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.

wuestenfux wrote:Is there already an overview about the impact of the new ruleset to the different races out there?

You find some attempts in "40k General Discussion", but are free to contribute yourself

BTW nice to see some retconning on Warseer, after closing all discussion threads for several days:

The Dude wrote:Nobody is forbidding discussion of the 'leaked' rules.
This thread was set up for just that purpose.

Also one mod, Darnok, answers this:

Darnok wrote:

Balerion wrote:I suppose it's too much to hope for an apology or mea culpa from the Warseer Illuminati regarding the treatment of this issue and the tone + potential falsehoods found in the OP of this thread should this ruleset eventually be vindicated as an obvious progenitor of the official 6th edition rulebook, but it would be refreshing. If anyone even remembers it come summertime.

I for one will always accept when I'm wrong it that turns out to be the case. If anybody is willing to remind me after the 6th ed. release, please do so.

tetrisphreak wrote:Yeah vindicators see some new legs with this change to the damage table.

These rules somehow manage to increase tank resilience while emphasizing units on foot in-game! I don't know what to think!

Another big thing is that they will rarely miss their target. So they became really good for blood angels and usable for everyone else.

ChocolateGork wrote: So they became really good for blood angels and usable for everyone else.

Speaking of which; I have some difficulties getting to understand the benefits of 'fast' when firing weapons: So compare a regular Predator to a BA Predator. What can the latter do, that the former can not?

Fast units count their speed as one step lower - combat = stationary, cruise = combat, and it unlocks a 3rd speed - flat-out.

Fast units with multi-targeting (x) can double their MT values when going stationary, combat, or cruising speed (but not flat-out, at that point they cannot fire).

A regular predator is MT(2) so stationary has 4 firing actions, combat speed has 2, and cruising has zero

A BA pred is fast MT(2) so stationary has 4 firing actions, combat speed has 4, cruising has 4, and flat-out cannot fire. They can move 12" and fire all 3 guns, and spend the 4th MT point to split that fire amongst up to 3 targets (one for each weapon). Once they start taking damage you'll see their utility drop, but they'll still be mobile and able to shoot all the way up until they're MT(-1)

Darkseid wrote:

ChocolateGork wrote: So they became really good for blood angels and usable for everyone else.

Speaking of which; I have some difficulties getting to understand the benefits of 'fast' when firing weapons: So compare a regular Predator to a BA Predator. What can the latter do, that the former can not?

A normal pred can:
Stand still and fire all three weapons at seperate targets (MT2 is doubled to 4, one to divide fire, one each to fire a weapon)
It can move 6" and fire two weapons at the same target.
It can move 12" and fire nothing.

A BA Pred can
Stand still or move 6" and fire all three weapons at seperate targets (MT2 is doubled to 4, one to divide fire, one each to fire a weapon) due to being Fast.
It can move 12" and fire two weapons at the same target.

In a case of funny BA Qhirlwinds can move 6" and fire their Multi Launcher indirectly.

FAST
Movement special rule
A fast unit that conducts a Combat or Engage
move performs Shooting actions as if it had
performed a Turn. Hence it can use Stationary
actions and shoot with twice the number of
weapons if it has the multi-targeting rule.
A fast unit that conducts a Run/Cruise or Charge
move performs Shooting actions as if it had
performed a Combat move, i.e. the unit can still
perform Shooting actions.
In addition, fast units may move flat out, as
described on the previous page.

@BoldOrStupid -- Look in the multi-targeting(x) special rule. It specifically states fast units using MT(x) double their actions all the way up to cruise speed.

tetrisphreak wrote:@BoldOrStupid -- Look in the multi-targeting(x) special rule. It specifically states fast units using MT(x) double their actions all the way up to cruise speed.

Nope they are treated as if they moved at Combat Speed, and then states that they can still fire. They are treated as Turning when they move Combat Speed.

FAST
Movement special rule
A fast unit that conducts a Combat or Engage
move performs Shooting actions as if it had
performed a Turn. Hence it can use Stationary
actions and shoot with twice the number of
weapons if it has the multi-targeting rule.
A fast unit that conducts a Run/Cruise or Charge
move performs Shooting actions as if it had
performed a Combat move, i.e. the unit can still
perform Shooting actions.
In addition, fast units may move flat out, as
described on the previous page.

The fast rule says that above, yes.

MULTI-TARGETING (X)
Individual Shooting special rule
Tanks, battle suits, jetbikes, walkers and aircraft
are all equipped with a wide array of deadly
weaponry. They are equipped with targeting
systems that allow them to fire several weapons.
These fire support systems can be enhanced
sensors, psycho-reactive matrices, artificial
intelligences computational support devices or
symbiotic organisms. In most cases the ‘targeting
system’ consists just of extra manpower - every
weapon is manned by a different crew member.
A model with this special rule is able to perform
more than one Shooting action per turn and the
number given next to the special rule specifies
how many. For example, a model with multitargeting
(3) would be able to perform three
Shooting actions per turn. If its unit had remained
stationary, the firing model could even double
the number of Shooting actions. Models with the
Fast special rule can do this even if they have
cruised or charged. Note that the model still
cannot fire the same weapon twice.
The number of actions, often called multitargeting
value, can decrease during the game
through battle damage. Apply this before you
double the number for a stationary model.
Models with this special rule can carry out the
following action.

Tetrisphreak - How very odd, I would guess one of those enteries was wrong, maybe something got changed in play test and they forgot to alter then other. I personnally would side with the Fast write up as it's basically what we have now.

Does this type of inconstistancy support it being real? I'd say yes as this sort of thing would seem unlikely to be added in a hoax.

Personally, I believe the argument for validity of the document is a mute point in the interim. But, that there are two important pieces of information included within the leaked rulebook which can serve as a measure in the coming months:

- The inclusion of the Cerebore in the Tyranid 2nd wave release next month

Rumor points to a non-codex large model included in the models to be released, with forthcoming rules to be published in White Dwarf. This hints at the Cerebore, but only time will tell.

- The inclusion of Zeal Bolters in the (hopefully) upcoming Codex: Black Templar

If either of these two pieces of information, or even one, this greatly adds to the validity of the leaked rulebook. Personally, I would go so far as to say, it would guarantee their validity as playtest rules. At the very least.

Any other tidbits or pieces of information that anyone else has noticed that may help add to validate the leak in the near future?

Bold or Stupid wrote:Tetrisphreak - How very odd, I would guess one of those enteries was wrong, maybe something got changed in play test and they forgot to alter then other. I personnally would side with the Fast write up as it's basically what we have now.

Does this type of inconstistancy support it being real? I'd say yes as this sort of thing would seem unlikely to be added in a hoax.

The rules above working together don't necessarily conflict. Fast units without multi-targeting work as they do now. Multi-targeting is a new rule, therefore how it interacts with Fast is inherently a new mechanic. Thus, it further increases the firepower of said unit.

Take in mind that once the MT(x) unit suffers 1 weapon destroyed result (assuming it is a vehicle), it's firepower will be reduced by usually half.

Also take in mind that without the MT(X) rule explicitly allowing fast's interaction DE venoms can only move 8" and fire both splinter cannons(defensive weapons). The way it's worded here the skimmer may move 16" and fire on full bore.

While I'm excited over the possibilities afforded by the vehicle firing rules in the PDF, I am dubious as to their complexity. They lack a kind of rules-writing je ne sais quoi elegance.

Just broke off and created a thread about 6th edition and how it impacts Necrons here.

It looks real enough

Thanks for the clarification of the 'fast' rule! I really wonder which interpretation will make the cut. In either case it makes BA vehicles really usefu, especially if you also consider the Evasion rule.

Luke_Prowler wrote:I never said these were bad changes, mearly that they are the strongest units current in the codex currently and would be hurt from this leak.

A battlewagons as a transport did kinda get hurt. Since they're Tanks they get -1 to their evasion, meaning they'll get hit on +2s by anyone with BS 4 amd by everyone but orks if it stand still, and they don't get the -1 to vehicle damage unless they take a hard top. Dakkawagons, however, are now much better thanks yo having the lumbering rule

Thing is, the new rules also took away a lot of the reasons not to have an 'ard Case, aside from points cost, seeing as you can now assault after moving out of a close-topped vehicle. Granted, 'ard Case still reduces outgoing fire, so a Burnawagon will probably want to be open-topped- but taking Battlewagons as pure transports, simply for assaulting from, allows them to be closed with little penalty.

Also, Nobz are still one of the units that can do wound shenanigans pretty well- You can have a Nob with his basic 6+, one with 6+/5++, one with 4+, and one with 4+5++, meaning 4 wound groups. So you can still have 8 Nobz differentiated to the extent that there's only 2 in each wound group, which may actually benefit them slightly- and it simplifies list building, and allows you to have more concentrated firepower, since now there's nothing keeping you from giving them all Powerklaws, or Big Choppas, or Kombi-skorchas or whatnot.

Also, with the new Charge rules, the entire army has a big boost to its assaulting, seeing as they can all charge 12" every turn.

Anvildude wrote:

Luke_Prowler wrote:I never said these were bad changes, mearly that they are the strongest units current in the codex currently and would be hurt from this leak.

A battlewagons as a transport did kinda get hurt. Since they're Tanks they get -1 to their evasion, meaning they'll get hit on +2s by anyone with BS 4 amd by everyone but orks if it stand still, and they don't get the -1 to vehicle damage unless they take a hard top. Dakkawagons, however, are now much better thanks yo having the lumbering rule

Thing is, the new rules also took away a lot of the reasons not to have an 'ard Case, aside from points cost, seeing as you can now assault after moving out of a close-topped vehicle. Granted, 'ard Case still reduces outgoing fire, so a Burnawagon will probably want to be open-topped- but taking Battlewagons as pure transports, simply for assaulting from, allows them to be closed with little penalty.

Also, Nobz are still one of the units that can do wound shenanigans pretty well- You can have a Nob with his basic 6+, one with 6+/5++, one with 4+, and one with 4+5++, meaning 4 wound groups. So you can still have 8 Nobz differentiated to the extent that there's only 2 in each wound group, which may actually benefit them slightly- and it simplifies list building, and allows you to have more concentrated firepower, since now there's nothing keeping you from giving them all Powerklaws, or Big Choppas, or Kombi-skorchas or whatnot.

Also, with the new Charge rules, the entire army has a big boost to its assaulting, seeing as they can all charge 12" every turn.

Removing Open Topped does limit the wagon in regards to entry points, however.
Also, for the nob squads, I do believe that, for the 5++, it's a case of either all get it, or none get it. Unless I'm mistaken, I don't believe you can only pick a few to get the Cybork upgrade.

Also, keep in mind that units can only assault out of a vehicle if it moved 6", so no more 13" disembark and assault. Then again, Red Paint now adds +1 inch to the vehicle's movement stat, so it moves 7" -> 14" -> 21", which may make up for it.

Taking what this obvious in-progress playtest tells us, at least.

Edit: Take into consideration that I've been spending the last hour or two gluing models together, so I may be completely confused as a result of excessive plastic glue fumes x_x

Open-topped transports allow Charge moves to occur when the transport moved at combat speed. So, keeping the Battlewagons as we have them now means we maintain the same threat range:

Now: 13" move + 2" disembark + 6" assault = 21" assault range

Leaked rules: 7" move + 2" disembark (Can't find confirmation for this though) + 12" assault = 21" assault range

AresX8 wrote:2" disembark

No, disembarkation isn't a move anymore. You just measure your charge from an entry point (or any spot on the hull in case of open-topped)

How have the leak's new reserve rules affected the viability of Trygon tunnels? It seems like they'll actually be useful now, since you can send in Trygons and then guarantee a follow-up wave next turn. Any thoughts?

Anvildude wrote:

Luke_Prowler wrote:I never said these were bad changes, mearly that they are the strongest units current in the codex currently and would be hurt from this leak.

A battlewagons as a transport did kinda get hurt. Since they're Tanks they get -1 to their evasion, meaning they'll get hit on +2s by anyone with BS 4 amd by everyone but orks if it stand still, and they don't get the -1 to vehicle damage unless they take a hard top. Dakkawagons, however, are now much better thanks yo having the lumbering rule

Thing is, the new rules also took away a lot of the reasons not to have an 'ard Case, aside from points cost, seeing as you can now assault after moving out of a close-topped vehicle. Granted, 'ard Case still reduces outgoing fire, so a Burnawagon will probably want to be open-topped- but taking Battlewagons as pure transports, simply for assaulting from, allows them to be closed with little penalty.

Also, Nobz are still one of the units that can do wound shenanigans pretty well- You can have a Nob with his basic 6+, one with 6+/5++, one with 4+, and one with 4+5++, meaning 4 wound groups. So you can still have 8 Nobz differentiated to the extent that there's only 2 in each wound group, which may actually benefit them slightly- and it simplifies list building, and allows you to have more concentrated firepower, since now there's nothing keeping you from giving them all Powerklaws, or Big Choppas, or Kombi-skorchas or whatnot.

Also, with the new Charge rules, the entire army has a big boost to its assaulting, seeing as they can all charge 12" every turn.

What really got me, were the changes to tank shock and ramming infantry. With the addition of the death rolla, on top of the existing rules I can see a battlewagon barrelling into an infantry group, dealing significant damage and then bailing a meganob squad right into the clearing provided to escalate the carnage.

Jump back into the battlewagon and repeat.

The sort of
movement the unit is allowed to perform
depends on the speed of the transport.
• If the transporting model has not moved during
the current game cycle, the disembarking unit
can perform any Move action except those with
the Disembarked type. The transport model can
move at a later point during the Movement
phase or in a different turn.
• If the transporting model has already conducted
a Combat move in this game cycle, the
disembarking unit can perform a Combat or
Engage move of its own. The transport cannot
move afterwards, as a unit can only perform one
Move action per game cycle.
• If the transporting model has conducted any
other Move action, the transported unit cannot
disembark.


You cannot disembark after a ram

Tapeworm711 wrote:The sort of
movement the unit is allowed to perform
depends on the speed of the transport.
• If the transporting model has not moved during
the current game cycle, the disembarking unit
can perform any Move action except those with
the Disembarked type. The transport model can
move at a later point during the Movement
phase or in a different turn.
• If the transporting model has already conducted
a Combat move in this game cycle, the
disembarking unit can perform a Combat or
Engage move of its own. The transport cannot
move afterwards, as a unit can only perform one
Move action per game cycle.
• If the transporting model has conducted any
other Move action, the transported unit cannot
disembark.


You cannot disembark after a ram

A ram isn't a combat move?

No.

Combat move
Unit Type: Move

Ramming
Unit Type: Move, Support

It is not.

Can anyone clarify the new scatter rules to me?

All I can see is that you roll to hit and whatever number you get when rolling to hit you double if you scatter - to me that means rolling a 6 would scatter you 12". Nor can I see that it states you deduct your BS from anywhere and in the example it says that a BS4 model rolling to hit moving infantry on a 2 would scatter 4". How would a marine with BS4 be able to score a successful hit on a 2+ firing at moving infantry?

I'm sure I'm missing something as from what I've read most of you here seem to think the new scatter rules are pretty good - I just can't see why. Thanks for the help.

Fire a Blast weapon like any other weapons.

A BS4 Marine needs a 3+ to hit. On a 3,4,5, or 6 the shot does not scatter.

If you rolled a 1 or a 2, you roll the scatter die. On a HIT the shot does not scatter.
Otherwise, on a 1 it deviates 2 inches and on a 2 it deviates 4 inches.


The most a blast weapon can ever scatter is 12". But that is a model that needs a 5+ to hit. But rolls a 6, and fails to roll a hit on the scatter die.

Tapeworm711 wrote:Fire a Blast weapon like any other weapons.

A BS4 Marine needs a 3+ to hit. On a 3,4,5, or 6 the shot does not scatter.

If you rolled a 1 or a 2, you roll the scatter die. On a HIT the shot does not scatter.
Otherwise, on a 1 it deviates 2 inches and on a 2 it deviates 4 inches.


The most a blast weapon can ever scatter is 12". But that is a model that needs a 5+ to hit. But rolls a 6, and fails to roll a hit on the scatter die.

Gah! Maybe I'm stupid but on the most it could scatter example - if you needed a 5+ and you rolled a 6, would that not be a hit? If you needed a 6 to hit and rolled a 5, then you would scatter and wouldn't you scatter 5 x 2 = 10"? so surely the most you could scatter is 10"?

Tapeworm711 wrote:Fire a Blast weapon like any other weapons.

A BS4 Marine needs a 3+ to hit. On a 3,4,5, or 6 the shot does not scatter.

If you rolled a 1 or a 2, you roll the scatter die. On a HIT the shot does not scatter.
Otherwise, on a 1 it deviates 2 inches and on a 2 it deviates 4 inches.


The most a blast weapon can ever scatter is 12". But that is a model that needs a 5+ to hit. But rolls a 6, and fails to roll a hit on the scatter die.

With a max scatter of 2" and hitting 5/6ths of the time annnnd cover universally reduced it's looking like my conversion beamer bike MOTF just got a new lease on life. Hell, bumping around with an EV of 4 is lookin' pretty keen too. I might even invest in another one. These changes took a borderline useless mini I took a long time converting and made it pretty gangbusters.

According to leaked 6ed, the only high deviations will be barrage blasts that would be fired without line of sight. In this case, the blast could get away by the highest results on the D6 * 2 inches.

In order to be on target, both a standard BS vs EV success, and a "HIT" are needed. If D6 fails, you're away by 1/2/3 inches. If scatter dice fails you're potentially away by even more. For example an IG mortar team that operates out of LOS rolls and an arrow : the blast scatters 6*2=12 inches away ! In this case you only have 1/3 * 1/2 = 1/6 chance of placing your blast on target.

In short, direct blast shots will get handy and accurate, and out of LOS barrage will get much worse.

ColdSadHungry wrote:

Tapeworm711 wrote:Fire a Blast weapon like any other weapons.

A BS4 Marine needs a 3+ to hit. On a 3,4,5, or 6 the shot does not scatter.

If you rolled a 1 or a 2, you roll the scatter die. On a HIT the shot does not scatter.
Otherwise, on a 1 it deviates 2 inches and on a 2 it deviates 4 inches.


The most a blast weapon can ever scatter is 12". But that is a model that needs a 5+ to hit. But rolls a 6, and fails to roll a hit on the scatter die.

Gah! Maybe I'm stupid but on the most it could scatter example - if you needed a 5+ and you rolled a 6, would that not be a hit? If you needed a 6 to hit and rolled a 5, then you would scatter and wouldn't you scatter 5 x 2 = 10"? so surely the most you could scatter is 10"?

Yea sorry that was supposed to be "6+" to hit, And rolls a 5, resulting in 10" of scatter. Sorry for the confusion.