Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

xttz wrote:

HiveFleet wrote:Well, if those rumors are true, my Canoptek army just got a bit better, but my Tyranids are still screwed. i was hoping for % based army design, as it would solve alot of problems with the Tyranid army IMO. Ah well, shall wait and see. Excited to hear about the new figs however

The jump infantry rule is interesting for 'nids. Imagine bonesword shrikes or 30 gargoyles dropping on someone with that initiative bonus.

Gargoyles already strike first in most situations against units outside cover, as they have I4 or I5. So? They are a decent unit, nothing more, and a single I10 attack on the charge won't make much of a difference.

xttz wrote:The WS thing for vehicles is fantastic for nids, MC's needing 4+/6+ to hit moving vehicles was always dumb. The Preferred Enemy change to shooting would also be interesting *cough* devilguants *cough* tyrannofex *cough*. Pity about FNP though.

The WS 1 is a typo. Moving vehicles are WS 10, apparently. If we're to beleive an anonymous Faeit poster. Wouldn't surprise me, makes more sense than WS1.
And the PE changes could be read as the only thing it will do now, is allow reroll 1's to wound. I do hope it is in addition to the current rerolls to hit.

davethepak wrote:Actually, FNP needed a nerf, it was being handed out like candy (well, if not like candy, like invul saves for marines).

Well, they have been handing out several special abilities like candy in this edition:

FNP (BA, DE, and to a lesser extent GK, Orcs, and Nids -- Necrons traded WBB for a modified FNP)

Instant Death (GK and to a lesser extent Nids and SW)

Poison (DE and Nids)

Rending (GK, SW, Deamons -- Nids always had rending)

If we go to random charge distances I will be sorely disappointed. I doubt it'll throw me from the game but I may sit that edition out. I just have an irrational dislike of that particular way of doing things.

Goresaw wrote:
Battlewagon orks are getting kicked in the balls. Moving only 6 inches in a battlewagons that are only getting +5 now? No thanks. I also feel sorry for non-Blood Angel landraider lists. (unless its all can move 6 and fire everything, move 12 and fire nothing, fast get an extra move).

Based on the rumors you can still move more than 6, but the additional movement occurs in the shooting phase. So for a non-fast vehicle you would move 6" in movement phase, then in the shooting phase you have either the choice of a) shooting a weapon b) moving another 6".

While it's an extra step, I think it adds pretty interesting mechanic, because you could have a squad of Long Fangs, then after they fires have a vehicle move 6" in front of them to block LOS in your opponents turn.

Platuan4th wrote:
40K used cards before WM was even written.

Aw yeah baby.



Time to go old school.

Shooting taking out the targets closest to the shooter first is a great idea. One of the things I dont like about 5th is the idea of people picking which get killed and which dont. Every other game Ive ever played was closest first, as it tends to be in real life.

Get rid of the wound allocation junk, and go back to units having a M stat, instead of the...everything moves 6", except 50% of the units in the game that have a special rule to make them faster or slower. Both of those would probably go a long way to getting be into playing 40k again.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

wyomingfox wrote:

davethepak wrote:Actually, FNP needed a nerf, it was being handed out like candy (well, if not like candy, like invul saves for marines).

Well, they have been handing out several special abilities like candy in this edition:

FNP (BA, DE, and to a lesser extent GK, Orcs, and Nids -- Necrons traded WBB for a modified FNP)

Instant Death (GK and to a lesser extent Nids and SW)

Poison (DE and Nids)

Rending (GK, SW, Deamons -- Nids always had rending)

That is another one of my big complaints about 5th, especially the rules that could be solved with just a simple stat change. It can be explained in the fluff/description of the unit and not with some special rule.

Sarge wrote:If we go to random charge distances I will be sorely disappointed. I doubt it'll throw me from the game but I may sit that edition out. I just have an irrational dislike of that particular way of doing things.

Since premeasuring seems to be going away as well, random charge range adds back in that element of uncertainty.

Kroothawk wrote:

starchild wrote:addition to a multipart plastic Eldar Avatar. Each kit is supposed to be the some of the best work GW has ever done, absolutely loaded with options so no two need be alike.

An Avatar kit with options sounds interesting as it implies there would be wargear options in the codex to go along with them.

I hope Dueling is not true.
It really, really, really is a crappy rule.

Macok wrote:I hope Dueling is not true.
It really, really, really is a crappy rule.

On no, not a rule to curtail uber-characters!

It's worked in Fantasy for almost 20 years, it's not going to ruin 40K.

I have a sinking feeling that Matt Ward had a hand in the rules. If so, say goodbye to any resemblance of the 40k we know and love and prepare for what I would predict to be the worst 40k rules set ever written. :(

oni wrote:I have a sinking feeling that Matt Ward had a hand in the rules. If so, say goodbye to any resemblance of the 40k we know and love and prepare for what I would predict to be the worst 40k rules set ever written. :(

Wow. Made it to page five before we Draigo'd. Congrats on your restraint in waiting this long!

oni wrote:I have a sinking feeling that Matt Ward had a hand in the rules. If so, say goodbye to any resemblance of the 40k we know and love and prepare for what I would predict to be the worst 40k rules set ever written. :(

I think 40K needs a total reset, so I embrace the change if for nothing other then a good change of pace.

The joy of figuring out a new game/rules set is euphoric. Being able to do that with the 40K setting/models is even more tantalizing.

If this change rakles the current tourney set or causes TFGs to rage-quit then I see those as bonuses...

CT GAMER wrote:

oni wrote:I have a sinking feeling that Matt Ward had a hand in the rules. If so, say goodbye to any resemblance of the 40k we know and love and prepare for what I would predict to be the worst 40k rules set ever written. :(

I think 40K needs a total reset, so I embrace the change if for nothing other then a good change of pace.
.

Have to disagree.

WFB didn't need it, got it, and now it kinda sucks.

CT GAMER wrote:I think 40K needs a total reset, so I embrace the change if for nothing other then a good change of pace.
... If this change rakles the current tourney set or causes TFGs to rage-quit then I see those as bonuses...

I couldn't disagree more. If Warhammer 40,000 needed anything it was a few refinements and better list-balancing, not change for its own sake.

Oh, and those are some classy weasel words... naturally everybody who disagrees with you is a TFG.

English Assassin wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:I think 40K needs a total reset, so I embrace the change if for nothing other then a good change of pace.
... If this change rakles the current tourney set or causes TFGs to rage-quit then I see those as bonuses...

I couldn't disagree more. If Warhammer 40,000 needed anything it was a few refinements and better list-balancing, not change for its own sake.

Oh, and those are some classy weasel words... naturally everybody who disagrees with you is a TFG.

So a few refinements can be done in an Errata/FAQ, not paying about $100 for "tweaks". Sorry now that is what, $200 in rules for just "tweaks" from 3rd edition? So if we get tweaks that means we paid $300 for edition 3.9

Vehicles cannot contest (unsure if scoring units in transports can)

I think that this change is universally for the best; I see it as a first step toward fixing one of the principle causes of many people's disdain for the current meta.

5+ Cover save for most things including ruins

Hallelujah, amen! My number one complaint with 5th is(was?) the ubiquitous 4+ cover save.

Wound Allocation is closest to furthest.

I'm neutral here. I do like the change a little, just because I think it adds a new element to the tabletop-tactical side of the game, as opposed to the list-creation side.

Dueling is similar to challenges in fantasy but contrary to earlier rumors, they don't replace Combat res, just add to sides. A IC can challenge another IC in the same combat even if not in base to base. If the defending IC refuses, he simply cannot attack that turn, if he does he counts as being in b2b and no one else can hurt him apart from the attacking IC. I'm guessing this is to offset the Wound Allocation rules

Well, Mindshackle Scarabs just became broken. Possibly GK win grenades if any ICs are able to take them (I don't play GK so I dunno).

Preferred Enemy is including shooting and you may reroll wound rolls of a 1 (either shooting or combat)

Christ, I hope so. My Destroyers desperately need something to justify their price tag right now. However, this does make Heavy Destroyers disgustingly good.

Jump Infantry get a free strike at I10 when they charge into combat

Triarch Praetorians just got a little bit more interesting...

Psychic Power Decks using a dice system similar to Fantasy

I have no frame of reference here. Is this a Nerf?

FNP drops to 5+ Save

Good. FNP is one of the most annoying mechanics in 5th Ed and it slows the game down so much. Every little bit that's chipped away makes me happy.

Therion wrote:

Aren't charge reactions in the game now? So you will get to shoot at them 1-2 times while they travel towards you, and then again when they charge. You might even be able to declare a fallback reaction, then regroup and shoot them again (note: I have not heard this presented as a rumour anywhere, I'm just extrapolating from the way charge reactions work in WFB, an the fact that 40K has had a voluntary fallback option in the past).

First of all if they get the first turn you get zero turns to fire against the fastest units or infiltrating units, and if the slower units just get the first turn you get one shooting phase in addition to the rumoured snap fire. The snap fire was rumoured to be BS2 so it's far from a real shooting phase or even a stand and shoot reaction from FB.

The voluntary fallback rule that 40K had in the past was never a charge reaction like you seem to suggest. It was an experimental rule for those assaults where a couple of Marines with bolters were fighting with a monster they couldn't do any damage to, meaning they were locked in the combat forever despite not being able to do anything.

In WFB a stand-and-shoot is completed at -1 to hit, and can only be used if the charge starts from a certain distance away, so there are comparable penalties to BS2. Shooting in 40K is many times more powerful than it is in WFB, and units are generally smaller and can absorb fewer casualties before they become crippled, so it makes sense that a snap-fire would be harder to achieve than a S-a-S

I didn't mean to suggest that voluntary fallback was a charge reaction, only that 40K has already flirted with the option of voluntarily putting a unit into rout in order to gain a tactical benefit, and that that combined with the existing & functional flee reaction in WFB would make it a no-brainer for inclusion in 40K.

azazel the cat wrote:

Psychic Power Decks using a dice system similar to Fantasy

I have no frame of reference here. Is this a Nerf?

Hard to say without a lot more info.

On one hand it will probably mean that all armies (or at least all psychic armies) can draw on useful generic powers, rather than Armies A, B and C getting awesome codex powers while Armies X, Y, and Z get crappy ones.

It might also introduce an element of random selection, where you roll for your powers and can't always depend on getting the ideal one.

It could also mean the introduction of an analogue to WFB's "dispelling" which would effectively mean an across-the-board improvement of psychic defense for all armies, rather than the scattershot way psychic defense is currently parceled out.

Davor wrote:

English Assassin wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:I think 40K needs a total reset, so I embrace the change if for nothing other then a good change of pace.
... If this change rakles the current tourney set or causes TFGs to rage-quit then I see those as bonuses...

I couldn't disagree more. If Warhammer 40,000 needed anything it was a few refinements and better list-balancing, not change for its own sake.

Oh, and those are some classy weasel words... naturally everybody who disagrees with you is a TFG.

So a few refinements can be done in an Errata/FAQ, not paying about $100 for "tweaks". Sorry now that is what, $200 in rules for just "tweaks" from 3rd edition? So if we get tweaks that means we paid $300 for edition 3.9

Whereas predominantly unnecessary and unwanted changes justify the price of a new rulebook, of course...

As much hate has Matt Ward gets, I have to admit, Necrons is a REALLY good codex. Its a great mix of 'omg thats broken' and 'holy $&(@# I'm about to get stomped by certain builds'. Its enough power to make the player feel like he has a good army, and enough weaknesses that make opponents enjoy playing the game.

As long as they reign him in, he can make a good book.

oni wrote:I have a sinking feeling that Matt Ward had a hand in the rules. If so, say goodbye to any resemblance of the 40k we know and love and prepare for what I would predict to be the worst 40k rules set ever written. :(

Everyone probably had a hand in it. Just because Mat Ward had a part in it doesn't mean it will be THE WORST THING EVAR. Anyway, I'll stop writing before I say something rude.
PS: Wait til the ruleset comes out before going Chicken Little on it.

ColdSadHungry wrote:Yeah, but how many of those units do you actually want in CC? Even with the I10 attacks? Certainly not the Eldar ones or the Vespids. Hellions already get I6 anyway but both Hellions and Scourges are just S3, T3 like Craftworld Eldar - simply not good enough to be in CC. Don't know much about the Nids. Marines on the other hand, the ones with Jump Packs are already assault marines, they'll just be even better than they are now and would be able to completely ignore something that may be a bit of help against them such as having I5 or I6. Sanguinary Guard will just be plain crazy. I'm not saying that other armies won't benefit from this but that marines will benefit more because it will boost their already assault orientated units.

Necron Wraiths. S6 rending, JI, ignores terrain.
Honestly, with the exception of DoA BA, I don't see many MEQ armies really gaining a huge benefit here. However, a DoA build is kinda scary now.

Altruizine wrote:It might also introduce an element of random selection, where you roll for your powers and can't always depend on getting the ideal one.

That sounds fantastic. I like the idea of a SW player not being able to suddenly have 2x Rune Priests firing JotWW at my Necrons.

Whats with all the Matt Ward better not write the rules? I think he did a great job in LotR rules, balanced, fun and well written.

I think he would do a great job with 6th. After all maybe that is what we need. A great shake up for EVERYONE not just Space Marines as alot of people like to say.

So with all the rumours coming out, how come we don't have who has written the Book?

Davor wrote:Whats with all the Matt Ward better not write the rules?

Have you been living under a rock since Warhammer Daemons in 7th Ed?

That sounds fantastic. I like the idea of a SW player not being able to suddenly have 2x Rune Priests firing JotWW at my Necrons.

So they will change their meta and possibly overrun you with Terminators. I personally believe that SM's and IG are going to get scary with this new rule set coming up.

And people are forgetting about being able to purchase terrain for your army. Why did you think Terrain went up so high in price
as well as other important models needed for a competitive list for 6th ED?

Well I did say was was buying up models and certain vehicle models in one of my previous posts.

Some of us will be giggling for joy while others will groan from the nerfing of those certain models that were so good in 5th ED.

But I will say this. If you are one of those people that kept your old armies and did not sell them off just to get the newest and uberist army available, then you are going to be fine. I believe that you are not going to have to spend too much money for upgrading your army.

Otherwise it sucks to be you.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Davor wrote:Whats with all the Matt Ward better not write the rules?

Have you been living under a rock since Warhammer Daemons in 7th Ed?

That was an army book which lost a lot of power in the transition to 8ed, the only people still having issues with that are still playing 7ed or are very good at holding grudges. I must agree that the War of the Rings ruleset was very well written and balanced. His codecies in 40k have significant issues in terms of fluff, no argument there, however writing a new edition ruleset should produce something interesting and hopefully to the same standard as War of the Ring.

That is if he is writing the new edition of 40k at all

Ehsteve wrote:That was an army book which lost a lot of power in the transition to 8ed...

I'm aware of that Rob, but that wasn't really the point I was making.

Dueling is similar to challenges in fantasy but contrary to earlier rumors, they don't replace Combat res, just add to sides. A IC can challenge another IC in the same combat even if not in base to base. If the defending IC refuses, he simply cannot attack that turn, if he does he counts as being in b2b and no one else can hurt him apart from the attacking IC. I'm guessing this is to offset the Wound Allocation rules

Well, Mindshackle Scarabs just became broken. Possibly GK win grenades if any ICs are able to take them (I don't play GK so I dunno).

Well, this is annoying. The only way to deal with MSS in 5th was careful positioning. If this duel thing is legit you had better be able to accept challenges with sergeants or something or IC heavy hitters are rendered basically worthless in the face of MSS.

It's hard to figure out how the game will go, but a few things cropped up:

Blood Angel Assault Marines (with Jump Packs) would be useful with the high initiative and pistols w/ AP value in assualt.

If there are AP values in assault, I can foresee Blood Angel Terminators/Assault Marines being reasonably useful.

Scarabs jumping on vehicles would now be very good. Those things would eat vehicles alive assuming they would hit on a 3-4+.

If vehicles can move in the shooting phase, how does the Eldar vehicle upgrade work which allows it to move in the movement phase in lieu of shooting?

I love the idea of wound allocation from the front row. Now people will actually have to think when they just charge out into the open instead of just pushing the models up. People who don't like this for the idea that models may get sniped are honestly complaining about having to think while playing the game. I for one welcome this increase to the tactical aspect of the game, as a Tau player it's mighty fun right now watching melee armies DURR HURR across the board with not a care in the world.

Random Charges are pretty cool, and I would hope snap shot is reactionary and failed charges will still have to move just like WHFB. This would seriously hamper assaults a little, but a the same time actually make it a gamble. And if I am to understand this correctly it's 6+2D6 (Highest of two)? What are people complaining about? Doesn't that mean at the lowest their charge range can be is still longer than it is now?

I'm glad vehicles cannot contest, this has easily been like the most ridiculous thing in 5th is that last turn flatout movement/Tankshock onto an objective. Tankshocks will obviously still work if they mange to run the squad off, but at least even a failed one wont continue to screw you over.

5+ cover change I have no problems with. 5+ cover save is what I have been wanting back since 5th came out. I want to be able to actually shoot crappy Guards and Orks and not have them laugh at half the bullets. What's the point of having good firepower and good AP when everyone is getting a 4+ cover? On a negative note this is a huge buff to SM codices obviously by widening that gap in survivability between them and xeno races. This will allow SM codices to kill most Xenos more effectively while at the same time not decreasing their own survivability (unless AP3 or better weapon of course). Luckily Tau sit around at a 4+ armor already lol.

ALLIES ARE NOT IN LIKE OLD EDITIONS! YES! I was going to hate the hell out of this change. Last thing I wanted to see is Grey Knights, or any other race for that matter, rolling around with three Broadsides suits. Allies honestly removes a lot of the uniqueness of codices in my opinion.

I'm perfectly fine with perentages not being in. While it is a nice way to balance FOCs, it will really make list making annoying as piss. I play Dwarfs WHFB and I hate the percentages simply for their inability to easily make an army on the spot.

Jump Infantry get a I10 strike! YES MY VESPIDS WILL CONTINUE TO BE OF NO USE TO ME! This rule does not bother me, in fact I like the idea of it a lot. It would be common sense if you picture a squad of people in jet packs making a dynamic entry into their enemy.

FNP 5+ is the most beautiful thing I have seen in all these rumors. FNP is practically given out like candy now, and I'm sick and tired of my already tragically low change to kill being cut in half again. Then again, my rage for special rules like this probably stems from Tau's absolute lack of containing any of 5th editions pet special rules.

Rapid Fire Weapons fire at max even while moving... never mind, this is now the most beautiful thing I have ever seen. This opens up the kiting ability of FW a lot for Tau and other armies like them. But at the same time it really makes the 'relentless' rule of Crisis Suits null, and now everyone can pull off this magic.

Dueling seems pretty fun and cinematic to me. Another thing I can't see ruining 40k since it really helped balance issues with ubers in WHFB.

Card decks for psykers a stupid idea and completely unrealistic? Back in the days of yore 40k already had these decks and I thought they were awesome.

Now the only thing I can hope for is that the rumored Tau Flyer is true, and doesn't suck. I would love to have something new in my army since Tau players have seen almost no changes in their models since their release in 2001 (besides the new ugly Stealthsuits).