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.

Wrath wrote:

Gus_Papas wrote:@ ShumaGorath, otakutaylor, & azazel the cat

Thanks for the replies! I know relentless extends Rapid Fire range to 18", but how has Rapid Fire itself gotten better (or is this what you meant, Shuma)?

Well I don't think anyone has it yet, but Rapid fire can have ranks now.

RF2 = 2 full, 3 12"
RF3 = 3 full, 4 12"

You can also move and fire at full range now can't you? I suppose thousand suns could do that before though.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Wrath wrote:

Gus_Papas wrote:@ ShumaGorath, otakutaylor, & azazel the cat

Thanks for the replies! I know relentless extends Rapid Fire range to 18", but how has Rapid Fire itself gotten better (or is this what you meant, Shuma)?

Well I don't think anyone has it yet, but Rapid fire can have ranks now.

RF2 = 2 full, 3 12"
RF3 = 3 full, 4 12"

You can also move and fire at full range now can't you? I suppose thousand suns could do that before though.

yea, sry I had assumed that this was known already. =]

Well hi everyone, and I just wanted to say that I am done with warseer!
Also, after playing with these rules with a friend, I am done with 5th edition as well!

So, after using Tau, Spacemarine (normal), Orks, and Imperial Guard, I have a fewbthings to say about this edition:

TAU: the new jump rules seem fine, no real problem with those, breaks the boring tactic of sitting behind a building and shooting things when you jump out and hiding again a tad more risky, and I noticed that moving in close to fire my plasma gun, melta, or twinlinked flamers for full erect and then moving back was a effective tactic, most of the time (not used dumbly). Firewarrior squads of 12infantry + a markerdrone proved to be one of the more effective weapons in your arsenal, and I need more of them. Moving 6" and fireing 30" with a chance to reduce EV by one was great, and sitting still in cover got them killed quick. Devilfish turned out to be a meh, still (atleast how I upgrade them) around a hundred and twenty point transport that 12 firewarriors can outperform. Pathfinders + railrifles =win and a really fun unit to play with, but because they are stationary they split fire ^_^ but hit on a 2+ by space marines and 3+ by guardsmen causes them to wilt under fire. :( railguns rarly deviate off target, so the units it targeted tended to make flames and billow smoke when hit. Piranhas are a must have due to jinking, and the increased move. Flechetes are nice addons, same with meltas.

SPACEMARINES: pistols in cc are a nice bonus, but honestly, moving around and shooting bolter and plasma at 24" is more preferable. Heavy weapons are kind of a nusanse in tac squads now, the game seems to me all about maneuvering, and you are punished for not being mobile (like devastators, they are all now about where you place them, that small armed fire won't be a threat, because Orks hitting your devys on a 4+ is embarrassing and deadly (lotta's deffguns). That said, an increase in plasma cannon devies and missile launcher devies will be more common due to deducted scatter. The thundercannon kicks ass, and whirlwind is more reliable, always handy. Landspeeders are more survivable now, I used them before, and will be enjoying them more so now. Landspeeder storms seem more like a support unit, and I have successfully used it to screen a landraider and provide protective support. I don't know about extra armour, I can't find the rules for it.

IMPERIAL GUARD: plasma vets might replace melta vets. Demo charges are unchanged in usage, and melta bombs look a little more deadly. Footsloggers are more effective if you constantly move them, sitting on your ass will lose you the game. Only keep your russes stationary if no imedate anti tank is in the area. Punishers cannon can hit stationary infantry on a 3+, slightly more effective. The nerf to outrageous cover saves mean the nova cannon isn't as devastating as it was previously. Battlecannons scatter less so they are more effective. Heavy weapon teams in general are more killable, so they don't last as long, due to them remaining stationary. Except the mortars. Oh good god at the mortars. Reduction of scatter, plus place the following blasts over themost models possible! ?! Crazy! Plus being out of sight so they can't be shot back at!?! They are very effective for the cost. Guard is very fun to play as.

SPACE ORKS: probably suffered the most. However, you force your opponent to constantly move or risk deffguns hitting tanks on 3+, and they can hit moving transports on a 4+. Killing tanks at range is easier for Orks. Killcannon upgrade on the battlewagon is useful now, because before, if it fired, then nothing else could, and it couldn't fire if moved. All changed now, makes it and looted wagons a more viable option. Also, grot arty has revived a huge boost, hitting tanks on 3 + and mortars being more effective. And they are more survivable (slightly). Recommend taking some. Orks infantry didn't recive a big buff like everyone else did, now everyone can move and shoot full range, and the two shot assault shoots are a little less effective. Burns are still fun, and nobs haven't really been nerfed that bad, our gaming group always played 4th edition wound allocation. So, less buffed, but still competitive. Nothing like a zapp gun to ruin your oppositions tanks!

One of my friends who plays eldar and marines took one look at the eldar faq and hated 6th edition.
he said something about ruining the fire axe, and eldrad. I don't play eldar, and I don't know if the eldar have truly been nerfed in 6th edition because I don't know how they currently benift in 6th edition. If someone could explain why they are worse and then put up some counter arguments on how they are better so I can tell him, that would be much appreciated!


~Long live Deutchistan! For the Emperor!

Deutchistan, Thanks for the input, and welcome to Dakka!

Gus_Papas wrote:Also, just so I know I'm understanding this; a unit can fire out of a transport but this uses one of the transport's MT points, and embarked units can only shoot out to 18". If the transport is stationary or has only moved 6", then the embarked squad benefits from Relentless. Since embarked units shooting is dependent on the MT points of the transport, if the transport suffers enough weapon destroyed results the squad cannot shoot. Is this correct?

Not quite. The number of MT points the vehicle has is irrelevant, it's how many fire points it has that matters and no shooting actions are spent by the vehicle when passengers fire.
If the vehicle doesn't move (or more specifically, can perform Stationary actions), then you can fire as many weapons out of it as fire points, remembering that the embarked unit still has to fire at the same target, so not all fire points will be able to see them (open-topped vehicles have no fire points and all models can see from any point of the vehicle and number is not restricted).
If it moves at combat speed then one model many fire from the transport.

If the vehicle cannot perform shooting actions (through Weapons Damaged results, Stunned, Cruising speed, etc.) then no model may fire.

Fast transports can fire one at Cruising speed, none at Flat Out and as they can perform Stationary actions at Combat speed, all can fire (subject to firepoints and restrictions mentioned above).


Deutchistan, I spotted you mentioned that you had twin linked template weapons in the Tau list. You know that they no longer re-roll to wound?
Instead you add 6" to their range .

I don't have the rules with me... but here are a few questions.

As a daemons player, I am curious. Can you deepstrike and assault? I swear I read this but didn't see rules corraborating it.

Can you assault and then shoot if you wipe out the unit? Doesn't think make assault units even better since they potentially eliminate two targets at once? Assault a squad, kill it, melta gun a tank or shoot up a small support unit, heavy weapons team, etc...

Can you assault, shoot and then embark into a vehicle?

Herp Derp nothing to see here...

The new wound allocation seems to be pretty painful for HQs since you have to 'saturate' an armour group before allocating wounds to another and a multi wound model counts for as many troops as the number of wounds he has. So, a 4 wound model needs to have 4 wounds allocated to him for example.

Could this change see generic HQ choices with lots of wargear options become more important? Taking a HQ with a set weapons/armour load out may mean that he's the only one in his unit with his armour configuration whereas a generic HQ choice could be kitted out to match several other models in the group. It's going to be more painful for a named HQ that lets you 'take something as troops' etc (although some like Belial can still change their war gear) as something like a Draigo doesn't have the option to swap gear. With directed fire on top of the new wound allocation system, this could really make those expensive HQ choices really big targets.

Walls wrote:I don't have the rules with me... but here are a few questions.

As a daemons player, I am curious. Can you deepstrike and assault? I swear I read this but didn't see rules corraborating it.

Our understanding is that after a deep strike you can perform an Engage move action which can get you into combat.

Walls wrote:Can you assault and then shoot if you wipe out the unit? Doesn't think make assault units even better since they potentially eliminate two targets at once? Assault a squad, kill it, melta gun a tank or shoot up a small support unit, heavy weapons team, etc...

Yes, provided you Engage the enemy.

Walls wrote:Can you assault, shoot and then embark into a vehicle?

It appears so.

Walls wrote:As a daemons player, I am curious. Can you deepstrike and assault? I swear I read this but didn't see rules corraborating it.

You can perform a Combat move or Engage action after DSing. So if you land within you Move distance, you can enter assault.
Just remember that units within 12" of a DSing unit can perform Defensive Fire.

Can you assault and then shoot if you wipe out the unit? Doesn't think make assault units even better since they potentially eliminate two targets at once? Assault a squad, kill it, melta gun a tank or shoot up a small support unit, heavy weapons team, etc...

If you use the Engage action, yes.

Can you assault, shoot and then embark into a vehicle?

If the unit leader is within 3" of an access point on the transport in the Consolidation phase, yes.

ColdSadHungry wrote:The new wound allocation seems to be pretty painful for HQs since you have to 'saturate' an armour group before allocating wounds to another and a multi wound model counts for as many troops as the number of wounds he has. So, a 4 wound model needs to have 4 wounds allocated to him for example.

I didn't think this was right, but on re-reading the allocation rules, yes.

Interesting to see how this will play out, but it might make small uber units more dangerous to characters (which is a good thing).

His Master's Voice wrote:You saturate armor groups by assigning one wound to each model in the group. The number of wounds the model has on it's profile is irrelevant.

He picks one armour group and distributes
wounds to this group until the number of wounds
distributed to the group equals the number of
models in it. Models with multiple Wounds count
as a number of models that equals their
remaining Wounds for this purpose.

Here's another in the sorta same lines: You can only chance charge a unit in the enemy's turn? So... ONLY on a death or glory or maybe Overwatch?

Walls wrote:Here's another in the sorta same lines: You can only chance charge a unit in the enemy's turn? So... ONLY on a death or glory or maybe Overwatch?

CBC can be done in the enemy's turn, or your own. Certain specific triggers allow it. Usually in the enemy turn it's triggered as a response to ramming/tank shock. In your own turn, you're explicitly allowed to charge by chance as a reaction to 'trapped' when you wreck a transport vehicle in close combat.

Walls wrote:Here's another in the sorta same lines: You can only chance charge a unit in the enemy's turn? So... ONLY on a death or glory or maybe Overwatch?

It's usually triggered by events in the enemies turn and it listed under the actions that can be performed then, but it is not prohibited from happening in your turn.

That said, there's currently only one example, and that's Trapped! When you block all access points to a unit that has to make an Emergency Disembarkation you may Charge-by-Chance it.

So: Assault vehicle - Kill vehicle - Charge-by-Chance occupants. If you made an Engage move and they're all dead/running, then you can shoot someone else.

So what's going on in this thread guys?

Worth reading 66 pages?

http://www.frontlinegaming.org/2012/01/13/6th-ed-40k-rumors/

*Pours more fuel on the fire*

Almarine wrote:So what's going on in this thread guys?

Worth reading 66 pages?

I've read it so it must be worth it right

I don't have the rules with me... but here are a few questions.

As a daemons player, I am curious. Can you deepstrike and assault? I swear I read this but didn't see rules corraborating it.

Yes using an Engage move. So gotta be within 6" after scatter for most dameon units, although 7 (beasts), 8 (fleet or jetbike) 9 (winged) for some of the others. You also have to weather Defensive fire from units within 12". So if you just plop down one unit in front of a gunline, every unit in 12" could fire. So gotta be smart, hit flanks and weak points or get more then one unit in range (a unit can only DF at one unit that arrived that turn).

Can you assault and then shoot if you wipe out the unit? Doesn't think make assault units even better since they potentially eliminate two targets at once? Assault a squad, kill it, melta gun a tank or shoot up a small support unit, heavy weapons team, etc...

Yup, assuming they have shooting and range and they used an engage move. It does sort of go back to 3ed where units could shoot one and charge another, except now the unit has to get through the cc first, which I think balances it. Also consider, engage moves are pretty short range. I think often times you will need the extra inches from a charge.

Can you assault, shoot and then embark into a vehicle?

Yes, could even throw in a disembark before the assault depending on the situation. However note that units in a vehicle cannot score VPs from objectives at the start of the turn.

The new wound allocation seems to be pretty painful for HQs since you have to 'saturate' an armour group before allocating wounds to another and a multi wound model counts for as many troops as the number of wounds he has. So, a 4 wound model needs to have 4 wounds allocated to him for example.

It is an interesting change. No more allocating a wound or two to draigo or similar as a way to make the unit he is with more resiliant. But you don't have to allocate to an IC that is a different armor group until all other armor groups are saturated, So its not that bad. Takes away some utility. It does mean they could be forced to take more saves if the unit gets hit with a ton of em. So I guess MSU and a character is a bit less resilient.

Which seems to be the point of these rules -- everything dies quicker to make the game faster.

Almarine wrote:So what's going on in this thread guys?

Worth reading 66 pages?

Lots of hypothetical discussion and arguments regarding the leaked rules. Overall some pretty good points have been raised, but pages 40-50 are basically an argument as to how defensive fire works and triggers LOL.

Drachii wrote:http://www.frontlinegaming.org/2012/01/13/6th-ed-40k-rumors/

*Pours more fuel on the fire*

True 6e rumors? Improved GW rules direction? Story progress?

This was my reaction:

LunaHound wrote:Hmmmmmmm...................

Since when could 2's hit ANYTHING? I believe, as other have stated, that this is probably just a playtest.

TechMarine1 wrote:

LunaHound wrote:Hmmmmmmm...................

Since when could 2's hit ANYTHING? I believe, as other have stated, that this is probably just a playtest.

BS 5 and higher in the current rules ALWAYS hit on 2's

Most EV stats will be 3, look, it's the same to hit chart we're used to seeing if you look at the EV 3 line.

Swarms and Jinking units are harder to hit - Look at EV 4 (hint - it's BS-1)
Massive and Stationary units are easier to hit - Look at EV 2 (hint, it's BS +1)

This to-hit chart isn't as increasingly difficult to understand as you're making it seem.

Flyers get EV 6 for a turn - - Currently in apoc if you're fielding a flyer it's only hit on 6's unless you have AA guns.
Again, not as far a departure as you're making it out to be.

Drachii wrote:http://www.frontlinegaming.org/2012/01/13/6th-ed-40k-rumors/

*Pours more fuel on the fire*

That's pretty nuts.

I will say that this book does have a LOT of balancing mechanics that should prevent old codexes from getting AS bad AS quickly as they have been. It looks like it's easier now for a bad list to still maybe pull it off with good strategy instead of being utterly steamrolled. That's a key ingredient for a healthier game right there.

FLG doesn't have any real evidence or anything, but there's nothing in these rules that out and out conflicts with what they're saying. These rules, if true, probably WOULD last longer and keep older books from getting bad as fast as they usually do.

Drachii wrote:http://www.frontlinegaming.org/2012/01/13/6th-ed-40k-rumors/
*Pours more fuel on the fire*

Here the full quote (should maybe added to title or first post):

Reecius wrote:So, we heard a doozy of a rumor today that I wanted to share with the community.

A source of ours who knows people who knows people, etc. often shares tidbits of juicy rumors. Today he and I were talking about 6th ed and whether or not the leaked rules were legit.

He told me that a friend of his who works for GW not only confirmed that this rule-set was legit, but that it was the culmination of a master plan, so to speak, that has been in the works for years.

Apparently, GW game design has wanted to get away from the edition cycle they’ve been in for the past 3 editions, and want to move towards a core rule set that they can rely on for a long period of time, updating with FAQ’s and Erratas as needed. They want to avoid sweeping changes that leave certain armies in the dust, and therefore with lagging sales.

This would allow them to focus on the model line to a greater degree, and to expand the game into different directions. They would be able to explore the game story both forwards and backwards, and a Warhammer 30K supplement was mentioned (which we’ve been hearing about multiple times). He also mentioned the possibility of progressing the story-line, which we have also been hearing from multiple sources.

The following are my thoughts on that information.

Forgeworld is already fleshing out the backstory with all of their preheresy and heresy era kits. It is not much of a stretch of the imagination to see FW doing a supplement for this period much as they did with the Badab War books, or at least making the models (Primarchs, anyone?).

This would allow GW to keep all books current, and to focus on the models, updating books as they need to.

Is this true? Who can say. Do I want it to be true? Yeah! It is criminal that GW has not made a game supplement for the most exciting part of the game background (Horus Heresy) and who wouldn’t want to use Primarchs and the Emperor and Horus in games? That would be awesome. Who wouldn’t want to see the story advance? That would be awesome, too!

And a lot of what we see in books that don’t make sense now, in the context of the new 6th ed rules we think are real, start to make sense. Maybe that is a case of fitting the system to the existing rules, or perhaps it was all part of a master plan. Who knows? Time will tell what we actually get, but all I can say is that I am very excited for what is to come.

What do you all think about this rumor? Would you like to see these things come true?

Edit: Started a new thread concentratinng on this rumoured GW master plan.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/423481.page

Mmm, I probably should've pasted that into my post. Ta, Krootzy. Maybe if we get enough of a threadnought going you can do another of your Rumour Thread Specials?

For laughs:

Fearless (2)
In addition to the normal effects of Fearless, units
with the second level of this special rule
automatically pass Morale checks with the types
terror and pinning. For Morale checks with the
types ability and psychic, the model uses a
Leadership value of 10. Note that units with the
Fearless (2) rule can still be shaken due to other
causes than a failed Pinning test.

Models without Leadership value
Models without Leadership values always have
the Fearless (2) special rule.

Vehicle psykers
Vehicles have the Fearless (2) rule and therefore
use a Leadership of 10 for the purposes of Psychic
actions.

Page 60 - Crucible of Malediction
Once per game, in its Shooting phase, a model with a
Crucible of Malediction may choose to open it. This is
an action with the types Shooting, Disembarked and
Disengaged. Every psyker within 3D6” of the bearer
must pass a Morale check (ability) or be removed from
play.

Aaaaaaaaand, we're back. Grey Knights, say hello to my little friend!

Wow, very interesting. If thats true, then the longevity of 40k has been drastically increased imo.

Maybe we'll finally see an end to the constant stagnation of the last 20 years or so...

Just back from my first game. 1200 pts Orks vs Eldar.

It plays well, there are certainly interesting tactical choices to make now. The interesting this is that my opponent won although he had not read the leak and I had to walk him through the rules... so he certainly beat my with clever tactics and not by exploiting the system.

I also greatly enjoyed hitting on 3+ with my Tankbustas (stationary warwalkers)

As all the community right now (except for the change alergics maybe), i want this to be true, and i want it to be great and epic. It would be a great way or GW to change the situtation, and i would even start to like price hikes if that occured. Start Believing, we are seeying light in the future...

Mandor wrote:For laughs:

Fearless (2)
In addition to the normal effects of Fearless, units
with the second level of this special rule
automatically pass Morale checks with the types
terror and pinning. For Morale checks with the
types ability and psychic, the model uses a
Leadership value of 10. Note that units with the
Fearless (2) rule can still be shaken due to other
causes than a failed Pinning test.

Models without Leadership value
Models without Leadership values always have
the Fearless (2) special rule.

Vehicle psykers
Vehicles have the Fearless (2) rule and therefore
use a Leadership of 10 for the purposes of Psychic
actions.

Page 60 - Crucible of Malediction
Once per game, in its Shooting phase, a model with a
Crucible of Malediction may choose to open it. This is
an action with the types Shooting, Disembarked and
Disengaged. Every psyker within 3D6” of the bearer
must pass a Morale check (ability) or be removed from
play.

Aaaaaaaaand, we're back. Grey Knights, say hello to my little friend!

Are you saying the the Crucible affects all models in a unit? This is what it says in the new rulebook:

'If the unit is subject to a rule that affects psykers, the
controlling player chooses a focus model to be
affected instead of the unit. If a psychic unit is
accompanied by independent characters (or
another unit with the ability to join units), these
models count as separate units for the purpose of
this rule. For example, they use psychic powers of
their own separately, cannot be picked as the
focus model and do not contribute to the number
of models in the psychic unit if the effect of a
power depends on it.'

One model per squad in range would be affected basically, just as it is now. I know there's not much faith in GW around here but there's no way they'd create a mechanic that can eliminate an entire army on one failed morale test. That's why it doesn't work in 5th and doesn't in 6th either - it would just be too crazy.