Go ahead, let out ALL of your vitriol here. 5th Edition RUINED my Tau. RUINED!! I'm playing the Spayss Marinez 4 EVAH!

You read my mind.

See?
|
|
\/

I hate the Index Astartes!

5th edition killed my Marines!

I'm playing TAU~er, wait a minute...

When is 6th coming out? I'm tired of 5th, it sucks.

Space Marines are Toughness 4 now?!? WTF!!!

5th edition ruined my orks! I'm playing squats now.

Dakkaladd just passed all his command checks!

I'm just happy that we have a Kvetching Thread.

Honestly I don't know what to think about the new rules. Some of it straight up sucks, and some of it seems absolutely great.

Right now I just can't help but realize how damn good Chaos just got.

Basic Marines with BP+CCW + 2 Specials in 10 man squads, or better yet Plague Marines in the same configuration. Then for Heavy Support you get Defilers, who sit in hard cover and put down pie plates to handle hordes, and to do anti-tank you just use Meltas in your line squads.

Add in the Obligatory Demon Prince, maybe a sorcerer, or second Prince, and the Generic Greater Demon, and you're looking at something really good.

Marines can do something similar with Whirlwinds, I think Land Raiders will be sick again, finally.

Horde Orks just got silly, IMO, but once people catch on to the fact that Templates will be amazing, especially against what will turn into a game with masses and masses of troops, their impact will lessen.

Honestly, I'm just so fed up with 4th Ed that I welcome just about any change. I don't want to play 4th because of the stupid armies that exist in the rules as they are.

Since I'm making a bunch of dave taylor copycat IG, I actually look forward to making a bunch of flamethrower+HB squads. I'm kidding myself when I think the flamethrower will actually do anything but the thought is nice.

I don't know what if i should like the Tank approach 5th edition rules are taking. Pill boxes are not cool, but what do you do if the main gun is destroyed? I would burn some rubber and bring those Heavy Bolters n your opponents face, and then ram his precious tanks away with A14 front...heheh

See how that will work out, other than that looks good.

Greets
Schepp himself

Units/armies that were good in previous edition now bad? Check.
Units/armies that were bad in previous edition now 'must haves'? Check.
New Universal Special Rules that are rendered irrelevant by pet project armies? Check.
Further reduction of variety and choice in viable army lists? Check.
Elimination of smaller points game options that are scenario and objectives based (e.g. Combat Patrol and Killteam)? Check.
Cartoonish obsession with skulls to the point where Gwar and Napalm Death would think it's lame and overdone? Check.

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, this would be...a new edition of Warhammer 40,000! Fifth verse same as the first!

What can you do about it?


Privateer Press is my master now.

Infantry moving as fast as my tanks? Check.
Tanks sitting in cover with little movement? Check.
Having to take railheads to play against hordes? Check.
Shield drones' utility questionable again? Check.
Photon grenades just like everybody else's? Check.
Fire Warriors continue to suck, but are required? Check (x2).
Running to the center of the board to be in HTH FTW? Check.
Another edition with questionable editing and incomplete line of army Codexes? Check.

AT-43 looking better all the time? Check.

Here's a thought that just occured to me.

In 3rd ed. vehicles moved to deliver their assault troops.

In 4th ed. vehicles moved to get glancing only (on skimmers) and because they could be mobile and still shoot.

In 5th ed. vehicles don't have either of these incentives, sounds exciting!

syr8766 wrote:Units/armies that were good in previous edition now bad? Check.
Units/armies that were bad in previous edition now 'must haves'? Check.


Privateer Press is my master now.

All I can say is, enjoy Privateer Press's 'golden age' while it lasts, because it will end at some point.


When they finally max out their range of miniatures to the point where retailers can't add any new models without ceasing to carry another model PP will finally have to make the hard decisions GW has.

They'll either have to:

eliminate units or a whole race in order to make room for a new race which of course drives players away as their race/units are no longer supported.

Stop introducing new races and/or units which kills the 'new' factor of the game and puts it in into stagnation which most gamers can't stand.

Start revamping their miniatures line re-doing previous models and tweaking the rules to make sure people buy the new minis (because how else can you continue to sell models?).

Chuck the whole game and start over, which of course would drive everyone bonkers.

I mean seriously, everyone wants to paint GW as the devil but the reality is, what does a game company do when they have a game that has maxed out its shelf space? You have to figure out a way to keep selling new miniatures to the same players and that means you have to change SOMETHING.

You gotta tweak the rules (change the balance of power) to get people to buy new minis.
You gotta put out new versions of the same models to try to get people to 'upgrade' their existing models.
You gotta eventually phase out some models/units/armies in order to make room for new ones.


You can 'retire' an army and let the minis go OOP and keep a version of the rules in print, but honestly that solution doesn't keep the people who bought those armies very happy as players usually want some sort of update to their army eventually. Plus, if you ever want to tweak your core rules (to try to get people to buy new units) you now have to re-visit all these old OOP armies with their archive rules.

The only other alternative is just to say: "this game is done" and stop putting out new minis and rules for it, but again most players consider this kind of retirement death for their game.

Right or wrong, CHANGE is the lifeblood of miniature gaming and why Games Workshop games have managed to last 25 years.


So yeah, I welcome the change of 5th edition. The wording in the codices and rulebook continues to get tighter and improve and I like the core values they seem to be focused on.


bring it on, I can't wait!

yakface wrote:

syr8766 wrote:Units/armies that were good in previous edition now bad? Check.
Units/armies that were bad in previous edition now 'must haves'? Check.


Privateer Press is my master now.

All I can say is, enjoy Privateer Press's 'golden age' while it lasts, because it will end at some point.


When they finally max out their range of miniatures to the point where retailers can't add any new models without ceasing to carry another model PP will finally have to make the hard decisions GW has.

They'll either have to: [do a lot of things that are icky]

Oh, I know. Every game has a life span, and there will be an update/reboot at some point. The level of updating going on with Prime-Prime Remix was necessary in the beginning, but has to peter out eventually. With the "Pirates" book (essentially, a Warmachine 'codex') and the "Legends" book coming out, I'm curious to see what happens. I'm also curious to see what happens when PP starts dumping a lot of energy in a CMG. So yeah, the end will come, but for now...

No spase marinz in my game! HURR!

There are quite a few PP minis that could benefit from new sculpts (including everything in the Legion of Everblight).


.... oh yeah, uh, 5th edition man. I STILL can't afford a gaunt horde. Stinkin' 5th edition.

yakface wrote:

syr8766 wrote:Units/armies that were good in previous edition now bad? Check.
Units/armies that were bad in previous edition now 'must haves'? Check.


Privateer Press is my master now.

All I can say is, enjoy Privateer Press's 'golden age' while it lasts, because it will end at some point.


When they finally max out their range of miniatures to the point where retailers can't add any new models without ceasing to carry another model PP will finally have to make the hard decisions GW has.

They'll either have to:

eliminate units or a whole race in order to make room for a new race which of course drives players away as their race/units are no longer supported.

Stop introducing new races and/or units which kills the 'new' factor of the game and puts it in into stagnation which most gamers can't stand.

Start revamping their miniatures line re-doing previous models and tweaking the rules to make sure people buy the new minis (because how else can you continue to sell models?).

Chuck the whole game and start over, which of course would drive everyone bonkers.

I mean seriously, everyone wants to paint GW as the devil but the reality is, what does a game company do when they have a game that has maxed out its shelf space? You have to figure out a way to keep selling new miniatures to the same players and that means you have to change SOMETHING.

You gotta tweak the rules (change the balance of power) to get people to buy new minis.
You gotta put out new versions of the same models to try to get people to 'upgrade' their existing models.
You gotta eventually phase out some models/units/armies in order to make room for new ones.


You can 'retire' an army and let the minis go OOP and keep a version of the rules in print, but honestly that solution doesn't keep the people who bought those armies very happy as players usually want some sort of update to their army eventually. Plus, if you ever want to tweak your core rules (to try to get people to buy new units) you now have to re-visit all these old OOP armies with their archive rules.

The only other alternative is just to say: "this game is done" and stop putting out new minis and rules for it, but again most players consider this kind of retirement death for their game.

Right or wrong, CHANGE is the lifeblood of miniature gaming and why Games Workshop games have managed to last 25 years.


So yeah, I welcome the change of 5th edition. The wording in the codices and rulebook continues to get tighter and improve and I like the core values they seem to be focused on.


bring it on, I can't wait!

Yak, don't get baited by the Rabbi. We all know he's just trolling the
GW thread because of his VSF addiction to homebrew army lists and
ironclad landships.

People are still playing/buying the PP stuff for now, so
the game's pretty safe. I'm willing to bet it will be good for at least
another 10 years (that's five major expansions for each of the
game lines), in which I'll have played more games of PP games
than I ever did or will of GW ones. If it dies, it dies, but I'll still
have my armies and be happy that I painted them. I treat my
Eldar the same way.

I'm trying to understand the impetus of going back to the 3rd edition vehicle rules? Whats wrong with the S6 defensive weapons issue? Absent 2-3 specific vehicles, they seemed awfully weak as it was. How is GW going to sell vehicle minis if vehicles are nerfed?

jfrazell wrote:I'm trying to understand the impetus of going back to the 3rd edition vehicle rules? Whats wrong with the S6 defensive weapons issue? Absent 2-3 specific vehicles, they seemed awfully weak as it was. How is GW going to sell vehicle minis if vehicles are nerfed?

Apocalypse datafaxes.

Ardboyz tournaments.

S4 Defensive Weapons.

It's the single worst thing to happen to the game in the new edition.

BYE

yakface wrote:

syr8766 wrote:Units/armies that were good in previous edition now bad? Check.
Units/armies that were bad in previous edition now 'must haves'? Check.


Privateer Press is my master now.

All I can say is, enjoy Privateer Press's 'golden age' while it lasts, because it will end at some point.


When they finally max out their range of miniatures to the point where retailers can't add any new models without ceasing to carry another model PP will finally have to make the hard decisions GW has.

They'll either have to:

eliminate units or a whole race in order to make room for a new race which of course drives players away as their race/units are no longer supported.

Stop introducing new races and/or units which kills the 'new' factor of the game and puts it in into stagnation which most gamers can't stand.

Start revamping their miniatures line re-doing previous models and tweaking the rules to make sure people buy the new minis (because how else can you continue to sell models?).

Chuck the whole game and start over, which of course would drive everyone bonkers.

I mean seriously, everyone wants to paint GW as the devil but the reality is, what does a game company do when they have a game that has maxed out its shelf space? You have to figure out a way to keep selling new miniatures to the same players and that means you have to change SOMETHING.

You gotta tweak the rules (change the balance of power) to get people to buy new minis.
You gotta put out new versions of the same models to try to get people to 'upgrade' their existing models.
You gotta eventually phase out some models/units/armies in order to make room for new ones.


You can 'retire' an army and let the minis go OOP and keep a version of the rules in print, but honestly that solution doesn't keep the people who bought those armies very happy as players usually want some sort of update to their army eventually. Plus, if you ever want to tweak your core rules (to try to get people to buy new units) you now have to re-visit all these old OOP armies with their archive rules.

The only other alternative is just to say: "this game is done" and stop putting out new minis and rules for it, but again most players consider this kind of retirement death for their game.

Right or wrong, CHANGE is the lifeblood of miniature gaming and why Games Workshop games have managed to last 25 years.


So yeah, I welcome the change of 5th edition. The wording in the codices and rulebook continues to get tighter and improve and I like the core values they seem to be focused on.


bring it on, I can't wait!

I should save this to a text file and just cut and paste it every time to save myself the trouble of making this argument over and over.

Adamsouza, please exaplin how the defensive weapons shift from S6 to S4 continues to tighten and improve the rulebook?

I'm looking forward to correcting people still trying to use bits and pieces of 3rd edition rules under 5th edition.

And if 5th edition takes this away from me, I quit!

People on Dakka Still complaining . . .Check
Me complaining about people still complaining... Check

H.B.M.C. wrote:S4 Defensive Weapons.

It's the single worst thing to happen to the game in the new edition.

BYE

The only rule I don't like of the new rumors. Should be S5 if you ask me, S4 is ridiculous and S6 is hardly "defensive" IMO

Otherwise ... bring it on!

- Salvage

malfred wrote:

jfrazell wrote:I'm trying to understand the impetus of going back to the 3rd edition vehicle rules? Whats wrong with the S6 defensive weapons issue? Absent 2-3 specific vehicles, they seemed awfully weak as it was. How is GW going to sell vehicle minis if vehicles are nerfed?

Apocalypse datafaxes.

Ardboyz tournaments.

Apocalypse is irrelevant. This is a game not toy soldiers making "pew pew" noises (thats funny right thar I don't care who ya are)

Ardboyz. I have not seen a discussion concerning the evil brokenness of defensive weapons before.

malfred wrote:

yakface wrote:

syr8766 wrote:Units/armies that were good in previous edition now bad? Check.
Units/armies that were bad in previous edition now 'must haves'? Check.


Privateer Press is my master now.

All I can say is, enjoy Privateer Press's 'golden age' while it lasts, because it will end at some point.

Yak, don't get baited by the Rabbi. We all know he's just trolling the
GW thread because of his VSF addiction to homebrew army lists and
ironclad landships.

You cannot resist. It is your DESTINY. [/Palpatine]

beef wrote:People on Dakka Still complaining . . .Check
Me complaining about people still complaining... Check

Beef using horrible spelling, incomplete sentences and crap grammar.... UNCHECK!?!?!

WHO ARE YOU, AND WHAT HAVE YOU DONE WITH BEEF!?!?!

People are taking this thread a lot more seriously that I imagined. Behold the Power of Dakka, I guess.

Like I said before, I'm just going to play 5th for a while and see how it goes. If I have fun, then it's a success. Any other metric is meaningless to me.

KiMonarrez wrote:

beef wrote:People on Dakka Still complaining . . .Check
Me complaining about people still complaining... Check

Beef using horrible spelling, incomplete sentences and crap grammar.... UNCHECK!?!?!

WHO ARE YOU, AND WHAT HAVE YOU DONE WITH BEEF!?!?!

Maybe he's gone to 97% Lean?

Iorek wrote:People are taking this thread a lot more seriously that I imagined. Behold the Power of Dakka, I guess.

Like I said before, I'm just going to play 5th for a while and see how it goes. If I have fun, then it's a success. Any other metric is meaningless to me.

here IOREK, I will use the power of Dakka icons to return this thread to its rightfully place


5th Edition is the end of the World!
All my armies are useless!
They nerfed vehicles!
They nerfed troops!
Troops as scoring units? What were they thinking?
Who is Jervis and does he really have a son?
Why does Phil Kelly look like the kid I will meet at the door with a Beretta I happened to be "cleaning" when he comes to pick up my then teenage daughter?
How come my demons can't assault after deepstrike but teminators can shoot? THATS NOT FAIR!
How come I never win at tournaments when I bring my fluffy all troop Kroot mercs?
How come my marines can't have baneblades and Shokk Attack Guns? We're the masters of the freeking universe-whats the deal?

And lastly, Ramming? my predators will be pwoned by Lemans. ITS NOT FAIR!!!

jfrazell wrote:

here IOREK, I will use the power of Dakka icons to return this thread to its rightfully place


5th Edition is the end of the World!
All my armies are useless!
They nerfed vehicles!
They nerfed troops!
Troops as scoring units? What were they thinking?
Who is Jervis and does he really have a son?
Why does Phil Kelly look like the kid I will meet at the door with a Beretta I happened to be "cleaning" when he comes to pick up my then teenage daughter?
How come my demons can't assault after deepstrike but teminators can shoot? THATS NOT FAIR!
How come I never win at tournaments when I bring my fluffy all troop Kroot mercs?
How come my marines can't have baneblades and Shokk Attack Guns? We're the masters of the freeking universe-whats the deal?

And lastly, Ramming? my predators will be pwoned by Lemans. ITS NOT FAIR!!!

All of this can be fixed with APOCALYPSE!1!!1!!ELEVENTYONE!

jfrazell wrote:

Iorek wrote:People are taking this thread a lot more seriously that I imagined. Behold the Power of Dakka, I guess.

Like I said before, I'm just going to play 5th for a while and see how it goes. If I have fun, then it's a success. Any other metric is meaningless to me.

here IOREK, I will use the power of Dakka icons to return this thread to its rightfully place


5th Edition is the end of the World!
All my armies are useless!
They nerfed vehicles!
They nerfed troops!
Troops as scoring units? What were they thinking?
Who is Jervis and does he really have a son?
Why does Phil Kelly look like the kid I will meet at the door with a Beretta I happened to be "cleaning" when he comes to pick up my then teenage daughter?
How come my demons can't assault after deepstrike but teminators can shoot? THATS NOT FAIR!
How come I never win at tournaments when I bring my fluffy all troop Kroot mercs?
How come my marines can't have baneblades and Shokk Attack Guns? We're the masters of the freeking universe-whats the deal?

And lastly, Ramming? my predators will be pwoned by Lemans. ITS NOT FAIR!!!

Oye, is this guy meshuggener or what?

5th. edition killed my Tyranids I am gonna... wait did it?

So far I've played 5th edition with orks, marines and tau. Overall the game is the same. I think I like the deployment changes the most, though overall it seems like things move much faster than in 4th. By the way, outflanking is painful and will definitely add a new element of strategy to the game.

the only problem i see is that defensive weapons are different within the armies. For Eldar, S6 is defensive, for Space Marines and Tau, S5 would cut it. For Imperials, it could be S4 i guess. The Imperial gear always struck me a rather lumbering, so no "scoop and shoot"...

Greets
Schepp himself

Actually thats a worthy point-assign "defensive" to the actual weapon system or specificc race. Defensive still functions, but its effective value changes. Good idea-too bad.

This does annoy me about the eldar. I loved it as they could be comprised as a mother of a shooty list and I liked the concept of not relying on low AP but sheer weight of fire to overcome things. This really crimps that (even wave serpents which I'd proffer was not what people were annoyed about).

How about they just include whether or not a weapon is "defensive" in the army list section. For example:

Rhinos: Both Storm Bolters are Defensive

Chimeras: Hull mounted Heavy Bolter and Storm Bolter/Heavy Stubber are Defensive

Falcons: Underslung twin linked Shurikun Catapults/Cannons are Defensive

Trukks: Big Shootas are Defensive

etc.

I know, I know. Just let your minds boggle for a minute.

That would mean they'd have to actually read the old Codices and make decisions instead of just focusing on new stuff.

The old codices will be set in stone for a longer period than the main rules. If that sounds like something they'd do on Bizarro World, you am right.

stonefox wrote:Since I'm making a bunch of dave taylor copycat IG, I actually look forward to making a bunch of flamethrower+HB squads. I'm kidding myself when I think the flamethrower will actually do anything but the thought is nice.

Hey never under estimate them IG flamers stonefox! I had my Smurf friend DS a 5 man termie squad right next to a 5 man command squad of IG, all 4 guardsmen armed with flamers...I killed 3 of his termies! albeit I did good with the wounding rolls, he did even better with 3/4 1's for his saves.

My biggest complaint about 5th edition?

It makes Apocalypse look fast.

My second is, I probably won't be able to play any of the 'I R BAD' folks before 4th goes away and they'll blame the spanking on 5th.

Stupid 5th, taking all my glory.

The Power Cosmic wrote:How about they just include whether or not a weapon is "defensive" in the army list section. For example:

Rhinos: Both Storm Bolters are Defensive

Chimeras: Hull mounted Heavy Bolter and Storm Bolter/Heavy Stubber are Defensive

Falcons: Underslung twin linked Shurikun Catapults/Cannons are Defensive

Trukks: Big Shootas are Defensive

etc.

I know, I know. Just let your minds boggle for a minute.

sounds smart.

Skimmers block LoS again. good stuff.

Voodoo Boyz wrote:Oye, is this guy meshuggener or what?

Oy is Jewish*. Oye is Spanish.

Easy mistake, but I'm both, so I can't let it go.





*Or Yiddish, whatever. Part of being an American Jew is not caring about your heritage once your Bar Mitzvah's done and the checks have all rolled in.

Dead Horse wrote:

Voodoo Boyz wrote:Oye, is this guy meshuggener or what?

Oy is Jewish*. Oye is Spanish.

Easy mistake, but I'm both, so I can't let it go.

*Or Yiddish, whatever. Part of being an American Jew is not caring about your heritage once your Bar Mitzvah's done and the checks have all rolled in.

Oh, dead horse, you just keep on beating that subject don't you?

Get it? Get it? Ah-ha!

syr8766 wrote:

Dead Horse wrote:

Voodoo Boyz wrote:Oye, is this guy meshuggener or what?

Oy is Jewish*. Oye is Spanish.

Easy mistake, but I'm both, so I can't let it go.

*Or Yiddish, whatever. Part of being an American Jew is not caring about your heritage once your Bar Mitzvah's done and the checks have all rolled in.

Oh, dead horse, you just keep on beating that subject don't you?

At least it wasn't meat.

I'm not Jewish, but I'm from Bensonhurst in Brooklyn, so I'm like honorary.

This means I only know how to speak the lingo, but I was never taught the proper way to write it; so technically it's all kosher.

Voodoo Boyz wrote:I'm not Jewish, but I'm from Bensonhurst in Brooklyn, so I'm like honorary.

This means I only know how to speak the lingo, but I was never taught the proper way to write it; so technically it's all kosher.

That all depends on how we kill you.

That's a joke people. A quote from Monty Python even. Just sayin'.

syr8766 wrote:

Voodoo Boyz wrote:I'm not Jewish, but I'm from Bensonhurst in Brooklyn, so I'm like honorary.

This means I only know how to speak the lingo, but I was never taught the proper way to write it; so technically it's all kosher.

That all depends on how we kill you.

That's a joke people. A quote from Monty Python even. Just sayin'.

Point taken.

Honestly though, my honorary Jewishness was confirmed by a Rabbi at the age of 5. Granted at the time I didn't know Matza from a Moyle, but I knew that if you wanted a good Pastrami on Rye you went to a certain deil two blocks over.

According to my parents the Rabbi said "Meh, close enough - he's in."

I too claim honorary Jew status, as not only have I had a Rabbi give the blessing at my wedding (The great and eloquent SYR8766 himself), but I was sent a membership card to the "World Jewish Congress" after donating to the Simon Wiesenthal (sp?) Center when I graduated college.

So Shalom biyatch

The Power Cosmic wrote:How about they just include whether or not a weapon is "defensive" in the army list section. For example:

Rhinos: Both Storm Bolters are Defensive

Chimeras: Hull mounted Heavy Bolter and Storm Bolter/Heavy Stubber are Defensive

Falcons: Underslung twin linked Shurikun Catapults/Cannons are Defensive

Trukks: Big Shootas are Defensive

etc.

I know, I know. Just let your minds boggle for a minute.

It seems pretty clear that GW has changed their concept of what a defensive weapon is in the new edition. They obviously don't want weapons like Heavy Bolters, Shuriken Cannons and Big Shootas to be a defensive weapon.

Whether you agree with it or not (and its clear that several people don't) they apparently want to emphasize that vehicles which stay still have a better ability to fire their weapons than those vehicles which move.

Given that Troops seem to be the new focus of the game and all of these previous 'defensive' weapons tend to be troop killers perhaps they want to make players controlling vehicles make choices about how they want their vehicle to perform.


I, for one, will wait to play the game until I render my judgement about the change in defensive weaponry status. With the reduction in AT weapons in the new codices, the new vehicle damage table and the ability for vehicles to have cover saves the balance of power regarding vehicles has definitely been altered. Removing their ability to fire multiple weapons with a Strength higher than 4 may be needed to keep them at their current points value.

Where's BenlAllen when we need him? His GF from a few years back was applying to rabbinic school, IIRC. Pretty soon we'll have enough to make a minyan. Keinahurra!

Whitescar wrote:I too claim honorary Jew status, as not only have I had a Rabbi give the blessing at my wedding (The great and eloquent SYR8766 himself), but I was sent a membership card to the "World Jewish Congress" after donating to the Simon Wiesenthal (sp?) Center when I graduated college.

So Shalom biyatch

Well in addition to the Pastrami confirmation I've also seen Fiddler on the Roof like 50 times!

So Shhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaalllllllllllooooooooooooooom right back at ya!

Oy, I'm one shickered gentile right now.

yakface wrote:

The Power Cosmic wrote:How about they just include whether or not a weapon is "defensive" in the army list section. For example:

Rhinos: Both Storm Bolters are Defensive

Chimeras: Hull mounted Heavy Bolter and Storm Bolter/Heavy Stubber are Defensive

Falcons: Underslung twin linked Shurikun Catapults/Cannons are Defensive

Trukks: Big Shootas are Defensive

etc.

I know, I know. Just let your minds boggle for a minute.

It seems pretty clear that GW has changed their concept of what a defensive weapon is in the new edition. They obviously don't want weapons like Heavy Bolters, Shuriken Cannons and Big Shootas to be a defensive weapon.

Whether you agree with it or not (and its clear that several people don't) they apparently want to emphasize that vehicles which stay still have a better ability to fire their weapons than those vehicles which move.

Given that Troops seem to be the new focus of the game and all of these previous 'defensive' weapons tend to be troop killers perhaps they want to make players controlling vehicles make choices about how they want their vehicle to perform.


I, for one, will wait to play the game until I render my judgement about the change in defensive weaponry status. With the reduction in AT weapons in the new codices, the new vehicle damage table and the ability for vehicles to have cover saves the balance of power regarding vehicles has definitely been altered. Removing their ability to fire multiple weapons with a Strength higher than 4 may be needed to keep them at their current points value.

Trying to get back on topic to 5th (was that even the topic?), I'd like to think that what the Developers want to see is the game be a bloody back and forth struggle for both sides. While at the same time, they want it to be about what the armies are supposed to be made of: Troops.

Right now they look at the game and in the majority of circumstances of "broken" armies, you're looking at just about everything except troops doing the hard work. Super Fex's, Heavy Skimmer Tanks, Elite heavy infantry, etc. Very rarely (in fact generally in the case of Orks and somewhat Chaos, which are both supposedly 5th ed enabled dex's) will you see the Troops be the strongest thing in the list. Sure Marines can get by with lots of Troops and do well with either Pods or Min/Max, but in both cases it's something that was being abused in the unit entry, not so much the actual troop itself.

Most games with higher end armies revolve around having stuff that just flat out refuses to die most of the time, or in some few cases, so much stuff on the table that you can't kill it all in 6 turns.

I'm being cautiously optimistic about 5th, if for nothing else than it'll change the balance dynamic of the game, which right now really does revolve around the lists than can put down the super units that just refuse to die when played right.

yakface wrote:With the reduction in AT weapons in the new codices, the new vehicle damage table and the ability for vehicles to have cover saves the balance of power regarding vehicles has definitely been altered. Removing their ability to fire multiple weapons with a Strength higher than 4 may be needed to keep them at their current points value.

It's scary how much this mentality makes sense, Yak, but I'd like to offer the argument that what tanks do for their points is generally not congruent to the same number of points in an infantry squad tasked with the same role. While they have increased the potential for tanks to survive, they haven't done so by much. In a game where enough people complain about gunlines, you'd think they'd want to encourage vehicle movement.

Ah well... we'll see what comes. I'm just waiting to see how guard shape up. I'd like to shelve my CSM and Eldar for a while and still have a reasonable chance of being competitive.


oh yeah...
*insert sarcastic kvetch here*

I just want honest to goodness good rules that dont insult the players of any age strata. Not to be patronized.

Saying that rules in 5th ed are "better than 4th ed" or "getting better all of the time" is like gold plating a fething turd.

Its still a turd. It still stinks up the place.

I am so pissed about th rules because I really want this game and GW to be successful, but they seem to be almost too...stubborn to do that.

Since I have only seen the 5th ed PDF, and not the actual rulebook, I will reserve the "ultimate death crotch punch" until then.

But my faith is slim because GW has QUITE a track record.

Voodoo Boyz wrote:So Shhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaalllllllllllooooooooooooooom right back at ya!

dear lord that is funny.

Hellfury wrote:I just want honest to goodness good rules that dont insult the players of any age strata. Not to be patronized.

Saying that rules in 5th ed are "better than 4th ed" or "getting better all of the time" is like gold plating a fething turd.

Its still a turd. It still stinks up the place.

I am so pissed about th rules because I really want this game and GW to be successful, but they seem to be almost too...stubborn to do that.

Since I have only seen the 5th ed PDF, and not the actual rulebook, I will reserve the "ultimate death crotch punch" until then.

But my faith is slim because GW has QUITE a track record.

Question:

Did you ever like the GAME of 40K? Because if so I'd be interested to hear about how the rules now are worse than back then. I mean specifically. How were those old games of 40K (rules-wise) fun for you but they're not now.

Blackheart666, I keep deleting your posts because they are trolling with no value to the thread. If you continue to troll, you will recieve a temporary suspension from Dakka.

Thank you.

I think it comes down to faith in GW for me. Or rather the lack of it.

GW have a track record of taking a basic good idea and totally ballsing it up through either ineptitude or overriding commercial considerations.

After 20 years when they still haven't got the game working properly, what are the chances this time around? Slim, I'd say judging from past experience. Jervisisation, for me, is actually a step in the right direction. But what is really needed is a rewrite from the ground up. Which just won't ever happen.

I'd take a £50 punt at a game on the offchance of it being a good 'un. Unfortunately 40k will require me to punt considerably more than £50 to give it a proper whirl (can't see 5th ed. being worth playing at below 1000-1500 points), with poor odds...

Compare that to punting £25 on a starter set for Warmachine and getting hooked from the get-go. Or AT-43 which also saw me buy in and is now available for £26 for Op. Damocles.

Maybe if I liked Spase Marienz (hurr), but I don't. I want IG. Or Tau. Or even DE. And just possibly Ordo Malleus.

And so when are the Kvetch coming to 40k then? (http://www.123exp-science.com/t/01551216979/)

yakface wrote:Question:

Did you ever like the GAME of 40K? Because if so I'd be interested to hear about how the rules now are worse than back then. I mean specifically. How were those old games of 40K (rules-wise) fun for you but they're not now.

A fair question.

At one time, yes. I also want to continue to enjoy it, hence my zealous fervor for change.

Rogue trader was far too much for me (and I am sure many people) to stomach, but the imagery and models were cool.
I got back in during the end of 2nd ed/beginning of 3rd ed, not having a whole lot of wargaming experience under my belt, and not knowing the difference between good rules and bad rules. I loved the models and wanted to play the game that was a decent social item in game shops during the mid late nineties.
After playing in 3rd ed for a few years, some glaring oddities that didn't make much sense began to slowly surface in my awareness. I became more discerning. I grew up, and the game I loved wasn't keeping up with my maturity level (which we all know, isn't often that high. This doesn't say much for 40K).
I wont go into an exhaustive list, but here is a couple examples:
*Leadership: It plays barely any role in the game. Troops sit there and duke it out to the whim of the player controlling them, and even the wimpiest models seem to stay stuck in. I know this is a matter of die rolls, but there seems something flawed when you execute a well timed maneuver only to fail when you cant break a unit. I would say the dice gods hate me, and they probably do, but it was far to consistent over a decade to ignore.
*The turn structure: UGOIGO seems somehow wrong for 40K even though it seems well suited for basically most of GW's other games. The lack of reaction to an action seems like a fundamental flaw in how 40K is designed. Its why first turn is such a huge advantage. There is no recourse, you simply have to suck it up and remove your casualties hoping you have enough left over from a devastating turn to affect your opponent. Sometimes army setup cant help you against a good first turn.
Inconsistency: This happened alot in 3rd ed codecies. The most recent example is the Johnson/Kelly schism. Quite glaring differences in design style. This doesn't help the game. Yet notice how all of the army lists in the 3rd ed rulebook were pretty balanced with each other. 4th ed is so flawed they didn't even get a chance to visit all of the codecies before 5th ed revamp. Just look at the FAQ you have assembled and it should be obvious.

What keeps happening (as evinced by 4th ed), is that GW keeps compounding on the 3rd ed rules flaws, instead of just biting the bullet and fixing them at their root. Sure, you can make someone feel better by giving them medication, but in order for that person to be healthy, they have to take care of themselves. Same thing goes for 40K. In order for the game to be truly healthy, you need long term goals, like making a solid rules set.

We aren't talking about a game where the company charges $.20 a model, with shoddy rules. I could forgive a company their rules writing in the face of the money they charge. But GW has been around for faaar too long and charge quite a premium to be this remiss with such solid IP. Lesser companies utilize their [design] resources far better than GW has demonstrated.

Like I said in the post you quoted, I am not giving final damnation on 5th ed until I see the final product in my hands and play quite a few games to get the feel for how the rules have changed. Until that time, its hard for me to think that they are doing anything other than gold plating a turd. I feel that I am being suckered into another iteration of a badly worded, ill conceived 3rd ed, spin-off that requires a hundred+ pages of fan made FAQs. [and then get no official support from GW...where are those 4th ed FAQ's again? Atleast in 3rd ed, we got them. Hell, we even got a WD with actual content during that time.]

I hope that helps you understand where I am coming from.

Voodoo Boyz wrote:

Whitescar wrote:I too claim honorary Jew status, as not only have I had a Rabbi give the blessing at my wedding (The great and eloquent SYR8766 himself), but I was sent a membership card to the "World Jewish Congress" after donating to the Simon Wiesenthal (sp?) Center when I graduated college.

So Shalom biyatch

Well in addition to the Pastrami confirmation I've also seen Fiddler on the Roof like 50 times!

So Shhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaalllllllllllooooooooooooooom right back at ya!

Oy, I'm one shickered gentile right now.

Gawd, I have not seen that in a long time. Brilliant.

And that's EXACTLY how the rabbinate is, by the way.

Images of missing Primarch Rabbi Wabbinowitz, leading the Great Crusade and doing it kosher style!

My favorite 5th edition rumor to mock is this one:

"No-Argument" cover saves: Your opponent says what they think it is; if you disagree they still gets the cover save but with a –1 ~That's and interesting new concept for GW to throw into a ruleset.

I kinda hope this is a joke, because if this is true, I REALLY think GW needs to head back to game design 101.

Here's the source:

http://belloflostsouls.blogspot.com/2008/04/latest-5th-edition-news.html

For the record, I think 5th edition will improve the game, but will not be a big enough overhaul to bring the rules to a level of quality to rival more modern miniature war games such as AT-43, FoW, or Warmachine/Hordes.

Happy Gaming,

Russ

P.S. The above doesn't mean I think 40k will cease to be dominant miniature war game played on the planet. Rules are only part of the equation. 40k still has the best fluff and models on the planet (IMHO) and I think this overcomes the rules weeknesses that many of us whine about. And its why people like the good folks at Adeptus Windy Cit and Yak are willing to spend hours writting their own "adendum" to the base rule set to make the game more playable in a competative environment.

One thing I have to add (in favor of that defensive weapon rule!) is, that there should be a difference if the vehicle moves or not. There should be a decision involved. In 4th, especially for skimmers, there wasn't. You simply moved and didn't lose much.

Greets
Schepp himself

5th edition ran over my dog.

And slept with my girlfriend.

And virused my computer.

And lowered my stock portfolio.

I hate fifth edition.

stonefox wrote:Since I'm making a bunch of dave taylor copycat IG, I actually look forward to making a bunch of flamethrower+HB squads. I'm kidding myself when I think the flamethrower will actually do anything but the thought is nice.

Two words for you: "Plasma throwers"

As long as your consistant it's legal!

I was gonna believe you 'til you said

Kid_Kyoto wrote:5th edition ran over my dog.

And slept with my girlfriend.

And virused my computer.

And lowered my stock portfolio.

I hate fifth edition.

We're all basement-dwellers here. Nice try though.

Kid_Kyoto wrote:5th edition ran over my dog.

And slept with my girlfriend.

And virused my computer.

And lowered my stock portfolio.

I hate fifth edition.

You know, a little rearrangement of your sentences would yield surprisingly insightful
results.

malfred wrote:You know, a little rearrangement of your sentences would yield surprisingly insightful
results.

Oooh... lemme try...


5th edition lowered my computer.

And slept with my dog.

And virused fifth edition.

And ran over my stock portfolio.

I hate my girlfriend.


That makes less sense than it did before...

BYE

Schepp himself wrote:One thing I have to add (in favor of that defensive weapon rule!) is, that there should be a difference if the vehicle moves or not. There should be a decision involved. In 4th, especially for skimmers, there wasn't. You simply moved and didn't lose much.

Greets
Schepp himself

I like your EU flag.

5th edition doesn't have enough EU flags in it.

yakface wrote:All I can say is, enjoy Privateer Press's 'golden age' while it lasts, because it will end at some point.

When they finally max out their range of miniatures to the point where retailers can't add any new models without ceasing to carry another model PP will finally have to make the hard decisions GW has.

...

Right or wrong, CHANGE is the lifeblood of miniature gaming and why Games Workshop games have managed to last 25 years.

So yeah, I welcome the change of 5th edition. The wording in the codices and rulebook continues to get tighter and improve and I like the core values they seem to be focused on.


bring it on, I can't wait!

QFT. Well-put, thanks Yak!

My main worries are:

1. The game will slow down considerably. Deployment will be quicker, but the new wound resolution system (in original leaked PDF it's used for both shooting and combat), the new LOS rules (we will need to check model's eye view quite frequently now), the increased cover options that will have to be negotiated (I'm not talking just about terrain but also about troops in the way), plus the significantly increased number of models due to the focus on troops, will lead to a game that will take perhaps 20% to 30% longer to play. So instead of playing two games on a saturday afternoon, it will just be one game; instead of four games/day at our local tournaments, we only be able to play three. Alternately, we may be forced into smaller point totals for tournaments (perhaps 1350 instead of 1500). Many of you complain about the focus on elites and FA in 4ed; it did make for a faster game to play (and to paint).

2. More opportunities for discord between players. This is my main worry. The LOS rules in the original PDF seem to open up many new opportunities for debate. The very fact that there have been brand new rumours about a codified dispute-solving mechanism for arguments about cover saves indicates that the designers have realized that these debates will now be a common feature of 5th Ed play. Once again, these debates will not be about "is this terrain 4+ or 5+ save?", but whether "the arm of that intervening model gives me a 4+ save!" Players will now be forced into a constantly deciding between two unpalatable choices:

a) completely trust what my opponent says about what he/she can see from the model's eye (and thus worry about whether I'm being a chump and a fool) or
b) being an *** and not trust my opponent and double-check every thing he/she says about what he/she can see.

I know that I will choose a) but I think it will mean that I'm less satisfied with my experience playing the game.

On the other hand, I'm looking forward to retooling my lists and strategies for the new edition. Hopefully, the final rules will have been cleaned up in comparison to the leaked version.

I don't think that 1500-pts games will go considerably slower. 40k 5th places a premium on vehicle Transports to get Troops where they need to be, so that will speed things quite a bit. I think, on net, 1500 pts will be OK. And it'll be nice to see a step away from the oversized 1750 / 1850 pt games.

Besides, weren't laser pointers specially created to deal with 40k LOS issues?

Kid_Kyoto wrote:5th edition ran over my girlfriend.

And slept with my dog.

And virused my computer.

And lowered my stock portfolio.

I hate fifth edition.

If the situation were as above, I think you'd be crying a lot more.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Kid_Kyoto wrote:5th edition ran over my girlfriend.

And slept with my dog.

And virused my computer.

And lowered my stock portfolio.

I hate fifth edition.

If the situation were as above, I think you'd be crying a lot more.

Nah. My dog's a bitch.

yakface wrote:Right or wrong, CHANGE is the lifeblood of miniature gaming and why Games Workshop games have managed to last 25 years.

Well, call me a cynic (actually, you don't have to call me a cynic as I know I am one), but however right or wrong that comment is Yak, I can't get past the fact that the change in GW's rules are not borne of a desire to improve the game, such as the guys writing BattleTech who have strived for years to get a tight ruleset, but to alter the rules to push a new shiny model that they've just made.

Change isn't always bad, but GW change is just to sell something new and to make things we already own worse.

BYE

H.B.M.C. wrote:

yakface wrote:Right or wrong, CHANGE is the lifeblood of miniature gaming and why Games Workshop games have managed to last 25 years.

Well, call me a cynic (actually, you don't have to call me a cynic as I know I am one), but however right or wrong that comment is Yak, I can't get past the fact that the change in GW's rules are not borne of a desire to improve the game, such as the guys writing BattleTech who have strived for years to get a tight ruleset, but to alter the rules to push a new shiny model that they've just made.

Change isn't always bad, but GW change is just to sell something new and to make things we already own worse.

BYE

Ehhh, I'm not so sure I'm 100% behind this kind of thought.

IF what you were saying was true. Then it makes sense to see Terminators get invalidated as most people have them (2 Assault Cannons or heavy weapons per squad). Or Fex's become stupid with more than one gun on them, or for Falcons to get nerfed into Oblivion.

But at the same time, they're not making things that already suck like Spawn, Possessed, Chaos Terminators, or all the other shiny new models they put out all that much "better".

I think they're making the changes they are because they want to balance the game. I think they see the "Power Lists" as a mistake to be corrected.

Kid_Kyoto wrote:And lowered my stock portfolio...

If you're stock's with GW I wouldn't tempt fate.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Besides, weren't laser pointers specially created to deal with 40k LOS issues?

Are you serious???? Does anyone actually use a laser pointer? I've never felt the need to use a laser pointer and I have a knee-jerk reaction against such things. It sorta brings up images of TFG for me.

EDIT: I hope your /sarcasm was on JohnhwangDD, because mine wasn't and I took what you said literally.

I DO remember a laser pointer shadow box kind of thing
that was built to stand at floor level and point laser beams
at model's eye level.

I used to play a guy who used a laser pointer, and he was a TFG. Especially when I asked to use it in order to prove him wrong (turned out I was right, and he was ultra-pissy about it).

Personally I like the part of the 5th edition rumours where on a roll of 5+ Jervis Johnson promises to come to your house and piss in your corn flakes.

Nurglitch wrote:Personally I like the part of the 5th edition rumours where on a roll of 5+ Jervis Johnson promises to come to your house and piss in your corn flakes.

On a natural 6 he eats asparagus before he does.

Polonius wrote:

Nurglitch wrote:Personally I like the part of the 5th edition rumours where on a roll of 5+ Jervis Johnson promises to come to your house and piss in your corn flakes.

On a natural 6 he eats asparagus before he does.

Mmmmmm.... fragrant.

In all seriousness, I'm not horribly worried about 5th edition. I have some concerns, but as the owner of two armies each over 6000points painted, with 4k each of two semi painted armies, I know I can handle changes in game balance.

One thing I've noticed in a lot of threads is that people post, making sweeping generalizations based on their own, often minotiry, circumstances. I'm not calling anybody out, but if you're a member of a solid gaming club where everybody has large collections, or a brutal balls out competitive clan, or game exclusively with 4 other dudes in your basement, that colors how you view changes to the game. I propose that it would help discourse if people, when talking about the implications a chance will have on the way they play, or while denying that any such change would occur, they remind/inform us as to HOW they play.

A guy with 6000pts of Black Legion that plays for fun probably loves the new Chaos book, while the guy with a carefully crafted 2000pt Emperor's children army with all sonic weaponry and 12 Daemonettes on steeds feels a little differently. If you can't see how one person would have far more cause then the other to feel bad, then you really need an empathy upgrade.

I'm certainly not calling anybody's opinions incorrect, quite the opposite. When I realized that JohnH, for example, plays casually in small point games, his posts made more sense! Knowing that HBMC games with a clutch of hard core gamers, I see where his critiques of GW's design come from.

Context is everything, especially for opinions. Keep that in mind when posting, because this is the internet: you have to assume that everybody that reads your words will assume the worst.

Schepp himself wrote:One thing I have to add (in favor of that defensive weapon rule!) is, that there should be a difference if the vehicle moves or not. There should be a decision involved. In 4th, especially for skimmers, there wasn't. You simply moved and didn't lose much.

I think I would be much happier making decisions about how many weapons could fire off my tanks if I knew my tanks might survive more than a round, or at least be able to dish out damage every turn like the almighty Dev squad. However, in a game where shaking a vehicle (or worse, stunning it!) means your decisions are made for you, I don't think arbitrarily making the vehicle's abilities decline is the way to go.

I'd be really happy if they incorporated structure points for normal vehicles. It would really help distinguish how tough a tank is, and might even lead to seeing landraiders on the table again. The binary nature of tanks is frustrating for the points you pay.

Falcons get a lot of flakk because they can deliver troops to their location without dying. But realistically, a Falcon doesn't get many opportunities to dish out damage. I haven't heard one iota of kvetching about Prisms--probably because they don't transport anything.

Devilfish were a pain because of Chevron maneuver, but now that skimmers won't block line of sight, that's taken care of, and there really isn't a need to decrease the firepower of such an expensive tank (same goes for the bloody chimera!)

I don't know anyone who complained about predators, leman russes, or landraiders... of course, since they're getting a universal points drop, maybe that'll work out with increased survivability & decreased firepower.

I know I'll be planting my Leman Russ & Demolisher in a copse of trees with sponson plasma cannons, waiting for the opponent to come to me. 4th was nice in that it encouraged me to move my tanks with my infantry--I could fire ordnance on the move, albeit with less accuracy, but that's okay because I could actually support my fragile troops who've lost their efficiency by moving.

Uh, skimmers never did block line of sight in 4th edition. See p.20 of the rulebook.

whitedragon wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:Besides, weren't laser pointers specially created to deal with 40k LOS issues?

Are you serious???? Does anyone actually use a laser pointer? I've never felt the need to use a laser pointer and I have a knee-jerk reaction against such things. It sorta brings up images of TFG for me.

EDIT: I hope your /sarcasm was on JohnhwangDD, because mine wasn't and I took what you said literally.

Sort of serious.

I own a laser pointer, and have used it in the past where my opponents *insisted* on "true" model's eye LOS.

It is a pain in the ass to play this way, and for that reason, I prefer Magic Cylinder and "solid" objects. It keeps everything a lot simpler and less wierd.

But I'll have you know that I've used that laser pointer to thread ML fire over woods, *through* a hole in a building wall, around a hill to take out a Whirlwind...

Again, if it were my choice, that kind of shooting would be illegal, but if GW insists on true model's eye LOS, I'm sure that the batteries are still good.

KiMonarrez wrote:

beef wrote:People on Dakka Still complaining . . .Check
Me complaining about people still complaining... Check

Beef using horrible spelling, incomplete sentences and crap grammar.... UNCHECK!?!?!

WHO ARE YOU, AND WHAT HAVE YOU DONE WITH BEEF!?!?!

I have started an English Lit degree so I thought it would be wise to spell things correctly.

But dont fear my late nights posts will still occasionally be badly written.

Especially after you have seen the pub close up.

A lot of what JohnHwangDD is saying makes sense.

It would easier and quicker if cover was done in simple blocks. There's nothing tactically skilfull about moving a model an inch left to get or avoid an LoS through a window.

I also like the 3+/5+ cover option.

BTW one nice thing for Tau is that Smart Missiles ignore LoS so they will ignore all cover if it is done on pure, natural whole grain LoS.

I have to agree with what Polonius has said, I think it depends on the background that various posters come from. I am not a huge fan of the new 5th edition rules mainly from the point Polonius made about have a finely crafted army based around a certain number of points.

I am married, I have a kid and I make enough for the three of us to get buy but not much more than that. I don't have a whole lot of time for myself, and I am into more than just tabletop gaming. I have various video games, my computer, TV, Movies and stuff like that which all vies for my time.

It took me a year to compile, assemble, convert and paint a Godzilla Tyranid list. I remember when the codex first came out, many Dakka-ites thought it was a dumb idea to have that many MC's, but suddenly it became a huge hardcore army. The places where I have played have been in a hardcore crowd, so I played with the big dogs.

Is the army fluffy, no not really, but I liked it. I like big bugs! I had won the majority of my games, but I didn't have much left and my opponents had fun. I remember asking the guys I gamed with if they minded the army and they didn't.

Now I am faced with the fact that fifth edition has made my army less viable for lack of better words. It stinks when I have some really cool converted models which now suck basically. I know it might sound like i am whining, but I am not, I guess it's more about frustration.

I agree with HBMC, I wish that GW would write a solid rule set and try to balance the game out in such a way that there wouldn't be uber list, or to take the mind set of PP and have their version of page 5 and play like you have a pair.

I have been playing 40k since the beginning, and with apocalypse I felt that "joy" again of when I first started the game. I like the fact that you can have wacky armies and be more fluff driven or let your imagination run wild. I even thought about doing a multiple Abaddon army for Apocalypse. Imagine 9 or 10 abaddon's running around, I'd probably lose, but hey it could have looked cool.

Again I now see myself maybe holding on to a few of my armies, mainly my Dark Angels and my Ultramarines which will need some tweaking, but my Nid's are going to go bye-bye (if you are interested PM me) but I like some others, am heading towards AT 43 and Warmachine Hordes. I know that eventually PP will run out of steam (pun not intended) but till then I'll enjoy the ride.

Thanks,
Chappy P!

(hopefully I didn't come across all emo like I was accused of in another thread, I am too old to be emo =) !)

What the Chaplain writes has merit.

Is it impossible to make rules that allow for fluff-driven wackiness and balance?

All ice-creams shouldn't be vanilla flavour.

Yes, but only if you're rather slowed when it comes to miniature games...