubt they actually hate each other. Also, both can take Harlequins so there's a pretty strong connection there. I expect that when it serves their needs they'll ally up quickly, especially if Harlequins are pushing the agenda.

Essentially, the Dark Eldar looks at his Craftworld Eldar peer, and says to him, with deep angst in his voice and a pained expression "You used to be cool, man!"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

balsak_da_mighty wrote:So how long before 7th comes out?

This is just ridiculous.

Oh, don't worry, 7th edition, we'll just wave our models around in our hands while making whooshing noises, and occasionally smashing models into each other for climactic effect.

tetrisphreak wrote:None of us have even played a single game of 6th edition yet so many folks are putting it down at every chance.

I love the internet.

quilava1 wrote:Say, why's everyone hating on the allies rule. I think its great!!! No longer can anyone complain a codex is broken, as you can either ally their units or make a combo to destroy them. Now each codex won't be restricted to one or two lists, it opens new doors in list building. Not to mention it will be extremely fun to play

tuiman wrote:I think 1850 should be a good balance, so no abusing the 2 foc shennanigans, but large enough so you can take your bastions or allies etc

Matt.Kingsley wrote:I'm loving all the stuff I've seen from 6th except random charge range

insaniak wrote:
If all of your movement is set in stone, it just turns the game into a geometry session.

Reivax26 wrote:You could go to a 20 person tournament and literally see every codex in the game represented in some fashion.

That means that everyone will have to know what every army is capable of almost down to the unit entries in their dex.

tetrisphreak wrote:None of us have even played a single game of 6th edition yet so many folks are putting it down at every chance.

I love the internet.

Fafnir wrote:

insaniak wrote:
If all of your movement is set in stone, it just turns the game into a geometry session.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

insaniak wrote:

Fafnir wrote:

insaniak wrote:
If all of your movement is set in stone, it just turns the game into a geometry session.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

It is. I'm playing a wargame. Some people mind find it fun to calculate the exact distance between every unit on the board every turn (or to watch their opponent doing so...), but I think it would get old really quickly.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Why can't Tyranids ally with anyone?

If Daemons and Dark Eldar can work together, then why can't Tyranids and Tau? The relationship would be somewhat similar, no?

tetrisphreak wrote:Tau tanks aren't actually Fast, they can just buy an upgrade to fire as Fast, so presumably Jink won't work for them.

[–]Rixitotal[S] 2 points 13 minutes ago
no all skimmers get jink.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Can dreadnoughts and MC's overwatch? can tanks overwatch?

[–]Rixitotal[S] 2 points 15 minutes ago
yes, but cant shoot blast weapons so no battle canons on overwatch.

insaniak wrote:

Reivax26 wrote:You could go to a 20 person tournament and literally see every codex in the game represented in some fashion.

Um, that can happen now...

That means that everyone will have to know what every army is capable of almost down to the unit entries in their dex.

Why?

If I take Long Fangs in an Ultramarines list, why is it suddenly more important for my opponent to know what they do than it would have been if I were just playing Space Wolves?


If you're playig in tournaments and don't have a working knowledge of every codex, you're handicapping yourself. Allies won't change that.

alarmingrick wrote:double post?

Griever wrote:

insaniak wrote:

Reivax26 wrote:You could go to a 20 person tournament and literally see every codex in the game represented in some fashion.

Um, that can happen now...

That means that everyone will have to know what every army is capable of almost down to the unit entries in their dex.

Why?

If I take Long Fangs in an Ultramarines list, why is it suddenly more important for my opponent to know what they do than it would have been if I were just playing Space Wolves?


If you're playig in tournaments and don't have a working knowledge of every codex, you're handicapping yourself. Allies won't change that.

Another problem I have with the allies is that it allows people to mix/match marine codices together.

Why would somebody ever take a Space Marine Librarian, Space Marine, Tactical Squad, and Devastator Squad when they can just take their better Space Wolves counterparts with no repercussions? Why would somebody every take Space Marine Assault squads when they can take their Blood Angels counterparts (along with their better Librarians) that are scoring. This basically kills codex Space Marines.