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.

Joey wrote:As far as I can tell you get +1 to you if you DON'T move.
Since rapid fire isn't affected by movement in these rules, does this mean we're all going to have to move our troops half an inch so we don't get blown up?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also just noticed you disembark in the "consolidation" phase, i..e you can't move, disembark, shoot, assault.
That's VERY handy.

A couple things, here:

1.) You declare your move action in the movement phase. The models count as having done what action you declare regardless of actual distance moved (I.e. you can call a 'combat' action and the unit counts as having moved, regardless of whether or not they've shifted on the table)

2.) Depending on how fast the transport vehicle moves, units inside may do a move action and disembark while doing so in the movement phase. (Infantry doing a combat action can move from a access point 6" then fire their weapons in the shooting phase of that game cycle.) During the consolidation phase if the Squad Leader is within 3" of the access point the entire squad can get back in their ride (keep in mind that embarked units cannot score, and objectives are part of every standard mission as well as kill points).
The disembarkation during the consolidation phase exists so that an embarked squad can get out of their transport and score on their following movement phase (provided they're still alive).

But it does make sense. Just because some poor dude was under 3 seperate blast templates shouldn't result in his 2 buddies that weren't under any templates getting smushed.

DarkHound wrote:Look, Tarkand, 4+ cover makes armor penetration irrelevant. Every small arm in the game might as well be AP--, and ordnance is dramatically hindered. It makes quality of firepower irrelevant, and that is hugely limiting from a game design standpoint. If the only quality is in quantity, then the game becomes almost deterministic. Grey Knights have the highest quantity now, it was Space Wolves before them, and IG before them.

The reason horde orks don't do well competitively is not because they aren't survivable enough. Hordes are slow and unfocused. They are forced to deploy in predictable patterns, thus easily flanked and overwhelmed. I can easily assault a mob such that reinforcements are unable to enter the combat, then destroy each mob one at a time. The changes won't make horde orks any worse.

And you blame cover for this? Not the fact that the great majority of armies have a 3+ save and thus make 4-6AP irrelevant?

None of the change in this pdf really help the Horde problem you're addressing here... except now, they'll ALSO die in drove from fire. Yeah, not a nerf at all.

I blame cover for the fact that AP3 or less is also useless. You can lob Battlecannon rounds at my CSM all day, but a Rhino will always give them some form of cover. What's the point of using quality weapons like ordnance when the quality is so severely capped?

I'm not saying it isn't a nerf. I'm saying the nerf doesn't correlate to your complaint. Your complaint is that orks will now die 17% faster, however that has never been a reason horde orks do poorly. It's the same as if it restricted Tyranid Carnifexs to 1 per Heavy Support slot, and you declared 'Nidzilla to be dead on the competitive scene. Not only was that style dead ages before, but the amount of Carnifexs taken was never a contributing factor.

Getting Marines to make save on 4+ instead of 3+ is a significant difference, doubly so if it ignore FNP (AP2). Useless? Really? Come on. We both know that's horse crap.

Not to mention that, you won't always get cover. I played with Sternguards often enough and used vengeance round to great effect - there is something to be said about positioning yourself to ignore your opponent's cover as he tries to position himself to maximize his cover... it IS about strategy after all. The game needs to be about outplaying your opponent and not just bringing the biggest amount of gun with the proper AP rating to line up with his save value.

And granted, Green Tides hasn't been competitive in a long time. Even with 4+ cover save, there's plenty of army that make short work of it now. But you know what, in semi-competitive scenes, it was still a lot of fun to play and could often win games out of sheer number of models. The 5+ cover save just knock down this fun army list even farther down the totem pole... and we're supposed to cheer this?

And again... AV10 Trukks also need cover to survive. The green tide isn't the only thing affected by this - many codex are (And most, if not all, ork lists type). It's easy to look at this and be like 'Finally! Cover 5+' when you're sitting behind the wheel of a 3+ save or AV13-14 shooty army... but this isn't good news for those of us not playing imperial codex.

Tarkand wrote:Getting Marines to make save on 4+ instead of 3+ is a significant difference, doubly so if it ignore FNP (AP2). Useless? Really? Come on. We both know that's horse crap.

You're missing my point. It is a 17% difference, which is big, certainly. However, the weapons are priced expecting tremendously better return than that. Troops specializing in ignoring armor are universally ignored: Vespids, Stormtroopers, Thousand Sons, etc. etc. etc. They are rendered useless because weapons of quantity universally perform better. That is a symptom of poor game design.

Not to mention that, you won't always get cover. I played with Sternguards often enough and used vengeance round to great effect - there is something to be said about positioning yourself to ignore your opponent's cover as he tries to position himself to maximize his cover... it IS about strategy after all.

No, actually I can guarantee I am getting 4+ cover, with about 200 degrees of coverage, if my squad has a Rhino. You would have to position significant threats to every side of a single unit, including Deepstriking behind, in order to effectively neutralize my cover bonus. The body of my Rhino, wrecked or otherwise, can obscure 50% of the squad by stringing the unit along all the doors. In the worst case, it has exploded, and my squad is now sitting in 4+ area terrain, which can only be ignored by coming within 2".

It's easy to look at this and be like 'Finally! Cover 5+' when you're sitting behind the wheel of a 3+ save or AV13-14 shooty army... but this isn't good news for those of us not playing imperial codex.

This change affects units with armor saves more than it affects hordes. You're designed and priced to be expendable. Ordnance weapon or small arm, you're designed to have enough bodies to win the day. When my 3+ is reduced to a 5+, it means I've just spent 10 extra points on nothing. If anything, all the points you made apply more to MEQs than hordes.

Jaon wrote:Yeah but when I would usually easily hit 6 off the bat...with the potential to hit one. I guess its better than nothing though, I shouldnt complain.

Patch Up on the other hand? Is it just me or does it say "YOU MUST MAKE A PATCHUP ACTION" if you have wounded models in your squad?

Does this mean that if I have 2 wounded paladin's in my paladin squad, I have to kill a hero of the chapter, worthy of being grandmaster, just to heal another one? Every turn!?

Oh no! Does that mean that GK players can't abuse a loophole to protect their ikkle points sinks anymore?!?

Wound allocation was one of the dumbest mechanics in 5e. If your unit just took 8 wounds in one go, you should be losing squad members and therefore unit effectiveness. You shouldn't be able to keep a whole squad alive just because you've given them all individual personalised weapons like giant space Barbies.

xttz wrote:

Jaon wrote:Yeah but when I would usually easily hit 6 off the bat...with the potential to hit one. I guess its better than nothing though, I shouldnt complain.

Patch Up on the other hand? Is it just me or does it say "YOU MUST MAKE A PATCHUP ACTION" if you have wounded models in your squad?

Does this mean that if I have 2 wounded paladin's in my paladin squad, I have to kill a hero of the chapter, worthy of being grandmaster, just to heal another one? Every turn!?

Oh no! Does that mean that GK players can't abuse a loophole to protect their ikkle points sinks anymore?!?

Wound allocation was one of the dumbest mechanics in 5e. If your unit just took 8 wounds in one go, you should be losing squad members and therefore unit effectiveness. You shouldn't be able to keep a whole squad alive just because you've given them all individual personalised weapons like giant space Barbies.

Despite having both nobs and paladins, I'm quite glad they fixed it, as it was a bit cheesey. I will however keep playing both of them as I got my grey knights as I've only ever had horde armies. One thing to point out is although dragiowing got weaker, purifierspam and cortez (sp?) Have gotten better.

xttz wrote:

Jaon wrote:Yeah but when I would usually easily hit 6 off the bat...with the potential to hit one. I guess its better than nothing though, I shouldnt complain.

Patch Up on the other hand? Is it just me or does it say "YOU MUST MAKE A PATCHUP ACTION" if you have wounded models in your squad?

Does this mean that if I have 2 wounded paladin's in my paladin squad, I have to kill a hero of the chapter, worthy of being grandmaster, just to heal another one? Every turn!?

Oh no! Does that mean that GK players can't abuse a loophole to protect their ikkle points sinks anymore?!?

Wound allocation was one of the dumbest mechanics in 5e. If your unit just took 8 wounds in one go, you should be losing squad members and therefore unit effectiveness. You shouldn't be able to keep a whole squad alive just because you've given them all individual personalised weapons like giant space Barbies.

It wasn't a loophole, it was a completely legal tactic that was completely within the scope of the rules.

Remember that this was around before GKs were.

Maybe it wasn't the best idea for game balance, but it was completely legal.

Grey Templar wrote:It wasn't a loophole, it was a completely legal tactic that was completely within the scope of the rules.

I might be being picky here, but that's exactly what a loophole is. Something totally legit on paper that circumvents the intention of a rule.

I guess the biggest gripe most people had with it was the fact that GW left in a loophole that only certain armies were allowed to take advantage of. Tyranid Warriors and Carnifex broods weren't allowed to make every model unique, and yet they follow up with the GK codex that grants this ability to Paladins. I can only hope that this is a sign of these books being written with 6e in mind.

xttz wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:It wasn't a loophole, it was a completely legal tactic that was completely within the scope of the rules.

I might be being picky here, but that's exactly what a loophole is. Something totally legit on paper that circumvents the intention of a rule.

I guess the biggest gripe most people had with it was the fact that GW left in a loophole that only certain armies were allowed to take advantage of. Tyranid Warriors and Carnifex broods weren't allowed to make every model unique, and yet they follow up with the GK codex that grants this ability to Paladins. I can only hope that this is a sign of these books being written with 6e in mind.

Well with a blob of guardsmen I can stick about 20 of them in a building, then stick a few lascannons and plasmaguns right out in the open, getting a 4+ cover save for the whole lot (more likely 3+ with go to ground/get back in the fight).
Wound allocation "tricks" aren't really an issue, multi-wound units are so rare anyway.

English Assassin wrote:Leaving aside the question of its authenticity (of which I too have my doubts), the question I find myself asking is how they managed to write the 'Evasion' rules so badly and clumsily.

Seriously, all that was needed to reintroduce to-hit modifiers and do away with cover saves was a single table, with abilities affecting cover saves causing a column shift ether right or left.

I wish they would get rid of Cover Saves and go with to hit modifiers.

oldone wrote:

xttz wrote:

Jaon wrote:Yeah but when I would usually easily hit 6 off the bat...with the potential to hit one. I guess its better than nothing though, I shouldnt complain.

Patch Up on the other hand? Is it just me or does it say "YOU MUST MAKE A PATCHUP ACTION" if you have wounded models in your squad?

Does this mean that if I have 2 wounded paladin's in my paladin squad, I have to kill a hero of the chapter, worthy of being grandmaster, just to heal another one? Every turn!?

Oh no! Does that mean that GK players can't abuse a loophole to protect their ikkle points sinks anymore?!?

Wound allocation was one of the dumbest mechanics in 5e. If your unit just took 8 wounds in one go, you should be losing squad members and therefore unit effectiveness. You shouldn't be able to keep a whole squad alive just because you've given them all individual personalised weapons like giant space Barbies.

Despite having both nobs and paladins, I'm quite glad they fixed it, as it was a bit cheesey. I will however keep playing both of them as I got my grey knights as I've only ever had horde armies. One thing to point out is although dragiowing got weaker, purifierspam and cortez (sp?) Have gotten better.

It's nice that they fixed it, but I'd hardly call Draigowing or Nobz competitive anymore. Far too expensive to justify using now.

That chart makes NO sense to me...

I actually understand the Evasion chart - it essentially IS a to-hit modifier if you read the relevant section.

Jink or Swarm = -1 to BS
Stationary or Massive = +1 to BS

It's simple.

Despite having both nobs and paladins, I'm quite glad they fixed it, as it was a bit cheesey. I will however keep playing both of them as I got my grey knights as I've only ever had horde armies. One thing to point out is although dragiowing got weaker, purifierspam and cortez (sp?) Have gotten better.

maybe I didn't read carefully enough but I'm not seeing the buffs the purifiers as much. Cortez lists will likely see some plasma cannon love though

I'm looking at the GK from a meta perspective meaning yes my GK hit better in close combat what with assault weapons and potentially 5 attacks with falchions but I will be having even fewer points to go around at I4. There's more options but my surviviability went to pot as most everyone's shooting is going to get deadiler and I will still die like a regular marine this time with less cover saves. Sure I'll get some evasion modifiers but I'm not convinced that will give me enough survivability to get into the thick of it vs alot of the shooty now a days. I'm already having a hard time assaulting necron blobs and charging IG gun lines or Tau lines or heck, other GK gun lines, all have gotten significantly harder.

Not able to thin them down a bit via supportive fire from other units like psybacks will also hurt quite a bit. (why take psybacks now? I have to priortize closing the distance ASAP so likely going cruising each turn, also can't shoot at the enemy if the guys I was carrying are already in combat)

Combat drill helped my Hive Tyrant yesterday - I dropped his I5 attacks to go at I4 so he and his tyrant guard could attack together and better saturate their wounds amongst the enemy models. I think units won't all necessarily take benefit of the combat drill rule, but I can see it being useful for beast squads to all attack at I5 and really throw down lots of wounds all at once.

tetrisphreak wrote:Combat drill helped my Hive Tyrant yesterday - I dropped his I5 attacks to go at I4 so he and his tyrant guard could attack together and better saturate their wounds amongst the enemy models. I think units won't all necessarily take benefit of the combat drill rule, but I can see it being useful for beast squads to all attack at I5 and really throw down lots of wounds all at once.

That is an interesting point I hadn't considered.

Joey wrote:

Gorlack wrote:

Joey wrote:
I will bet you all the money I have that it's fake

Ah yes, the good old ''million, billion dollars'' bet. How about we make it interesting and you and I bet a years DCM status that the pdf is real leak?

We find someone trustworthy (like a Mod) and we both send him the cost of a years DCM. Then when 6th edition is released, he decides who was right, either you in that it is fake, or me in believing that it's an early draft, but that a lot will be transferred to the actual release.

He then buys the winner two years worth off DCM (by spending both our deposits). And if it's too close to call (perhaps only the phases order change and EV exists in 6th), he buys us both a years worth of DCM (again by spending the deposits).

This way dakka gains a couple of DCMs and I get too call your (perhaps) bluff.

Cheers

Gorlack

That's actually a pretty good idea.
Unfortunately, I'm skint.
Tell you what. Whoever's wrong has to change their avatar to whatever the other one wants it to be (as long as its in the rules obviously)?

That's a fair counter offer. I would also much rather have control over your public image than 25 of your dollars

You've got yourself a bet mate.

Cheers

tetrisphreak wrote:That chart makes NO sense to me...

I actually understand the Evasion chart - it essentially IS a to-hit modifier if you read the relevant section.

Jink or Swarm = -1 to BS
Stationary or Massive = +1 to BS

It's simple.

Yeah the evasion rule is much simpler than the monstrosity that guy posted.

Gorlack wrote:
That's a fair counter offer. I would also much rather have control over your public image than 25 of your dollars

You've got yourself a bet mate.

Cheers

Having read the thing more extensively, I'm now on the side of it probably being a leaked playtest.
But I'm too much of a man to back down so the bet's on!

^ To me it seemed like you realised it when someone pointed out the first page of the pdf was actually page 22.

No I read through it linearly rather than dipping in and out and it seemed to have a lot more structure than I first thought.
A lot of the rules are also a lot simpler than first glance.
For example, Eternal Warrior(1-3) is very difficult to explain in words, but easy to actually figure out.

Yeah, I think its just that they havn't hashed out the wording of the multi-tier rules just yet.

and that's quite a 180 there pal

Reecius and a friend have posted a 6th edition Battle Report, first post.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/423366.page

ceku wrote:What is everyones thoughts on what might happen?

Given how 90% of the things posted in the "Predictions" threads are completely wrong, I will wait until the new edition is actually *out* before I worry about it too much. Not going to get cranky about rules changes that may or may not even be true.

Skriker

I think it's pretty dumb that Fortune ends on the same turns it's cast, that is, you're turn.

It is in line with the GK psychic buff powers that only last one player turn.

Assuming that the document does in fact represent at least a functional version of the 6e rules, and that significant playtesting has resulted in additional tweaks, I think we can further assume that a lot of the confusion resulting from lack of explicit examples, diagrams, and more extensive charts will be at least somewhat resolved when a final version is released.

That being said, I am still uncertain about the exact use of the multitracking, supersonic, and defensive fire rules.

The ID vs. EW thing seems pretty clear, as well as the +/- Attacks for different weapons.

Patch-up is a great fix for Wound Allocation BS - and despite complaints from Ork and GK players, I still think that Nobs and Paladins are both going to be powerful units.

The reserve, deep strike, outflank, and infiltrate changes are going to breathe new life into Daemons and Tyranids, which is great.

A lot of models that haven't seen action in years, or ever, are going to make it back onto the table thanks to the leakset, even if only for a few games, which is really my favorite thing about these rules. Stealth teams, legion of the damned, chaos raptors & thousand sons, Harpies & Mawlocs...

I also can't get over the fact that a lot of things that I hated about the game are just gone... like random movement distances and ubiquitous 4+ cover saves. Seriously, who hasn't been in the situation where you have to roll a 3 on your move through cover check in order to get into that game changing assault, and rolled 2,2,1?

It always makes me wonder what the hell is going on with those troops...

"Sergeant, lead your squad down from that ridge and engage those battlesuits before they destroy our artillery!"
"But sir, it's loose gravel, we have no idea if we'll be able to reach them in time"
"No idea whatsoever?"
"Negative sir, we may be able to run across it, but who knows. The terrain, it's... difficult."

Then again, the most annoying rule is still there.

"Aspiring Champion Blood-Drinker Doomguts, I command you to fire your Reaper Autocannon into that melee!"
"But sir, we still have one mindlessly brutal berserker hacking away hopelessly at the enemy!"
"Oh, good point, better let those 18 genestealers finish eating his intestines before you open fire. We wouldn't want to accidentally hit him."
"Yes, Abbadon."

xttz wrote:Wound allocation was one of the dumbest mechanics in 5e. If your unit just took 8 wounds in one go, you should be losing squad members and therefore unit effectiveness. You shouldn't be able to keep a whole squad alive just because you've given them all individual personalised weapons like giant space Barbies.

I disagree entirely and strongly. Multiple wound units should always have been able to split wounds at the owners discretion. It adds meaning to instant-death, and makes the expensive premium paid for multi-wound models worth it.

Aspiring Champion Blood-Drinker Doomguts, I command you to fire your Reaper Autocannon into that melee!"
"But sir, we still have one mindlessly brutal berserker hacking away hopelessly at the enemy!"
"Oh, good point, better let those 18 genestealers finish eating his intestines before you open fire. We wouldn't want to accidentally hit him."
"Yes, Abbadon."

unless you are inquisitor Karamazov kekeke

Has poison changed at all?
Im thinking DE vs Nids/Daemons here and how much those match ups used to hurt for MCs etc.