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.

DeffDred wrote:Real military commander?.... Seriously?

I'm pretty sure that it has been said a million times but comparng 40k to real life is silly.

In 40k heroes lead from the front. That's how it's always been.

If a space marine captain wasn't trying to take the warboss' head in single combat he wouldn't have made the rank of captain.

This does work for Space Marine Captains, but what about IG sergeants? One doesn't usually become a squad leader by doing stupid things like calling out ork warbosses or chaos lords on the battlefield. Also this is an annoying way for characters to have even greater impact on fights which is just annoying. Don't want to worry about your character being hurt by a power fist on a lower powered character? Just challange them and watch them have to run away because they have no chance in a challange. Pretty much means any weapon in a lower powered unit that could really hurt a big name character will now have zero effect on the combat as if uber characters aren't already hard enough to take down in melee.

Skriker

guiltl3ss wrote:I joined 40k for the hobby. 6th makes me feel like I can enjoy my various models to a much greater degree. Since I do not play in tourneys I cannot comment on that, but I do feel the changes were made to make the game more "fun." Since it IS a game, I think making it more "fun" is much more important. If you don't enjoy it, don't play. I think that is fair.

Everyone should listen to the voice of reason.

DarknessEternal wrote:

guiltl3ss wrote:I joined 40k for the hobby. 6th makes me feel like I can enjoy my various models to a much greater degree. Since I do not play in tourneys I cannot comment on that, but I do feel the changes were made to make the game more "fun." Since it IS a game, I think making it more "fun" is much more important. If you don't enjoy it, don't play. I think that is fair.

Everyone should listen to the voice of reason.

Whilst I can scarcely argue with the assertion that people want to have fun, I'm not entirely convinced that more randomness and less balance necessarily equates with more fun, nor that fun and tactical depth need be mutually exclusive.

Your opinion of balance and tactical depth is just that though. To me, this edition has more of both.

English Assassin wrote:

DarknessEternal wrote:

guiltl3ss wrote:I joined 40k for the hobby. 6th makes me feel like I can enjoy my various models to a much greater degree. Since I do not play in tourneys I cannot comment on that, but I do feel the changes were made to make the game more "fun." Since it IS a game, I think making it more "fun" is much more important. If you don't enjoy it, don't play. I think that is fair.

Everyone should listen to the voice of reason.

Whilst I can scarcely argue with the assertion that people want to have fun, I'm not entirely convinced that more randomness and less balance necessarily equates with more fun, nor that fun and tactical depth need be mutually exclusive.

Everyone keeps harping about "more randomness", yet 6th Ed has also two changes which signifantly reduce role of luck compared to 5th: vehicle damage and reserve rolls.

DarknessEternal wrote:Your opinion of balance and tactical depth is just that though. To me, this edition has more of both.

Most statements in this world are opinions, you know. But there is still a sizable difference between an informed opinion and just making an assertion.

After the commercials: Necron player joins our panel to say that the nerfing of CC and xenos assault builds is 'just a theory', only on Baal News Network!

Backfire wrote:

English Assassin wrote:

DarknessEternal wrote:

guiltl3ss wrote:I joined 40k for the hobby. 6th makes me feel like I can enjoy my various models to a much greater degree. Since I do not play in tourneys I cannot comment on that, but I do feel the changes were made to make the game more "fun." Since it IS a game, I think making it more "fun" is much more important. If you don't enjoy it, don't play. I think that is fair.

Everyone should listen to the voice of reason.

Whilst I can scarcely argue with the assertion that people want to have fun, I'm not entirely convinced that more randomness and less balance necessarily equates with more fun, nor that fun and tactical depth need be mutually exclusive.

Everyone keeps harping about "more randomness", yet 6th Ed has also two changes which signifantly reduce role of luck compared to 5th: vehicle damage and reserve rolls.

Be fair; those two changes (one of which is, to be frank, marginal in its effects) scarcely balance out random charges, random psychic powers, mysterious terrain and warlord traits all added in the name of "narrative" and "cinematic" games, and all of which increase the role of luck (and thus decrease that of generalship) on the battlefield.

English Assassin wrote:

Backfire wrote:
Everyone keeps harping about "more randomness", yet 6th Ed has also two changes which signifantly reduce role of luck compared to 5th: vehicle damage and reserve rolls.

Be fair; those two changes (one of which is, to be frank, marginal in its effects) scarcely balance out random charges, random psychic powers, mysterious terrain and warlord traits all added in the name of "narrative" and "cinematic" games, and all of which increase the role of luck (and thus decrease that of generalship) on the battlefield.

Huh? Both of those changes are much bigger than any of those you mentioned, except maybe random charge distance. Random psychic powers you don't have to take, Warlord trait has little effect most of the time, mysterious terrain is optional rule.

DarknessEternal wrote:

guiltl3ss wrote:I joined 40k for the hobby. 6th makes me feel like I can enjoy my various models to a much greater degree. Since I do not play in tourneys I cannot comment on that, but I do feel the changes were made to make the game more "fun." Since it IS a game, I think making it more "fun" is much more important. If you don't enjoy it, don't play. I think that is fair.

Everyone should listen to the voice of reason.

Casual players opinion of balance is not all that relevant.

Well I'm not going to read the whole thread, but I just wanted to say a few things.

I don't think GW has top people working for them in the writing department. I think the best people in that department left GW for other companies. Now we have people like Matt Ward writing books and the main rules. The guy's writing is just awful and yet they left him write whole armies? Hm ....

I don't think GW will go under anytime soon. People keep saying they will, but GW is more resilient than that I think. Maybe I'm wrong.

Anyway, if you're sick of GW look into other games. Have you looked into Warmachine/Hordes, Flames of War, Infinity, Mailifaux, Heavy Gear, Uncharted Seas, Firestorm Armada, Dsytopian Wars, Mercs, or Helldorado? Just to name a few ...

I have played 40k for 8 years and consider myself frimly enamoured with the fluff (the old, fundamental fluff - not the army specific fluff) yet I have not even purchased the 6th edition rulebook, and I don't feel very inclined to do so.

My reason? Hello, it's 90 bucks. How much was the rulebook for Infinity, the game I have now played for 3 years? Oh, it was a free PDF downloaded off their official sight. I think GW could learn alot from a game like Infinity, because CB (Corvus Belli) seem to know how to make a game that is affordable, very fun, very satisfying, does not suffer from codex creep, and sells better looking models for less money.
In 40k I play(ed) a foot-based Eldar list and Sisters of Battle (I own other armies, but those are the two I played most in the latter days of 5th). These are two armies, I think, that have been repeatedly hosed by the company yet have some of the most dedicated fan-bases, and I - as a player - feel punished for playing these armies the way I want.
Some people can be heard saying "Of course you didn't win - look at your list!"
To which I say "Why the F*** should my list have anything to do with it?!?" I take Howling Banshees because I like the models and the unit, yet I am penalized because they are a 'sub-optimal' unit? To hell with that! "Oh, but this edition makes X unit good again!" Well to hell with that too! Because until GW gets it that making imbalanced units isn't a good idea, then why should I pay more money for a game where I CAN'T play the way I want when I can pay less money for a game where I CAN?

Needless to say, I've gone over to Infinity. It is a game where all my models actually play a part in the game other than simply being removed as casualties. It is a game that is fast paced, well designed, and well executed, and does not leave us scrounging through the tattered remains of our armies to see how we can adapt to their changes instead of the other way around.
I'll be keeping my 40k armies because I invested so much that it would be a shame not to, but I don't expect they will see use any time soon.

To be fair, I don't think that GW could learn much from CB.

Corvus Belli produce a single game system of squad based combat.

GW produce three major systems, each with a host of factions, as well as several other specialist games.

I'm not saying CB don't do their job better than GW, just that it's a bit like comparing apples to oranges.

Negator80 wrote:

DarknessEternal wrote:

guiltl3ss wrote:I joined 40k for the hobby. 6th makes me feel like I can enjoy my various models to a much greater degree. Since I do not play in tourneys I cannot comment on that, but I do feel the changes were made to make the game more "fun." Since it IS a game, I think making it more "fun" is much more important. If you don't enjoy it, don't play. I think that is fair.

Everyone should listen to the voice of reason.

Casual players opinion of balance is not all that relevant.

Don't you guys get it? Its a game! Its supposed to be FUN! Don't look at the bad rules, look at this! ohh pretty.

Negator80 wrote:

DarknessEternal wrote:

guiltl3ss wrote:I joined 40k for the hobby. 6th makes me feel like I can enjoy my various models to a much greater degree. Since I do not play in tourneys I cannot comment on that, but I do feel the changes were made to make the game more "fun." Since it IS a game, I think making it more "fun" is much more important. If you don't enjoy it, don't play. I think that is fair.

Everyone should listen to the voice of reason.

Casual players opinion of balance is not all that relevant.

You only have 100 posts. Clearly you are a casual poster and your opinion is irrelevant.

See how incredibly useless of an argument yours is?

Lady_Canoness wrote:
Some people can be heard saying "Of course you didn't win - look at your list!"
To which I say "Why the F*** should my list have anything to do with it?!?" I take Howling Banshees because I like the models and the unit, yet I am penalized because they are a 'sub-optimal' unit? To hell with that! "Oh, but this edition makes X unit good again!" Well to hell with that too! Because until GW gets it that making imbalanced units isn't a good idea, then why should I pay more money for a game where I CAN'T play the way I want when I can pay less money for a game where I CAN?

I hear you, I've played a few games wtih this edition, and yes I will say the games are more dramatic in the events that take place in them. But that doesn't necessarily make it more fun, a guy who puts down a horde army just spends more time picking up models off the board after they get the absolute sh!t shot out of them. Simply put this edition is all about shooting, assaults are dangerous and risky affairs now, so rather than get into position to charge you get into position to create crossfire. Assaults aren't a scary thing any more (unless your the one doing the assaulting). Why shouldn't I have a competitive assault based army?

Yeah so it's into the box under the bed with my CSM and hello warmahordes circle...

CSM as an assault based army..I'm sorry but I'm kinda laughing a bit at that, because the only decent assault units we had is terminators (still useful in a fight), and beserkers (gained a buff to fearless wounds and nerf to FC)

ZebioLizard2 wrote:CSM as an assault based army..I'm sorry but I'm kinda laughing a bit at that, because the only decent assault units we had is terminators (still useful in a fight), and beserkers (gained a buff to fearless wounds and nerf to FC)

Case in point: to me, CSM are an aggressive, in-your-face army - always have been - but suddenly the only "decent" units we have are terminators and berzerkers, and anyone who plays the way I would like to is playing it 'wrong'? What the hell GW??? Why?

My current army of choice is a Biel-tan Eldar. All the Aspects are represented at 1750, and I choose Maugan Ra and Farseer to lead the army with a Falcon in support. I love this army. It gets a 50/50 win ratio, but I love it. In 5th I was already feeling pinched because I was using an army that defied common wisdom, but now in sixth I feel like GW is trying to dictate to me how I should play the army I put together using their own rules ("No! You're using the rules wrong! Don't use them like that!") Flyers? I don't want a flyer - I like my army the way it is. Maxed out units? No thanks - I would rather represent all the Aspects instead of just a few of them. Allies? Are you missing the point? I play BIEL-TAN.

So I won't buy into the new things, and I'll be penalized for it in 6th edition. Flyers will kick my ass. Hull-points make a once impervious Falcon a joke. Wound alocation means that my tooled up Exarchs are now prey to positional shooting. Banshees now bounce off 2+ saves (what I really could use them for) and instead have to pick on 3+ saves (like I ever had trouble with that anyway...) Random assault distances really rock the boat for an army that *RELIES* on precision. Not to mention how useless outflank has become on Striking Scorpions...
Am I wrong to be pissed off that my army (MINE - MY OWN) is now even more behind the curve than it was before because I don't want to compromise what makes it what it is? Am I a bad person for not wanting to keep my army 'up to date' with the meta? Am I selfish for wanting to play the game how I want to?
According to Infinity, I am not.
Infinity lets me play how I want with the models I choose, and does not penalize me fore being 'behind the times'. I think I know the superior game.

Case in point: to me, CSM are an aggressive, in-your-face army - always have been - but suddenly the only "decent" units we have are terminators and berzerkers, and anyone who plays the way I would like to is playing it 'wrong'? What the hell GW??? Why?

Suddenly? This has been the same since friggen 4th, this dex was horrible for true CSM assaulting even back in 4th and 5th! People still substitute blood angels for actual world eaters if they really want an actual assault codex.

curran12 wrote:

Negator80 wrote:

DarknessEternal wrote:

guiltl3ss wrote:I joined 40k for the hobby. 6th makes me feel like I can enjoy my various models to a much greater degree. Since I do not play in tourneys I cannot comment on that, but I do feel the changes were made to make the game more "fun." Since it IS a game, I think making it more "fun" is much more important. If you don't enjoy it, don't play. I think that is fair.

Everyone should listen to the voice of reason.

Casual players opinion of balance is not all that relevant.

You only have 100 posts. Clearly you are a casual poster and your opinion is irrelevant.

See how incredibly useless of an argument yours is?

I see how incredibly useless YOURS is. Do us a favor and actually form a rebuttal to my statement.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Case in point: to me, CSM are an aggressive, in-your-face army - always have been - but suddenly the only "decent" units we have are terminators and berzerkers, and anyone who plays the way I would like to is playing it 'wrong'? What the hell GW??? Why?

Suddenly? This has been the same since friggen 4th, this dex was horrible for true CSM assaulting even back in 4th and 5th! People still substitute blood angels for actual world eaters if they really want an actual assault codex.

Well to be fair you CAN still make amazing csm assault armies, you just have to tailor them to it. A couple of large infantry squads are capable in both shooting and assaults as they have a bolter, pistol and ccw. There's your first building block. Assault terminator champions, chosen, berzerkers, khornate or slaanesh infantry, lords and Deamon Princes, raptors even bikes to a lesser extent can be good assault units. It depends on how you kit them out and how you use them. It's a given that compared to the previous codex this one is total garbage, however I will say it does have a better layout and format for the army list... but that's purely a cosmetic really...

EDIT: I forgot to mention Havocs... they can be a surprisingly good assault unit too...

JbR of the Endless Spire wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Case in point: to me, CSM are an aggressive, in-your-face army - always have been - but suddenly the only "decent" units we have are terminators and berzerkers, and anyone who plays the way I would like to is playing it 'wrong'? What the hell GW??? Why?

Suddenly? This has been the same since friggen 4th, this dex was horrible for true CSM assaulting even back in 4th and 5th! People still substitute blood angels for actual world eaters if they really want an actual assault codex.

Well to be fair you CAN still make amazing csm assault armies, you just have to tailor them to it. A couple of large infantry squads are capable in both shooting and assaults as they have a bolter, pistol and ccw. There's your first building block. Assault terminator champions, chosen, berzerkers, khornate or slaanesh infantry, lords and Deamon Princes, raptors even bikes to a lesser extent can be good assault units. It depends on how you kit them out and how you use them. It's a given that compared to the previous codex this one is total garbage, however I will say it does have a better layout and format for the army list... but that's purely a cosmetic really...

EDIT: I forgot to mention Havocs... they can be a surprisingly good assault unit too...

The first building block is worthless, even compared to standard marines they don't have the necessary rules to provide them with a decent support. Sure they have double attacks, but that's it, they don't get the special marine rules to keep them from getting swept in combat, they don't have anything good to keep them in combat, icons could die to wound allocation in 5th and now they'll die to targetted attacks in 6th.

Assault terminator champions are the same cost as TH/SS or LC without the survivability or a decent weapon, or even rules to keep them survivable, sure you can do well with them, but they are the only thing worthwhile.

Chosen are not assault units, ever, nobody should ever confuse this with being an actual assault unit, they are more expensive CSM troops that don't even get +1 to attacks oh sure you can give them more expensive options to kit them out in offense, but then you'll have 30+ point power weapon wielders that are more expensive then terminators and don't even get the nice save bonus with it.

Bezerkers are the second best assault units in the dex, useful for it's large number of attacks and decent strength, however they like everything else are overcosted in this slot.

Slaaneshi infantry are in the same boat, except don't get the decent number of attacks or the bonus, take a plague marine, it'll survive longer and fight better.

Lords are even weaker, and more overpriced than standard space marine captains, why would you ever take this over a Daemon Prince unless you were being truly fluffy? (I do myself actually, I just like the unique property of a crap-ton of a khorne lord with daemon weapons, sometimes It'll kill itself, sometimes it'll roll double 6's and make the enemy cry)

Daemon princes are good, they are nice in assault even though they are basically cheap MC's, they honestly aint spectacular in CC, but do rather well at least.

Raptors are more expensive than C:SM assault troops, have less options to them, and actually overall are weaker without the space marine special rules. Even C:SM doesn't take it's assault troops much, you are just gimping yourself a bit with raptors.

Bikes are expensive, but I've begun hearing good things about T6 bikers, so I'll leave them out for now.

EDIT: I forgot to mention Havocs... they can be a surprisingly good assault unit too...

I honestly have to ask, are the local players eldar? Do they try and run storm guardians at your troops? Maybe the local tau is trying to see how well he can manage an effective kroot list?

But to put it bluntly, chaos is not an effective assault list, it is a "Making due with what they have" sort of list.

Negator80 wrote:I see how incredibly useless YOURS is. Do us a favor and actually form a rebuttal to my statement.

Writing off a huge section of the target market, probably the larger section, as being not worthy of consideration is rude. Tournament play revolves around very specific metas, which would rarely come off well against some players' so called 'casual' lists. Dismissing non-tournament players as 'casuals' whose opinions and experiences are valueless speaks of an arrogance that does not do you credit.

The way I look at it is that Games Workshop have not changed anything. 6th Edition is a new game. A different game. Players can play whatever version they want to play.

Sure, 5th Edition Tournament scene is pretty much over now in favour of 6th Edition. Nothing lasts forever. Star Wars miniatures Tournament scene is pretty much dead, support by a mere handful of players. Heroclix actually retire old sets from Tournament play. And where are the D&D Miniatures Tournaments now?

I'd much rather GW bring out a new edition and continue rather than stop production altogether.

Noisy_Marine wrote:Well I'm not going to read the whole thread, but I just wanted to say a few things.

Well, I am not going to read our whole post, but just wanted to point out that I hate when people don't read a thread to then end before posting.

60mm wrote:Yeah, GW does seem pretty competent at disappointing/aggravating me more than anything. I was drawn into wh40k 15 years ago with all the fantastc models and fluff. The models are still fantastic, the fluff . . . eh, the game system, meh. But the way GW treats its customers overall just grates on me badly enough that buying their stuff feels shameful

Look up cycle of abuse.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
The first building block is worthless, even compared to standard marines they don't have the necessary rules to provide them with a decent support. Sure they have double attacks, but that's it, they don't get the special marine rules to keep them from getting swept in combat, they don't have anything good to keep them in combat, icons could die to wound allocation in 5th and now they'll die to targetted attacks in 6th.

It is not worthless, yes they don't have know no fear, and yes icons can die just like anything else that is special in any other squad in the entire game because of targeted attacks but they aren't worthless. If your in a position to have your 'anvil' swept off the board then obviously your going wrong somewhere, suffering from a run of bad luck or are just against a better opponent. If a 15-20 man squad of chaos marines is being forced to run away your not positioning them well enough or your standing in front of a shed load of big guns, what could possibly be the cause of that?

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Assault terminator champions are the same cost as TH/SS or LC without the survivability or a decent weapon, or even rules to keep them survivable, sure you can do well with them, but they are the only thing worthwhile.

Yes they are the same cost, but what TH/SS lack is options. Seriously you can make a Chaos squad better than their loyalist counterpart, by a long distance. You've gotta spend the points on them though, it's tough but you work with what you've got.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Chosen are not assault units, ever, nobody should ever confuse this with being an actual assault unit, they are more expensive CSM troops that don't even get +1 to attacks oh sure you can give them more expensive options to kit them out in offense, but then you'll have 30+ point power weapon wielders that are more expensive then terminators and don't even get the nice save bonus with it.

So a squad with 4 flamers, or meltaguns, or plasma guns, or powerfists with tzeentch or nurgle icon and a champion with extra equipment is useless too? Yes they will be expensive, that's tough, but that doesn't make them any less effective at what they do.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Bezerkers are the second best assault units in the dex, useful for it's large number of attacks and decent strength, however they like everything else are overcosted in this slot.

Yes Berzerkers are expensive, again how does that make them any less effective at what they do? These guys kick ass. Fact. Set a horde of these on TH/SS Termies and take them down through weight of numbers before they have even attacked. They have better WS, S, I and A... for just over half the points... whats not to like?

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Slaaneshi infantry are in the same boat, except don't get the decent number of attacks or the bonus, take a plague marine, it'll survive longer and fight better.

Ok yeah I'll agree these guys aren't great unless they have a decent ccw, of which there are none as options for them... these guys really are shooters, though again with numbers they can take down anything in cc.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Lords are even weaker, and more overpriced than standard space marine captains, why would you ever take this over a Daemon Prince unless you were being truly fluffy? (I do myself actually, I just like the unique property of a crap-ton of a khorne lord with daemon weapons, sometimes It'll kill itself, sometimes it'll roll double 6's and make the enemy cry)

No arguements here, yes they lack some of the abilities and options of their loyalist counter part. One and only solution though... deamon weapon, especially the khorne or tzeentch ones, yeah they have a risk but still khorne is horde killer tzeentch is a power weapon that can shoot dead marines with just as much ease. These really do often get underestimated because of their ability to 'self harm'.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Daemon princes are good, they are nice in assault even though they are basically cheap MC's, they honestly aint spectacular in CC, but do rather well at least.

This is where its at, and yeah its not a great out look for them to start with, but they can be excellent if used carefully and precisely. These are your character/tank/armour killers. Very susceptible to TH/SS squads though, best answer is to back them up or keep a bulky squad nearby just in case.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Raptors are more expensive than C:SM assault troops, have less options to them, and actually overall are weaker without the space marine special rules. Even C:SM doesn't take it's assault troops much, you are just gimping yourself a bit with raptors.

Yeah these guys do suck when you compare them to Assault Marines. So don't compare them, just slaanesh icon them up and always hit and run against tough cc targets and get stuck in on soft ones. Again making them good costs points, but they are good.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Bikes are expensive, but I've begun hearing good things about T6 bikers, so I'll leave them out for now.

I was running T6 bikers before the rules change, all you had to do was put down some serious speed and get into close combat. Sure enough they did die to S8 weaponry but then most things do... turbo-boost made them invulnerable and once they were in combat they were safe from shooting. And never go anywhere without a champ with a Power Weapon...

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
I honestly have to ask, are the local players eldar? Do they try and run storm guardians at your troops? Maybe the local tau is trying to see how well he can manage an effective kroot list?

But to put it bluntly, chaos is not an effective assault list, it is a "Making due with what they have" sort of list.

The havocs can take meltaguns or flamers... I know thats not really assault but 4 flamer templates worth of wounds usually takes down a TH/SS or two (or three) right before a charge in and finish the job with weight of attacks. I know Chaos were seriously nerfed, and yes your right you do have to make do with what you've got. But don't just write em off because their codex sucks, if you know your army inside out and your a good player you can beat anyone or anything. Yes some are very unforgiving of bad luck and mistakes like GK but you CAN beat them. I've done it and that was before the nerfing. If you compare codex your will write them off, but it IS an old codex so you'll have to forgive them for some weaknesses. But if you compare unit to unit, or build to build they aren't out of the fight not by a long way. The way to handle Chaos now is to know their weaknesses inside out and to know what situations will likely produce what results (a simple example is standing in front a blob squad of guardsmen in rapid fire range) remember the dice are fickle. So load the situation into your favour that even bad rolls can be covered for.

Oh and up untill a couple months back (early this year actually) I was regularly playing against GK, BA and SM armies and winning quite resounding victories. Yes some of them were very hard fought and close but they were wins regardless. There was only one Eldar player in my local gaming group and he quit last year some time. I actually had the most trouble dealing with green tide Orks and one particularly tenacious IG player.

EDIT: Really the point I'm making is yes they are expensive, but no that doesn't make them useless. Your fighting an up hill battle from the word go, treat it like one even if you've got the upper hand. Capitalise on your opponents mistakes, be utterly ruthless with your tactics. Throw away an expensive squad if it gets your horde killing character in to contact with a large block of troops or your expensive terminators into a flank attack on vehicles or what ever. Treat everything as though it was expendable as well as priceless. Use one unit as decoy and hit with another, distract and divide. Divide and conquer.

EDIT: Really the point I'm making is yes they are expensive, but no that doesn't make them useless. Your fighting an up hill battle from the word go, treat it like one even if you've got the upper hand. Capitalise on your opponents mistakes, be utterly ruthless with your tactics. Throw away an expensive squad if it gets your horde killing character in to contact with a large block of troops or your expensive terminators into a flank attack on vehicles or what ever. Treat everything as though it was expendable as well as priceless. Use one unit as decoy and hit with another, distract and divide. Divide and conquer.

Oh I know, your points are very valid when it comes to it, I still would play it even it hit complete rock bottem, though right now I'm more interested in a Tsons psyker list now that the psyker powers have gotten interesting in 6th.

Though the whole thing is a bit disappointing to me, but seeing as we'll be seeing chaos sometime soon (a few months maybe) I will hold onto what I have and play around with the new 6th rules.

Negator80 wrote:
I see how incredibly useless YOURS is. Do us a favor and actually form a rebuttal to my statement.

His rebuttal was exactly as valid as your original statement. If anything, casual players are MORE likely to recognize balance, as they aren't playing one of the same 3 netlists in a rock/paper/scissors paradigm and actually trying different things.

htj wrote: just that it's a bit like comparing apples to oranges.

Oranges and Apples are both fruits.

Oranges and Apples are both roundish, have an outer layer that is barely digestible and all the nutrients locked into the flesh inside. Both are acidic...

couldn't resist the humour, sorry.

I don't really understand all this complaining about 6th. Allies are just a trick to sell more models? Don't use them. Personally, I would like to add a Chaos sorcerer and a rubrik marine squad to my necrons, since I can't use psychic powers and would like to try them. Also, it was in the game since 1st ed. so what's the point.

Then, real players to me aren't the ones who spams the list of the moment, but the ones who play what they like. And those TFG that first mockes that unit but when it kills his paladins it's overpowered are pathethic. Back in 5th, I used to play lots of necron warriors, just because I liked them, even in anyone was telling me that Immortals were stronger. Now in 6th I play exactly the same list I played in 5th, but now it's cheesy. Please stop complaining, play what you like, even if it sucks to hell (like my old loved Destroyers) and you'll be always having fun, even if you lose every single game. There's a guy at my local GW who play CSM, and always loses every match, cause he plays what he likes even if it pretty sucks, but he always has fun.

So what I'm trying to say is: have fun guys, and adapt to the rules, 'cause they're pretty funny indeed.