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.

Gavin Thorne wrote:

Happens every edition and with every new codex. Nothing new there.

Absolutely - we witness this regularly , but this may be epic !

I've gone through all of my armies and I am pretty sure more things become playable than stop being playable. These rules have a LOT of balancing mechanics.

Obvious sign that this is fake. You think GW is capable of doing this?

Rented Tritium wrote:

I've gone through all of my armies and I am pretty sure more things become playable than stop being playable. These rules have a LOT of balancing mechanics.

If this really is the case , and it is done well , and as long as players can get over the inevitable nerfs and Buffs then it may be a very good move , and worth forking out the also inevitable premium price GW will want to charge for 6th Ed rulebook

Weird isnt it how a fan made book or hoax is trying to peddle GW product like the vehicle damage dice?

Ozeo wrote:Weird isnt it how a fan made book or hoax is trying to peddle GW product like the vehicle damage dice?

Could it also be a hoaxer with an Axe to grind and a point to make that 5th ed
Vehicle damage tables made the 4th Ed Damage Dice obsolete ?

I will say it again.

Occam's razor

Schrodingers Cat

Its both a Fake and True at the same time until we open the box

The rules have and always will be about selling more models. Does this ruleset do that? If so, then it may be legit. If not, it probably isn't.

Its almost true. Except we have seen inside the box (aka Read the Rules).

There is a finite number of people/group capable of generating this document. GW is the most obvious choice. (not necessarily the correct one.)

Opening the box in this context to me means when we get the Rulebook in our grubby Mitts , until then or we get a better look then its supposition and guesswork .

Sure , its a bit of fun too all this speculation

Dynamix wrote:Schrodingers Cat

Its both a Fake and True at the same time until we open the box

I have always hated this.....just because we do not know does not mean the cat is still alive heh. I do however love the reference to this and the razor heheh.

Fishboy wrote:

Dynamix wrote:Schrodingers Cat

Its both a Fake and True at the same time until we open the box

I have always hated this.....just because we do not know does not mean the cat is still alive heh. I do however love the reference to this and the razor heheh.

The cat is a metaphor and a thought exercise, it's not actually how that is described to work.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Fishboy wrote:

Dynamix wrote:Schrodingers Cat

Its both a Fake and True at the same time until we open the box

I have always hated this.....just because we do not know does not mean the cat is still alive heh. I do however love the reference to this and the razor heheh.

The cat is a metaphor and a thought exercise, it's not actually how that is described to work.

And just because we do not know doesn't mean the cat is dead, either...

If you don't know anything about Quantum Mechanics, there's no need to drop that Schrodinger's Cat meme here.

It's worse than those people that spammed "The Cake is a Lie" everywhere irrelevantly without even having played the game because it has lasted decades.

scuddman wrote:It can be. You know how I know? I was one of those people on Gamefaqs that wrote those huge massive guides telling people how to get better in a video game. Some of my work is still on there. Look at the work Kao Megura did before he passed on...we're talking docuemtns of text..TEXT that were 400k in size.

http://shoryuken.com/forum/index.php?threads/ibuki-player-guide-book.139593/

Yes, that ibuki guide is done by a fan. If this guy can do it, then some random person on the internet can make a fake sixth edition ruleset. Hell, I've made my own rulesets, I just didn't perpetrate them as a fake ruleset.

It may be a good book, but the production quality is clearly amateur.

Idk if its just me but I couldn't find the classification of the vehicle type Heavy which is listed on the Necron Monolith on the GW website, makes me wonder.

I haven't seen anybody mention this yet, but the Tau are rumored to have a "super-battlesuit" type walker coming in the new Codex (whenever that might be). This unit is also rumored to have some sort of ability that allows it to fire everything twice if it stands still, if my memory serves correctly.

If the leaked rules are legit, this rumor would make a lot of sense as a misconstrued interpretation of the Multi-Targeting rule (units with MT can double their MT value if they remain stationary). People privy to one aspect of upcoming releases probably wouldn't be privy to others, aside from the folks central to the design process. I might just be looking for a connection where none exists, and of course drawing a conclusion from a circumstantial connection between two rumors is going to be wild speculation at best. However, maybe there's something there.

The whole classification of the Monolith being a 1-structure-point Superheavy is still highly unlikely.

The Necron "Codex Updates" isn't even existent, things are subject to dynamically change.

Anvildude wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Fishboy wrote:

Dynamix wrote:Schrodingers Cat

Its both a Fake and True at the same time until we open the box

I have always hated this.....just because we do not know does not mean the cat is still alive heh. I do however love the reference to this and the razor heheh.

The cat is a metaphor and a thought exercise, it's not actually how that is described to work.

And just because we do not know doesn't mean the cat is dead, either...

Alas as someone who thinks logically (digital for you non programmers) I think in ones and zero's. It is or it is not....that and I hate cats so dead it is

Breotan wrote:The rules have and always will be about selling more models. Does this ruleset do that? If so, then it may be legit. If not, it probably isn't.

Having read the rules a bit more thoroughly, especially the stratagems section, it seems to me that not only is GW pushing troops, point totals and models in general now we will be looking at toting around bastions, landing pads and defence lines. --hmm Thunderhawk--- So I believe yes they are pushing more models.

Pragmatically I see the business sense in this and applaud it. FW and GW models should be in greater demand. Models will come on and off quickly.. with few staying the entire game.

The BIG question in my mind is point values. If I read the vehicle section right even super heavies are under the multi tracking umbrella and thus will fire based on speed and multipliers.

IF the math is well worked out and values consistent.. I for one am greatly intrigued!

.2 imperial credits.

Mongo

Grey elder wrote:Idk if its just me but I couldn't find the classification of the vehicle type Heavy which is listed on the Necron Monolith on the GW website, makes me wonder.

It's at the very bottom of the rules for Super Heavies.

I've seen some folks say that Land Raiders are "Heavy" also, but I can't find that anywhere....

Wait... vehicles confer relentless on infantry inside them, so does this mean that everyone's favorite deffrolla wagon in going to very quickly become a lootawagon? Get to 18", have a field day.

Ditto for rhino rush and IG weapons teams in chimeras.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, Gate of Infinity is classified as a teleport move, teleport homers specifically work within this rules set.

Kurce wrote:

I've gone through all of my armies and I am pretty sure more things become playable than stop being playable. These rules have a LOT of balancing mechanics.

Obvious sign that this is fake. You think GW is capable of doing this?

In the name of profit, hell yeah! I think they can get themselves into gear and balance things if it means money.

Like everyone else has said, if it will boost model sales they will likely have a go of it. Fingers crossed they can indeed bring the goods, I'd personally love to see larger diversity in competitive lists.

Slackermagee wrote:Wait... vehicles confer relentless on infantry inside them, so does this mean that everyone's favorite deffrolla wagon in going to very quickly become a lootawagon? Get to 18", have a field day.

Ditto for rhino rush and IG weapons teams in chimeras.

As long as it remains stationary (or in the case of fast vehicles counts as stationary). If a battlewagon moves only one loota can fire regardless of relentless. Also seems suicidal to me with only an 18" range. Then remain staionary and get hit on 2's vs most shooting and autohit in CC.

Tankbustas could work though, since you can disembark, shoot and embark all in the same turn.

Dynamix wrote:Schrodingers Cat

Its both a Fake and True at the same time until we open the box

Awesome. you have made me smile.

Tapeworm711 wrote:I will say it again.

Occam's razor

You sir, have not. Ockham's razor doesn't apply when both possibilities make an equal number of assumptions.

Absolutionis wrote:If you don't know anything about Quantum Mechanics, there's no need to drop that Schrodinger's Cat meme here.

It's worse than those people that spammed "The Cake is a Lie" everywhere irrelevantly without even having played the game because it has lasted decades.

The latter is a Portal reference, right? Anyway, Schrodinger's Cat fits perfectly: until we can know for certain through observation, we should treat this document as both a fake and as a legitimate leak.

I am very intrigued and excited about the direction of the game, assuming this leak is legit.

1. The rules appear to be written more clearly and directly.
2. This ruleset sets itself up to be a solid base, with clear potential for expansion in the future
3. Increased complexity, but not for every turn/unit. This allows for more strategies and army design.
4. Changes to reserves deployment are positive - less luck-based and allows for more tactical play


Clearly as an early draft there are a lot of things that can be improved. For one, I hope they continued to refine the rules and organization of the document. There are quite a few ambiguities and contradictions that need to be addressed as well. Overall, however, I really applaud the direction and am hoping for a well-oiled, polished product to emerge!

Adrik wrote:I now believe it to be an early version of 6th that was scrapped. There were rumblings that a GW employee had been fired after designing a ruleset that was too unlike 5th.

Anyone remember this? I do recall hearing about this.

It's very interesting. Plausible scenario = Disgruntled former employee releases his rules to seek revenge on GW. His rules, being praised and revered make the actual 6th edition a massive disappointment.

azazel the cat wrote:until we can know for certain through observation, we should treat this document as both a fake and as a legitimate leak.

Nicely said, azazel the cat!

Dynamix wrote:Schrodingers Cat

Its both a Fake and True at the same time until we open the box

Schrodinger's Ruleset?

winterman wrote:

Slackermagee wrote:Wait... vehicles confer relentless on infantry inside them, so does this mean that everyone's favorite deffrolla wagon in going to very quickly become a lootawagon? Get to 18", have a field day.

Ditto for rhino rush and IG weapons teams in chimeras.

As long as it remains stationary (or in the case of fast vehicles counts as stationary). If a battlewagon moves only one loota can fire regardless of relentless. Also seems suicidal to me with only an 18" range. Then remain staionary and get hit on 2's vs most shooting and autohit in CC.

Tankbustas could work though, since you can disembark, shoot and embark all in the same turn.

Why can only 1 shoot? Not arguing with you, just wondering.