Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/21 20:42:39


Post by: Theduke07


That would be great if the book was full color.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/21 21:03:25


Post by: Davor


OMGF, with all these comment on what unit moved how fast we can't keep track of it.

How the hell do you guys play other games? I guess you guys wouldn't be able to play Battletech. 40K=checkers and Battletech=chess.

It's not that hard, have some counters to show that a unit moved and has a modifier like +1 or +2, something like people do now with multi wound units? It's not that hard. Also just like how GW made templates and counters for 5th edtion for units that have ran or gone to ground etc etc.

You do it now, you are just whining and complaining about nothing.



6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/21 21:05:06


Post by: Theduke07


Yeah but the more complex games either/have datasheets/ less models/ or simply take forever.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/21 21:07:10


Post by: KingCracker


Grot 6 wrote:
Adam LongWalker wrote:
megatrons2nd wrote:
KingCracker wrote:Am I the only person that thinks most of what BOK says is total BS? It seems like he just dumps a metric crap ton of ideas that range from possible all the way up to yea friggin right. Then the ones he pegs or gets close enough to, claims its why he is right and the others are shrugged off as bad intel or early writtings. Personally, I think the majority of that list sounds like terrible ideas.

If it is true, then 6th edition can kiss my ass


I'm fairly certain he himself did not post these, but it was posted by someone else on his sight.


Again I am being civil on my comments concerning BoK, however if this site has a dubious past for stating dubious reports, regardless of whom wrote the article, the only conclusions to me are this is a simple stunt to gain readership on to that site.






+1to that sentiment. Good call !


Yea


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/21 21:17:27


Post by: wyomingfox


Except Ghost 21 (whom one could hardly call as being in league with BOK) said that the rumors lined up with what he had seen as well.

As a Nid player, the farther we get from 5th Edition and its internal hate machine, the better.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/21 21:20:10


Post by: KingCracker


Ive been on DAKKA awhile now, and Ive seen MANY rumors threads pop up. I can tell ya, that most the crap thrown around in those threads is just that, crap. Some might sound good, some like utter junk, no one really knows WTF GW is thinking. So Ill read them sure....but Im done thinking this guy is right and that guy is wrong, they have ALL said stuff that was so far off it was sad


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/21 21:51:01


Post by: wyomingfox


Not sure if posed already, but Ghost 21 posted the following on the Warseer thread:

Ghost 21 wrote:im not saying 2nd ed didnt have problems, its just i havent enjoyed 40k since

prehaps im harking for a time where squats were there

but really if you didnt like overwatch n those sort of rules you wont like the changes


Ghost 21 in responce to Draconis wrote:
Draconis wrote:Imagine if it was broken down into forces of good versus evil. It would look a little something like this:

Good
Blood Angles
Eldar
Grey Knights
Imperial Guard
Space Marines (Vanilla)
Space Wolves
Sisters of Battle
Witch Hunters

Warp
Chaos Daemons
Chaos Space Marines
Dark Eldar

Solo Forces
Orks (they fight everyone)
Tyranids (they eat everyone)
Necrons
Chuck Norris

Bit of a size disadvantage in armies


urm (you do know theres going to be 2 new "armies" right to add to that list?)

hides


and in response

BramGuant wrote:
ghost21 wrote:
urm (you do know theres going to be 2 new "armies" right to add to that list?)

hides
As far as I know "Traitor Legions" and "Holy Inquisition", that is.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/21 22:06:02


Post by: Guildsman


So... where do the Tau fit in on that list?


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/21 22:15:29


Post by: warboss


Guildsman wrote:So... where do the Tau fit in on that list?


We're above "good" under "greater good".


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/21 22:21:43


Post by: wyomingfox


Guildsman wrote:So... where do the Tau fit in on that list?


What? You didn't see Tau? It's at the bottom of Solo Forces. Tau is spelled C-H-U-C-K N-O-R-R-I-S, if you weren't aware.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/21 22:56:55


Post by: chaos0xomega


Theduke07 wrote:Yeah but the more complex games either/have datasheets/ less models/ or simply take forever.


Sounds like someone who has never played a 'more complex' game before...

Anyway, Bramgaunt is better known for his rumor accuracy than Ghost 21, IIRC. Interesting that he seems to be agreeing with this as well, although I'm slightly concerned that "Holy Inquisition" is a faction when we already have that in the form of Codex: Grey Knights...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/21 23:03:08


Post by: Kroothawk


To be fair, no rumour poster other than ghost21 or the BoK owner have commented on the 6th edition rumours yet. BramGaunt only speaks about old rumours on Chaos and Inquisition.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/21 23:39:53


Post by: Archonate


SkaerKrow wrote:Vanilla Marines =/= Blood Angels =/= Space Wolves =/= Black Templar =/= Dark Angels.
Maybe not 100%, but you can't close your eyes to how outrageously similar they all are. The differences are quite negligible. Ask any non-SM player, they use the same strategies no matter what color his opponent's SMs are.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/21 23:53:01


Post by: the_trooper


Archonate wrote:
SkaerKrow wrote:Vanilla Marines =/= Blood Angels =/= Space Wolves =/= Black Templar =/= Dark Angels.
Maybe not 100%, but you can't close your eyes to how outrageously similar they all are. The differences are quite negligible. Ask any non-SM player, they use the same strategies no matter what color his opponent's SMs are.


Some wear robes, some have nipples and ugly wings, some right slowed looking wolves, and some look like dudes in futuristic armor.

EDIT:

I want so much for the Legions codex to be true.... so it must not be. For now I'll just keep playing warmachine.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 00:03:40


Post by: Theduke07


Archonate wrote:
SkaerKrow wrote:Vanilla Marines =/= Blood Angels =/= Space Wolves =/= Black Templar =/= Dark Angels.
Maybe not 100%, but you can't close your eyes to how outrageously similar they all are. The differences are quite negligible. Ask any non-SM player, they use the same strategies no matter what color his opponent's SMs are.

Man no wonder people whine if they're fighting SW or BA like Vanilla marines


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 00:14:30


Post by: Mr.Church13


I have Blood Angels (DoA style). But I play mostly Non SM armies and I would never play the same way I do against SW as I would aginst BA or even VSM for that matter.











Edited for Grammar


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 00:15:11


Post by: Brother SRM


Considering we already keep track of if units move for the purposes of their own shooting, assaulting vehicles, and so on, I really don't see this being an issue. If anything, I see it as something to add depth to the game.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 01:44:21


Post by: SkaerKrow


Archonate wrote:Maybe not 100%, but you can't close your eyes to how outrageously similar they all are. The differences are quite negligible. Ask any non-SM player, they use the same strategies no matter what color his opponent's SMs are.
I'm sorry, but you literally have no idea what you're talking about on this subject.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 01:50:51


Post by: itsonlyme


ThirdUltra wrote:No problem; I can totally understand where you're comming from on that though....

Cheers!

Hah, what man wouldn't! who needs erm! anyways...

wyomingfox wrote:Except Ghost 21 (whom one could hardly call as being in league with BOK) said that the rumors lined up with what he had seen as well.

As a Nid player, the farther we get from 5th Edition and its internal hate machine, the better.


I thought he said this in the direction of what he heard, way he said it made it sound like these rumours have had a bit of chinese whispers played, still if these are even in the right ball park then I will be playing a hell of a lot more 40k than fantasy!


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 01:51:30


Post by: timetowaste85


Brother SRM wrote:Considering we already keep track of if units move for the purposes of their own shooting, assaulting vehicles, and so on, I really don't see this being an issue. If anything, I see it as something to add depth to the game.


Absolutely. I think keeping track would be more intense and add more strategy and skill to the game.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 02:18:11


Post by: MasterSlowPoke


I'm not sure about skill; most people would keep track with tokens. Definitely adds a consideration for target priority, though.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 03:23:11


Post by: Vaktathi


SkaerKrow wrote:
Archonate wrote:Maybe not 100%, but you can't close your eyes to how outrageously similar they all are. The differences are quite negligible. Ask any non-SM player, they use the same strategies no matter what color his opponent's SMs are.
I'm sorry, but you literally have no idea what you're talking about on this subject.
I beg to differ. As someone who plays IG, CSM's, Tyranids, Eldar, Tau, GK's, and SoB, who has played in dozens of events in multiple states and cities, and plays at least once a week, sometimes up to 3 games a week, they really aren't all that different, and don't require a significantly different strategy aside from the fact that some (SW's, BA's) are just outright better than others. You may change some tactical decisions based on various things, but often every list is capable of forcing the same potentialities at you.

They're similar enough that many players treat them as one army with respect to playing them (e.g. they'll play SW's one week, BA's the next, and Vulkan marines at the tournament at the end of the month, all with the same collection of models).

For many armies, when faced with SW's, SM's, DA, BA's, etc, they really will use pretty much the exact same strategy because that's all there really is to do against them. The only difference is the differing degrees to which it functions based on the competitiveness of the particular marine book they are facing. Sometimes it will work a lot, others it needs a hefty bit of luck, but often there's only a small handful of changes you can really make when facing MEQ armies that don't involve list changes.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 07:22:56


Post by: InventionThirteen


I'm all for these changes, all of them appeal to me. I understand the doubts and hope these rumours have an ounce of truth.

Eldar will be harder to hit and space marines will have their usual heavy armour. Balance.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 09:59:24


Post by: htj


Why do people keep quoting this ghost21 character like he's some kind of gospel? Has he been right about much before? The only rumour I've seen him 'confirm' is that Sisters definitely won't be getting a WD codex. Yeah.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 11:47:58


Post by: SkaerKrow


Vaktathi wrote:I beg to differ. As someone who plays IG, CSM's, Tyranids, Eldar, Tau, GK's, and SoB, who has played in dozens of events in multiple states and cities, and plays at least once a week, sometimes up to 3 games a week, they really aren't all that different, and don't require a significantly different strategy aside from the fact that some (SW's, BA's) are just outright better than others. You may change some tactical decisions based on various things, but often every list is capable of forcing the same potentialities at you.
Going by that logic, most every list in 40k can force the same potentialities from you, so they're all comparable (with an exception for Daemons, since they break most every mold out there). In practice, the only things that Space Marine codexes have in common are lots of AV 11 transports, S4 AP5 shots, and 3+ saves. Sure, Blood Angels might have Tactical Squads, but how often do you actually see them? The same is true with Space Wolves and Jump Infantry. Do you not make any special consideration when fighting a Lucifer Pattern Vindicator, knowing the extended range that it has thanks to its greater maneuverability when firing? Those wrinkles, small individually but with a greater impact when taken as a whole, are one of the key elements that gives identity to all of the armies in the game. Knowing them and responding accordingly is one of the elements that separates tournament players from casuals.

Beyond all of that, the original argument here was that all Space Marines were equally powerful (and top tier ), and even you admit that Blood Angels and Space Wolves stand above Vanilla, Dark Angel and Black Templar Space Marines. They aren't all just the exact same army with Blood Fists or Wolf Fists instead of Ultra Fists.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 16:33:11


Post by: Archonate


the_trooper wrote:
Archonate wrote:
SkaerKrow wrote:Vanilla Marines =/= Blood Angels =/= Space Wolves =/= Black Templar =/= Dark Angels.
Maybe not 100%, but you can't close your eyes to how outrageously similar they all are. The differences are quite negligible. Ask any non-SM player, they use the same strategies no matter what color his opponent's SMs are.


Some wear robes, some have nipples and ugly wings, some right slowed looking wolves, and some look like dudes in futuristic armor.
Sad as it sounds, these differences are more significant to me than those of their different codices. As long as I know that they're just a bunch of T4 3+ Svs, I won't lose to them.

Back to the topic: I'm also excited to see them change wound allocation. 5th ed made a few idiotic changes that resulted in longer games and more debatable rules interpretations. Wound allocation was one of those things. I knew the moment I read it that it would be revised in 6th ed. I was hoping that TLoS would also be withdrawn, as it stifled certain modeling liberties and is just lazy. 4th ed. had the most spectacular, simple LoS rules...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 17:54:39


Post by: wyomingfox


Some more hints from Ghost 21 in regards to the post below

Ghost 21 wrote:urm (you do know theres going to be 2 new "armies" right to add to that list?)

hides



Ghost 21 wrote:one is "warp" based...the other isnt marines


Ghost 21 wrote:i wish i could tell you it was enslavers but it isnt


Ghost 21 wrote:they both exist in fluff.... n thats all i can nod too



6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 18:14:11


Post by: Nvs


I think it was said they were Chaos Legions and an Inquisitor book.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 18:19:17


Post by: gorgon


I think the case for SM diversity is being a bit overstated by some. I find it far easier to learn to play against a new SM codex just because there are so many similar parts. SM varieties aren't identical to each other. But the many similarities create a kind of shorthand for me and probably most players. Long Fangs are Devs plus X and Y. Grey Hunters are tacticals with A and B. BA rhinos are the same thing plus fast.

Same thing follows for gameplay. The SM armies play differently, but facing them there are some things that apply across the board. There's just not a coherent argument for claiming SM armies are as different from one another as other armies. Contrast SM with Eldar/DE. Falcons aren't Raiders plus X and Y, and the two don't play anything alike.

Back on topic, I really don't know what to make of the Inquisition rumor. Doesn't make a lick of sense to me. Codex: Stormtroopers? Think there's much more potential for AdMech, among others.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 18:29:21


Post by: Alpharius


Heading into wishlisting and arguing territory here.

Thread in danger of being closed unless there's a way to keep it on topic and relevant...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 21:45:38


Post by: wyomingfox


Nvs wrote:I think it was said they were Chaos Legions and an Inquisitor book.


Per Ghost 21 lastest postings on Warseer:

Ghost 21 wrote:
wyvirn wrote:
Uhhh, we don't need need more codexes that are mostly copy pasted units so that they can have one or two unique units.

i can asure you the legion dex will have alot of varation

really its not marines of any type

and why would umbra suck? really they wouldn't


Ghost 21 wrote:sigh.....
i meant the new army is not marines of any type spikey or non
im not talking about legions


ghost21 wrote:{They allign themselves with} order (but marines thought they killed em)


ghost21;5598633 wrote:i only mean order as in they want to blat chaos

ps one person got right

edit it not squats



Ghost 21 struck down Zoats and Interex. Someone suggested Laer, Megarachnid, and Umbra.

Ghost 21 wrote:
MrSatan wrote:
I'm sure the hrud were meant to have been wiped out during the crusade?
Right Ghost?

thats correct


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 21:54:58


Post by: Che-Vito


Sounds like a complete load of crap.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 21:57:03


Post by: lord_blackfang


Che-Vito wrote:Sounds like a complete load of crap.


Warseer posters making up rumours? Unprecedented!


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 21:58:35


Post by: Ouroborus


Theduke07 wrote:That would be great if the book was full color.



I was talking about the new one, which will probably be full color.



Nevertheless, $60 is *still* cheap for a hardcover tome.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 22:03:11


Post by: wyomingfox


Che-Vito wrote:Sounds like a complete load of crap.


So did the GK rumors but by and large they turned out to be true *shruggs shoulders*


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 22:57:39


Post by: Che-Vito


wyomingfox wrote:
Che-Vito wrote:Sounds like a complete load of crap.


So did the GK rumors but by and large they turned out to be true *shruggs shoulders*


Yes, and no.

Did the ones near the end come close to the mark? (when there were leaked pre-release versions out in PDF format anyways...)
Yes.

Were the originally rumors close?
Not by any means.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 22:59:14


Post by: chaos0xomega


After double checking warseer, it seems that there will in fact be three new books:

1. Chaos Legions (I assume this is Chaos Space Marine Legions, with the current book becoming a Renegades/Lost and the Damned type deal).

2. Hrud/Umbra (Ghost said subterranean dwellers who worship dark orbs and were thought to be wiped out by Space Marines).

3. Unknown, but is apparently not a Marine book or warp based...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/22 23:18:06


Post by: Compel


Remember, Hrud were recently alluded to in Age of Darkness, with their background surprisingly expanded. Their weapons were described as causing 'extreme aging' - turning even Marines to old men and making tanks rust apart. - Could be an introduced hint or two.

On the other hand, I still think there's a case for one of the chaos books having a greater presence of heretics and cultists. - Maybe some 'Dark Mechanicus' too.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 00:06:55


Post by: Evil Lamp 6


Stupid question, but what exactly is the difference between Chaos Legions and CSM? Would it be more like the 3.5 CSM dex with the different Legions actually represented or am I mistaking something for something else?


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 00:09:04


Post by: Brother SRM


Evil Lamp 6 wrote:Stupid question, but what exactly is the difference between Chaos Legions and CSM? Would it be more like the 3.5 CSM dex with the different Legions actually represented or am I mistaking something for something else?

That's pretty much what they're getting at. Chaos Legions had stuff like Death Guard Terminators as opposed to Terminators who just carry around a smelly stick with a Nurgle icon on it. They had unique rules and army compositions for each of the Legions, like Iron Warriors getting 4 heavy support slots and access to Basilisks.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 00:15:22


Post by: Mr.Church13


I'll almost buy splitting Chaos Marines and Legion Marines up, but I really don't think GW would introduce a new army to the game. They have a hard enough time keeping the current range updated so I don't think they would bring in something fully new.

Plus I just don't think the risk is worth the reward in making a new army. Well that is unless they let Matt Ward make it the most powerful army in the history of 40k. Then newbies and powergamers would buy the beejezus out of it.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 00:28:53


Post by: SkaerKrow


Legion Marines wouldn't be a new army, they'd be a rebranding of Chaos Space Marines. It's about as dramatic as releasing a new Astartes Codex, honestly. What confounds me is why they would bother supporting Legion Marines AND Chaos Space Marines as separate books. If you take the Legion elements away from the Chaos Space Marines...what's left? Codex: Red Corsairs? As much as I like Huron and his boys, that seems rather unnecessary.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 00:36:48


Post by: -Loki-


Ouroborus wrote:
Theduke07 wrote:That would be great if the book was full color.



I was talking about the new one, which will probably be full color.

Nevertheless, $60 is *still* cheap for a hardcover tome.


I feel bad getting the Warhammer rulebook cheap, since I ordered it from the UK. Nearly 500 pages, high quality full colour hardback. That sort of book would actually run the price they're asking in Australia from a normal book store.

That said, I can't read it for very long unless I'm at a table, because the thing weighs a fething ton.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
SkaerKrow wrote:Legion Marines wouldn't be a new army, they'd be a rebranding of Chaos Space Marines. It's about as dramatic as releasing a new Astartes Codex, honestly. What confounds me is why they would bother supporting Legion Marines AND Chaos Space Marines as separate books. If you take the Legion elements away from the Chaos Space Marines...what's left? Codex: Red Corsairs? As much as I like Huron and his boys, that seems rather unnecessary.


The current Chaos Codex basically is already Codex Red Corsairs, or rather, Codex Chaos Renegades. There's nothing of the old Legions in it aside from a couple of specialized squads. Codex Chaos Legions would be far more different to the Chaos Codex than the variant Space Marine codices are from Codex Space Marines.

And the great thing is they're rolled into a single book. Just like the variant Space Marine chapters should be.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 00:57:12


Post by: Vaktathi


SkaerKrow wrote:Legion Marines wouldn't be a new army, they'd be a rebranding of Chaos Space Marines. It's about as dramatic as releasing a new Astartes Codex, honestly. What confounds me is why they would bother supporting Legion Marines AND Chaos Space Marines as separate books. If you take the Legion elements away from the Chaos Space Marines...what's left? Codex: Red Corsairs? As much as I like Huron and his boys, that seems rather unnecessary.
There's a rather profound difference that the current codex doesn't really capture. The Legions have dedicated cult units outside of just troops, and pre-heresy wargear and organizations. Huron's forces and other renegade Space Marines (the 50+ confirmed renegade chapters plus all the uncounted companies, squads, and individuals) would really still have wargear, weapons, equipment and organization closer to that of Codex: Space Marines. Really they should be done as an addendum to that book rather than the Chaos Legions book. However, it's rather silly to see Hurons troops running around with Reaper Autocannons and TL Bolters instead of Assault Cannons and Storm Bolters and no Razorbacks, Land Speeders, newer pattern LR's, etc. I don't think they necessarily need their own book really, but a half dozen page WD article would do nicely.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 01:16:42


Post by: Nvs


I imagine Chaos Legions is the current CSM book but more fleshed out to represent the legions.

The new book would be Chaos Renegades then which will likely turn out like evil imperial guard with a small smattering of chaos marine elemtns and demons thrown in.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 01:34:52


Post by: Mr.Church13


Ooooooh Chaos Guard. Theres something I can get behind. Maybe a 5th army behind? (No, no, I need some self control.)


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 01:57:23


Post by: Alpharius


Vaktathi wrote:
SkaerKrow wrote:Legion Marines wouldn't be a new army, they'd be a rebranding of Chaos Space Marines. It's about as dramatic as releasing a new Astartes Codex, honestly. What confounds me is why they would bother supporting Legion Marines AND Chaos Space Marines as separate books. If you take the Legion elements away from the Chaos Space Marines...what's left? Codex: Red Corsairs? As much as I like Huron and his boys, that seems rather unnecessary.
There's a rather profound difference that the current codex doesn't really capture. The Legions have dedicated cult units outside of just troops, and pre-heresy wargear and organizations. Huron's forces and other renegade Space Marines (the 50+ confirmed renegade chapters plus all the uncounted companies, squads, and individuals) would really still have wargear, weapons, equipment and organization closer to that of Codex: Space Marines. Really they should be done as an addendum to that book rather than the Chaos Legions book. However, it's rather silly to see Hurons troops running around with Reaper Autocannons and TL Bolters instead of Assault Cannons and Storm Bolters and no Razorbacks, Land Speeders, newer pattern LR's, etc. I don't think they necessarily need their own book really, but a half dozen page WD article would do nicely.


Yes, that pretty much sums it up!

I'd imagine that the CSM Legions book would be just that, and the Renegades Codex would be more Huron and Traitor Guard... I hope!


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 02:27:39


Post by: chaos0xomega


Basically what nobody is willing to say is that Chaos Renegades = Lost and the Damned.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 02:37:20


Post by: Starfarer


chaos0xomega wrote:Basically what nobody is willing to say is that Chaos Renegades = Lost and the Damned.


Let's be honest; no one is saying it because it probably isn't the case. I would absolutely love to be wrong on that, though.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 03:02:55


Post by: pombe


Bringing back Chaos Legions and Lost and the Damned would make a lot of fans happy.

That seems to go counter to GW corporate's apparent agenda.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 04:35:10


Post by: Mr.Church13


Vaktathi Wrote:

There's a rather profound difference that the current codex doesn't really capture. The Legions have dedicated cult units outside of just troops, and pre-heresy wargear and organizations. Huron's forces and other renegade Space Marines (the 50+ confirmed renegade chapters plus all the uncounted companies, squads, and individuals) would really still have wargear, weapons, equipment and organization closer to that of Codex: Space Marines. Really they should be done as an addendum to that book rather than the Chaos Legions book. However, it's rather silly to see Hurons troops running around with Reaper Autocannons and TL Bolters instead of Assault Cannons and Storm Bolters and no Razorbacks, Land Speeders, newer pattern LR's, etc. I don't think they necessarily need their own book really, but a half dozen page WD article would do nicely.


As a fluff junkie that fact has always bugged me.



6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 12:49:36


Post by: Just Dave


Personally, I'd be really surprised if GW did release more armies; they struggle to keep up as it is.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 13:02:18


Post by: dajobe


If there was a Thousand Sons dex released...I would be SO ON IT! i'd have a 2000 pt army after about a week, dont play chaos now because dont like other chaos legions, but thousand sons are legit!


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 13:51:12


Post by: Pael


Questions, if Chaos Legions does come out. Who would still play the current CSM codex?

Answer, ............not a single informed individual.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 13:53:29


Post by: SkaerKrow


Vaktathi wrote:
SkaerKrow wrote:Legion Marines wouldn't be a new army, they'd be a rebranding of Chaos Space Marines. It's about as dramatic as releasing a new Astartes Codex, honestly. What confounds me is why they would bother supporting Legion Marines AND Chaos Space Marines as separate books. If you take the Legion elements away from the Chaos Space Marines...what's left? Codex: Red Corsairs? As much as I like Huron and his boys, that seems rather unnecessary.
There's a rather profound difference that the current codex doesn't really capture. The Legions have dedicated cult units outside of just troops, and pre-heresy wargear and organizations. Huron's forces and other renegade Space Marines (the 50+ confirmed renegade chapters plus all the uncounted companies, squads, and individuals) would really still have wargear, weapons, equipment and organization closer to that of Codex: Space Marines. Really they should be done as an addendum to that book rather than the Chaos Legions book. However, it's rather silly to see Hurons troops running around with Reaper Autocannons and TL Bolters instead of Assault Cannons and Storm Bolters and no Razorbacks, Land Speeders, newer pattern LR's, etc. I don't think they necessarily need their own book really, but a half dozen page WD article would do nicely.
We agree that there isn't two FULL books of content to be spread between the Traitor Legions and the Renegade Chapters. I'm all for them rebranding/repackaging Chaos Space Marines in a Traitor Legions book, but trying to support a current form Chaos Space Marine codex on top of that seems redundant.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 13:54:09


Post by: Baragash


Pael wrote:Questions, if Chaos Legions does come out. Who would still play the current CSM codex?

Answer, ............not a single informed individual.


doesn’t invalidate Codex Chaos Space Marines which gets extensive White Dwarf update as Codex Renegade Space Marines


Not everyone plays a Legion-based force


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 13:59:22


Post by: Pael


Baragash wrote:
Pael wrote:Questions, if Chaos Legions does come out. Who would still play the current CSM codex?

Answer, ............not a single informed individual.


doesn’t invalidate Codex Chaos Space Marines which gets extensive White Dwarf update as Codex Renegade Space Marines


Not everyone plays a Legion-based force


True but with how the renegade rules are it would be too much to resist a counts as army.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 13:59:42


Post by: dajobe


THOUSAND SONS!!!


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 14:01:17


Post by: puma713


chaos0xomega wrote:there will in fact be. . .


Really? I also heard that 6th Edition will take care of your kids, walk your dog and is good at playing the stock market.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 14:02:39


Post by: wyomingfox


In regards to possible new races:

ghost21 wrote:to clarify there is a traitor legion dex

there are also 2 other dexes one of chaos hateing dark orb worshiping subterainans


BrazenRogue;5598829 wrote:Given that Ghost has already pointed out that someone previously guessed correctly... yes, I'd say chaos-hating dark orb-worshiping subterraneans pretty much has to be hrud.

Certainly in keeping with the current trend of fleshing out previously-mentioned-but-scarcely-touched-upon aspects of the background. I'm really quite intrigued by what they'll do with them! Hrud have been played about with quite a bit over the years, insofar as they've been mentioned at all. They pretty much seemed to be space-skaven at first, but Xenology turned them into... well, something odd. Should be interesting to see what happens here.

And good lord are they going to hate the Plasma Siphon...


http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Hrud

And the second race:

Ghost 21 wrote:
Glyn wrote:
You know what everyone has missed the obvious one here that could be the other Non-marine list that is a viable option....the Adeptus Mechanicus, there's been a lot of stuff about them in recent years popping up, including descriptions of their fighting forces the Skitarii...their not strictly speaking Imperial forces their Imperial Allies, there is the schism element to their armies as well and with the rumour that super heavies are going to come more into the main lists it would make sense for them to be there.
did people like codex imperialis? if so theres your answer


In regards to 6th edition:

ghost21 wrote:there is a optional rule to restore movement values

taht rule discussion enough for ye?




6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 14:09:49


Post by: gorgon


I really don't think a WD CSM redux would end up looking like real LatD, but I think they could squeeze a couple Traitor units into the existing template and I'd love to see it. With a proper Legions book and then (crossing fingers) some Mutants and new Daemon Engines in the Mk. 2 Daemons book, I think Chaos would have its mojo back. Next best thing to an actual LatD book, at least.

Gotta say I really didn't expect "new" armies in the next edition, or at least not armies representing new concepts. So this part of the rumors is almost as interesting as the overhauled rules. Umbra would be even more puzzling than =I=, IMO. Hrud would seem to be a little more conventional and a decent fit, I guess. Still think AdMech has a better hook, but maybe that becomes a FW project, as has been long rumored.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 14:23:00


Post by: FalkorsRaiders


wyomingfox wrote:
And the second race:

Ghost 21 wrote:
Glyn wrote:
You know what everyone has missed the obvious one here that could be the other Non-marine list that is a viable option....the Adeptus Mechanicus, there's been a lot of stuff about them in recent years popping up, including descriptions of their fighting forces the Skitarii...their not strictly speaking Imperial forces their Imperial Allies, there is the schism element to their armies as well and with the rumour that super heavies are going to come more into the main lists it would make sense for them to be there.
did people like codex imperialis? if so theres your answer




Matt Ward working on a codex that isn't Space Marines? Only if the codex can be used to introduce more Imperial codexes. Sure, whatever codex he's working on now will be sacrificed for the Imperium, but look on the bright side: Adeptus Mechanicus, another machine army!!!

On a side note, as a Necron player, I cried while typing this and realizing the truth...

** edit **

FalkorsRaiders wrote:
Re:Fairly Solid Necron Rumors - (updated 5/5 with new stuff)
2011/05/30 16:59:32
Page 53

Speaking of the Void Dragon, what if the reason Ward was brought on is to talk about Adeptus Mechanicus? What if we are getting an actual army for them? I mean, if I was Matt Ward and I needed to use a xeno race to help push out an Adeptus Mechanicus army, why not Necrons? I mean, the Void Dragon already helps the Emperor get more technologies.


I knew Adeptus Mechanicus was the reason Matt Ward was working on Necrons...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 14:38:14


Post by: dajobe


I must be a farseer because i just had a vision of the future...necrons all with the imperial aquila on their chests...void dragon leading a SM/Guardsman/Necron army, all in a new codex called "40999: A SPACE ODESSY"


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 14:52:28


Post by: morgendonner


I really don't know what to believe, this just seems like way too many rumors all at once.

I wouldn't be surprised to see them add in a new race all together, but I recall they specifically said about a year ago that they would not add any new races until every existing codex was updated.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 14:58:27


Post by: FalkorsRaiders


morgendonner wrote:I really don't know what to believe, this just seems like way too many rumors all at once.

I wouldn't be surprised to see them add in a new race all together, but I recall they specifically said about a year ago that they would not add any new races until every existing codex was updated.


GW is holding up their end of the bargain. By giving SoB the WD release, all thats left is Necrons, and everythings been updated. What, you thought they'd update everything to the newest edition??? GW just meant it was updating everything out of 3rd, which constitutes everything in their books. Besides, even if they want to add new armies, they can use WD! Its not like they've failed at that in the past, right?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Over at warseer, ghost21 pointed out that 6th edition looks like its going to have many optional rules.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 17:14:47


Post by: Element206


*cough* wishlisting *cough*


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 18:20:20


Post by: gorgon


The mods at Warseer seem to think he's a reliable source, though. Of course, even if he's right you never know if these are only concepts in the studio or stuff that's definitely going to see the light of day.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 18:31:38


Post by: Omegus


Right or wrong, I have a very hard time believing someone who can't spell two words in a row correctly.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 18:34:36


Post by: Morathi's Darkest Sin


The mistakes might be because he's typing so fast as the huge red eye on top of the GW Ivory tower looks the other way.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 18:55:33


Post by: dajobe


^
/ O
/ \ \\
\ / \0\
\-----/ \00\
l o l \000\
l ol \0000\
lo l \0000\ ______
l o l \00000\ l o o l
lo l \00000\ l o o l
l ol \00000\ l o o__l_
l o l \000000\ l o l o l
l o l \000000\ l o __l__o l
_________ l l_______ \888888\________l__l__o_l_l_
IVORY TOWER
AKA
BARAD DUR!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
darn, that didnt work there...it worked in my quick reply...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 18:58:06


Post by: Kroothawk


Update time by the same source, posted by rideroftheerk on BoLS:
http://bloodofkittens.com/network/groups/grey-knight-rumors/
persuaded my source to give me more (some would say: everything there is ), the following is copy and pasted from hour long icq sessions, so there might be some missing bits, but most of the time, nothing has changed. we all know what unit coherency is, these are not actual rule texts but answers for my questions about the rules
I tried to arrange all fragments in proper order and corrected grammar, but most kudos go to my friend for being helpful while being annoyed of GW

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
As I am done with GW forever. I love the miniatures, I like the new rules (been pretty enthusiastic about it), but I hate the company, that makes them. If you knew what I know you would feel the same. GW doesn’t care for their customers one bit. The whole corporal culture is cynical as hell. The managers despise the hobby and all immatures who play it. There is a huge rift in the management and most of the executives that actually play the game have left or are leaving the company right now.

Layout
Pretty crisp and clean
on odd pages there is the normal rule text with examples, on even pages there are the usual diagrams and charts, and small boxes with definitions
Lots of rules that were formerly explained within the text, are now only summarized in the text, the full rules are given in these boxes, you can read the rules text very fast without much detail, there are some boxes that have a name of a rule, but are empty otherwise. I guess that there should be page references to later pages, for example in the terrain rules, there is Torrent of Fire mentioned, the rule is explained much later (in a box), there is an empty box in the terrain section that reads Torrent of Fire however
So you have both: clear rules veterans and easy reading for first-timers
But it seems that there is not much space left for pictures, though :(

Fundamentals:
characteristic tests as normal,
if unit must make test, it is made by squad leader
vehicles fail every test automatically if they don’t have the value
test on ld is made with single D6 on halved value, vehicles pass these tests automatically
Majority characteristic: characteristic-value with most wounds in unit, if draw, use the higher

Keep track on:
wounds
movement distance
morale condition
everything else can be forgotten between actions

Saves:
4 kind of changes: armour save, cover save, invulnerable save, Feel no Pain
no model can ever make more than two saves or one re-rollable save
normal models can only make one roll or one re-rollable roll
Situation where two rolls are eligible:
- one of the saves is FnP
- model is character
- model is bracing

Feel no Pain (1-3): save on 5+,4+,3+, only negated by AP 1, 2 and wounds that don’t allow armour saves, the only save that every model and not only ICs may take in addition to another save

Actions
The rules make really clear what an unit can do and what not. There is an own chapter for the basic concepts. Every special rule has only to state: can do x, y, z and it is perfectly clear that the unit can still a, b and c
Actions:
- movement: movement in movement phase, sometimes only special types of movement are allowed: advance, surge, flat out, fleet; charge and disembark have to be rules out explicitly
- consolidate moves: every other move, has to be mentioned explicitly
- psychic powers
- shooting
- Reactions
- residual actions: any other action, for example popping smoke
unit is immobile: abbreviation for cannot move, react, make consolidation moves

Reactions
models can react every time the conditions are met

- Going to Ground:
who: non-vehicles, non-monstrous creatures
when: unit is being shot at, before rolls are made
instant effect: -
lasting effect: Suppressed, if not already Suppressed

- Brace:
who: tanks, walkers, monstrous creatures
when: being shot at, before rolls are made
instant effect: one weapon destroyed ignored, two saves for MC like IC
lasting effect: Suppressed, if not already Suppressed

- Flying High:
who: jet pack infantry, jump infantry, jetbikes
when: being shot at
instant effect: count as being flyer for shooting, opposing player can make 6” consolidation move with the unit
lasting effect: Suppressed, if not already Suppressed

- Evade:
who: skimmer, fast non-tanks, jetbikes, bikes, jet pack infantry, jump infantry
when: unit is being rammed or tank shocked and nearly fails morale check
instant effect: on 3+ can make 6” consolidation move, ignores ram if out of the way
lasting effect: -

- Return Fire:
who: (disembarked) units with Overwatch
when: unit is shot at the first time in the phase
instant effect: unit can fire rapid fire and assault weapons with a single shot at attacking unit, range 12”, resolved simultaneously, opposing unit is fearless (2) and stubborn for this purpose
lasting effect: -

- Charge by chance:
who: non-vehicles, walkers
when: Trapped, tank shock
instant effect: charge by chance
lasting effect: -

Terrain:
there are two different things: to be in cover, to be in terrain
every piece of terrain has a footprint, if an unit is this area or touches it, it is in terrain, being in terrain is important for movement and assaults
to decide if a model is in cover, you use true line of sight, cover is usually used for shooting, though some weapons use terrain

terrain is open, impassable, or has any number of the following attributes:
- difficult terrain: unit can only advance through it, if a single model moves through
- dangerous terrain:
units that move through dangerous terrain must make a test
non-vehicles make dangerous terrain test for every model that has actually moved through it at the end of the phase
vehicles must designate a point where they enter the terrain before the movement, than make the test, if vehicle is stunned, immobilized or destroyed, move it to designated point in a straight line
for every failed test, the unit gets a hit
non-vehicles: failed on 1: auto wound on unit, allocated together as Torrent of Fire
vehicles: roll depends on movement distance: advanced = failed on 1, surged = failed on 1-3, flat out = failed automatically, vehicle gets S8 hit against side armour
walker only ever fail on 1
non-vehicle units make only a single dangerous terrain test a turn, vehicles every time they enter a different dangerous terrain
- leveled: must spend movement for vertical advancement, non-walker vehicles and bikes can’t move vertical in leveled terrain

difficult and dangerous terrains are always ignored if the movement isn’t taking place in the own movement phase

Preparation and consolidation phase
These phases are collecting basin for all kinds of action that takes place before the movement or at the end of the turn. The player which turn it is may choose the order of these actions freely.

preparation phase: psychic powers, placing reserves, rallying, joining/ leaving, claiming mission markers

consolidation phase: rallying, consolidation moves, jet pack moves, joining/ leaving, embarking, killing multi-wounded units

consolidation move: moves outside the movement phase (jet pack movement, embarking, joining/leaving, falling back, moves after combat, tank shock evasion …) and moves that are described as consolidation moves are consolidation moves
cannot end in contact with enemy, ignores terrain even if performed in own movement phase, all units are relentless for this movement, can move even if fired heavy weapon, can fire heavy weapon afterwards, doesn’t affect unit speed for being shot at if not stated otherwise

Abandon: If there is more than one model with less than its initial wounds in an unit in the consolidation phase, the owning player must remove all but one as casualty ( ID(3) ). Independent characters are ignored.

movement phase:
Units can stay stationary or move in different speeds. They can advance and use their normal movement or they can surge and double their movement distance. Some units can go flat out or fleet and triple their movement.

Advance: normal movement: every action allowed
Surge: double movement: close combat, consolidate moves, psychic powers, reactions, residual action allowed
Flat out: movement: triple movement: only reactions allowed, use own columns on to hit chart
Fleet movement: triple movement, can charge, count as moving against shooting, cannot forced surge

If the unit goes through difficult terrain it can only advance. No unit can ever go flat out or fleet through terrain.

Forced surge: Units can surge through terrain if they are allowed to go flat out outside terrain this turn. Tanks cannot force surge (except during a ram).
If the unit fails an I-test, terrain is treated as dangerous terrain.
During a charge, every unit can try to surge through. If the I-test is failed, the unit still can only advance. units, that have passed their I-test for the fleet movement, automatically pass this I-test.
Can’t surge if there is another reason for the restriction to advance movement than terrain.

Unit types:
infantry: 6”
beasts/cavalry: 8”, fleet (1)
jump infantry: 8”, ignore terrain*
jet pack infantry: 6”, ignore terrain*, 6” move in consolidation phase
jetbikes: 10”, ignore terrain*, flat out
(eldar jetbike: jetbike with Fleet (2) )
bikes: 8”, flat out, cannot force surge
vehicles: 6”
fast vehicles: 6”, flat out
fast skimmer: 8”, flat out
walker: 6”, treat terrain like infantry

* as long as they don’t start or end in terrain

Fleet (1): infantry, beasts, monstrous creature, jump infantry, jet pack infantry: I-test, if successful, can perform fleet movement, can always advance during disembarkation;
bikes and jetbikes: I-test successful: can make 6” move in consolidation phase
Fleet (2)/Bounding Leap: as Fleet (1), no I-Test required

Random movement: roll a D6: 1-2 unit moves as infantry, 3-4 unit moves as jump infantry but cannot ignore terrain, 5-6 unit moves as beast

Charging:
no model may enter 1” of enemy models unless it charges,
the only difference between a charge and a normal movement is: models may enter 1” of enemy models.
all other movement restrictions apply, unit must stay in coherency, are subject to terrain
charging units can make a forced surge
an unit can charge more than one unit, but must stay in coherency, cannot move closer than 1” to enemy units that are not charged
The units in contact are now locked. If any model moved through terrain, the defending unit can claim to be in terrain in the assault phase, in the assault phase, both unit pile in before trading blows

Charge by chance:
sometimes units are forced to perform a charge in another phase than the movement phase, the charge by chance is a pile in move, as if the charging and defending unit were locked but have lost contact, the defending unit can make a pile in move afterwards (even if it is his phase, the defending player piles in last).
the combat is fought in the next assault phase and no side counts as attacker or being in terrain, no side can use grenades, no further pile in moves occur before the fighting

Movement distance is important for shooting, only the attempted movement in the movement phase counts (other movements do not count, consolidate moves don’t count, even a vehicle that has movement 1” can claim having moved flat out),
can be ‘overridden’ by three events outside movement phase:
fighting in close combat : stationary
become immobile: stationary
falling back: moving

Wounding:
To wound chart:
wound everything at least on 6+

Wound Allocation (cc and shooting):
hit as normal, wound against majority

mark dice that represent special weapons and attacks or roll separately
1. decide whether to use Torrent of Fire or not
2. target’s player allocate wounds to models, beginning with one chosen armour group, if every model in this group has a wound, start with another armour group and so on, if every model in the unit has a wound, start over
—> multiple wounds: count for allocation as as many models as wounds remain
3. pick an unresolved armour group, determine which wounds are directed
4. directed wounds: roll saves for directed wounds, shooting player removes casualties
5. roll all remaining saves of this armour group, owning player removes casualties
6. goto 3

Directed wounds:
there are directed wounds in close combat and long-range combat, casualties from directed wounds are removed by owning player of the attacking unit
Wounds cannot be directed if targeted unit has Shielded USR, Torrent of Fire is used, vehicle diverts its fire or non-vehicle, non-MC unit is in fire corridor
Number of directed wounds: After allocating wounds to an armour group, it is determined if the how many and which wounds are directed as following:
- every attack from an IC in close combat is a directed wound,
- of the remaining wounds, every second wound, beginning with the first, from a Sniper weapon is directed.
- Of the remaining wounds on-sniper wounds, every fifth wound is directed, owning player of the shooting unit decides which wounds are directed

Torrent of Fire/Blows: if torrent of fire is used, the targeted unit is a single armour group, the owning player can choose one model, the whole unit has the same combination of armour saves
During a Torrent of Fire, no wound is directed

Armour group: number of model that share the same combination of saves, for example: 3+ armour save, Feel no Pain (1), no invulnerable save, 6+ cover save that is re-rollable on 1

Shooting:

for determining if a particular model in the unit can shoot, check range and line of sight from this model

cover saves:
fire corridor is measured from squad leader, to the two outermost models in the target unit, if 50% or more models are invisible or partial invisible due to cover or vehicles or monstrous creatures, the unit is in cover,
non-vehicles/MC are invisible for determining cover saves, but if such an unit is in fire corridor, wounds cannot be directed
if unit is covered mostly by fortifications or models are completely invisible: 4+ save
if unit is covered mostly by vegetation: 6+ save
if unit is covered mostly by vehicles or anything else: 5+ save

To Hit chart:
it is the same chart as the wound chart, but with seven columns from 0 till 6
(evasion value in brackets, abbreviates for small chart)

rows:
buildings (0)
stationary vehicles, MC, bikes (1)
stationary infantry, jet pack infantry, jump infantry, beasts // moving vehicles, monstrous creatures (2)
short distance // moving infantry, jet pack infantry (3)
moving bikes, jump infantry, beasts // swarms // flat out vehicles (4)
flat out bikes (5)
flyers, beacons (some narrative missions use beacons) (6)

columns:
BS 1-10

every column is: …. 6+ 6+ 6+ 5+ 4+ 3+ 2+ 2+ 2+ …. but is shifted up or down
I give you the BS value for every column that hits on 3+: 1 // 2 // 3 // 4 // 5 // 6 // 7

if distance from squad leader to target is less than 12”, unit can always change column to short distance column
if a model moves like a different unit type, the initial unit type is still used for the chart

Assault weapon: bonus attack for second close combat weapon if unit has charged

Pistols: model can use it as additional close combat weapon or use its Strength in close combat but gains no bonus for another ccw, if pistol is AP 1,2 or 3, attacks are Rending (2)

Blast (Small) and Blast (Large):
scatter as before
don’t use line of sight for determining cover saves, if majority of unit is in terrain, models get cover saves
marker has infinite height, only in leveled terrain it is two-dimensional
multiple Barrage is used every time when there comes more than one blast marker of the same type from a single shooting unit

Template: if there is a range given in a template weapon’s profile you can place the small end anywhere in this distance

Sniper (1): always wounds on 3+, Pinning, every second wound from a Sniper weapon beginning with the first is a directed wound
Sniper (2): always wounds on 3+, Rending (1), Pinning, every second wound from a Sniper weapon beginning with the first is a directed wound

Pinning: must make a pinning morale check

Tracer: treat every target as stationary

Anti Air: treat targeted flyer as flat out vehicle

Rending (1-3): 6,5+,4+ on to wound roll wound automatically and are AP2 or count as power weapon, D3 extra armour penetration

Poison/Dissolving (X+): as before, for shooting and close combat

Lance (1-3): treat AV as 13,12,11, no modifiers on damage chart ever

Instant Death(1): caused by double strength and other effects, models without Eternal Warrior (1-3) loose all wounds
Instant Death(2): models without Eternal Warrior (2-3) loose all wounds
Instant Death(3): also called removed from play, models without Eternal Warrior (3) loose all wounds

Eternal Warrior(1-3): Immune to Instant Death of same or lower level

Assault Phase:

Engaged model: a model that is in base to base contact with enemy model is called engaged, a model that is in contact with friendly engaged model is also called engaged, so if you have a long queue of models that are all in base to base contact and the first is in contact with enemy, alls are engaged

Pile In Move: consolidation move, 6”, priorities:
- must move as man models as possible in base contact with locked enemy unit
- as many models as possible must end the move engaged with model of unit it is locked in close combat with,
- rest of the model must move as near as possible to engaged models
if it is not possible to bring a single model into contact, the distance is increased with 3” until one model is engaged
At the end of the pile in move, every struggling, still unengaged IC is placed in contact with engaged model of enemy’s choosing.

Pile in after charge:
charging units make Pile In move, than the defending unit makes a Pile in Move

Attacking
Every engaged model can attack. If it is engaged with more than one unit, it can decide freely.
WS majority is used
IC are unit of their own in close combat

Initiative order:
Always strike first/last: unit strikes before I1 or after I10, is not affected by I modifiers, if unit always strikes first and last, it strikes in normal I order

charging unit in terrain: strikes at I1

Power fist: strikes always last

Feint: models can attack in a lower initiative phase if they want

Grenades: unchanged

Resolving combat
unchanged, but no more -1 for under half strength

No retreat:
Fearless units (or units that stay in combat even if they fail their morale check) make normal morale checks after loosing a combat, if failed, can decide nonetheless to stay in close combat, but every model in base to base contact may make a single attack against unit, if a model is in base to base contact with several Fearless units that failed their test, it can make one attack against each unit

Sweeping Advance: normal, unmodified I of squad leader is used

Pile in after combat: all locked units make Pile In moves, order is chosen by the player who’s turn it is, units that are no longer locked and not falling back, make a 3” consolidation move, the unit counts as being stationary

Special rules
distinction between special rules and universal special rules
Some USR and other special or weapon rules have more than one level. If no level is given, the rule is treated as level 1. Only exception: Lance and Fearless are level 2 by default
USR are always conferred to or from joined IC, other special rules not
deployment rules and rules in codices are temporarily lost if not every model in the unit has it, if it is not explicitly stated otherwise

all USR:
Preferred Enemy: as before
Tank Hunter: as before, but it only works against tanks
Counter Attack: as before, negates Furious Charge
Veiled(1): if unit targets veiled unit, must roll 3D6 x 3” over distance or forfeit shooting
Veiled (2-3): 2D6” x 2
Acute Senses/Night Vision(1-3): reroll Veiled roll of equal or lower level
Furious Charge: as before
Hit & Run: as before
Overwatch: can react with returning fire
Move through cover (1): I-Test to ignore terrain
Move through cover (2): ignores terrain
Sworn Brothers/Mindless Slaves: if squad leader is killed, every other model in unit can assume leadership
Rage: must always at least advance and use full distance towards enemy (for example raged infantry must at least move 6”, if decide to surge, must move 12”), if shaken or embarked, ignores the rule
Shielded: as long as one model with this rule remains in target unit, wounds cannot be directed wounds
Slow and purposeful: Relentless; can only surge, if S-test is passed, if unit moves through terrain, it cannot force a surge, units with SaP and Fleet and/or Flat out have Relentless and Random movement instead, negates Preferred Enemy
Shock Troop: always rolls a single D6” under 18” in a deep strike, a hit is a hit
Skilled Rider/Driver/Ranger (1): reroll dangerous terrain tests
Skilled Rider/Driver/Ranger (2): ignore dangerous terrain tests
Stealth (1): +1 on cover save, must take Vanish reaction if unit takes a shooting reaction
Stealth (2-3): +1,+2 on cover save; 6+,5+ in the open, must take Vanish reaction if unit takes a shooting reaction

no USR:
Relentless: always count as stationary for firing weapons
Swarms: use the moving beasts (4) column in the chart regardless of movement or unit type, Blast and Template Weapons cause Instant Death (2) against swarms

Vehicles:

damage chart:
only negative modifiers: -2 glancing, -1 any hit except AP1 and AP – against tanks, -2 AP – against tanks (AP 1 flat +1 gone), -3 hit by blast marker but hole not over vehicle and vehicle is not open-topped (no more halved S for blast markers)

chart unchanged, but if vehicle blows up (6+ on chart), embarked troops and models in D6” get S3 AP – hit, if vehicle blows up embarked troops are Suppressed, if the vehicle is only wrecked they are fine

if a flat out moving vehicle is immobilised (4) or wrecked (5) it blows up (6+) instead and embarked units are Pinned instead of Suppressed.

close combat basically the same:
no close combat resolution against non-walkers, but units can decide to break off and make a 3” consolidation move
hit stationary vehicle automatically, advancing vehicle on 4+, at any other speed and skimmers on 6+

Shooting: stationary: fire all weapons, advance: fire one, surge: no weapon
fast as before: advance and fire all, surge and fire one
every weapon can target different unit, when doing so, cannot cause directed wounds, even with Sniper weapons

Transport:
Fire point: can fire if vehicle has advanced or surged, but only 12” regardless of weapon type, embarked troops are relentless
Embarking: 4” move in consolidation phase in contact towards access point, if squad leader reaches access point, unit is embarked. If not, no move is performed
Disembarking: 4” in movement phase from any access point or base in case of flyers, consolidation move, counts as having moved the same distance category as vehicle, i.e. stationary, advance, surge; no charge
cannot disembark if going flat out or if unit cannot move as fast as vehicle, i.e. cannot disembark at surge speed into cover, as you can only advance in cover
if vehicle was stationary, unit can move normally from access point instead of disembarkation move, can charge
fleeting units can advance from access point instead of making disembarkation move if vehicle advanced or surged

Trapped: if an enemy model is in base to base contact with access point of closed vehicle, access point cannot be used. If every access point is blocked, the unit cannot disembark. If the unit is forced to disembark because the vehicle is destroyed, the unit is placed on the wreck or in the crater. If the unit is forced to disembark for another reason it is destroyed. The units that were in base to base contact with the access points must make a charge by chance on the embarked unit immediately if it can react
Flyers in skimmer or flyer mode and open-topped vehicles are not subject to this rule. If embarked units have to disembark place them as near as possible to the vehicle (wreck) or base

Multiple embarked units: must use different access points, if Trapped, choose access points, respective unit must charge

Skimmer: no more cover save for flat out movement

Squadron: must target the same unit,
if consists of at least two vehicles, one is squadron commander
commander: as long as commanding vehicles exists, every immobile result in squadron on vehicle with weapons left is weapon destroyed instead
rest unchanged, old allocation rules

Lumbering: can only surge if roll of 4+ on D6, if moved not faster than advance: can fire every turret mounted weapons in addition to normally allowed weapons

open topped:
has no further effect than that units can disembark and fire everywhere, no charge advantage, no damage modifier

Tanks
cannot force a surge, even if they are flat out, but can ram
AP 1 and AP – only useful against tanks

Non-tanks:
only non-tanks can force surge through terrain outside of ram
fails I-test automatically, so gets a S8 on 4+

Ramming:
now every tank shock is a ram, a ram is a straight movement with max speed (flat out or surge), if tank cannot go faster than advance, cannot ram
tank can force surge through terrain, but still can’t go flat out through it
only one turn before the movement is possible

three things can happen: tank shock through unit, passing interfering terrain, ramming attack against vehicle or building or impassable terrain

no disembarking or shooting from embarked unit or vehicle is possible after ramming

terrain:
S8 against side on 4+ as normal
Skimmer can choose to fly over terrain or go through. If go over, no tank shock or ram on units in terrain.

Tank shock:
an unit under the vehicle’s path must make a morale check
if it fails, the unit evades headless and is falling back
If check is nearly failed, unit is rolled over
If check passed but not nearly failed, can decide if nothing happens nothing happens as tanks passes by or unit is rolled over
Rolled over: unit can attempt to stop vehicle (like death or glory)
shaken units can’t try to stop
if the tanks presses on, the unit gets D3 S5 hits with Rending (2)

Ram against vehicle/building:
both vehicles deal an automatic hit to the opposing vehicle
the hit is resolved against the side in contact
to calculate the S, take the AV in contact (if it is a tank, always take the front AV) and subtract a modifier
-6 if ramming vehicle has surged
-4 if ramming vehicle moved flat out
impassable terrain and buildings have AV 14 for this purpose and can’t be damaged

Ram against walker
walker can try to stop tank as if rolled over, if vehicle isn’t stopped, impact is resolved as ram, walker cannot charge by chance

if tank would end movement on unit:
may make a 6” special move in any direction but they must try to make place for the tank, if they would be still under the vehicle they may make another 3” move and another and another, until they are 1” away from the tank and in coherency, moves are treated like consolidation moves, but can performed in every situation even if unit is immobile or can’t perform any other action
the evading unit can perform a charge by chance on the vehicle, if it can react, afterwards

comes to halt, if it: touches vehicle, building, impassable terrain, 1” before an unit in close combat or is stunned, destroyed or immobilized, movement distance is reached

Artillery: vehicle, squadron, immobile, AV 10 /10 /10, BS as crew,
no commander
can place one crew counter per artillery, some can have additional crew members
can remove counter to ignore a single crew shaken or stunned result
can fight in cc like a walker, with WS, S, I as the crew, the number of attacks is the number of crew counters plus the number of artillery devices
enemy attacks are resolved solely against the artillery

Flyers:
- can decide every round in the preparation phase: count as fast skimmer or flyer, can decide upon arrival from reserves

flyer mode:
- If flyer is in reserve, it is placed in harry reserve every time, even if it can’t outflank
- Flyers from reserve are place in the the preparation phase on any table edge
- unlike other vehicles, flyers cannot turn as they like
- ignore all terrain, even impassable
- up to 18” movement, no surge, no flat out, one turn anywhere during the movement up to 90 degrees
- must move 12” in straight line in preparation phase, can turn up to 45 degree at the end of the movement,
- must move 12” in straight line in consolidation phase, can turn up to 45 degree at the end of the movement, if reaches table edge or can’t be placed at the end of the turn, flyer is put back in harry reserve, cannot change into skimmer mode
- Flyers can always fire every weapon at a single target, all weapons have AA rule
- no (dis-)embarking, except special drops if unit has Aerial Drop special rule
- if immobilized (4) or wrecked (5), place Blast (Large) marker in random direction in 3D6”, causes S5 (against side armour), place crater
- Embarked troops are destroyed if flyer in flyer mode is wrecked or destroyed. If immobilized, unit is placed in crater, get S5 hit each, Suppressed
- flyers have their own column in the to hit chart, Blast weapons don’t use their marker, use BS to hit, if marker targets another unit and touches flyer, hit is ignored
- barrage and ordnance weapons can fire direct, but must re-roll hits, even if twin-linked, weapons that hit automatically can’t hit flyers, that includes shooting, rift and shock wave psychic powers that hit automatically
- close combat: in contact with base, attacks hit on 6, any other unit than jump infantry, jetpack infantry and jetbikes must re-roll hits
- cannot be rammed, base is treated like unit in close combat

Aerial Drop: flyer with this special rule can disembak units even if in flyer mode, in any phase embarked jump infantry and jet pack infantry can be placed via deep strike on a point, the flyer has moved over in this phase

IC: can roll two saves at the same time,
All wounds from an IC in close combat are directed. count as separate unit in assault phase for dealing damage
joining: 3” move in preparation or consolidation phase, assumes automatically squad leadership
combat: if IC is part of an unit that is in close combat, but isn’t in base to base contact, it is moved into it by the shortest distance

Squad Leader:
You must nominate one model of every unit to be the squad leader, if the unit entry doesn’t make clear which model it is in the first place.

Banner/Icon/Trophy: if squad leader is killed, standard- or icon bearer automatically becomes new squad leader.
If one or more independent characters have joined the unit, one of them automatically becomes new squad leader. If the IC is killed, the normal leader takes over.

Squad leaders can take two saves, all wounds from squad leader in close combat are directed
only applies for initial squad leader.

If the unit must take a characteristic test, use the profile of the Squad leader.
used for all kinds of things

Every time when something is measured from the squad leader, or he has to make a test for the unit, but the unit has no leader anymore, the opposing player can choose one model for this purpose

psychic powers:

Psychic test: morale check to use power, if morale check is failed, no more powers this turn from this psyker

perils: unchanged

power levels: number of psychic powers per player’s turn
power types:
- shooting power: count as firing a weapon, line of sight, BS roll or scatter if blast, fire point needed
- rift power: count as firing a weapon, true line of sight, no BS roll or scatter, only disembarked, targets suffer described effect, wounds from rift powers cause ID (2)
- modifying power: preparation phase, no line of sight or BS roll, no fire point needed, distance from hull, can only target own models inside transport; if target splits during the turn, the psyker’s player can decide on which part the power remains
- aura: preparation phase, psyker and joined unit are effected, if psyker leaves unit, power stays only with psyker, no BS roll, no fire point needed, transport unaffected, sustained power
- shock wave: count as firing a weapon, no line of sight, no BS roll needed, radius from base edge, must be disembarked, units in transports are unaffected

block: psyker in normal condition in 24” of other psyker can attempt to block psychic power, on 5+ blocked, on 1 perils of warp attack (unchanged), if equipped with similar wargear, psyker can decide which to use, only one block attempt per power

passive powers: no need for psychic test, not subject to block, don’t work if unit ‘can’t perform any action’
resonating powers: can stack
sustained powers: if psyker is shaken or engaged in close combat, power is blocked
rampant power: if psyker uses a rampant power, cannot use another power this turn, even with power level 2 or more

force weapon: as before, ID(2)
witchblades: as before, besides: force weapon with ID(1)

Unit conditions:
Morale checks: roll with 2D6 against squad leaders Ld as normal, but result of a failed or passed roll varies from situation to situation i.e. psychic test, pinning test, casualties, and are given for every situation. there is no more: “make a normal morale check”
In some situations a morale check can not only be failed or passed, but also be nearly failed. Nearly failed is if rolled higher than halved LD (rounding up) but below or equal to Ld, modifiers are applied before halving, but there are no more modifiers outside close combat

five usual situations: lost close combat, heavy casualties, pinning, psychic test, rallying
checks due to other fleeing unit is gone

Heavy casualties: made in consolidation phase, 25% casualties or more in a shooting phase: if failed: fall back

Pinning:
if morale check fails, unit is Pinned, if nearly fails, unit is Suppressed

Lost close combat:
unchanged, difference in combat resolution as modifier

- Suppressed:
non-vehicle and non-MCs units cannot move flat out, fleet, force a surge, shoot, use psychic powers, react, if they fail a T-test, they cannot surge and charge
vehicles and MC: can still react and fire a single weapon, cannot ram, (vehicles fail their T-test automatically), vehicles can only voluntarily become suppressed, embarked units in a suppressed vehicle cannot shoot from within
infantry, beasts, unit with swarm get Stealth (1) or level of stealth one up up to 3
if charged: looses suppressed status immediately
if forced to make another morale check: morale check, if nearly failed or failed, unit is Pinned instead of Suppressed
- Pinned: cannot move, shoot, make consolidate moves, use psychic powers, react
infantry, beasts, unit with swarm get Stealth (1) or level of stealth one up up to 3
if charged: looses Pinned status immediately but cannot use defensive grenades and Counter Charge USR and gains no bonus from terrain
if forced to make another morale check: morale check, if nearly failed or failed, unit is Falling Back instead of being pinned
- Falling Back:
in moment of breaking unit immediately makes consolidation move towards own table edge with surge distance, count as having surged for purposes of shooting
can act in subsequent turn as normal, but must attempt to move and simultaneously end their movement not closer to any enemy unit. If they cannot move in the movement phase because of this they are removed from play. Therefore they cannot stay stationary voluntarily or charge an enemy.
They can perform consolidation moves, but cannot end nearer to any enemy unit. Unit cannot react.
if charged: if charging model reaches the unit, unit is destroyed and charge is unsuccessful
if forced to make another morale check: unit is destroyed, does not apply for rallying
if reaches voluntarily or during their initial move the table edge: are removed from play but don’t count as destroyed
- Shaken: abbreviation for Suppressed, Pinned, Falling Back
- Immobile: abbreviation for cannot move, cannot react, cannot make consolidation moves

Rallying: suppressed and pinned units automatically recover in the consolidation phase of their next player’s turn
A falling back unit with squad leader can make a morale check in the preparation phase if there is no enemy unit in 6”. If successful the unit can act normally. If failed, the unit is not destroyed. A falling back unit can embark into a vehicle an rallies immediately. The 3” movement can be towards enemies as long as it end inside the vehicle.

Fearless (1): if any morale check for rallying, casualties, tank shock or in close combat fails, the unit can decide to pass it anyway, Fearless units treat Pinned as Suppressed, treat Falling back as normal condition
Fearless (2): as Fearless (1) but can decide to pass Pinning tests, too

Stubborn: always use the unmodified Ld for morale tests in close combat, Stubborn and Fearless (1-2) units must always choose to pass a morale check

Misc:
swarm = model with swarm rule
there is no special rule for allocating wounds against units with multiple wounds

Mission rules:
3 old types of placement, only one type of mission

Sequence:
place terrain -> decide type of placement -> place mission markers -> decide first turn -> choose stratagems -> put units in reserve ->deploy remaining units -> deploy infiltrating units -> make scout moves

First turn:
roll-off, looser bids a number of strategy points, opponent can raise or bail out, both player can raise the stake until someone bails out. Winner can decide to go first or last
Player that goes first can decide table edge and has to deploy first
The looser can spent the strategy points on stratagems

Placing mission markers: 1 marker is placed as near as possible to the middle of the table, 4 markers are placed in turn, starting with the player that goes first. marker has to be more than 12” away from table edges and other markers
marker use a 60mm base and are impassable terrain, the center marker is flat and doesn’t block line of sight, the players can use every shape they want for the markers they place, as long as it doesn’t overlap the base significantly

Night Fighting: all units Veiled (1)

Scout: 12” move before the game after infiltrators are placed, outflank

Infiltrator: can be placed anywhere outside 18” of enemy models, count as veiled (2) as long as they make no voluntary action

Outflank: nominate side, on 3+ comes from there, on 1-2 from other side

Deep Strike: mishab table as before, place squad leader,
if in 6” of enemy: 3D6” scatter, use arrow on hit symbol, if in 12”: 2D6” hit is hit, in 18”: 1D6”, outside 18”: no scatter
may only advance on turn of arrival, even with fleet or flat out, count always as (advance) moving, charge allowed

Reserves: unit(s), their transport and joined IC count as one unit for all reserve related purposes, but the unit has to start inside the transport and IC has to be in the unit, units can use special deployment options of the vehicle but not vice versa,
1. nominate any number of outflanking units to harry, place them near the table, facing the enemy’s table edge
2. flank guard: nominate half (rounding down) of the remaining units to arrive in turn 2, place them near the table, facing the small table edge
3. rear guard: the rest arrives in turn 3, place them near the table, facing the own table edge
In the preparation phase
when you put an unit in reserve you have to decide upon a deployment method

In preparation phase:
flank guard: from turn 2 on: arrives on 2+
rear guard: arrives in turn 2 on 1, and from turn 3 on on 2+
harrying units arrive on 4+ from turn 2 on
all remaining reserves are arriving on turn 6

for every harrying unit that is in reserve in the enemy’s preparation phase, you can make the enemy reroll one reserve roll

units from reserves are placed in the preparation phase in base to base contact with table edge (if not deep striking), if there is not enough space, placed back in reserves

Victory Points
both armies can collect victory points throughout the game, there are two ways: claim a kill, claim a mission marker at the end of the game turn:

Claim Kill:
every destroyed tank (not vehicle), walker, monstrous creature or independent character is a kill. Every squad leader that is killed is a kill (not counting standards, etc.)
Every kills gives one victory point

Claim Marker:
You check in your own preparation phase if you hold or control a marker. Opponent checks in his preparation phase.

You control a marker, if there is one of your scoring units in 3” of the marker and no enemy scoring unit. If you control a marker you get 3 victory points.
You hold a marker, if you don’t control it, there is one of your non-scoring non-vehicle units in 3” and no enemy unit. If you hold a marker you get 2 victory points.

You start in the preparation phase of the second going player in the second game turn. The player that goes first checks a last time at the end of the game as there is no preparation phase in turn 7.

Vehicles and shaken units are completely ignored. Embarked units only count if transport is open-topped.

Game length:
6 turns

Stratagems:

1 can place automatic turret
immobile BS 3 10/10/10
is equipped with twin-linked weapon
can choose one weapon, that an infantry model from FOC Troop can be equipped with

1 the first or last game turn is night fighting

1 can re-roll one outflanking roll and one deep striking scatter roll per turn

1 can block every psychic power on 6+ even if no psyker in 24”, psykers block on 4+

1 steal the initiative: if going second, roll at the start of the game a D6, on 6 you go first

1 own units use Ld 10 for pinning morale checks

2 one unit for every full 1500 points can get one of the following USR: Tank Hunter, Shielded, Fearless (1), Preferred Enemy, Relentless

2 decide during deployment if rear or flank guard: roll a single reserve roll for all units in chosen guard

2 Mine Field: makes one piece of terrain for every full 750 points dangerous

2 units of both forces that are holding or controlling mission marker have Overwatch USR

3 can make one non-vehicle unit upon deployment scoring

3 enemy deep striking units must subtract 6” from distance to enemy to see how they scatter

2 all weapons of one unit for every full 750 points have the Anti Air and Tracer rule

4 you can switch units from rear guard to flank guard until you roll the first reserve roll,
every unit can decide upon arrival which deployment method it uses: deep strike, normal reserve or outflank,
one unit for every full 1500 points per turn can change its deployment method to one it cannot normally be deployed with

4 All own units count as having surged or moved flat out before the game.

4 all own units are equipped with offensive grenades

6 all enemy units count as being in terrain in their first turn

6 all own units count as Veiled (2) in turn one

6 enemy rear guard and flank guard units roll like harrying units for their arrival

12 Pitch black: Night fighting with Veil (2) during the whole game

12 own units: weapons fired in 6” range count as twin-linked

12 enemy must re-roll successful cover saves

every stratagem can only be taken one time,
for every unspent point, once per game one roll may be re-roll, this cannot be the steal the iniative roll

Narratives rules:
- optional rules: apocalyptic weapons, super heavy vehicles (not much changed, but rules for damaged super heavies for small games), formations
- new deployment types, mostly taken from mission expansion
- new victory conditions
- rules for games with predetermined strategy points for both players
- three sets of additional stratagems: fortifications, deployment options, reinforced buildings
- special terrain: ruins, streets, hell rivers, deathworld mangroves, warp gate, sand pit, orbital landing platform, habitat block
- highly modular: you can mix deployment rule, victory condition, optional rules, available stratagem sets, number of strategy points to spent and special terrain: voila, you have your own mission

And the following:
some more:
- narrative rule with strategy points: can agree with other player to with fix stock of strategy points, both players can spend them, then the looser of the bidding can use his strategy points on top
- damaged super heavies are cheaper, have only one structure point left, give 5 victory points
- pistols can make only a single attack in cc
- new close combat weapon: colossal power weapon: 2D6 against vehicles, models with S5 attack in I-order, models with lesser attack last. dreadnoughts double strength, dreadnought cc is colossal weapon
- IC can still be picked in cc, that seems to be huge, as in most meeles their is a wall of models that are in base to base contact
- movement is really fast now, every unit behaves almost the same, but you need marker for movement distances
- only very tiny paragraphs for unit types
- favorite tactic: charging unit with large ork mob, attack with almost every model, than shoot the hell out of another unit


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 19:08:46


Post by: dajobe


THIS LOOKS LEGENDARY!

but much different


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 19:22:40


Post by: Marthike


vehicles: 6” ok Is that a total nerf?


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 19:26:44


Post by: dajobe


NERF BLASTER (trade marked)


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 19:27:24


Post by: AgeOfEgos


That's a lot to take in. The last part got me though about IC being a unique unit in HTH. That's the way it is now.

However, with directed attacks---your IC (it appears) can direct his wounds against the PF in the group and stay safe. So it would seem ID won't be as big of a deal.

Again though, that is a ton to take in.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 19:37:49


Post by: Omegus


Wow, just wow! I do hope some or all of this is true, I'm really bored with the current simplistic nature of the game.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 19:41:43


Post by: Morathi's Darkest Sin


Damn if thats in any way accurate, it's going to feel like a different game.

The return fire thing for example would be huge, Marines, damn, those bloody Marines.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 19:42:59


Post by: Hawk


I wonder who the source is.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 19:46:07


Post by: LavuranGuard


Very interesting, a huge shift there but I can't see anything that's terrible.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 19:52:19


Post by: Kirasu


ICQ session?! Doesnt sound legit already since I left ICQ after russian companies bought the service and started trying to hack everyones accounts


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 19:55:01


Post by: grizgrin


Now THAT is a post. Seems a bit....long to be BS?


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 19:56:42


Post by: Extinction Angel


Wow, looks like 3rd edition and 5th edition got together and impregnated 2nd edition and are in a heated battle for custody of 6th ed.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 20:02:42


Post by: Samus_aran115


WOAHTEXTWALL.

I can't read through all that. Can someone point out the important chunks?


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 20:06:03


Post by: wyomingfox


grizgrin wrote:Now THAT is a post. Seems a bit....long to be BS?


You remember that Fandex for Tyranids that hit the internets and got people to thinking it was the next 5th edition Nid codex...right? Not saying this is a fake, just saying that some people do have alot of free time on thier hands.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 20:06:34


Post by: pretre


Or the BA 'leakdex'.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 20:14:54


Post by: Alpharius


Extinction Angel wrote:Wow, looks like 3rd edition and 5th edition got together and impregnated 2nd edition and are in a heated battle for custody of 6th ed.


Awesome analogy - congrats!


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 20:15:45


Post by: MrDrumMachine


Omg.. . .way for nids to get assault grenades on whole army. . . . .?!?!?!?!? The possibilities. . .they are endless.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 20:17:15


Post by: Samus_aran115


Alpharius wrote:
Extinction Angel wrote:Wow, looks like 3rd edition and 5th edition got together and impregnated 2nd edition and are in a heated battle for custody of 6th ed.


Awesome analogy - congrats!


I agree! Sounds like an episode of General Hospital.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 20:18:09


Post by: Wehrkind


That is an interesting set of rumors. The suppressed/shaken etc. reminds me a lot of various historical games, with multiple states between "Lovin' it" and "OMG RUN!"

I dunno... I am getting curious, but remain skeptical.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 20:19:59


Post by: Marthike


I hope all of this is or my entire 5000 points of GK I just bought is gone to waste.

Also All the rules I just learnt since I just started playing will be useless by next year same time.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 20:22:08


Post by: morgendonner


Wow, that is a lot of text. Changes the game entirely, I'm not sure I like all of these. Again who knows how valid they really are but a few thoughts of mine:

-Seems like there is infinitely more conditions to keep track of. Right now we have binary questions to remember: did it move, has it gone to ground, is it falling back, etc. Very black and white yes or no questions. These rumors propose all kinds of in betweens. I think that may really bog down games.

-Along those lines, having so many variable speeds requires you to be much more vigilant on your opponent IMO. It's very fluid to know almost every unit moves a multiple of 6" typically and makes it very easy to sit back and watch your opponent. Maybe this won't be a big deal, just a thought.

-It seems completely pointless to consider FNP a save and then say regular units can only use two if fnp is one of them. Why not just keep it as is now and say you can only use one save, and if you happen to have fnp it can be used additionally.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 20:26:38


Post by: Zyllos


morgendonner wrote:Wow, that is a lot of text. Changes the game entirely, I'm not sure I like all of these. Again who knows how valid they really are but a few thoughts of mine:

-Seems like there is infinitely more conditions to keep track of. Right now we have binary questions to remember: did it move, has it gone to ground, is it falling back, etc. Very black and white yes or no questions. These rumors propose all kinds of in betweens. I think that may really bog down games.

-Along those lines, having so many variable speeds requires you to be much more vigilant on your opponent IMO. It's very fluid to know almost every unit moves a multiple of 6" typically and makes it very easy to sit back and watch your opponent. Maybe this won't be a big deal, just a thought.

-It seems completely pointless to consider FNP a save and then say regular units can only use two if fnp is one of them. Why not just keep it as is now and say you can only use one save, and if you happen to have fnp it can be used additionally.


Maybe the rules are changed where FnP is now considered a save?


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 20:28:08


Post by: Death By Monkeys


Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:Damn if thats in any way accurate, it's going to feel like a different game.


Seriously - that's what it sounds like: A Whole Different Game. Which gets me wondering how much to believe these rumors, but there's enough stuff that logically evolves from this edition, so maybe it really is true.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 20:40:16


Post by: Ozymandias


Yeah, that's kind of what I'm thinking, it all seems like a progression. And with the changes to WHFB in 8th edition, nothing is impossible.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 20:40:29


Post by: grizgrin


wyomingfox wrote:
grizgrin wrote:Now THAT is a post. Seems a bit....long to be BS?


You remember that Fandex for Tyranids that hit the internets and got people to thinking it was the next 5th edition Nid codex...right? Not saying this is a fake, just saying that some people do have alot of free time on thier hands.
Point.

pretre wrote:Or the BA 'leakdex'.
Point.

Extinction Angel wrote:Wow, looks like 3rd edition and 5th edition got together and impregnated 2nd edition and are in a heated battle for custody of 6th ed.
Money, or money shot?


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 20:43:36


Post by: gorgon


There are a few snippets in that give me pause...or at least make me wonder what edition the leaker is playing. So I dunno.

Heckuva hoax if it is one, though. I'd probably play that game, lol.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 20:44:02


Post by: Kroothawk


ghost21 wrote:
Dominic1905 wrote:hmm, these changes seem interesting...
Can you say if what was said in the BoK post is relatively accurate ghost?

some (i wont do rules n stats, im sorry ive been asked not too)


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 20:47:49


Post by: Marthike


Kroothawk wrote:
ghost21 wrote:
Dominic1905 wrote:hmm, these changes seem interesting...
Can you say if what was said in the BoK post is relatively accurate ghost?

some (i wont do rules n stats, im sorry ive been asked not too)


Some..... meaning there are some fakes but how much.

This literally changes the game, every army list ever made is now down the drains because they can't be used.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 20:48:47


Post by: daedalus-templarius


I am officially intrigued by this new list of stuff.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 20:54:27


Post by: Kirasu


Its perfectly plausible that GW would totally change the game and invalidate every book.. They did with 3rd ed and honestly it looks like (For the sake of argument) that they are keeping the same terminology that the current books use, so that probably means they wouldnt be invalidated

I welcome a ton of change, its been the same game basically for 14 years


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 20:55:43


Post by: SkaerKrow


Ok, now I'm certain that this is pure wishlisting. Too long, too specific and too collected. It's the result of someone sitting down and reworking the rules to suit their tastes. That's not a "leak," and it certainly isn't a leak for a product that's at least a year away from being released.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 21:00:05


Post by: LavuranGuard


well depends who you believe, rumour was that 6th will be out before the next olympics...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 21:06:03


Post by: daedalus-templarius


Would be nice if it was easier to read, might be able to playtest a bit.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 21:08:25


Post by: MasterSlowPoke


Even though these rumors probably aren't true, I was bored enough to translate the shooting To Hit table:



6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 21:12:06


Post by: GBL


MasterSlowPoke wrote:Even though these rumors probably aren't true, I was bored enough to translate the shooting To Hit table:



Ballistic skill 1 has a 50% chance to hit the broad side of a barn.

That sounds like GW reasoning, for better or for worse.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 21:14:10


Post by: Dr. Temujin


Hmmm.... I dunno if I like what's going on here...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 21:15:25


Post by: Baragash


Holy crap that's a lot of text.

One reason it seems plausible to me is that there are some ideas that Alessio is implementing in Warpath in those rules, which is consistent with the other rumour about the lead designer leaving during the project.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 21:16:22


Post by: Kroothawk


66% to hit a barn, 50% to hit a stationary vehicle. Sounds reasonable.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 21:16:50


Post by: daedalus-templarius


So, you only need a 4+ as a marine to hit a flat out fast skimmer, and they don't get a flat out cover save anymore?

I wonder if the Stormraven could get any worse...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 21:18:13


Post by: AgeOfEgos


That would certainly make DoA armies a bit more interesting.



6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 21:18:26


Post by: lord_blackfang


I am now somewhat less enthusiastic than I was after the first batch of rumours. But also somewhat more doubtful that they're true (and I was very doubtful to begin with)


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 21:20:01


Post by: Samus_aran115


Kirasu wrote:Its perfectly plausible that GW would totally change the game and invalidate every book.. They did with 3rd ed and honestly it looks like (For the sake of argument) that they are keeping the same terminology that the current books use, so that probably means they wouldnt be invalidated

I welcome a ton of change, its been the same game basically for 14 years


Exactly. Every other game has re-made itself over the years, except GW-tabletops. It's been three full editions. Time to move on GW. I applaud these new changes. The game has been horribly static and monogamous since third, at least from what I can tell. Second was a land of exciting rules, experimental armies, insanely complicated tank busting and interesting background. It was all new, and it was fun! That's what GW should try to achieve. IMHO, by the way.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 21:28:04


Post by: GBL


If these rules are true (and in my mind they have the same truth to them as both the fake BA codex and GW moving to resin, so 50/50) then i expect the amount of terrain required to double.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 21:36:23


Post by: Kingsley


daedalus-templarius wrote:So, you only need a 4+ as a marine to hit a flat out fast skimmer, and they don't get a flat out cover save anymore?

I wonder if the Stormraven could get any worse...


Nope, the Stormraven will certainly be a flyer, and thus it's been super buffed-- most units will only be able to hit on a 6!


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 21:38:23


Post by: daedalus-templarius


Fetterkey wrote:
daedalus-templarius wrote:So, you only need a 4+ as a marine to hit a flat out fast skimmer, and they don't get a flat out cover save anymore?

I wonder if the Stormraven could get any worse...


Nope, the Stormraven will certainly be a flyer, and thus it's been super buffed-- most units will only be able to hit on a 6!


Yea, while I hope that is true, there are going to be some pretty serious FAQs going out timed with the release of 6th if this will be the case; because it will basically be reclassifying the vehicle, as it is currently a Fast Skimmer.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 21:38:50


Post by: Marthike


The new rules seem to confusing don't you think? I kinda like the old shoot and charge in stuff because that is the most realistic way of someone to actully fight a war, no one is just gonna charge into close combat before they tried everything to thin out their numbers.

Anyway these new rules really messup transports since what's the point of a rhino when you can already move 6 inch on foot.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 21:41:40


Post by: pretre


Marthike wrote:Anyway these new rules really messup transports since what's the point of a rhino when you can already move 6 inch on foot.

Ummm. You know that it listed Surge and Flat out, right? x2 and x3 movement?


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 21:58:01


Post by: winterman


pretre wrote:
Marthike wrote:Anyway these new rules really messup transports since what's the point of a rhino when you can already move 6 inch on foot.

Ummm. You know that it listed Surge and Flat out, right? x2 and x3 movement?

Infantry will still out pace a non-fast vehicle since they get to fleet with a leadership test. Even better if you are infantry that move through cover, as it appears you can fleet into terrain (although depends on the definition of ignore terrain I guess).


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 22:03:08


Post by: Mr.Church13


Shooting already gets the short end of the stick in 5th ed if they go with this there will be very little reason to take anything other than assault units and the biggest guns so the reward for actually hitting is worth the loss of CQC potential.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 22:07:32


Post by: Vertrucio


I like pretty much all the rules changes I'm hearing, if handled well.

But, I still won't get into 40k despite liking the universe so much because everything else I'm reading and seeing about GW's lineup shows they're doing everything else wrong.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 22:19:08


Post by: winterman


This one made me chuckle
Abandon: If there is more than one model with less than its initial wounds in an unit in the consolidation phase, the owning player must remove all but one as casualty ( ID(3) ). Independent characters are ignored.

If true, there will be many remodeled paladins and nobs next summer.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 22:45:46


Post by: Magister187


These feel legit to me, and as others have said, 40k needs a fresh take pretty badly. They seem like good changes really.

Also, for the "these make the game too slow" crowd, several of the changes feel like they streamline thing and make it go quicker, like measuring LOS from the squad leader, taking all tests at the squad leaders statistics, and assigning armor groups wounds instead of "identical models". Also, the important thing to note about making FNP a save is that it means Independent Characters don't take 2 saves AND FNP, just 2 saves from among the 4. As winterman quoted, the elimination of the diversified multi-wound model "shenanigans" just by itself will make the game flow better imo.

Overall, assuming all these changes are true (they are probably not), I think it will keep the actual game around the same speed, but make the pregame take longer and give you a few more things to track (but also likely less special rules about movement).


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 22:54:35


Post by: Anvildude


Well, looks like there'd be very little reason not to take 'ard Case on your Wagons, now...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 23:13:04


Post by: AgeOfEgos


Mr.Church13 wrote:Shooting already gets the short end of the stick in 5th ed if they go with this there will be very little reason to take anything other than assault units and the biggest guns so the reward for actually hitting is worth the loss of CQC potential.



I don't know how the changes are going to affect that dynamic (If they're true)---but I find it difficult to call assault armies strong in 5th Edition.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 23:25:16


Post by: Sarigar


I'm all for change. Not a fan of 5th at all.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 23:41:04


Post by: daedalus-templarius


Pretty sure if they eliminate wound spreading, gonna find it difficult to convince myself to run Draigowing.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 23:47:37


Post by: Lysenis


So a Blood Angel assault marine gets a single attack in CC that can be S8 a d Rending! I love it!


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/23 23:54:13


Post by: puma713


So they work for years and years and years to try to 'perfect' their game model - to try to get it more streamlined - and make it easier to play a 2K in a few hours rather than all day, then they simply throw all that away for this rule-stuffed edition? I doubt it. This all seems like utter crap.

I will be the first to admit I was wrong if this turns out to be true (because I probably won't have much interest in playing), but I sincerely doubt it. The list seems too put together. It seems too "finished".

Seems like a wishlist above all else.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 00:40:34


Post by: whembly


winterman wrote:This one made me chuckle
Abandon: If there is more than one model with less than its initial wounds in an unit in the consolidation phase, the owning player must remove all but one as casualty ( ID(3) ). Independent characters are ignored.

If true, there will be many remodeled paladins and nobs next summer.


What? I'm not sure I understand this... wouldn't this make it impossible to do the would allocation on paladins/nobz??? Help me out here...

I guess there's no point of wound allocation then...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 00:58:08


Post by: warboss


whembly wrote:
What? I'm not sure I understand this... wouldn't this make it impossible to do the would allocation on paladins/nobz??? Help me out here...

I guess there's no point of wound allocation then...


If so then, HOORAY for GW!! The idea that a unit should be able to run around with half dead models ONLY because they're have different color shoes on or some other inconsequential piece of wargear that doesn't protect them was ridiculous.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 01:02:27


Post by: Kingsley


whembly wrote:
winterman wrote:This one made me chuckle
Abandon: If there is more than one model with less than its initial wounds in an unit in the consolidation phase, the owning player must remove all but one as casualty ( ID(3) ). Independent characters are ignored.

If true, there will be many remodeled paladins and nobs next summer.


What? I'm not sure I understand this... wouldn't this make it impossible to do the would allocation on paladins/nobz??? Help me out here...

I guess there's no point of wound allocation then...


This would indeed make it impossible to do the standard wound allocation tricks on Paladins and Nobz-- and that's almost certainly the point, given that many players have complained about the current state of affairs.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 01:13:42


Post by: Ehsteve


warboss wrote:
whembly wrote:
What? I'm not sure I understand this... wouldn't this make it impossible to do the would allocation on paladins/nobz??? Help me out here...

I guess there's no point of wound allocation then...


If so then, HOORAY for GW!! The idea that a unit should be able to run around with half dead models ONLY because they're have different color shoes on or some other inconsequential piece of wargear that doesn't protect them was ridiculous.

The counter-argument could be made that it's less realistic for every bullet to be magically diverted to the half-dead guy in the squad. Wound allocation is the one thing which sets the vindicare assassin apart from any other model, the ability to choose your target regardless.

Having a squad of half-dead models simply means they're resillient, rather than simply being bulletcatchers after the very first unlucky save.

"Oh no! I've taken a shot in the shoulder, I'm done for. Every wound must be allocated to me until I die. Woe is me!"

Not that I believe Nob Bikers are fun to kill along with paladins, but it makes as much sense either way. As for the rules, I'd have to see them complete within the context of 6th rather than a single rule which affects a minority of 40k models (since they exclude ICs). I would love to see the return of the more powerful ICs because it will make those Brotherhood Champions nigh unstoppable. I'd hate to see what this change would do to Crowe though...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 01:23:52


Post by: daedalus-templarius


warboss wrote:
whembly wrote:
What? I'm not sure I understand this... wouldn't this make it impossible to do the would allocation on paladins/nobz??? Help me out here...

I guess there's no point of wound allocation then...


If so then, HOORAY for GW!! The idea that a unit should be able to run around with half dead models ONLY because they're have different color shoes on or some other inconsequential piece of wargear that doesn't protect them was ridiculous.


More like I'm paying 55 points for each one of them.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 02:14:09


Post by: Anvildude


And I don't know about Paladins, but it's still possible to do slight Shenanigans to Nobz, since you could have one group with bare bones 6+, one group with 6+/5++, one group with 4+, one group with 4+/5++... It'd make slightly smaller groups 'tougher', with the shenanigans. So not really doing away with it, per-say, but making it less effective.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 02:21:36


Post by: daedalus-templarius



Abandon: If there is more than one model with less than its initial wounds in an unit in the consolidation phase, the owning player must remove all but one as casualty ( ID(3) ). Independent characters are ignored.


I'm not even sure what this even means; you take an auto-wound if you don't have full wounds in consolidation? That doesn't even make sense.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 02:24:12


Post by: adhuin


Abandon-rule gets thumbs up from me.

I play orks to kicks ass and chew squicks. Not to bookkeep each nobs wound allocations.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 03:09:03


Post by: youbedead


daedalus-templarius wrote:
Abandon: If there is more than one model with less than its initial wounds in an unit in the consolidation phase, the owning player must remove all but one as casualty ( ID(3) ). Independent characters are ignored.


I'm not even sure what this even means; you take an auto-wound if you don't have full wounds in consolidation? That doesn't even make sense.


If you have two nobs with one wound each one of them dies


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 03:45:17


Post by: helgrenze


Varied movement speeds, multiple saves on a model, overwatch...... People, this IS a 2nd ed revision.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 03:49:56


Post by: AresX8


These new rumored changes bog down the game considering how many models we have. There's too many variables going on. This doesn't look good.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 04:24:41


Post by: chaos0xomega


Yeah, I'm less inclined to believe the validity. First, most of these rules will invalidate the current army books. Now its not like GW hasn't done that before, but I seem to recall towards the end of 4th edition, the new books started using 5th edition terminology, etc. If 6th is really so near, you would think that the newer books would have used some 6th terminology, yet Dark Eldar lances dont have a number associated with them, etc.

Also, it seems like the new rules would be a little too in depth for the large size games GW is shifting towards...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 04:29:54


Post by: daedalus-templarius


youbedead wrote:
daedalus-templarius wrote:
Abandon: If there is more than one model with less than its initial wounds in an unit in the consolidation phase, the owning player must remove all but one as casualty ( ID(3) ). Independent characters are ignored.


I'm not even sure what this even means; you take an auto-wound if you don't have full wounds in consolidation? That doesn't even make sense.


If you have two nobs with one wound each one of them dies


So what is the point of having multiple wound troops

"Oh I guess you got one wound on me, guess now that you didn't hit me with anything else/I saved it, I'll lose a model" No thanks.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 04:45:12


Post by: -Loki-


Abandon sounds really far fetched,k considering how many armies rely on multi-wound troop units.

Paladins, Nobz, Crisis suits, lots of Tyranid broods, Orgyns... Yeah, if it works how it's described, a lot of units simply won't see the light of day. My guess is he missed something vital when describing that rule.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 05:14:32


Post by: chaos0xomega


-Loki- wrote:Abandon sounds really far fetched,k considering how many armies rely on multi-wound troop units.

Paladins, Nobz, Crisis suits, lots of Tyranid broods, Orgyns... Yeah, if it works how it's described, a lot of units simply won't see the light of day. My guess is he missed something vital when describing that rule.


No, it makes perfect sense, its just that they expect you to arm all multiwound models identically, or at the very least to minimize variation. The way wound allocation works, if all models are identical, you should only ever really have one wounded multiwound at a time.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 05:48:35


Post by: GBL


-Loki- wrote:Abandon sounds really far fetched,k considering how many armies rely on multi-wound troop units.

Paladins, Nobz, Crisis suits, lots of Tyranid broods, Orgyns... Yeah, if it works how it's described, a lot of units simply won't see the light of day. My guess is he missed something vital when describing that rule.


I believe the idea is to give you the option of spreading wounds out (at the expense of those models dieing at the end of turn) or concentrating them on single models.

I like it.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 05:49:53


Post by: MasterSlowPoke


chaos0xomega wrote: If 6th is really so near, you would think that the newer books would have used some 6th terminology, yet Dark Eldar lances dont have a number associated with them, etc.


We have. The Grey Knights book uses the unit type "Infantry (Character)" on the ICs , Mordak, and Crowe - the (Character) part is entirely useless in 5th edition, but is likely to matter in 6th. It also has Psychic Mastery levels, which are self contained in the codex but would probably be superseded by the rulebook.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 06:46:17


Post by: Reecius


I really like 5th, but a lot of these changes look pretty fun.

Just have to wait and see how it all pans out.

What really alarms me the most though, is the first paragraph where the informer talks about hating the company and their attitude towards their customers. I have heard that too often from former employees. That is not a good sign in my eyes.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 10:10:58


Post by: Omegus


I don't buy it. Infantry moving 18" a turn?


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 10:11:53


Post by: AlexHolker


warboss wrote:
whembly wrote:What? I'm not sure I understand this... wouldn't this make it impossible to do the would allocation on paladins/nobz??? Help me out here...

I guess there's no point of wound allocation then...

If so then, HOORAY for GW!! The idea that a unit should be able to run around with half dead models ONLY because they're have different color shoes on or some other inconsequential piece of wargear that doesn't protect them was ridiculous.

It's good they're getting rid of a tactic that shouldn't exist, but doing so by adding yet another kludge is not.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 10:18:34


Post by: kartofelkopf


Omegus wrote:I don't buy it. Infantry moving 18" a turn?


As it stands now, foot lists are at a severe disadvantage in objective missions (particularly with Dawn of War deployment!). Transports add mobility, survivability, and firepower at a pretty light cost-- the only real drawback is Kill Point missions, and a lot of tournaments shy away from KPs (with some justification- a Rhino is equivalent to a Land Raider? Really?).

Some added movement for infantry would be particularly welcome (especially since it seems run moves are out in this theoretical 6thE).


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 10:22:19


Post by: Omegus


Yes, that's fine, I wouldn't care about 2x movement, but 3x? Even 2nd edition didn't have that crazy nonsense. It's the only thing that jumps out as truly ludicrous.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 10:23:35


Post by: MasterSlowPoke


Omegus wrote:Yes, that's fine, I wouldn't care about 2x movement, but 3x? Even 2nd edition didn't have that crazy nonsense. It's the only thing that jumps out as truly ludicrous.
Infantry can move 18" in 5th edition.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 10:32:10


Post by: Omegus


MasterSlowPoke wrote:Infantry can move 18" in 5th edition.

Are they completely removing the assault phase movement? If so, it's slightly better, but so much for shooting before assaulting.

And infantry can move 18" now if they have jump packs and roll a six on their run movement. With the new edition, jet pack infantry (which is apparently different from jump infantry?) move 18" and then another 6" during consolidation. It's like they all get the GK shunt, every turn. Beasts if they have fleet now can charge 24"? Dubious.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 10:44:06


Post by: Sidstyler


If your troops can move faster than their transport then why bother taking a transport?

Well, Blanca brings up a good point (lol ), with a successful run move you could move 18" now...but I'd say regular infantry being able to move 18" all the time is bs. But that's me not knowing what I'm talking about.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 11:23:08


Post by: Marthike


The multiple wound consolidation death thing is just bull. Why does one model have to die because he is the first to take a wound also you don't abadon people in war.

Oh hi paladin you have a broken arm, you can't fight demons anymore so we gonna leave you to die. bye bye. What about tyranid warriors? 3 wound each, one take a wound so it dies?

Transports are useless if infantry can move 18", now with BA you just don't bother with shooting and just charge ahead and fleet and kill everything you see.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 11:25:51


Post by: htj


Yes, take your infantry out of those transports. My Guard army has now problem with you advancing across the field unprotected by your metal boxes. Gooood, gooood...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 11:41:08


Post by: Marthike


htj wrote:Yes, take your infantry out of those transports. My Guard army has now problem with you advancing across the field unprotected by your metal boxes. Gooood, gooood...


With those rules assault armies can get to you in 2 turn. tanks will take 3 so if someone uses cover well, you have to fight CC in turn 2


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 11:48:09


Post by: Omegus


I'm assuming vehicles would be able to surge or flat out as well.



6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 11:49:31


Post by: Sidstyler


Well, turn 2 assaults are also possible in 5th, so that's nothing new either.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 11:49:43


Post by: AlexHolker


kartofelkopf wrote:As it stands now, foot lists are at a severe disadvantage in objective missions (particularly with Dawn of War deployment!).

So? Hasn't World War One taught you anything?


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 11:51:45


Post by: Omegus


Marthike wrote:The multiple wound consolidation death thing is just bull. Why does one model have to die because he is the first to take a wound also you don't abadon people in war.

The rule doesn't take effect until you have multiple wounded models. Even the current rules want you to remove whole models where possible so you only have one model with partial wounds. People just get around it with allocation shenanigans. This rule discourages that.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 11:53:16


Post by: His Master's Voice


Marthike wrote:The multiple wound consolidation death thing is just bull. Why does one model have to die because he is the first to take a wound also you don't abadon people in war.

Oh hi paladin you have a broken arm, you can't fight demons anymore so we gonna leave you to die. bye bye. What about tyranid warriors? 3 wound each, one take a wound so it dies?



The Abandon rule removes all wounded models except for one. As long you have that one, and only one, wounded model, you're fine. It's not any more strange than a unit of 8 Nobs running around each with one wound due to current allocation rules.

And this is WH40k, of course you abandon people on the battlefield.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 11:54:15


Post by: htj


Sidstyler wrote:Well, turn 2 assaults are also possible in 5th, so that's nothing new either.


Exactly. If infantry can indeed move a guaranteed 18" every turn, this is not too dissimilar to how things work now. The advantage there is that you will be firing on the troops immediately, rather than on their transports first, then the troops. This will reduce their impact in close combat.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 11:54:37


Post by: Morathi's Darkest Sin


Omegus wrote:
Marthike wrote:The multiple wound consolidation death thing is just bull. Why does one model have to die because he is the first to take a wound also you don't abadon people in war.

The rule doesn't take effect until you have multiple wounded models. Even the current rules want you to remove whole models where possible so you only have one model with partial wounds. People just get around it with allocation shenanigans. This rule discourages that.


Aye, I can live with that change. When I was explaining the gear Nobz wound thing to my mate before this years 40K doubles, he wanted me to check with the judges as he couldn't believe it was legal.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 12:01:29


Post by: Omegus


But they are harder to hit while moving. Then again, you can shoot them as they charge you, so you should still get two volleys before they start punching you in the face.

Still, the fact that everything in your army can touch the back of your opponent's deployment zone by turn two is just weird. Makes the table seem very small.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 12:02:56


Post by: warpcrafter


Marthike wrote:The multiple wound consolidation death thing is just bull. Why does one model have to die because he is the first to take a wound also you don't abadon people in war.

Oh hi paladin you have a broken arm, you can't fight demons anymore so we gonna leave you to die. bye bye. What about tyranid warriors? 3 wound each, one take a wound so it dies?

Transports are useless if infantry can move 18", now with BA you just don't bother with shooting and just charge ahead and fleet and kill everything you see.


Tyranid Warriors aren't allowed individualized equipment like Nobs, so you would have to remove whole models anyway, so this is not really an issue.

I was exactly this dubious when I first read The Dude's thread about 5thE rumors on Warseer, but that turned out to be the real deal, so I'm not discounting anything yet.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 12:07:08


Post by: htj


Omegus wrote:But they are harder to hit while moving.


Vehicles are? Or infantry? The listed BS changes say that BS3 hit's moving infantry on a 4+. No change there, surely?

Still, the fact that everything in your army can touch the back of your opponent's deployment zone by turn two is just weird. Makes the table seem very small.


That's true. I can't say as I'm a fan of this lightning infantry, my earlier comments notwithstanding.



6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 12:10:52


Post by: Kirasu


The movement rules arent a whole lot different in terms of total movement possible that we already have. The main difference is it seems that run is simply being replaced by an extra 6" move instead of D6.

Move 12" in vehicle, disembark 2", run d6" = average 17" already. The main reason you dont see that is because being outside a vehicle is insane right now.. Maybe the next edition will make infantry have a purpose without a transport

Granted all of this could be fake and probably is but remember.. most rumors have a basis in truth somewhere


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 12:36:01


Post by: grizgrin


How much does this actually resemble 2nd edition? Any old school gamers in here care to make a comparison?


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 12:39:37


Post by: warpcrafter


grizgrin wrote:How much does this actually resemble 2nd edition? Any old school gamers in here care to make a comparison?


Well, it's more about the army as a whole, instead of the rampant hero-hammer of the olden days.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 13:27:26


Post by: gorgon


Yeah, this is still much more of a 3rd ed evolution. These mechanics evolved out of 3rd...2nd used completely different mechanics for CC, cover, psychics, etc.

However, you can clearly see some 2nd ed bloodlines in this set, if that makes sense. Lack of random movement, shooting "modifiers" for moving targets, and blocking/nullifying enemy psychics would all be examples. Pistols would be another. Although pistols are one of the areas I question just because the complexity (not that it's too complex for most of us to handle, but it could be a bit arcane for little Billy Customer).

Reading through them, it occurred to me these rules would integrate pretty well with the current codicies except for a lot of the special rules, unit and universal. Those would be problematic in many instances and require errata. But a lot of the system changes center around movement, phase order, game setup, to-hit tables, etc. and those shouldn't affect the codicies much. I think.

I'm starting to lean toward this being authentic, but even if that's true, there could be a lot of playtest stuff in there that will never make it into the final edition.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 13:29:37


Post by: wyomingfox


kartofelkopf wrote:
Omegus wrote:I don't buy it. Infantry moving 18" a turn?


Transports add mobility, survivability, and firepower at a pretty light cost-- the only real drawback is Kill Point missions, and a lot of tournaments shy away from KPs (with some justification- a Rhino is equivalent to a Land Raider? Really?).

Some added movement for infantry would be particularly welcome (especially since it seems run moves are out in this theoretical 6thE).


This . Tranports give far too many benefits without an significant tradeoffs in 5th edition. Even in casual play, KP crop up only 1/3 of the time and those armies that are predisposed to foot slogging have to rely significantly on busting transports in CC, which leaves the assaulting unit extremely vulnerable and easily killed off itself during the opposing player's turn. If there is going to be any semblance of balance in 6th edition, either foot slogging units would need to be boosted or mech would need to be nerfed (or a little of both).


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 13:29:57


Post by: Omegus


More updates:

my source stubbornly refuses to give me all interim codex erratas he was given. he fears that this can be used to trace him. But I convinced him that probably everyone involved has at least the space marine errata.
Here we go:

Codex Space Marines
p.51
And they Shall know Fear: Sworn Brothers, pass rally morale check automatically, if caught in sweeping advance, fights on and gets No Retreat hits
p.53
Chapter Banner: counts as as banner for assuming leadership, units in 12” re-roll morale checks for heavy casualties, lost close combat, tank shock and pinning , rest unchanged
p.55
Nartheticum: Feel no Pain (1)
Company Banner: counts as as banner for assuming leadership, units in 12” re-roll morale checks for heavy casualties, lost close combat, tank shock and pinning , rest unchanged
p. 56
Librarians have power level 1, Epistolaries 2
p. 57
Smite: shooting power
The Avengers: shooting power
Quickening: modifying power, must target himself, used in preparation phase
Null Zone: shock wave
Might of Titans: modifying power, used at start of assault phase
Gate of infinity: modifying power, used in movement phase
Vortex of Doom: Rift power
p.58
Honour of the Chapter: Fearless (2) and Stubborn
p. 62
Heroic Intervention: can surge on turn of arrival, but not shoot
p. 65
Move Through Cover: Move Through Cover (2)
p. 66
Move Through Cover: Move Through Cover (1)
Sniper Rifle: Sniper (1)
p. 69
Drop Pod Assault: Remaining drop pods are divided between rear guard, flank guard, cannot harry. Disembarking unit cannot assault even if unit has fleet.
p. 73
Thunderfire Gun: 1 crew marker, make additional S8, power weapon attack at I 1
Tremor: unit already in cover cannot force a surge
p. 75:
Cerberus Launcher: additionally units disembarking from moving vehicle have Fleet
p. 81
Power of the machine spirit: can fire one more weapon, advanced rules: can still cause directed wounds if diverting fire
Assault vehicle: units disembarking from moving vehicle have Fleet
p. 84
God of War: Fearless (2) for every unit with combat tactics
p. 85
Surprise Attack: no effect without advanced rules in play
Rites of Battle: re-roll any failed morale check for pinning, heavy casualties, tank shock or lost close combat
Talassarian Tempest Blade: Instant Death (1)
Mantle of Suzerain: Fell no Pain (1)
p. 86
Hood of Hellfire: power level 3
p. 87
Feel no Pain: Feel no Pain (1)
p. 88
Eye of Vengeance: controlling player can choose, to which armour group Telion’s wounds go
Stalker Pattern Boltgun: Rending (1)
p. 92
Chapter Tactics: Fleet (1), when disembarked from moving vehicle unit can advance, but not charge (except from Land raider and Land Speeder Storm)
The Raven’s Talons: Rending(1)
p. 94
Moondrakkan: can charged even if moves flat out
Moonfang: ID (1)
p. 95
Fearless: Fearless (2) and Stubborn
p.97
Assault Cannon: Rending (1)
p. 98
Master-crafted Weapons: has master-crafted rule
p. 100
Camo Cloaks: Stealth (1)
p.103
Dozer Blades: can re-roll dangerous terrain tests
p.129-143
Chapter Champion, Company Champion and Sergeants are squad leaders, Servitor units and attack bike squadrons can nominate one model as squad leader

I have another Q&A session this afternoon. I can probably relay questions. At least I can try. So shoot away.


http://bloodofkittens.com/network/groups/grey-knight-rumors/


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 13:31:26


Post by: puma713


It reads like the 'source' took Flames of War, Warmachine and 40K and threw them in a pot and mixed them up, then poured them into a pan and baked them. The end result was the 'rumored' 6th Ed. book.

Also, amazing how much intact information he has. As if this is all already written. Thought GW was cracking down on secrecy. Whoever the source is must have pages and pages of info that he's just spilling. That's what makes it seem fake to me.



6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 13:32:20


Post by: dajobe


not excited about the 18" thing...if they do that, i want standard board size to be increased, because my friend who plays chaos will just drop all of his transports and be at my lines with a bunch of khorne berskerkers after 1(maybe 2 turns shooting at them), if this is true, im gonna have to majorly reconfigure, but then again, i will probably have to do that anyway...would make doing a giant infantry rush cool though(thinking about doing a guard army like that)


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 13:35:03


Post by: ColeFournier


I feel like this is going the exact opposite direction from what 4th to 5th was, which i kinda felt was a dumbing down of the ruleset to make it more approachable.
I for one never found 4th edition to be too complicated, and if I ever had a problem with an Opponents special rule or unit, I'd just look at their army book.
Even though its just a rumor for now, if this is the direction their going, I will be quite happy happy camper.

These BS movement rules are also a very welcome sight if they turn out to be valid.
Some people have suggested that simply adding extra points to Armor Saves would do the same to these units to represent their speed as a modifier to BS, without complicating things but I'd argue otherwise.

Fluffwise, a Raptor has just as much armor as a regular SM, yet with the current rules, troops disembarking from a Rhino can move pretty much the same distance as them, and you have just as much of a chance of hitting and wounding them equally even though the Raptors are probably doing barrel rolls and spins to impress girls. Sure, Raptors can move over terrain and units, but other than that, they are kind of overpriced for what they do.

Realistically, I imagine it SHOULD be alot harder to hit a bunch of dudes flying circles around your head, or a group of dudes ripping around on motorcycles than a Leman Russ that's the same distance away. This would really take the emphasis on putting EVERY squad into a Rhino as what seems to be the current trend, due to their small cost.

Also, where are people getting this "Infantry moves 18 inches" stuff from from?
I think they are getting confused with
new phase “consolidate” phase for random movements, jetpack movements, pursuits, morale checks/effects and resolving shooting reactions


but that would be for extra movement for things with special rules... I think, unless I missed something big on this thread?

EDIT,
Just skimmed through the new errata that was posted while I was posting...
when disembarked from moving vehicle unit can advance, but not charge

That is a pretty huge Rhino Nerf... Like.
Maybe Too Huge.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 13:39:40


Post by: Omegus


The movement of troops can be curbed by terrain, since you can only advance through it. That's one more advantage for vehicles, since they can still surge/flatout through terrain.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 13:45:33


Post by: dajobe


yeah, my rhino's may take a rest on the sidelines for a while if this is true, but thats ok, because they have been playin hard everygame since 5th


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 13:47:15


Post by: Omegus


ColeFournier wrote:Also, where are people getting this "Infantry moves 18 inches" stuff from from?
I think they are getting confused with
new phase “consolidate” phase for random movements, jetpack movements, pursuits, morale checks/effects and resolving shooting reactions


but that would be for extra movement for things with special rules... I think, unless I missed something big on this thread?

EDIT,
Just skimmed through the new errata that was posted while I was posting...
when disembarked from moving vehicle unit can advance, but not charge

That is a pretty huge Rhino Nerf... Like.
Maybe Too Huge.

The post says units can surge for double movement, and some units can go flat out/fleet for triple movement.

And how is not being able to charge when disembarking from a moving rhino a nerf? It's not a nerf at all, it's exactly how its working now, except now you can't even advance when you disembark from a moving vehicle.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 13:52:01


Post by: lord_blackfang


ColeFournier wrote:EDIT,
Just skimmed through the new errata that was posted while I was posting...
when disembarked from moving vehicle unit can advance, but not charge

That is a pretty huge Rhino Nerf... Like.
Maybe Too Huge.


Pssst... you've been playing it wrong for two editions.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 13:52:14


Post by: dajobe


oops, been doing that wrong...probably owe my brother and friends some units that they lost from disembarked rhino charges...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 14:00:27


Post by: htj


lord_blackfang wrote:
ColeFournier wrote:EDIT,
Just skimmed through the new errata that was posted while I was posting...
when disembarked from moving vehicle unit can advance, but not charge

That is a pretty huge Rhino Nerf... Like.
Maybe Too Huge.


Pssst... you've been playing it wrong for two editions.


Man, they nerfed Rhinos so hard they got nerfed retroactively!


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 14:07:22


Post by: dajobe


lord_blackfang wrote:
Pssst... you've been playing it wrong for two editions.


i actually lol'ed at this, thats ok, thats very accurate, because i started in 03 which was 4, but never been a tourney player and the people i play with are pretty lax, the more you know


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 14:11:39


Post by: Omegus


Don't be too hard on the guy, fellas. He's from Wisconsin, after all. All that cheese has clouded his mind.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 14:13:32


Post by: dajobe


i am actually from saint louis, but attend school in wisconsin, but yes, i definitely do eat alot of cheese!


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 14:15:18


Post by: daedalus-templarius


My only request is, clear up the wound allocation stuff if you can.

That is pretty important for a few armies, especially tons of multi-wound models like nids. So does a Tervigon lose the 5 wounds it has left in the abandon phase because it took 1? Its not an IC...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 14:18:03


Post by: Kurce


I think it only applies for squads, which a Tervigon isn't. However, a Carnifex brood...

EDIT:

Nevermind. Forgot that all Tyranids have to take exact same weapons so wound shenanigans can't happen with them.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 14:21:25


Post by: His Master's Voice


puma713 wrote:Also, amazing how much intact information he has. As if this is all already written. Thought GW was cracking down on secrecy. Whoever the source is must have pages and pages of info that he's just spilling. That's what makes it seem fake to me.



If the book comes out next year, it has to be written already, or close to finished by now, with the core set in stone. GK at least would have been written with 6th in mind and all people testing new codicies would be doing so with 6th in mind. In order to do so, they'd need access to the rules. Really, I'm not particular surprised by how precise those rumors are, provide they're based on actual GW product.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 14:27:06


Post by: Kirasu


The fake BA dex was a lot of work .. But making a bunch of fake FAQs to go with your fake rulebook? Either we are dealing with "that which has no life" or GWs Iron Curtain isnt as secure as they think it is


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 14:38:11


Post by: dajobe


i believe it is an adamantium curtain, iron is outdated


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 14:38:27


Post by: daedalus-templarius


Kurce wrote:I think it only applies for squads, which a Tervigon isn't. However, a Carnifex brood...

EDIT:

Nevermind. Forgot that all Tyranids have to take exact same weapons so wound shenanigans can't happen with them.


So sounds like they just want to punish people using diversified nobs and paladins. Is there any other army that can do what they do? Tau Battlesuits I guess, they can be equipped differently.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 14:45:54


Post by: ColeFournier


lord_blackfang wrote:
ColeFournier wrote:EDIT,
Just skimmed through the new errata that was posted while I was posting...
when disembarked from moving vehicle unit can advance, but not charge

That is a pretty huge Rhino Nerf... Like.
Maybe Too Huge.


Pssst... you've been playing it wrong for two editions.



FML.



6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 14:56:00


Post by: wyomingfox


daedalus-templarius wrote:So sounds like they just want to punish people using diversified nobs and paladins. Is there any other army that can do what they do? Tau Battlesuits I guess, they can be equipped differently.


SW TWC, Orc Nobz, GK Paladins, Deamon BC, Tau Battle Suits. Not sure about Farseer/Warlock squads?


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 14:57:40


Post by: Omegus


There is plenty to love about vehicles in this theoretical 6th edition, including transports.

Speed: Vehicles are more reliable for clearing through terrain, being able to surge through it. For capturing objectives, infantry would be surging 12" or advancing 6" if there is terrain in the way (assuming not to many units outside of bikes/jetpacks can go flat out). With a transport, they'll be able to surge 12" regardless and disembark 4".

Offense:You can also now fire out of the firepoints even if the vehicle surged 12" (so 24" threat with all weapons, since the range is limited to 12"). Tank shock/ram is a lot more deadly/disruptive.

Defense: With ranged fire being able to direct some of the wounds (not clear still on what torrent of fire/blows does), you will be losing your specials more often, so having a hull between yourself and the opponent will be useful. Other infantry now won't grant you cover saves, and most terrain we currently treat as 4+ will only give you a 6+ (vegetation) or 5+. Vehicles can provide mobile cover even if you don't embark in them.


Outside of transports, I'm going to be squadroning my Russes like a sonofabitch! Even penetrating strikes roll -1 on the chart (AP1 weapons just make a flat roll), so vehicles are tougher, and as long as you're squadroned you can replace immobilized results with a weapon destroyed.

Add on top of that being able to split your fire, and I'll be loooooovin' my battle tanks if this stuff is true.

Dark Eldar also look to be sexy. No more +1 on the damage chart for being opened top, so an effective reduction of 2 for most damage results against them. Their 5+ cover shields are actually quite valuable now, since skimmers lose their 4+ for going flat out (instead they are more difficult to hit, so now DE skimmers will be more difficult to hit AND get a cover save). Finally, all lance weapons without a number default to Lance (2), so all AV is 12 as before, but they ignore all modifiers for the damage chart (so effectively function as AP1). Sexy sexy sexy.


Honestly, now that I've read all 20 pages of the spoiler (yes, it really is that long... and that's with 0.5" margins), I would be ecstatic if this is true. As in, over the moon this game rocks ecstatic. I barely play 40k anymore since 5th edition has become so stale.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 15:09:52


Post by: daedalus-templarius


wyomingfox wrote:
daedalus-templarius wrote:So sounds like they just want to punish people using diversified nobs and paladins. Is there any other army that can do what they do? Tau Battlesuits I guess, they can be equipped differently.


SW TWC, Orc Nobz, GK Paladins, Deamon BC, Tau Battle Suits. Not sure about Farseer/Warlock squads?


Warlocks only have 1 wound and Farseers are ICs, so they wouldn't really be affected. Still not very pleased with this change if it comes about. I thought they were pretty aware of this and it was endorsed, as it is a way to give these units some real durability.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 15:16:21


Post by: wyomingfox


Probably true, but it helps explain why Tyranids...the traditional poster boy of multiwound units...didn't benefit from any of these shenannigans when the new codex came out.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 15:18:32


Post by: Frogboy14


So I'm a little lost about whats happening to csm. are they getting renamed our are they going to be taken out and updated thro white dwarf.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 15:22:59


Post by: randyc9999


Omegus wrote:There is plenty to love about vehicles in this theoretical 6th edition, including transports.

I am intrigued by this from the rumor:
Fire point: can fire if vehicle has advanced or surged, but only 12” regardless of weapon type, embarked troops are relentless

So now, for instance, a regular tactical squad with a melta and a multimelta in a rhino can fire both if the Rhino moves 12" (but only at targets 12" or less away). However, camping, say, a unit of Jokeros in a Chimera in the backfield will be pretty pointless.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 15:24:33


Post by: pretre


randyc9999 wrote:I am intrigued by this from the rumor:
Fire point: can fire if vehicle has advanced or surged, but only 12” regardless of weapon type, embarked troops are relentless

So now, for instance, a regular tactical squad with a melta and a multimelta in a rhino can fire both if the Rhino moves 12" (but only at targets 12" or less away). However, camping, say, a unit of Jokeros in a Chimera in the backfield will be pretty pointless.


Just don't move the joker Chim and you're fine.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 15:26:48


Post by: Revarien


imo: with these rules - Swarms are now even more useless...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 15:29:14


Post by: htj


Revarien wrote:imo: with these rules - Swarms are now even more useless...


How so? (And is that even possible?)


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 15:39:10


Post by: Leggy


dajobe wrote:i believe it is an adamantium curtain, iron is outdated


I heard they upgraded the curtain to finecast. The leak escaped through an airbubble.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 15:39:40


Post by: dajobe


lol


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 15:40:40


Post by: randyc9999


pretre wrote:Just don't move the joker Chim and you're fine.

I'm not so sure. It sounds like the rule is that fire points only allow you 12" range shooting, regardless of its distance moved ...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 15:56:22


Post by: morgendonner


Frogboy14 wrote:So I'm a little lost about whats happening to csm. are they getting renamed our are they going to be taken out and updated thro white dwarf.


The rumor is that they will release a Codex: Chaos Legions, which will cover true chaos space marines and legion specific units/rules (think black legion, world eaters, etc). This book will not invalidate Codex: Chaos Space Marines though. The current book will then receive a white dwarf update for Codex: Regenade Marines (think red corsairs).

Some people are hoping that the white dwarf release will maybe be something more like Codex: Imperial Traitors and include Legion of the Damned, Traitor Guard, and Renegade Marines etc.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 16:01:31


Post by: Revarien


htj wrote:
Revarien wrote:imo: with these rules - Swarms are now even more useless...


How so? (And is that even possible?)


Template weapons causes instant death (2)... :/


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 16:04:02


Post by: htj


Revarien wrote:
htj wrote:
Revarien wrote:imo: with these rules - Swarms are now even more useless...


How so? (And is that even possible?)


Template weapons causes instant death (2)... :/


Pff, well done GW on achieving the impossible and making swarms suck even more.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 16:12:00


Post by: Crom


I would like to see some options for activating units one at a time, and then switching back and forth. that way there is no real advantage to going first and it plays more like chess.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 16:16:16


Post by: FalkorsRaiders


htj wrote:
Revarien wrote:
htj wrote:
Revarien wrote:imo: with these rules - Swarms are now even more useless...


How so? (And is that even possible?)


Template weapons causes instant death (2)... :/


Pff, well done GW on achieving the impossible and making swarms suck even more.


No, my Scarab Swarms! They were rumored to be so good in the next codex!!!


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 16:18:12


Post by: Omegus


Frogboy14 wrote:So I'm a little lost about whats happening to csm. are they getting renamed our are they going to be taken out and updated thro white dwarf.

From the rumors, there will be a new codex that focuses on the Legions with cult-specific units and daemons, while the current book will get updated in White Dwarf to represent renegades.

htj wrote:
Revarien wrote:imo: with these rules - Swarms are now even more useless...

How so? (And is that even possible?)

Template weapons AND blast weapons are ID against Swarms.


On the plus side, my IG psykers will be able to try cancelling out psychic powers without a hood. That's what hurts the most about allies being phased out completely. Couldn't care less about the mystics, but losing all forms of psychic defense hurts.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 16:20:52


Post by: warboss


warpcrafter wrote:
Marthike wrote:The multiple wound consolidation death thing is just bull. Why does one model have to die because he is the first to take a wound also you don't abadon people in war.

Oh hi paladin you have a broken arm, you can't fight demons anymore so we gonna leave you to die. bye bye. What about tyranid warriors? 3 wound each, one take a wound so it dies?

Transports are useless if infantry can move 18", now with BA you just don't bother with shooting and just charge ahead and fleet and kill everything you see.


Tyranid Warriors aren't allowed individualized equipment like Nobs, so you would have to remove whole models anyway, so this is not really an issue.

I was exactly this dubious when I first read The Dude's thread about 5thE rumors on Warseer, but that turned out to be the real deal, so I'm not discounting anything yet.


Marthike, the scenario you're describing is exactly what happens and has happened to identical multiwound units since 3rd edition. Ogryn and Nid Warrior units that have identical models have to do exactly what you're describing. The problem is that 5th edition came out with a ridiculous rule that allowed you divvy up the wounds ONLY if the models had different wargear. I wouldn't have had too much of a problem if they had done it for all multiwound models as at least that would have been consistent (still overpowered but at least consistent) but 5th edition instituted the ability to survive a wound ONLY because you bought a pistol that your buddy next to didn't. Five models with identical gear? They die sequentially. Those same five models armed exactly the same except that one has another CCW/pistol/different CCW/different pistol? Now they can soak up fire twice as well. The rule was needlessly confusing and led to endless debates at my local store because people had no clue how to use it. It added nothing to the game except for the more potential for abuse. Does that screw over armies that are built entirely on the premise of (ab)using that rule? Sure... but that's the risk you take when building a one-trick pony gimmick army.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 16:24:03


Post by: Magister187


Crom wrote:I would like to see some options for activating units one at a time, and then switching back and forth. that way there is no real advantage to going first and it plays more like chess.


40k is nothing like chess. You don't have restrictions on number of units. That system works well only in games that have an even number of units, or no turn structure (ie. each move is a turn, not each move is back and forth) and/or where each unit is of similar quality.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 16:28:52


Post by: Mr.Church13


Does anyone want to explain to me how this doesnt make the game all assault based? Ive read this theoretical ruleset and now see no point in even carrying guns with anything other than my BA. Just seems like shooting is going from ineffective due to prevalence of cover to usesless because no one without an extremely high BS or something with rerolls will be able to hit anything. Not forgetting that now since you stab someone with a knife BEFORE you shoot at them assault armies will just be on you before you react.

Maybe I'm just missing something here, but it seems to me like I should just start pulling off all the guns from my armies. I'm not trying to sound angry here I'm just really confused at this decision.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 16:29:25


Post by: Reecius


randyc9999 wrote:
Omegus wrote:There is plenty to love about vehicles in this theoretical 6th edition, including transports.

I am intrigued by this from the rumor:
Fire point: can fire if vehicle has advanced or surged, but only 12” regardless of weapon type, embarked troops are relentless

So now, for instance, a regular tactical squad with a melta and a multimelta in a rhino can fire both if the Rhino moves 12" (but only at targets 12" or less away). However, camping, say, a unit of Jokeros in a Chimera in the backfield will be pretty pointless.


Did you miss the part where it said all units in vehicles are relentless? That means heavy weapons can fire on the move, if only out to 12".

It looks like they are making units a bit more mobile (although not that much more) and vehicles a bit more powerful and tougher because they want armies moving at each other. If there really is only the one mission the game is now about moving onto objectives right away and killing as much of the other guys army as possible.

That sounds like fun to me. No more playing conservatively, sitting in the back hiding, waiting for last turn objective grabs.

The leadership changes look great too. Being able to surpress fearless units leans shooty armies can slow down assualt armies and being fearless isn't so crazy good as before.

The more I reader these the more I like them.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 16:30:42


Post by: dajobe


all of my guardsman will dual wield chainswords!!! all of my marines will have power fists and chainswords!!! my necron and tau will DIE!!!


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 16:34:25


Post by: Magister187


Mr.Church13 wrote:Does anyone want to explain to me how this doesnt make the game all assault based? Ive read this theoretical ruleset and now see no point in even carrying guns with anything other than my BA. Just seems like shooting is going from ineffective due to prevalence of cover to usesless because no one without an extremely high BS or something with rerolls will be able to hit anything. Not forgetting that now since you stab someone with a knife BEFORE you shoot at them assault armies will just be on you before you react.

Maybe I'm just missing something here, but it seems to me like I should just start pulling off all the guns from my armies. I'm not trying to sound angry here I'm just really confused at this decision.


It looks to me like the balance between assault/shooting is likely to remain where it is now (slightly skewed towards assault). The reduction of cover saves is huge, as is the way blasts work. Since being in terrain slows down infantry terribly, they will never be getting cover saves against blasts. Further, the ability to assign every 5th wound means you can kill specific troublesome enemies far easier. Also of note, some units will likely have overwatch, and multiple weapons on vehicles will no longer be such a waste (since you can split fire). Vendettas with heavy bolters make a lot more sense with that rule in place.
Overall, it really seems pretty balanced between the two imo.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 16:45:34


Post by: Omegus


Mr.Church13 wrote:Does anyone want to explain to me how this doesnt make the game all assault based? Ive read this theoretical ruleset and now see no point in even carrying guns with anything other than my BA. Just seems like shooting is going from ineffective due to prevalence of cover to usesless because no one without an extremely high BS or something with rerolls will be able to hit anything. Not forgetting that now since you stab someone with a knife BEFORE you shoot at them assault armies will just be on you before you react.

Maybe I'm just missing something here, but it seems to me like I should just start pulling off all the guns from my armies. I'm not trying to sound angry here I'm just really confused at this decision.

Let's see... cover saves are a lot harder to come by, ranged attacks can direct a portion of their wounds, and your assessment of the hit charts is incredibly exaggerated?


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 16:48:04


Post by: MrDrumMachine


Magister187 wrote:
Mr.Church13 wrote:Does anyone want to explain to me how this doesnt make the game all assault based? Ive read this theoretical ruleset and now see no point in even carrying guns with anything other than my BA. Just seems like shooting is going from ineffective due to prevalence of cover to usesless because no one without an extremely high BS or something with rerolls will be able to hit anything. Not forgetting that now since you stab someone with a knife BEFORE you shoot at them assault armies will just be on you before you react.

Maybe I'm just missing something here, but it seems to me like I should just start pulling off all the guns from my armies. I'm not trying to sound angry here I'm just really confused at this decision.


It looks to me like the balance between assault/shooting is likely to remain where it is now (slightly skewed towards assault). The reduction of cover saves is huge, as is the way blasts work. Since being in terrain slows down infantry terribly, they will never be getting cover saves against blasts. Further, the ability to assign every 5th wound means you can kill specific troublesome enemies far easier. Also of note, some units will likely have overwatch, and multiple weapons on vehicles will no longer be such a waste (since you can split fire). Vendettas with heavy bolters make a lot more sense with that rule in place.
Overall, it really seems pretty balanced between the two imo.


And then genestealers were made to move 36" in 2 turns with move through cover to ignore terrain and given assault grenades, or be allowed to come in from the back table edge and there was many lulz


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 16:51:20


Post by: Mr.Church13


I understand th hit chart. But what gets me is the if it moves even straight twoards me in an open field in a huge swarm it gets the equal equivilent of a cover save in my reduced BS.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 16:53:25


Post by: dajobe


MrDrumMachine wrote:And then genestealers were made to move 36" in 2 turns with move through cover to ignore terrain and given assault grenades, or be allowed to come in from the back table edge and there was many lulz


I do many instead of many


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 16:53:53


Post by: Crom


Magister187 wrote:
Crom wrote:I would like to see some options for activating units one at a time, and then switching back and forth. that way there is no real advantage to going first and it plays more like chess.


40k is nothing like chess. You don't have restrictions on number of units. That system works well only in games that have an even number of units, or no turn structure (ie. each move is a turn, not each move is back and forth) and/or where each unit is of similar quality.


If you ever played warzone back in the 90s, they did this via action points and activation one unit/vehicle/character at a time and then you traded turns off. I think it makes for better game play. Warzone was one of the best balanced game systems I played, but when I quit war gaming for a long time, I heard their last edition they screwed it all up though and they totally unbalanced the game.

When you activate a squad you can do whatever you with with it's activation points. In 40K you could activate a squad, move them, shoot them assault them, and then when you are done your opponent does the same and you trade off from there. Once everything has been activated turn 1 is over, and you start turn 2.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 17:02:41


Post by: FalkorsRaiders


I think the easiest way to see how true these rumors are is to wait for the SoB WD dex or even the next full release (rumored to be Necrons). These should have terminology that either fits with current rumors, or doesn't. Until 6th actually comes out, with GW's great Finecast Wall, we won't know until the day its released onto the internet with pictures and everything...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 17:10:51


Post by: Magister187


Crom wrote:
Magister187 wrote:
Crom wrote:I would like to see some options for activating units one at a time, and then switching back and forth. that way there is no real advantage to going first and it plays more like chess.


40k is nothing like chess. You don't have restrictions on number of units. That system works well only in games that have an even number of units, or no turn structure (ie. each move is a turn, not each move is back and forth) and/or where each unit is of similar quality.


If you ever played warzone back in the 90s, they did this via action points and activation one unit/vehicle/character at a time and then you traded turns off. I think it makes for better game play. Warzone was one of the best balanced game systems I played, but when I quit war gaming for a long time, I heard their last edition they screwed it all up though and they totally unbalanced the game.

When you activate a squad you can do whatever you with with it's activation points. In 40K you could activate a squad, move them, shoot them assault them, and then when you are done your opponent does the same and you trade off from there. Once everything has been activated turn 1 is over, and you start turn 2.


I understand how that system works, which is why I feel it won't work at all for 40k. Units range so greatly in quality/cost, that it can't possibly be balanced for an army with 3 or even 4 times the units to have that system. Seriously, think about orcs/nids/IG vs. Crons/SM/GK.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 17:15:11


Post by: megatrons2nd


I haven't seen how Rapid fire weapons will work in these rules. If assault weapons count as 2 close combat weapons and pistols may either be at it's strength or a second close combat weapon, maybe the rapid fire weapon will always be able to fire 1 shot at max range or 2 at close range as long as you don't surge.

Tau having a 36" threat range sounds nice or being able to have an orderly fall back rather than being routed every time the enemy gets close.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 17:22:26


Post by: winterman


Mr.Church13 wrote:Does anyone want to explain to me how this doesnt make the game all assault based? Ive read this theoretical ruleset and now see no point in even carrying guns with anything other than my BA. Just seems like shooting is going from ineffective due to prevalence of cover to usesless because no one without an extremely high BS or something with rerolls will be able to hit anything. Not forgetting that now since you stab someone with a knife BEFORE you shoot at them assault armies will just be on you before you react.

Maybe I'm just missing something here, but it seems to me like I should just start pulling off all the guns from my armies. I'm not trying to sound angry here I'm just really confused at this decision.

You are missing something.

BS3 will hit most things more often or the same. Only moving jump infantry and bikes and flyers, or flat out (eg fast) vehicles will be hit less often -- but keep in mind this is coupled with removal of cover saves for these units moving fast -- Ohh and you can hit these guys as often as before as long as you are within 12" and the squad leader is alive. MCs and stationary things will be hit more often. Couple with a bit downgrading for cover and better control of who is wounded, shooting is ramped up a bit in my opinion. There's some stuff to compensate though (MCs being able to take armor and cover if they brace, as an example).

I remember the knee jerk reaction to the 5ed assaulting vehicle rules -- everyone thought tanks would be worthless due to being hit on rear armor. Boy were they wrong.

EDIT oh forgot this gem

non-vehicles/MC are invisible for determining cover saves, but if such an unit is in fire corridor, wounds cannot be directed

That is huge. Shooting has gotten a serious improvement. No more bringing your own cover unless its an MC or vehicle.

I better start painting some venomthropes now.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 17:22:39


Post by: gorgon


FalkorsRaiders wrote:I think the easiest way to see how true these rumors are is to wait for the SoB WD dex or even the next full release (rumored to be Necrons). These should have terminology that either fits with current rumors, or doesn't. Until 6th actually comes out, with GW's great Finecast Wall, we won't know until the day its released onto the internet with pictures and everything...


Eh, I dunno. Beastmen came out not too long (6 months?) before a fairly big makeover to WFB, and it still needed the FAQ/errata. And figure Necrons will probably still be a full year out from 6th. What you might see are more USRs and fewer army/unit special rules. Then again, the rumors point to Necron WBB being a unique rule and not just a FNP USR. So I'm really not sure we're going to be able to tell. If Tau or BT come next year as rumored, those might incorporate 6th ed concepts, much like the Daemon codex did with 5th.

Something that jumped out at me is that you can see a number of unit special rules incorporated into the USRs and rules. Lumbering is Lumbering Behemoth. Veiling (2) might be for Harlies. Shielding is for Tyrant Guard, etc. Still might be a hoax, but at least it's a reasonably thorough one, lol.

Are we missing the rules for a Vanish reaction? I can't find them anywhere.

Edit: I agree with winterman -- shooting looks a lot more dangerous. Not only is cover downgraded (a lot in some instances), it's slower to move through and thus you won't want some units to be in it. Snipers actually look worth it too, especially in larger units. Lose the squad leader and lose a VP? Ratlings FTW!


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 17:34:54


Post by: winterman


Yeah gorgon, as I added to my postabove they also removed cover saves from models in between the fire lane. Only MCs and vehicles give cover. That is huge for alot of armies and makes those cover save bubbles pretty much mandatory. SHooting is far from nerfed if these rules end up being implemented as rumored.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 17:53:43


Post by: Omegus


There is also a line in there about a modifier to hit if you're in short range, whatever that is. I'm guessing that works somewhat like WFB.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 17:57:24


Post by: Magister187


I think that it says if you are in short range and your squad leader is still alive, then you can use the short range row on the to hit chart. It also defines short range as within 12" in the shooting section (I believe, sometimes its hard to follow).


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 17:57:53


Post by: Revarien


Is it me, or does it also sound like someone playing a terminator army/deathwing army (which usually relies HEAVILY on equipment variation for wound allocation) is getting the shaft?... I mean, fluff-wise (as they've made precedence in the GK FAQ as having some authority) it should seem that an army of super-elite troops should be able to handle themselves well...

With wound allocation going to 'armor groups' instead, it kinda makes them go down easily imo...

I will say though, a sgt and IC's getting multiple saves is nice... albeit this will lead to IC and named character armies...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 18:08:43


Post by: Nvs


Wound allocation didn't impact Deathwing much because everything still had a single wound. Something gets hit, it does. It's only game breaking when dealing with units with more than one wound.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 18:10:43


Post by: Magister187


Revarien wrote:Is it me, or does it also sound like someone playing a terminator army/deathwing army (which usually relies HEAVILY on equipment variation for wound allocation) is getting the shaft?... I mean, fluff-wise (as they've made precedence in the GK FAQ as having some authority) it should seem that an army of super-elite troops should be able to handle themselves well...

With wound allocation going to 'armor groups' instead, it kinda makes them go down easily imo...

I will say though, a sgt and IC's getting multiple saves is nice... albeit this will lead to IC and named character armies...


Though you do gain some survivability from wound allocation on 1 wound models, it really isn't as significant as some people claim it to be. I like it, when it is reasonable, but typically for Deathwing Terminators you don't get that many good options to have them completely diverse anyway.
Honestly, giving each squad a member (the sergeant) who can take both a 2+ and 3++ is probably an upgrade in survivability.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 18:32:34


Post by: Noisy_Marine


As excited as I would be for a codex: chaos legions, all these changes seem like a bit much. I prefer my games simiple and easy to learn.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 18:40:05


Post by: Magister187


Honestly, I feel like the complexity of the rules is compounded by two factors:
1) We are used to 5th edition rules, so the fact that these are changes to the rules we know complicates them.
2) They aren't in a rulebook, they are paraphrased on a spiel from ICQ. They are in a continuous stream and include minimal details or explanation. I am pretty sure you could lay out the 5th ed rules in the same way and they would seem far more confusing.

Seriously though, these rumours contain at least as many streamlined rules as they do new things like the hit chart and strategems (which I have a feeling they might include as cards/counters in the new starter sets, if those rumours are true). I dunno, I just think its impossible to evaluate how these changes as a whole will impact the flow and complexity of the game without playing a game using them.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 18:47:03


Post by: Revarien


Magister187 wrote:
Revarien wrote:Is it me, or does it also sound like someone playing a terminator army/deathwing army (which usually relies HEAVILY on equipment variation for wound allocation) is getting the shaft?... I mean, fluff-wise (as they've made precedence in the GK FAQ as having some authority) it should seem that an army of super-elite troops should be able to handle themselves well...

With wound allocation going to 'armor groups' instead, it kinda makes them go down easily imo...

I will say though, a sgt and IC's getting multiple saves is nice... albeit this will lead to IC and named character armies...


Though you do gain some survivability from wound allocation on 1 wound models, it really isn't as significant as some people claim it to be. I like it, when it is reasonable, but typically for Deathwing Terminators you don't get that many good options to have them completely diverse anyway.
Honestly, giving each squad a member (the sergeant) who can take both a 2+ and 3++ is probably an upgrade in survivability.


Somewhat. Though Draigo-wing suffers significantly under this change.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 18:53:12


Post by: Orock


I like it! Now if they can improve the basic firewarrior, or give us TH/SS termie squats, ill be content Tau wise.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 18:54:39


Post by: FalkorsRaiders


gorgon wrote:
FalkorsRaiders wrote:I think the easiest way to see how true these rumors are is to wait for the SoB WD dex or even the next full release (rumored to be Necrons). These should have terminology that either fits with current rumors, or doesn't. Until 6th actually comes out, with GW's great Finecast Wall, we won't know until the day its released onto the internet with pictures and everything...


Eh, I dunno. Beastmen came out not too long (6 months?) before a fairly big makeover to WFB, and it still needed the FAQ/errata. And figure Necrons will probably still be a full year out from 6th. What you might see are more USRs and fewer army/unit special rules. Then again, the rumors point to Necron WBB being a unique rule and not just a FNP USR. So I'm really not sure we're going to be able to tell. If Tau or BT come next year as rumored, those might incorporate 6th ed concepts, much like the Daemon codex did with 5th.

Something that jumped out at me is that you can see a number of unit special rules incorporated into the USRs and rules. Lumbering is Lumbering Behemoth. Veiling (2) might be for Harlies. Shielding is for Tyrant Guard, etc. Still might be a hoax, but at least it's a reasonably thorough one, lol.

Are we missing the rules for a Vanish reaction? I can't find them anywhere.

Edit: I agree with winterman -- shooting looks a lot more dangerous. Not only is cover downgraded (a lot in some instances), it's slower to move through and thus you won't want some units to be in it. Snipers actually look worth it too, especially in larger units. Lose the squad leader and lose a VP? Ratlings FTW!


I don't follow WHFB, but rumors said necrons would be set up gearing towards 6th. tau and BT will most definitely be geared towards 6th, but as a Necron player, I'd like my precious necrons to be incorporated in that list, please?


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 19:08:05


Post by: Omegus


Noisy_Marine wrote:As excited as I would be for a codex: chaos legions, all these changes seem like a bit much. I prefer my games simiple and easy to learn.

And yet, going by the rules forum, there is nothing simple about it.

As far as learning, I am convinced at least 80% of 40K players never read the whole rulebook, but rather "pick it up on the way".


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 19:20:17


Post by: Davor


Sidstyler wrote:If your troops can move faster than their transport then why bother taking a transport?


How else are the All Mighty Space Marines going to hide and cower and not get hit with anything then? That is the only reason why people take transports now. Not because of speed, but because the Space Marines are scared they may get shot at.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 19:22:06


Post by: wyomingfox


In regards to Chaos Legions Codex, More tidbits is being posted by Ghost 21:

Ghost21 wrote:
vladsimpaler wrote:If you hadn't posted this, I would have. Personally I just want the Company of the Chosen back. Maybe in a mono-Khorne book, haha

expect extensive cult lists but not books, same with other legions



ghost21;5603204 wrote:a cult legion list is significantly different to a cult list .. if you catch my meaning


In regards to background (for those like me who are not in the know):

Bold_or_Stupid wrote:the cults are: Khorne Berzerkers, Nurgle Plague Marines, Slaanesh Noise Marines and Tzeentch Thousand sons.

The legioans are: Alpha Legion, Black Legion,Death Guard, Emperors Children, Iron Warriors, Night Lords, Thousand Sons, Word Bearers and World Eaters. At least two of these has been subsumed entirely into a cult Troop type.



6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 19:30:52


Post by: GoDz BuZzSaW


What's that Smell, Ah it's only BS.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 19:37:44


Post by: gorgon


Man, some of this really turns stuff on its head.

If I'm reading things right, Lictors (specifically their pheromone trails, assuming they don't change) could be devastating. *IF* you can keep them alive for a turn after they arrive on turn 2 (flank guard), they can call in accurate deep strikes for rear guard stuff on turn 3, which can then charge if they're within 6" of a target. Scratch that...within 8" if we're talking about Raveners.

More controlled reserves also mean Trygon tunnels are legitimately in play, although I guess there may be qualifiers (flank guard? rear guard?) on what can enter this way. Still, my reserve Tyranids would be even more fun under these rules.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 19:57:51


Post by: Davor


I am surprsied nobody made comments on the SM FAQ.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 19:59:41


Post by: winterman


Yeah I was thinking the exact same thing gorgon. Makes me glad I own 6 lictors Also it doesn't look like drop pods were errated as far as how they scatter, so trygons and mawlocs could be quite interesting under these new rules too, depending on their erratas.

But at the same time tyranid stuff will die much more readily to shooting. Think missile spam is bad now for TMCs? how about getting hit on 2+ by BS4? So it seems like that is the balance -- stuff moves and assaults faster, but is also hit a bit more often. Also terrain will seriously slow down assault armies much more then now. SUre they can garauntee 12-18 inches of move, but terrain drops that down to 6 a turn, even if assaulting

I am also interested to know how exactly move through cover works now. The rumor states it ignores terrain but does that mean you can fleet through terrain? What about going last?


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 20:18:28


Post by: Morathi's Darkest Sin


So wait, does the SM FAq semi confirm that this is possibly accurate, or just folks being aware of those little footnotes like Fearless (2)

I am eager for any change though if I'm honest, 40K is fun, but it could be alot more fun, and alot of these changes are pointing it that way for me.

Hell after getting into Infinity recently, it reminded me of what an actual complex wargame looked like, and thats crazy fun. So a little more to be aware of in 40K would not be a bad thing in my book.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 20:23:41


Post by: gorgon


Seems like the obvious translation would be fleet through terrain but still suffering terrain effects in CC, but who knows? If MCs still have MtC, that should help the Trygons at least.

Yeah, right now it's looking like more large units of gribblies over MC-heavy builds. But I guess there's tons we don't know even if this is all accurate.

Another big one there for reserve lists is that you don't need Hive Commander as much anymore. The extra harrier (still with +1?) is nice, but not really necessary. Perhaps the Parasite will become the reserve HQ du jour.

@Morathi -- I think the SM errata means it's at very least a very well-done hoax.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 20:43:32


Post by: Omegus


wyomingfox wrote:
Bold_or_Stupid wrote:the cults are: Khorne Berzerkers, Nurgle Plague Marines, Slaanesh Noise Marines and Tzeentch Thousand sons.

The legioans are: Alpha Legion, Black Legion,Death Guard, Emperors Children, Iron Warriors, Night Lords, Thousand Sons, Word Bearers and World Eaters. At least two of these has been subsumed entirely into a cult Troop type.


Well, Thousand Sons and Death Guard are all a "cult Troop type". It's very probable all the Emperor's Children eventually became noise marines.

GoDz BuZzSaW wrote:What's that Smell, Ah it's only BS.

The veracity of these rumors has been at least partially confirmed by tastytaste, who is a playtester for GW and has been providing very solid rumors for a long time. But you are welcome to your skepticism. I'm sure the final product will only partially resemble this.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 21:31:45


Post by: FalkorsRaiders


More from the Blood of Kitten's 6th edition leaker...
http://bloodofkittens.com/network/groups/grey-knight-rumors/

rideroftheerk wrote:
- models that have charged already locked unit have I 10 this turn
- Assume leadership: Standard bearers, etc. that assume leadership count as squad leader in all respects (two saves, directed wounds), any other model that assumes leadership only in regard of performing unit actions
- if you deploy in 24” distance from enemy you cannot shoot with 24” weapon or assault with 24” movement
- models must always consolidate out of 1” of vehicle after attacking it, if locked in combat with another unit, vehicles are ignored for pile in moves after combat, must use this pile in move to bring 1” between unit an vehicle, artillery and walkers are obviously exceptions
- swarms have Eternal Warrior (1)
- Seize the initiative: same name, but completely different rule: stratagem, 1 str. point, after the deployment of both force, but before placing infiltrators, roll a D6, on 5+, enemy must place infiltrators in contact with his own table edge, no scout moves allowed
- whole unit or squadron must make the same reaction
- Pistols: got confused by what I though were two contradicting short statements; units with pistols can attack with pistol’s S, AP1,2,3 pistols confer Rending (2) (Rending on 5+), Gets Hot! wounds count against combat resolution,
on charge: can make full attacks
in any other turn: can make single attack, does not get bonus of second ccw, etc.
- if both player agree, the charge movement and pile in move before combat can be made as one move with combined movement distance after the first model was engaged to fasten things up
- Characters: shooting wounds are directed, too
- Advanced rules: evasion value (normal rules: always use short distance), all reactions, Torrent of Fire, Directed wounds, damage chart modifiers for AP, flyer mode, ramming, Stratagems: bidding stays intact but only re-rolls can be taken, unique units, measuring*
* normal rules: can measure anytime you want, advanced: movement: measure full movement distance you want to go, i.e. 6” for a advancing, can’t measure 12” surge distance, anything else: measure distance to target
you play either all advanced rules or none at all
- Hit & Run: still random: 3D6” consolidation move
- Morale checks for casualties: only in enemy’s shooting phase
- witchblade can now cause ID after psychic test like force weapons
- there is a small box for rare movement situations: if infantry unit moves as jump infantry (or any other unit type has movement rules of another unit type), it uses the jump infantry movement rules, but for shooting and close combat it counts as original unit type, so it is still easy to hit, if an unit moves flat out and there is no column in the to hit chart, take the moving column, exotic movements count as ‘moving’ even if faster than flat out move, deep striking units count as ‘moving’ , if units that are immobile arrives from reserves but not via deep strike, they are placed in contact with table edge normally and remain there for the rest of the game, we shall assume the the bunker has decloaked or something similar, units disembarking from deep striking vehicles use the disembarking rules for charging, so no charge unless fleet rule
- Master-crafted: re-roll one to hit roll, if several models attack with master-crafted weapons of the same type, roll the dice together, then re-roll as many dice as there are master-crafted weapons
- if you shoot through interfering models, you cannot snipe

running out out steam because I don’t get the errata info and I have reached even the tiny details of the rules
but I have one big thing left:
- monstrous creatures: 2D6 versus vehicles, ignore armour, move as infantry unless stated otherwise, are ignored for Abandon as ICs, IGNORE TERRAIN WHEN CHARGING


What do we think?


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 21:38:57


Post by: Evil Lamp 6


Complicated, if true, to say the least.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 22:15:41


Post by: Omegus


Yeah, even at the basic level there is a lot to keep track of, even before you consider that there are apparently three levels of rulesets: normal, advanced, and narrative.

Still, there are games with that level of complexity and they play just fine (the old epic rings a bell). We'll just have to wait and see. We've seen hoax codices before, but those looked like a labor of love (really, no different than someone's homebrew codex of which there are plenty released under the guise of being "real").

This mess would have taken an enormous amount of time to no real gain. I'm sure even if it's true, not all of this will make it in the final product.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/24 23:45:14


Post by: Kroothawk


Some more tidbits by ghost21:
6th ed is planned to last a good few years perhaps 8 ish

... and on new Codices/lists:
expect extensive cult lists but not books, same with other legions
(...)
a cult legion list is significantly different to a cult list .. if you catch my meaning
Lungboy wrote:Genestealer-Cult list?

eventually but expect it to be wd only
(...)
honestly there will be a cult list that you pick n choose , one way will be genestealers the other chaos , or as far as i understand
not exactly a full list but close enough to please people (and i did say eventually)
the mystery release is stil sheduled for sept


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 00:05:09


Post by: Shadelkan


I guess I don't like change as much as I thought, because all this depresses me. It makes me feel like the game I know is dying... Though maybe its just evolving into something better.

I don't know.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 02:17:18


Post by: Brother Ramses


I have expressed this on a local forum;

After reading all the rumors and proposed changes, GW is sending 40k into the crapper in an attempt to play catch-up to all the new game systems, however all they have done is just over complicate the hell out of a very easy game.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 02:38:07


Post by: Happygrunt


Took all these rumors with a salt mine.

Some stuff looks good, some looks bad, but it invalidates almost everyone's codex.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 03:05:57


Post by: Stanley Rubric


Brother Ramses wrote:I have expressed this on a local forum;

After reading all the rumors and proposed changes, GW is sending 40k into the crapper in an attempt to play catch-up to all the new game systems, however all they have done is just over complicate the hell out of a very easy game.


My feeling is that GW needed to do something to fix issues in 40K and some of these rule changes sound great. But, I agree that it seems they have realized that they basically stagnated for 14 years and are cramming everything but the kitchen sink in there to try and appease all the people who play other systems. The irony of it all is that after waiting so long for a real upgrade to 40K this system might just be so overcomplicated that it causes people to turn away from the game. Good thing Mantic is building a 40K sized game with cheaper minis and a simple rule set to catch all those people who leave 40K when 6th comes out!


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 03:49:40


Post by: Lysenis


I lke the idea of having different rule levels. That will make game fun in multiple aspects while allowing campaigns to be more story based. This will allow GT players to practicse their advanced rules and let those of us that enjoy creating amazing and crazy stories (Khorne berzerkers breaking through a wall to only get burnt to a crisp bu a Flamestorm weilding Baal) enjoy our games as well.

To me this will bring about a whole different level of gaming for 40K in general.

If this turns to be true I am all for it!


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 03:51:45


Post by: ShatteredBlade


I both welcome and abhor these changes.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 04:28:23


Post by: Brother Ramses


Stanley Rubric wrote:
Brother Ramses wrote:I have expressed this on a local forum;

After reading all the rumors and proposed changes, GW is sending 40k into the crapper in an attempt to play catch-up to all the new game systems, however all they have done is just over complicate the hell out of a very easy game.


My feeling is that GW needed to do something to fix issues in 40K and some of these rule changes sound great. But, I agree that it seems they have realized that they basically stagnated for 14 years and are cramming everything but the kitchen sink in there to try and appease all the people who play other systems. The irony of it all is that after waiting so long for a real upgrade to 40K this system might just be so overcomplicated that it causes people to turn away from the game. Good thing Mantic is building a 40K sized game with cheaper minis and a simple rule set to catch all those people who leave 40K when 6th comes out!


It isn't fixing anything by just completely trashing the old system. That is called reinventing the game entirely. I will try playing the new system, but if half of this crap is real, I will be one of tbose that leave this game.

Just had a thought;

With all the new rules along with the different levels of play, expect the starter set to have model, "cards" for ruls and stats, just like all the new game systems. Pokemon/Magic 40k 6th Edition!!


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 04:30:52


Post by: ShatteredBlade


Well I have gone to a better place. A place filled with missus Pelz fish sticks.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 05:04:26


Post by: Earthbeard


Shadelkan wrote:I guess I don't like change as much as I thought, because all this depresses me. It makes me feel like the game I know is dying... Though maybe its just evolving into something better.

I don't know.


These rumours, the cancelling of SWG and EVE's rather rapid plummeting fiery doom, have made my hobby/gaming week one hell of a depressing time.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 05:10:38


Post by: Omegus


What happened to EVE Online?


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 05:25:08


Post by: ShumaGorath


if this is true

I for one applaud games workshops attempt to trash an old and awful gaming system and replace it with one that has at least a chance to be good. Players have accepted the silent agreement for years that 40k has great fluff and models but awful and non sensical gameplay. I'd prefer to have three good things instead.

Given that this is a massive bullet list of random, half remembered tidbits it should surprise no one that it sounds complicated. Change is like that when you don't have it formatted with simple pictures. There are a lot of people that still don't understand fifth because 40k is a bad game with poorly written rules. Just because you got half an AIM conversation without context doesn't mean the subject in question is somehow difficult to comprehend. It just means you're trying to figure it out through a very blurry lens.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 05:31:48


Post by: Omegus


Enough of you and your logic and positive thinking!


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 05:37:18


Post by: Zefig


ShumaGorath wrote:if this is true
Given that this is a massive bullet list of random, half remembered tidbits it should surprise no one that it sounds complicated. Change is like that when you don't have it formatted with simple pictures. There are a lot of people that still don't understand fifth because 40k is a bad game with poorly written rules. Just because you got half an AIM conversation without context doesn't mean the subject in question is somehow difficult to comprehend. It just means you're trying to figure it out through a very blurry lens.


This is reminding me a lot of something.



Let's see. Widely disputed, questionably documented, with camps vehemently denying as well as hoping against hope for.

Either way, it looks pretty hair and is probably more than a bit smelly.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 05:39:13


Post by: Sidstyler


If the changes are real then learning the new edition would be a little more complicated at first, but hopefully much more rewarding than playing a game now. Of course I doubt the new edition will be any more well-written or balanced than the current one just because it's GW we're talking about but surprises are always nice.

Well, good surprises like rules exceeding your expectations are nice, "bad" surprises like not knowing your army is getting an update until the week before it happens not so much.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 05:46:13


Post by: puma713


So, with all these rumors, we can expect a War-and-Peace sized rulebook? It'll come with a calculator, a compass (to help divine your unit's movement), a tablet computer to help you keep up with all the new rules, and a calendar, so you can plan out the weeks it'll take to play a single game. Tournaments with 3 games in 7 hours? Ha! Now tournaments with 3 games will be 7 days! Take that Warmachine/Flames of War!


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 05:50:45


Post by: Shadelkan


Earthbeard wrote:
Shadelkan wrote:I guess I don't like change as much as I thought, because all this depresses me. It makes me feel like the game I know is dying... Though maybe its just evolving into something better.

I don't know.


...and EVE's rather rapid plummeting fiery doom...


What's wrong with EVE?

Either way, I cheered up when I remembered that the gaming system is only a small aspect of why I play; and hell, if 6th changes so much, I can always stick to 5th ed rules. This all reminds me of Wizards of the Coast and D&D; they didn't ruin it with 4.0, because you can always go back to 3.5; and NOTHING stops you from making house rules up. I collect 40k because I love the fluff and the models, and little will change that.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 05:52:18


Post by: Sidstyler


Exaggerated post is an exaggeration. If the rulebook did come out with all that though I would finally consider paying $80 for it. lol

What's wrong with EVE?


Plenty. But I'm curious as well since I didn't know EVE was doing that badly.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 05:58:43


Post by: Shadelkan


Sidstyler wrote:Exaggerated post is an exaggeration. If the rulebook did come out with all that though I would finally consider paying $80 for it. lol

What's wrong with EVE?


Plenty. But I'm curious as well since I didn't know EVE was doing that badly.


As horribly off topic as this subject is... I beg to differ that there's anything wrong at all. If you find EVE boring, that's totally subjective, and not really something wrong with it; you just don't like the style. Otherwise, as someone who enjoys the style of game EVE offers, I haven't noticed much wrong with it. In fact, I wish GW were as good as CCP is, in terms of... EVERYTHING!


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 06:03:51


Post by: chaos0xomega


I'm liking these rumors less and less the more I hear about them (and I was originally quite optimistic). I think this is for two reasons:

1. GW is seemingly trying to hamstring a complex ruleset into an inherently simple core engine. The new rumors don't seem like they will mesh very well with the existing system, and would be better served by a complete overhaul of everything (including the army books) rather than the "patch and FAQ" attitude GW seems to have adopted, which will only result in confusion and even more rule inconsistencies then we have now.

Which leads me to my second reason:

2. If the new edition that GW is going to be putting out really is so massively different, then they should cease codex development now (I would argue they should have done it a while ago), and direct all efforts to putting out the new rulebook as soon as possible. Continuing down this path is going to result in the last 2 or 3 codecies in this release cycle not seeing an update again for ages, and ending up severely nerfed as a result. This is especially upsetting to me, because I started life as a Tau player towards the end of 3rd/start of 4th. With the release of 4th, the Tau army was broken, although not terribly so. I suffered under such a state until the release of the 4th ed. Tau codex, which made them whole and new again, and it was good... until about a year later when GW released 5th edition, and broke the army again... even worse than the first time. I also happened to pick up Necrons as a second army... I'm sure you can see why I might be upset by all this, especially considering that both Tau and Necrons are rumored to be among the last three releases before 6th hits...


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 06:23:03


Post by: ShatteredBlade


Well, I've always thought that the best way to deal with the Imperial Guard Parking lot and transport spam was to make infantry a little bit more survivable and useful. It'd be kinda funny to see 6th edition hit and Tyranids moving back up to their 4th ed broken spot.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 06:34:20


Post by: mondo80


Over on Bell of Lost Souls they posted additional rumors, I am in agreement with most of you, if they are goin to completely redo the game system they should release with compatible codex's. By shoehorning them in it confuses everyone.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 06:40:30


Post by: STUCARIUS


puma713 wrote:So, with all these rumors, we can expect a War-and-Peace sized rulebook? It'll come with a calculator, a compass (to help divine your unit's movement), a tablet computer to help you keep up with all the new rules, and a calendar, so you can plan out the weeks it'll take to play a single game. Tournaments with 3 games in 7 hours? Ha! Now tournaments with 3 games will be 7 days! Take that Warmachine/Flames of War!


I really do not understand where all this angst is coming from about 6th Ed. 40K is and has always been a super simple game. getting rid of some of the garbage in the rules and bringing them closer to modern rules sets in their mechanics is nothing but good.

Right now 40K is full of gamers who's experience is limited to card games, Warmachine and "Maybe" Flames. All GW is doing is making the game less of a game about the use of rules to play and win to a game where the rules will come closer to facilitating tactical play.

The end result is not longer more difficult games. It is better gamers playing a better game. One decided by the skill of the gamers battlefield tactics vs their skillful exploitation of the rules. Maybe if we are really lucky all the Kard_Kiddies will get out of the game and leave it to the grown ups.



6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 06:42:03


Post by: Mr.Church13


Average Game Length = 8 - 24 hours with theese rules.

You should technically be being paid minimum wage to play this as it would feel more like work than a fun game.

Faaaaaaaar to complex but thanks for confiming theyre fake by posting these wishes.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 07:00:01


Post by: junk


According to the rumored release schedule, we'll have a couple of codices to look forward to before the rule change which will no doubt either lend credence to or help to dismiss this font of unusual information.

For starters, I think these shadowy interpretations of simplified explanations of potential rules are intriguing; and while they seem to denote a bias towards cc and away from 'camping', they also paint a picture of a game that is more exciting, varied, and interesting.

I love the idea of modular missions with a focus on strategy over luck. If nothing else, I welcome the change from the standard array of mission types and deployments.

I love the idea of multiple rulesets for different levels of intricacy in games.

As a tau player, I'm terrified that if the new codex doesn't include a significant CC boost; then all of my models are even less likely to see the gaming board; but as a GK player, I'm thrilled that I don't have to be so concerned with the short range and limited mobility of my favorite units.

Yeah, Wound allocation closes a loophole, so what, play better. They're not saying that you have to equip your squads identically, they're just saying stop trying to exploit the RAW. If the squad takes 3 unsaved wounds, remove a model. it doesn't make Paladins bad. It just makes them mortal, apparently, you can still assign a melta-wound to a model that's also suffered a bolter wound; you just can't spread the bolter wounds around... that's probably why the apothecary is a 75 point upgrade instead of a 75 point additional unit (which it should be in 5th).

Yeah, there are a few things I find uncomfortable about these potential rules, but it's the stupid stuff; like tiered USRs. Seriously, errata-ing EVERY codex to represent the value of each unit's special rules? This dude gets FNP(2) while this one gets FNP (1), and I can ignore your Stealth (2) if I have acute senses (3)... That's just annoying.

Unless they include a fixed point mechanic for applying upgraded special rules, universally, to any model; then I don't think it's going to go over too well when they start power-creeping the codices like they do. Based on track record, the Tau or CSM will get ABILITY X (1) but every book that comes out afterwards will have NEGATE-ABILITY X (2).

What I'd like to see? Less guns that kill their users. More balance between CC and Shooting. Less force organization nonsense. And if they're going to Tier USRs then You should be able to spend points to a. get them and b. upgrade the ones you've got, so no army gets shafted every time a new codex comes out... but now I guess I'm wishlisting. Whatever the new rules are, we'll all play them, argue them, exploit them, bitch about them, and abuse them the second they can be downloaded from the pirate bay.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 07:05:10


Post by: chaos0xomega


STUCARIUS wrote:
puma713 wrote:So, with all these rumors, we can expect a War-and-Peace sized rulebook? It'll come with a calculator, a compass (to help divine your unit's movement), a tablet computer to help you keep up with all the new rules, and a calendar, so you can plan out the weeks it'll take to play a single game. Tournaments with 3 games in 7 hours? Ha! Now tournaments with 3 games will be 7 days! Take that Warmachine/Flames of War!


I really do not understand where all this angst is coming from about 6th Ed. 40K is and has always been a super simple game. getting rid of some of the garbage in the rules and bringing them closer to modern rules sets in their mechanics is nothing but good.

Right now 40K is full of gamers who's experience is limited to card games, Warmachine and "Maybe" Flames. All GW is doing is making the game less of a game about the use of rules to play and win to a game where the rules will come closer to facilitating tactical play.

The end result is not longer more difficult games. It is better gamers playing a better game. One decided by the skill of the gamers battlefield tactics vs their skillful exploitation of the rules. Maybe if we are really lucky all the Kard_Kiddies will get out of the game and leave it to the grown ups.



As someone who has played more tabletop games than you can shake a stick at, and is dabbling inthe art, I can tell you (from what I have seen) its not a better game, but a clunky frankensteins monster of a ruleset. GW is not making the game more tactical or skillful, its giving the illusion of that through meta balancing, etc. Most of the proposed changes are there to try to balance out the various factions and unit types in relation to one another, make certian unit types more relevant, others less relavant, and it is a veiled acknowledgement on GW's part that special rules aren't special when almost everyone has them. The only really tactical/skill related thing I see in the proposals are the reactions, and even then its really still a buckets of dice beer and pretzel kinda game.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 07:22:11


Post by: lord_blackfang


So how reliable is this ghost21 guy? It seems he's just saying things we want to hear. Genestealer Cults? Really?


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 08:10:33


Post by: Kingsley


lord_blackfang wrote:So how reliable is this ghost21 guy? It seems he's just saying things we want to hear. Genestealer Cults? Really?


It could just be that things are actually getting better-- a novel idea to some, giving the tone of these forums over the past month or so!


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 08:38:56


Post by: Sidstyler


Shadelkan wrote:As horribly off topic as this subject is... I beg to differ that there's anything wrong at all. If you find EVE boring, that's totally subjective, and not really something wrong with it; you just don't like the style. Otherwise, as someone who enjoys the style of game EVE offers, I haven't noticed much wrong with it. In fact, I wish GW were as good as CCP is, in terms of... EVERYTHING!


"Boring" is the very least of my complaints. I don't really feel like getting too far into it, but suffice to say, no, the style of game EVE offers does not appeal to me, and I have to wonder about the people that it does appeal to.

As for wanting GW to be like CCP, lol. For people who haven't played EVE Online, it would be like playing 40k, but massacring is always encouraged in every scenario and promoted by GW as the only way to play, and if you were tabled in a game, any game, then your dead models counted as being dead forever and would have to be replaced with new ones. Also, your opponent gets to roll a die after the battle to see how many of your models he can claim for himself. Or you can avoid a game altogether by paying your opponent a "ransom" of $XX.XX dollars...who can of course then pocket your money and force you to appease him with a game anyway if he thinks you have models that he really wants.

BTW, in case you're wondering, I did play EVE for a bit, and while I do consider myself really gak at the game, I don't hate it because I was stupid and lost everything, which is usually the first conclusion other players jump to. In fact one of the only times I ever engaged in PvP was when a corpmate and I were doing missions in low-sec (and he was trying out an experimental hull-tanking battlecruiser... ), he went ahead to the next part without me and got attacked by a guy at the last gate while I was still a few jumps out. When I came through the gate in my megathron (which I was nowhere near skilled enough to actually fly and was equipped with T1 modules) I managed to scare the guy off and we both fled before he could come back with friends. Personally I considered that a victory.

While I admit that did give me an adrenaline rush and a sense of accomplishment I've never gotten from any other game, I still wouldn't recommend EVE Online to anyone but the most "hardcore" of gamers. If you want a game that plays exactly like real life, where honesty and hard work pay very little and get you nowhere (and you're basically paying $15 a month to exist as prey for all the douchebag pirates and griefers...oh, and supply them with all their ships, weapons, and ammo of course, since none of those guys do that boring mining/manufacturing stuff), and the only real way to succeed is to lie, cheat, steal, and backstab your way to the top of a mountain of corpses, then by all means, buy EVE because that gak is right up your alley. There's no tutorial either, so...good luck, wear a helmet.


Anyway, Genestealer Cults? Now I'm calling bs on the whole thing as a fan's wishlist. Now if it is true then that's awesome, but I'm gonna need proof.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 09:15:40


Post by: AlexHolker


Sidstyler wrote:As for wanting GW to be like CCP, lol. For people who haven't played EVE Online, it would be like playing 40k, but massacring is always encouraged in every scenario and promoted by GW as the only way to play, and if you were tabled in a game, any game, then your dead models counted as being dead forever and would have to be replaced with new ones. Also, your opponent gets to roll a die after the battle to see how many of your models he can claim for himself. Or you can avoid a game altogether by paying your opponent a "ransom" of $XX.XX dollars...who can of course then pocket your money and force you to appease him with a game anyway if he thinks you have models that he really wants.

That's pretty much what I've heard about the game. It's a griefer's paradise.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 10:32:14


Post by: ceorron


michelj wrote:

- squad leaders more important, no more 50% rallying threshold, unit can rally as long as squad leader lives



If there is one rule i'm rooting for to be included in the new 40k this is it.
Too many times I have had a high points cost unit get just below the 50% theshold run, this is a real pain. If anything 50% (half a unit running!) is just too much 25% might be more acceptable, even if it is that there is still a squad leader so you can test to rally at -2 that would still be a vast improvement.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 10:38:49


Post by: Sarigar


Some of the things in general that stick out can be a PITA for 6th.

Tokens. Right now, there are a lot of counters (or dice) being used in the game. I see many a game where dice are used to represent certain things (wounds/damage results) and these dice accidentally get picked up, moved or forgotten. It appears nearly every unit will require some type of marker, especially for movement.

Size of game. It's hard to say with all these changes how fast game play will become, but it seems a bit more detailed than 3rd, 4th or 5th. I'll be curious it points levels such as 2000 remains an accepted standard (in the U.S., I see a lot of events at this points size).

Multiwound. On the fense about the removing wounded models fix, but I am in agreement that the current multi wound shenanigans is a bit lame (Nobz, SW TWC and Paladins off the top of my head).

Strategems: this could be huge. In Apocolypse, certain stratagems can be quite game changing. Not sure how I feel about these either, but I'm sure certain ones will become quite popular (night fighting all game chosen by foot slogging assault armies really stood out).

I'm ready for change and will give 6th a try. However, the last time GW massively overhauled the game (2nd to 3rd edition), I quit for nearly 3 years.

I'm in wait and see mode. The game is in desperate need of change, however, by forcing themselves to ensure all codexes are still valid really limits what they can do for the game.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 13:18:46


Post by: Shadelkan


Sidstyler wrote:As for wanting GW to be like CCP, lol. For people who haven't played EVE Online, it would be like playing 40k, but massacring is always encouraged in every scenario and promoted by GW as the only way to play, and if you were tabled in a game, any game, then your dead models counted as being dead forever and would have to be replaced with new ones. Also, your opponent gets to roll a die after the battle to see how many of your models he can claim for himself. Or you can avoid a game altogether by paying your opponent a "ransom" of $XX.XX dollars...who can of course then pocket your money and force you to appease him with a game anyway if he thinks you have models that he really wants.


Cute, but full of BS.

I didn't say for WHFB / 40k / LOTR to be like EVE, I said for GW to be like CCP, a company that makes a niche market game, updating it massively at least once a year (with 4 lesser but important updates), where the developpers actually play the game, where its encouraged (see: get paid) to make third party programs, and who listens to their player base. In fact, with the latter one, they made a council of players voted by players to come up with ideas to be adopted by the company into EVE. So far, its worked amazingly, and dozens of their ideas are added in each update.

Beyond that, you just sound like a carebear, even with your low sec horror story. Based on your interpretation of EVE, I should start telling people that in WHFB/40k, players are rules lawyers, who don't accept anything but RAW, where they use lists meant to win only, and who feel they don't need to waste time on a pleb who can't even paint eyes. Oh and that it's impossible to start an army, because people can't afford the models.

Obviously that's not true for every player; it exists, sure, but it's not what you encounter all the time. And if you're smart, you can avoid it. <- This is exactly what can be said with what you said.

AlexHolker wrote:That's pretty much what I've heard about the game. It's a griefer's paradise.


If that's all you've ever heard about the game, you pretty much read one page in the middle of a 200 page book, decided that it's impossible to follow the story, therefore a bad book.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 13:40:38


Post by: gorgon


I really don't think this will seem as complicated once we get a chance to play it a few times.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 14:29:33


Post by: IVEATCH


lord_blackfang wrote:So how reliable is this ghost21 guy? It seems he's just saying things we want to hear. Genestealer Cults? Really?


Perhaps Games Workshop is just doing due diligence in the marketing research department by releasing these purported new rules and gauging reaction. As a publicly traded company it would be a fiduciary responsibility.

I find it hard to believe that all of these "rules" are set in stone yet.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 15:39:37


Post by: Reecius


Ah yes, all the chicken little's are already crying about the sky falling.

Come on people. This happens EVERY time. Every edition change, every new book, everyone flips out before they have any real facts.

Continue to enjoy the game now and wait to see what happens. Then, gasp, try it out and make a judgement call. No need for these overly dramatic statements based on rough rumors coming from the memories of a supposed play tester.

In other words, be cool people. These are just rumors.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 16:04:13


Post by: ShumaGorath


Reecius wrote:Ah yes, all the chicken little's are already crying about the sky falling.

Come on people. This happens EVERY time. Every edition change, every new book, everyone flips out before they have any real facts.

Continue to enjoy the game now and wait to see what happens. Then, gasp, try it out and make a judgement call. No need for these overly dramatic statements based on rough rumors coming from the memories of a supposed play tester.

In other words, be cool people. These are just rumors.


But if the 40k community isn't being reactionary children then what are they?


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 16:10:57


Post by: Balance


Brother Ramses wrote:With all the new rules along with the different levels of play, expect the starter set to have model, "cards" for ruls and stats, just like all the new game systems. Pokemon/Magic 40k 6th Edition!!


Yes, having a game be created such that reference material is widely available and easy to use is horrible and ruins the game.

Wait, didn't WH40k 2nd edition have cards and datafaxes?


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 16:21:56


Post by: helgrenze


Balance wrote:
Brother Ramses wrote:With all the new rules along with the different levels of play, expect the starter set to have model, "cards" for ruls and stats, just like all the new game systems. Pokemon/Magic 40k 6th Edition!!


Yes, having a game be created such that reference material is widely available and easy to use is horrible and ruins the game.

Wait, didn't WH40k 2nd edition have cards and datafaxes?


Why yes... yes it did.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 16:43:33


Post by: Asuron


Shadelkan wrote:
Sidstyler wrote:As for wanting GW to be like CCP, lol. For people who haven't played EVE Online, it would be like playing 40k, but massacring is always encouraged in every scenario and promoted by GW as the only way to play, and if you were tabled in a game, any game, then your dead models counted as being dead forever and would have to be replaced with new ones. Also, your opponent gets to roll a die after the battle to see how many of your models he can claim for himself. Or you can avoid a game altogether by paying your opponent a "ransom" of $XX.XX dollars...who can of course then pocket your money and force you to appease him with a game anyway if he thinks you have models that he really wants.


Cute, but full of BS.

I didn't say for WHFB / 40k / LOTR to be like EVE, I said for GW to be like CCP, a company that makes a niche market game, updating it massively at least once a year (with 4 lesser but important updates), where the developpers actually play the game, where its encouraged (see: get paid) to make third party programs, and who listens to their player base. In fact, with the latter one, they made a council of players voted by players to come up with ideas to be adopted by the company into EVE. So far, its worked amazingly, and dozens of their ideas are added in each update.

Beyond that, you just sound like a carebear, even with your low sec horror story. Based on your interpretation of EVE, I should start telling people that in WHFB/40k, players are rules lawyers, who don't accept anything but RAW, where they use lists meant to win only, and who feel they don't need to waste time on a pleb who can't even paint eyes. Oh and that it's impossible to start an army, because people can't afford the models.

Obviously that's not true for every player; it exists, sure, but it's not what you encounter all the time. And if you're smart, you can avoid it. <- This is exactly what can be said with what you said.

AlexHolker wrote:That's pretty much what I've heard about the game. It's a griefer's paradise.


If that's all you've ever heard about the game, you pretty much read one page in the middle of a 200 page book, decided that it's impossible to follow the story, therefore a bad book.



Sorry to keep this going off topic but I really have to say something here on EVE
Dude the game is notorious for being tough and cruel
Its merciless, because dying can set you back so badly and noobs have NO chance of learning this without research or learning the hard way.

I love PVP myself and I love that EVE is so merciless, but noones a carebear for recognising the diifculty of that game, griefers in that game have the ability to render all the work you've done pointless if your not always on guard
Hell even running a successfull coporation is akin to having a second job, even moreso than running guilds in other games, taking up contracts, having to do accounting to track funds etc
It is really a game for the hardcore in every sense of the word and noone can be blamed for backing out of it

Anyways back on topic
Reading through all that, it seems really, really overcomplicated
I mean wow, I can't imagine the charts people will need to follow this if its true


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 17:09:36


Post by: Sidstyler


Shadelkan wrote:I didn't say for WHFB / 40k / LOTR to be like EVE, I said for GW to be like CCP, a company that makes a niche market game, updating it massively at least once a year (with 4 lesser but important updates), where the developpers actually play the game, where its encouraged (see: get paid) to make third party programs, and who listens to their player base. In fact, with the latter one, they made a council of players voted by players to come up with ideas to be adopted by the company into EVE. So far, its worked amazingly, and dozens of their ideas are added in each update.


That's what I assumed you meant, but I wanted to be funny instead so I posted my bs.

Shadelkan wrote:Beyond that, you just sound like a carebear


Oh god damn it.

Shadelkan wrote:even with your low sec horror story.


And I want to reiterate that I knew full-well the risk we were taking being there, I'm not just a bumbling idiot who stumbled in unknowingly. We checked the map beforehand too, to avoid areas where pod-killing occurred so as to further minimize the chance of being jumped on.

Shadelkan wrote:Based on your interpretation of EVE, I should start telling people that in WHFB/40k, players are rules lawyers, who don't accept anything but RAW, where they use lists meant to win only, and who feel they don't need to waste time on a pleb who can't even paint eyes. Oh and that it's impossible to start an army, because people can't afford the models.


...heh...yeah. That would be crazy...*cough*...I mean I've surely never told anyone that before to discourage them from starting the game up. Nope.



I'll never understand the "lists meant to win = bad" thing, though. It makes me think that there are actually people out there who design their armies and play every game with the intention of losing and I don't think anyone needs to explain how absurd that is, no one actively tries to lose every game and if you do you're just wasting time. I have nothing against casual play, it's all I really do in any game, but I also disagree with this notion that trying to win is bad or wrong.

Shadelkan wrote:
AlexHolker wrote:That's pretty much what I've heard about the game. It's a griefer's paradise.


If that's all you've ever heard about the game, you pretty much read one page in the middle of a 200 page book, decided that it's impossible to follow the story, therefore a bad book.


Yeah, I'll admit that EVE is a lot more complicated than that (so much more, even combat isn't as simple as pointing and clicking, there's actual math involved and it requires a lot more thinking than what's common for an MMO), but I still don't think that summation is entirely inaccurate. It's true that piracy isn't all that easy and if you don't know what you're doing you'll fail pretty hard at it, and there are ways to avoid becoming a victim in the first place, and there's also bounty-hunting on top of that (though IIRC bounty-hunting wasn't exactly profitable and your target would likely be impossible to get to anyway), so saying that there's no retribution isn't really true, but I still get the feeling at times that the game catered to that style of player and that everything else was frowned upon. I think you even helped prove it when you slapped the "carebear" label on me almost immediately, people who try to enjoy the game without being ruthless dicks to everyone around them were looked down on and given their own derogatory nickname, and I know some people will argue otherwise but nine times out of ten the word "carebear" was used in a derogatory manner on the forums so I'm treating it as such.

But yeah, the EVE stuff is off-topic so my official final thoughts on EVE are that it's just not my thing. I personally don't like the game, but that's only because it's way too demanding and "hardcore" for me. I'm super casual about gaming and I detest games that feel more like work than play. Some people love it though, they like the fact that there's a real risk and that you can actually lose everything that you invested so much time and money into acquiring (I'll admit that PvP in most games is a joke and ultimately pointless, but it's like that because they don't want people to feel like they're paying a monthly subscription fee just to exist as fodder), they like that it's so harsh and unforgiving, and I can't really fault them for that I guess. If you're going to get into it though I ask that you do some research and find out exactly what you're getting into, because it isn't just a game about space battles and pretty ships.


Anyway, I personally wouldn't mind if 40k had a little more depth so I'm not exactly turned off by the rumors...I'm actually intrigued, even though I think putting out a new edition is stupid when half the armies still haven't been updated for the current one. I've never liked this update schedule that GW has chosen for their games, it pretty much guarantees that the game will always be unbalanced purely because of all the people playing with older books.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 17:24:50


Post by: TrollPie


For all the people saying this would be way too complex and take forever, I thought the exact same thing when I saw the 5th edition rules. Guess what? After a few weeks I knew most of the rules of by heart and didn't have to refer to the BRB except for special rules and unit stats. It'll take a month to get used to these rules, then you'll probably have adjusted to them. The sky is firmly above our heads.

And thank God they're fixing the under 50% thing with retreating. If you've lost a unit you should just remove it from the table, not have them run around screaming for a bit. It's irritating.
Now they just need to fix getting swept and nerf mech, and I'm a happy little nerd.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 17:29:41


Post by: Shadelkan


Works great for me; Truth be told, I talk well about EVE, but always end conversations with "And I don't recommend you play it."

@Asuron: What you said is all true; but that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with EVE, it just caters to a niche market. I'm sure some people think GW's products are stupid because you need to assemble and paint them before you can (officially) use them.

As for the topic on hand, I'm going to take it a step at a time; for now, its 5th ed, and until GW really makes any announcement, its going to stay 5th ed.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 18:23:53


Post by: Earthbeard


Shadelkan wrote:
Sidstyler wrote:Exaggerated post is an exaggeration. If the rulebook did come out with all that though I would finally consider paying $80 for it. lol

What's wrong with EVE?


Plenty. But I'm curious as well since I didn't know EVE was doing that badly.


As horribly off topic as this subject is... I beg to differ that there's anything wrong at all. If you find EVE boring, that's totally subjective, and not really something wrong with it; you just don't like the style. Otherwise, as someone who enjoys the style of game EVE offers, I haven't noticed much wrong with it. In fact, I wish GW were as good as CCP is, in terms of... EVERYTHING!


Go in game, check out the forums.

EVE's on a very fast screw the customer, and make everything MT based. When the basic prinicpals of the game are being taken away in the name of making cash, a problem you do have.

Anyone that plays EVE currently and isn't aware of these issues and much, much more for the wider base, really does live in a flower garden with rose tinted glasses.

I love EVE, it's far from boring or even perfect, but the recent looming NGE style feth up, is not good.

On Topic - With Storm of Magic bringing back some oldies and goldies as new units, monsters, I can see 40k following suit and providing lots more of the cult lists, hell even creatures like Grox, sure makes a little less sense, but it seems to be a grasp at retro as cool, and a shouting voice saying "Look we've added Cudbears, we're all VETS here, now worship Draigo and follow our creed"


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 19:49:59


Post by: Sageheart


WOW these rules really change things up. Whole armies are going to be entirely reformatted.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 19:51:18


Post by: Brother SRM


It's going to make a more complex game, but a much deeper one. I welcome these changes after three editions of merely evolving bit by bit.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 20:27:00


Post by: Kroothawk


lord_blackfang wrote:So how reliable is this ghost21 guy? It seems he's just saying things we want to hear. Genestealer Cults? Really?

Well, most of his predictions are on things still in the future, so we will see. But he was wrong about Sororitas not getting a WD Codex (or maybe just half wrong as BramGaunt says they get a WD Codex now AND a full Codex not that far away). That said, I have no reason currently to mistrust him. But if he is the only source, I would like to have a second source.
IVEATCH wrote:Perhaps Games Workshop is just doing due diligence in the marketing research department by releasing these purported new rules and gauging reaction. As a publicly traded company it would be a fiduciary responsibility.

GW? Marketing research? Responsibility to shareholders?
IVEATCH wrote:I find it hard to believe that all of these "rules" are set in stone yet.

Okay, I agree to that. But printing a new standard rulebook takes considerable time, so rules design should be in the end stages.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 20:35:11


Post by: Omegus


Sageheart wrote:WOW these rules really change things up. Whole armies are going to be entirely reformatted.

So no more razorback spam in 4/5 lists? Damn, I really enjoyed that. :(


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 20:42:58


Post by: micahaphone


I don't want to bee too mean, but are we really going to trust Blood of Kittens? I thought that he wasn't the most trustworthy source.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 20:56:26


Post by: FalkorsRaiders


micahaphone wrote:I don't want to bee too mean, but are we really going to trust Blood of Kittens? I thought that he wasn't the most trustworthy source.


Firstly, it wasn't himself who posted it, it was someone who posted on the site. Secondly, always take rumors with salt. Just because people say they like these rules or don't doesn't mean they believe them. Most likely, you may see parts of this be true and parts be false.


6th edition 40k rumors (from Blood of Kittens) @ 2011/06/25 21:55:58


Post by: grizgrin


"We"? Some of us will, some of us won't. It's not too terribly often that all of Dakka comes together in consensus on much of anything.