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.

I'm going to go with Adeptus Mechanicus versus Chaos Space Marines.

What a better way to kick off a new edition than a new army and a Chaos crusade on a forgeworld for the starter set (Mars?).

At least, this is what I hope for.

There is no way Sisters will be in a starter box. When my brother and I started playing 40K back in second edition, I got to be the Space Marines because I was older, and he got stuck with Orks. No kid wants to get stuck with the girl army. And, Sisters vs Chaos? Make it Sisters vs Slaanesh and you have parents staring at a box of guns and titties- not a good purchase decision for little Johnny.

I'm going for Sisters vs CSM.

If i'm going to ignore the 'no xenos' rumour, then i'd also throw out these pairings:

Eldar vs Tau (Unusual pairing, but there haven't been any recorded conflicts between these two yet IIRC)

Eldar vs CSM (Both Codices need an update)

Eldar vs Necrons (A conflict that harks back to times long past)

CSM vs Tau (Like Eldar, we haven't heard much about these two meeting each other. Maybe it's time for the Chaos Gods to meet the miniature blip they've been ignoring on their radar)

Tau vs Necrons (We can re-enact the party scene, complete with streamers, cake and gauss flayers!)

CSM vs Necrons (I haven't heard much about these two duking it out - Have the Chaos Worshippers of a traitor planet awoken the tomb that lies beneath with their sorcerous chants?)

AgeOfEgos wrote:

Reecius wrote:Don't count on it. That is such a fundamental change that it would require all codecies to be rewritten.

Also, alternate squad activation games take much longer than IGOUGO systems. A game of 40K using the size armies we use now would take several hours longer to play.

I like the system as it is. The rules are excellent now, and only minor changes are needed to tune it up, IMO.

I wouldn't mind a supplement for small sized games with alternate unit activation, but for the core rules, the game kicks butt now.

I agree, 5th Ed. is the strongest we've seen. Some minor changes I would like to see;

Emergency Disembark to carry over to the next player turn or worded (During the owning player's next turn, the unit that emergency disembarked is immediately pinned)
Give Walkers a stomp feature---D3 auto-hits to a non-IC unit in HTH (Still need to roll against IC as normal)
Make any unit placed in reserve have the ability to outflank====units that do so add a +1 to their reserve roll. If a unit already has the outflank ability, they may choose the side they wish to enter when they arrive.
Change the missions a bit-----make it Primary/Secondary/Tertiary already with Kill Points always being Secondary. Make Spearhead only have a 8" measure from middle instead of 12".
To score an objective--the unit scoring must be out of the vehicle it's in. Empty vehicles NEVER contest objectives.
Weight Kill Points based on FOC----make any dedicated transport worth the same number of kill points of the unit it carries

Honestly, I just want strength 5 defensive weapons and some minor changes to assault. Other than that, the game is good as is, IMO. Please just don't feth it up like they did with Fantasy.

Reecius wrote:

AgeOfEgos wrote:

Reecius wrote:Don't count on it. That is such a fundamental change that it would require all codecies to be rewritten.

Also, alternate squad activation games take much longer than IGOUGO systems. A game of 40K using the size armies we use now would take several hours longer to play.

I like the system as it is. The rules are excellent now, and only minor changes are needed to tune it up, IMO.

I wouldn't mind a supplement for small sized games with alternate unit activation, but for the core rules, the game kicks butt now.

I agree, 5th Ed. is the strongest we've seen. Some minor changes I would like to see;

Emergency Disembark to carry over to the next player turn or worded (During the owning player's next turn, the unit that emergency disembarked is immediately pinned)
Give Walkers a stomp feature---D3 auto-hits to a non-IC unit in HTH (Still need to roll against IC as normal)
Make any unit placed in reserve have the ability to outflank====units that do so add a +1 to their reserve roll. If a unit already has the outflank ability, they may choose the side they wish to enter when they arrive.
Change the missions a bit-----make it Primary/Secondary/Tertiary already with Kill Points always being Secondary. Make Spearhead only have a 8" measure from middle instead of 12".
To score an objective--the unit scoring must be out of the vehicle it's in. Empty vehicles NEVER contest objectives.
Weight Kill Points based on FOC----make any dedicated transport worth the same number of kill points of the unit it carries

Honestly, I just want strength 5 defensive weapons and some minor changes to assault. Other than that, the game is good as is, IMO. Please just don't feth it up like they did with Fantasy.

Vehicles stronger!? My 198% love for you just became 197.8%. You know, on that subject....I'll eat crow and state I was completely against Str. 4 defensive weapon fire...and I remember that when 5th Ed. was leaked someone on Seer said it was due to Phil Kelly. I thought he was dead wrong, which is odd for me because I think he's their best.....but then I played some games in 5th with armor...and changed my opinion once I started rolling on damage tables.

Regardless, I probably encroached a bit with my wish list though...so perhaps I should end that now.. Maybe I'll start a 40k General Disc. thread.

In my opinion, the cover system needs an overhaul. In most of the games i've seen and a few i've played, everything was simply:

"10 Shots, 5 hits, 4 wounds on your guardsmen from my pulse rifles."
"Okay, 5 4+ cover saves..."
"Now, 1 submunition template on your storm troopers. Direct hit, 9 hits, 8 wounds."
"Right, 8 4+ cover saves..."
"2 shots, 2 hits, 1 glance and 1 penetrate from my broadsides on the side of your Leman Russ."
"2 4+ cover saves from smoke..."
"Markerlights firing on your other leman russ. Going to reduce your smoke cover save to nothing with those 3 hits. Firing with my other Broadsides, 2 shots, 1 hit, 1 penetrate."
"Righto, 1 4+ cover save from being obscured..."

Whatever was fired, you either got a 3+ armour save or better against it, or a 4+ cover save against it. Cover plays a heavy part in war, but when you can hide your army behind a 4+ cover save it starts to become stupid.

AgeOfEgos wrote:
...Please just don't feth it up like they did with Fantasy.

A-men. I never liked fantasy much but the fact that they botched it so much with randomw charge rangfe and random terrain effects (REALLY!?!?!) means I cant play it until 9th comes out. In 2014.

Kanluwen wrote:

Plus, I said it once before and I'll say it again:
If you're going to try for the 'boobs sell' angle--you wouldn't be using an army that wears full body armor for most of their units, nor an army where the women are definitely not 'pretty' by any standard.

So Plastic Repentia?

jake wrote:

Fetterkey wrote:

Hans Chung-Otterson wrote:I guess what I really mean is: I'd like to see turns be "I activate a unit, you activate a unit, I activate a unit..." rather than IGOUGO.

This was tested by GW in the runup to Codex: Cityfight and they ultimately found it cumbersome. I'd be surprised if they implemented it now.

They found it cumbersome, yet many, many other games use it to great effect. Often these games play faster (and in my opinion cleaner) than the current edition of 40K as well.

Honestly, I'm not expecting any great changes. The game has barely changed at all since 3rd edition.

Most of those games use half the models that would be used in an average game of Warhams


Automatically Appended Next Post:

grizgrin wrote:

AgeOfEgos wrote:
...Please just don't feth it up like they did with Fantasy.

A-men. I never liked fantasy much but the fact that they botched it so much with randomw charge rangfe and random terrain effects (REALLY!?!?!) means I cant play it until 9th comes out. In 2014.

Fantasy is fine. Most people make an semi-conscious effort to "forget" what the terrain does anyway.

Charging really doesn't mean that much either unless you pull off a feat of tactical brilliance.

The starter box has got to be Vampire vs. Werewolves. It'll draw in all the Twilight fans.

My first choice (guess) would be Space Wolves vs. Chaos Marines but SW already have a decent line of plastics. SoB vs. Chaos would be my second choice.

I don't think GW cares how good the existing line is when choosing the contents of the starter box. If that were the case then Space Marines wouldn't have been in any of them.

If Space Wolves are in the starter, great opportunity for some Thunderwolf love.

Mr. Burning wrote:

Darkvoidof40k wrote:

blackclaw1 wrote:I'm gonna go for daemon-hunters (an elite army) with a more horedy daemon army , which i think will be nurgle as then they will have people buying it just for plastic nurgle daemons.

But thats a stab in the dark.

That's what I was thinking, but rather it'd be Grey Knights vs Chaos Daemons.

Honestly, can't say that'd be too bad.. but why would they try and market a top-end elite army that has high-point-cost models, and therefore doesn't require as much wallet-beating as other armies? Hm..

gw will have a few more price increase before this comes out.

They better not...the hobby can only absorb so much, before it becomes a ridiculous barrier to entry.
Someone there has got to have a business degree and understand the simplicity of the supply/demand curve and economies of scale, margins and volume.

Stunning.

I'm gonna put my two cents in could crons' possibly be in there? I mean when was the last time they got anything?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

davethepak wrote:

Mr. Burning wrote:

Darkvoidof40k wrote:

blackclaw1 wrote:I'm gonna go for daemon-hunters (an elite army) with a more horedy daemon army , which i think will be nurgle as then they will have people buying it just for plastic nurgle daemons.

But thats a stab in the dark.

That's what I was thinking, but rather it'd be Grey Knights vs Chaos Daemons.

Honestly, can't say that'd be too bad.. but why would they try and market a top-end elite army that has high-point-cost models, and therefore doesn't require as much wallet-beating as other armies? Hm..

gw will have a few more price increase before this comes out.

They better not...the hobby can only absorb so much, before it becomes a ridiculous barrier to entry.
Someone there has got to have a business degree and understand the simplicity of the supply/demand curve and economies of scale, margins and volume.

Stunning.

you see you would think that except for everytime they go "we are going to raise the prices $5" everyone just takes another $5 out of they're wallet and forks it over.

Assuming that the rumour is true (and I'm taking it with so much salt I've had to place a cardiac surgeon on ready-alert), I can only see it being one thing:

Dark Angels vs LatD

No xenos means Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Orks, Necrons, Tyranids are all out and with IG and Ultrasmurfs being ruled out too that leaves only Inquisition, Non-codex marines and Chaos.

But - starter sets thus far have all been marines vs xenos. GW needs its Power Armoured poster boys to take on the 'hero' role in the starter. DA are in need of an update, but don't have army-wide special rules in the same way as SW, BA or BT do and would make an easier army for a starter game. Inquisition again is very much an outside bet due to the complexity of the army structure and number of special rules.

With DA getting my vote for 'ye goodies', what about 'ye baddies'? Well, for contrast you ideally need a non PA force, which rules out CSM. Daemons are difficut for a starter force due to the all-deep-strike deployment - definately not ideal for teaching someone the game. This would only leave you two Chaos options. Bring back LatD or have a mono-god themed 'legion' army, with CSM, daemons and auxilia cultists all in (If they did this it would be Khorne in the box - Nurgle would mean green army vs green army, not good for box art, Tzeentch is too many psychic rules, Slaanesh is too many bewbs ).

However, given that GW prefers the Chaos love-in where followers of every god happily fight alongside each other before swapping campfire stories over roasted commisar, I can't see Legions! This puts LatD as the only logical choice. A supposedly common (fluffwise) imperial enemy and one that if people start collecting will need loads of troops and tanks plus loads of chaos conversion kits.

It sets up 40k6 with a bang, attracts loads of former diehards back into the hobby by dangling the carrot of their favourite army, and given the amount of work done on renegade armies by FW means little development work is needed before a new codex is issued.

[/logical-but-rambling]

AgeOfEgos wrote:Some minor changes I would like to see;

Emergency Disembark to carry over to the next player turn or worded (During the owning player's next turn, the unit that emergency disembarked is immediately pinned)
Give Walkers a stomp feature---D3 auto-hits to a non-IC unit in HTH (Still need to roll against IC as normal)
Make any unit placed in reserve have the ability to outflank====units that do so add a +1 to their reserve roll. If a unit already has the outflank ability, they may choose the side they wish to enter when they arrive.
Change the missions a bit-----make it Primary/Secondary/Tertiary already with Kill Points always being Secondary. Make Spearhead only have a 8" measure from middle instead of 12".
To score an objective--the unit scoring must be out of the vehicle it's in. Empty vehicles NEVER contest objectives.
Weight Kill Points based on FOC----make any dedicated transport worth the same number of kill points of the unit it carries

I agree to all of these, except the Spearhead suggestion, it's fine how it is, IMO.

Also, S5 defensive weapons on vehicles.

On topic, so far the most logical ones to me are either SOB vs CSM or DA vs. LatD. I would LOVE to see LatD back in the game. Officially.

This is easily the thinnest rumour I've ever seen at this place, and it has generated 8 pages so far. Amazing...



Also:

Chimera_Calvin - I like your style, but unfortunately GW are under a court order to only take armies I play away from me, never to give them back. So LatD can't come back for legal reasons. This is why I now start armies that don't have rules - can't take from me what they never gave in the first place!

H.B.M.C. wrote:This is easily the thinnest rumour I've ever seen at this place, and it has generated 8 pages so far. Amazing...

It is a thin rumor, but keep in mind that the precursors to 6th Edition are already evident in Codex: Grey Knights.

Mastery level?

Fetterkey wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:This is easily the thinnest rumour I've ever seen at this place, and it has generated 8 pages so far. Amazing...

It is a thin rumor, but keep in mind that the precursors to 6th Edition are already evident in Codex: Grey Knights.

expand on this?

Everyone will have one huge model released with there codex? MANTA!

I think it would be super awesome if 6th had rules for flyers in the game. Rules for bombing runs, Landings, Aerial Combat, Crashing (it would be awesome to be able to aim a crashing plane at something) and they could put the rules for the planes in the big rule book.
I realize there is IA rules for this but it would be cool to have a 0-3 Aerial Support in the FOC

Hans Chung-Otterson wrote:

Fetterkey wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:This is easily the thinnest rumour I've ever seen at this place, and it has generated 8 pages so far. Amazing...

It is a thin rumor, but keep in mind that the precursors to 6th Edition are already evident in Codex: Grey Knights.

expand on this?

Yes. Please do.

While it is too early to speculate on rules changes in 6th edition, we can't be sure it is only a minor tweak of 5th edition.

In Fantasy, 7th edition was seen as a quite balanced rules system (only broken by Matt Ward's Chaos Daemon army book). Then 8th edition by Mat Ward completely changed the game (with a big FAQ for each army to adapt them to the new edition) . Esp. the random magic practically put an end to competitive play, as one dice roll can decide the game whatever the tactics. It is more interactive story telling now, which is nice for some but not for others. This drastic change wasn't expected and rumoured. So noone can be sure that 6th 40k edition is just a variation of 5th edition.

And keep in mind that the BoK rumour is early and not set in stone and contradicting stickmonkey's even earlier rumour. So as Harry said, enjoy speculation and wait for more.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Chimera_Calvin - I like your style, but unfortunately GW are under a court order to only take armies I play away from me, never to give them back. So LatD can't come back for legal reasons. This is why I now start armies that don't have rules - can't take from me what they never gave in the first place!

Can you please start BT and DA? Could shave a year off the update cycle

Chimera_Calvin wrote:Assuming that the rumour is true (and I'm taking it with so much salt I've had to place a cardiac surgeon on ready-alert), I can only see it being one thing:

Dark Angels vs LatD

No xenos means Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Orks, Necrons, Tyranids are all out and with IG and Ultrasmurfs being ruled out too that leaves only Inquisition, Non-codex marines and Chaos.

But - starter sets thus far have all been marines vs xenos. GW needs its Power Armoured poster boys to take on the 'hero' role in the starter. DA are in need of an update, but don't have army-wide special rules in the same way as SW, BA or BT do and would make an easier army for a starter game. Inquisition again is very much an outside bet due to the complexity of the army structure and number of special rules.

[/logical-but-rambling]

Aside from your army prediction which I'm not too sure about, thanks for listing what everyone seems to have actually missed in their predictions. I.e. what the rumour actually says

As for an introduction of a new turn system (away from Igoyougo), remember that Andy Chambers had originally proposed this for 4th edition. It was turned down as being too revolutionary, and he took the system to Mongoose Publishing and their good but ultimately doomed Starship Troopers game.

Anything other than a very minor tweaking of the rules I think is being optimistic, but as a few posters have pointed out I think looking at the trend of 5th edition (and the latest edition of WFB) should give us a few pointers; Movement towards more narrative-based gameplay, scenery kits and even larger, bordering on Apocalypse size army sizes. Many of us have picked up vehicle kits since 5th edition, it will be time to turn the tables on them again and prompt sales of infantry. Just my guess!

It would also be nice if they actually advanced the story line a bit, get the ball rolling for the next black crusade or c'tan arrival or something to bring all the players back into a huge story arch just my hopes.

Advanced the story are you new to GW?

Sorry , that was the cruel jibe of a practiced cynic after twenty some years of seeing GW asymptotically approaching new years eve 40,999.

@pacific - thanks, I try and stay on topic where I can

@HBMC - does that mean if you play one of every army currently in existence that GW will implode and give birth to a new company? DO IT NOW!!!

I'm okay with not 'advancing the storyline a bit'. Start doing it too much, you end up with a White Wolf incident...start doing it too little and you get people clamoring for you to go White Wolf!

Maybe the Emperor dies and the Imperium falls apart. Maybe the Emperor dies and the Imperium gets her much needed wake up call and stops being the victim of poorly written Forge World plots. Maybe the Ultramarines are finally getting their much needed fall from grace. Maybe the Void Dragon will finally fart in its sleep and have the cog boys do something. Maybe we'll get a new warmaster who does something right for a change. Maybe Cadia will be wholly recaptured and restored. Maybe Yarrick and Ghazghul can finally have their final ultimate showdown that they were destined to have. Maybe..

Maybeeeeeee you'll think of me when you are all alone

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Hans Chung-Otterson wrote:

Fetterkey wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:This is easily the thinnest rumour I've ever seen at this place, and it has generated 8 pages so far. Amazing...

It is a thin rumor, but keep in mind that the precursors to 6th Edition are already evident in Codex: Grey Knights.

expand on this?

Yes. Please do.

Codex: Grey Knights uses several terms that have not been used in previous books and aren't part of the rules at present. Psykers have "mastery levels" instead of just being able to cast a certain number of powers; supposedly there's some funkiness with the way that single-model units/characters are defined as well. There are also a few other nonstandard rules terms used elsewhere in the 'Dex as if they were standard, so it looks like GW is preparing for some shifts, or perhaps just keeping their bases covered. This fits in well with the rumors about 6th ed being 1-2 years out.