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.

Think the new psycher system will allow for dispelling, with psychic hoods and the like being additional or replacing attempts? Probably only if they make powers really all that, but that would be quite the twist.

ShumaGorath wrote:

I like the idea of taking 22 paladins and a dreadknight and going up against 100+ orks with kanz and lootas thrown in.

And no one likes playing your 22 palladins, especially not that ork player who might as well not even deploy. My idea of 40k is being able to put an army on the table and not knowing for absolute certain whether I will win or lose the game based on how many av14 vehicles or utterly idiotic death star units they have on the table. My ideal for 40k is one where there is a game between bouts of rock paper scissors army creation.

I agree with most of your points, but you seem to be contradicting yourself here. 22 Paladins vs a horde of Orks is pretty much the definition of a rock vs scissors matchup, its precisely what we don't want to be showing up. Unbalanced armies aren't good for the game, since they an almost auto win vs some matchups and auto loss vs others. Even in an ideal world I don't think you will ever be able to remove them from the game completely, the key is to encourage people to build balanced lists in every way possible (including FOC changes).

Gods of Chaos I whope we get something in May. I'm getting pretty tired of waiting. Jumped in the game almost one year over now, and been waiting to see CSM get a new codex since then (their fluff is what got me in)

ShumaGorath wrote:-There are three marine armies capable of making entire armies composed of nothing but terminator armor

They're supposed to. The problem here isn't that three Marine armies can field all-Terminator armies, it's that the others can't.

It's meant to force army builds with varied unit choices that are representative of a realistic army.

All-Terminator armies are a well established part of the fluff, across multiple chapters. A FOC rule that does not permit this is a bad rule.

They're supposed to. The problem here isn't that three Marine armies can field all-Terminator armies, it's that the others can't.

No, the problem is that it's an extreme army build that makes anti infantry firepower worthless while negating the defensive countermeasure of armor or toughness due to ubiquitous power fists or force weapons. It's a problem because it's bad game design to allow something like that.

All-Terminator armies are a well established part of the fluff, across multiple chapters. A FOC rule that does not permit this is a bad rule.

Then they should make a game wherein an army like that isn't a majorly distorting force in the meta. Those armies either win because they can't lose or lose because they can't win. They are entirely matchup dependant like with almost all extreme builds. That is a fundamentally imbalanced approach to game design and creates unfun games.

Goresaw wrote:I'm really starting to feel the bloat of models too. I've been playing Dark Eldar, and was playing an IG foot list. I made a bad decision in turn one which knocked out half my sailboats. I was crippled and at that point could only play for a tie because I could no longer actually hurt the IG player (spearhead deployment. Open season on me and all my long range was in my transports).

So the dragged on turn after turn of just unrelenting shooting and very short turns for me. So many dice. The turns were taking an obnoxious amount of time. The Brits have got it right. This 2000 point stuff is too much.


Although aside from complaining about army size, a % base FOC would help alleviate a LOT of issues for some armies. Some armies fill their FOC's around 1750, and are forced to take sub-optimal choices to get to 2000. Again, I've been playing DE, and if you venom spam, you're out of troop slots fast, and you desperately wish you could take more. If you look at IG though, and he gets insanely more powerful the higher the points go, because he can just squadron his tanks, etc. Everything over 1750 isn't just icing, its more meat.

If we went percentages that would also help armies who have 'cheaper' heavy support options. Like DE ravagers are only 105 points. Having 355 points of your army maxed into heavy support at 2000 points is just dumb. It would also allow some less seen units an opportunity to see the table. A lot of times you have 'decent' or 'situational' choices in your FOC slot, but you can't use it because one of those choices so insanely outshine it (or you NEED at least _____ of something to work). If you're not limited to only three of "x", now you can take your normal amount of "x" and throw some extra points towards that fun unit.

Im sorry but squadding my tanks does not make them any more powerful in a sense most LR varients would be redundant squaded some may not like vanilla russ but even then still get wrecked with the squad rule, especially against any Lance weapon that makes it a chimmy with lotsa firepower....
up to 2000pts
I avoid squadding my tanks at all costs(unless artillery), id rather fill another slot once my HS is full
And because your HS is cheap dosnt mean its dumb just means your army dosnt heavily focus on HS choices to get the job done, unlike IG where it makes sense for them to have "lumbering behemoths"...

Anywho the 6th rumors are both good and bad... But personally dont see all these things wrong with the current edition rules.. :s maybe some things need to be tweaked here or there but i dont think we need a new overhaul of the whole game and how it works... and realistically ill shoot before ill assault anyway or both at once.
Also this is 40k not Fantasy so why should we be geared so much with CC? i understand some armies focus on it but majority do not...

Also being able to only shoot 1 gun from fire point in a chim/transports if it moves seems really dumb, if your gonna change that you midas well change the whole model while your at it and remove the lasguns on the back...

I also see alot of people mentioning that tanks being easier to kill would be better..... I never thought it was that hard... again if your eldar/DE against av14 bring a lance... your IG or SM bring a melta...

FOC-% dont know about that, i like the FOC maybe just add an extra slot for everything
and please dont take away dedicated transports.

I dont like the fact it seems there pushing people away from mechs or just making it so your guaranteed to lose it because if thats the case why am i spending 200 pts on a russ? IG are but puney humans we need big tanks and heavy artillery to Help win the wars.

Some of the rules mentioned are neat like with snipers, or split fire for mechs, dont think they need to change everything and have so many rules within rules, myabe just take some of those good ideas and sprinkle them on top of 5th edition. ( vehicle dmg chart is fine! )

All-Terminator armies are a well established part of the fluff, across multiple chapters. A FOC rule that does not permit this is a bad rule.

I'm sorry but no, there's only two, Gray Knights, and Dark Angels.

Dark angels have the only facilities able to reproduce their terminator armor only for them, to the point they can willfully put an entire chapter within it, rather than small squads at a time.

I think it is important to remember that 40k is GW's main cash cow and that they know this and game design is driven by sales.

Remember 4th ed and what transports were like back then? So, 5th ed GW changes the vehicle rules to make it more important to run troops in a transport. So they sell you the squad and the transport.

My guess is GW saw the MSU sales and liked that. I'd wager that GW likes 2 squads of 5 marines in a razorback more than 1 squad of 10 in a rhino.

That and clearly they want to sell us flyers.

I don't believe any leaks that don't have flying rules in them.

I think 6th will have:
1) More units and everybody in a transport
2) Flyers
3) Older historic units are not very useful (look at what happened to the Necrons and Grey Knights)

Their design is based around selling models. Not having tight rules or changing the basic system.

evancich wrote:I think it is important to remember that 40k is GW's main cash cow and that they know this and game design is driven by sales.

Remember 4th ed and what transports were like back then? So, 5th ed GW changes the vehicle rules to make it more important to run troops in a transport. So they sell you the squad and the transport.

My guess is GW saw the MSU sales and liked that. I'd wager that GW likes 2 squads of 5 marines in a razorback more than 1 squad of 10 in a rhino.

That and clearly they want to sell us flyers.

I don't believe any leaks that don't have flying rules in them.

I think 6th will have:
1) More units and everybody in a transport
2) Flyers
3) Older historic units are not very useful (look at what happened to the Necrons and Grey Knights)

Their design is based around selling models. Not having tight rules or changing the basic system.

Sadly %100 this.

Thank you... Transports just make sense this is the future why wouldnt my cardboard armor and flashlight weilding guardsmen not want to be in a chimy?

Diezel wrote:Thank you... Transports just make sense this is the future why wouldnt my cardboard armor and flashlight weilding guardsmen not want to be in a chimy?

It's 38 thousand years in the future. Why are they hitting eachother with swords? Why does ground combat still exist? Why aren't the just deleting eachother from the informational superstructure of reality or something else suitable to the future date?

GW: Ok, how do we increase model count in 6th?

GW troll: Well, if we have flyers that the ground pounders don't get a cover save from, then we will sell everybody flyers...They will kill other models quick.

GW: Brillant! But, but won't removing half their army make folks mad?

GW Troll: Take the 'leet marine army and drop the point costs to get everybody ready for the crazy cheap point cost "normal" marine 'dex. So everybody takes twice the models they take now and they won't mind the damage planes do to their army

GW: I love you. Done! Print 6th ed

ShumaGorath wrote:

Diezel wrote:Thank you... Transports just make sense this is the future why wouldnt my cardboard armor and flashlight weilding guardsmen not want to be in a chimy?

It's 38 thousand years in the future. Why are they hitting eachother with swords? Why does ground combat still exist? Why aren't the just deleting eachother from the informational superstructure of reality or something else suitable to the future date?

Because in the grim darkness of the 40k universe, there is only WAR (with chainswords, bolters, power weapons, plasma guns, melta guns, krak grenades...if the weapons 'aint broke, don't fix them)!

And, Orks, Tryranids, Demons, Necrons, Chaos and pretty much everyone else doesn't fight that way...

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

All-Terminator armies are a well established part of the fluff, across multiple chapters. A FOC rule that does not permit this is a bad rule.

I'm sorry but no, there's only two, Gray Knights, and Dark Angels.

Dark angels have the only facilities able to reproduce their terminator armor only for them, to the point they can willfully put an entire chapter within it, rather than small squads at a time.

The Ultramarines and the Blood Angels are another two chapters that have fielded all-Terminator forces in the fluff. Hell, there's an entire game about Blood Angels doing it.

The Force Organization Chart needs to stay unless some sort of other restriction is implemented or the basic rules switch to otherwise punish MSU, with WHFB style panic checks, mandatory KP in all scenarios, or something to that effect. Otherwise, everyone will be spamming out 3 man Long Fang squads, solo Attack Bikes/Landspeeders/Hive Guard/Zoans, etc. MSU armies are strong enough already...

**puts up shield** i kept telling GW, they should bring back the two systems as one.
My reason....well Warhammer is a Feral world.

***falls to ground as Brick flies over head**

Heck, i still have the Warhammer Siege, By good Ol' Rick Priestly, from 1988. has both, fantasy/40k rules. Ha ha ha! i NEVER throw away my Warhammer books.

**puts hand to head** (brick found its mark)

I even got,.. well to many to count.

looking forward to see if the wispers are true.

GW doesn't care about things being over powered. They've said time and aging that 40k is a "beer and pretzels" game.

They care about selling you models. Newsflash, they don't even care if you ever play a game.

GW has already changed 40k to sell you transports. They are going to change the game to sell you planes. If they thought MSU would result in higher model sales, they'd do that.

These aren't complicated folks. They a trying to make theirs while they have command of the ship.

AlexHolker wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

All-Terminator armies are a well established part of the fluff, across multiple chapters. A FOC rule that does not permit this is a bad rule.

I'm sorry but no, there's only two, Gray Knights, and Dark Angels.

Dark angels have the only facilities able to reproduce their terminator armor only for them, to the point they can willfully put an entire chapter within it, rather than small squads at a time.

The Ultramarines and the Blood Angels are another two chapters that have fielded all-Terminator forces in the fluff. Hell, there's an entire game about Blood Angels doing it.

Space hulk is about a SQUAD going into a hulk and clearing it of genestealers. Really now.

Yes, they have fielded all terminator forces before, but when you count up they only have at max 50-150, Dark Angels has over 1000.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Yes, they have fielded all terminator forces before, but when you count up they only have at max 50-150, Dark Angels has over 1000.

I have a feeling you don't know the fluff for this game terribly well. Dark Angels have the Deathwing, which is their first company. This is 100 Marines. They have more suits of Terminator armor so they can field the whole company in said armor if they like. They have 100 Terminators. That's all. Also, you missed that Space Wolves can field an all Terminator army.

evancich wrote:GW doesn't care about things being over powered. They've said time and aging that 40k is a "beer and pretzels" game.

They care about selling you models. Newsflash, they don't even care if you ever play a game.

GW has already changed 40k to sell you transports. They are going to change the game to sell you planes. If they thought MSU would result in higher model sales, they'd do that.

These aren't complicated folks. They a trying to make theirs while they have command of the ship.

Yes, but if GW ruins the game, I will buy zero GW models, as my funds will be redirected to Defiance Games, Corvus Belli, or Privateer Press. Even from the most cynical point of view, GW has an incentive to make their games good.

Fetterkey wrote:

evancich wrote:GW doesn't care about things being over powered. They've said time and aging that 40k is a "beer and pretzels" game.

They care about selling you models. Newsflash, they don't even care if you ever play a game.

GW has already changed 40k to sell you transports. They are going to change the game to sell you planes. If they thought MSU would result in higher model sales, they'd do that.

These aren't complicated folks. They a trying to make theirs while they have command of the ship.

Yes, but if GW ruins the game, I will buy zero GW models, as my funds will be redirected to Defiance Games, Corvus Belli, or Privateer Press. Even from the most cynical point of view, GW has an incentive to make their games good.

Games workshop is also a medium scale international company, not a collection of 1980s movie stereotypes of evil businessmen. They understand that the continued success of their business is tied into the continued success of their games as a medium for selling products. Newsflash, they care a whole hell of alot if you play the game because that's how they sell you models.

Brother SRM wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Yes, they have fielded all terminator forces before, but when you count up they only have at max 50-150, Dark Angels has over 1000.

I have a feeling you don't know the fluff for this game terribly well. Dark Angels have the Deathwing, which is their first company. This is 100 Marines. They have more suits of Terminator armor so they can field the whole company in said armor if they like. They have 100 Terminators. That's all. Also, you missed that Space Wolves can field an all Terminator army.

It's hard to keep track from the Rogue Trader, to the Space Hulk, to the 2nd edition codex to the various other fluff.

Ugh, I don't even know where I keep getting 1000 from..

And yes they can,

ShumaGorath wrote: It's meant to force army builds with varied unit choices that are representative of a realistic army. It is failing at that totally and completely and the games design intentions have been to nullify it as much as possible for years, first with the removal of max allotments, then with the removal of the force org itself in many situations.

40k isn't really meant to replicate an army - these are small to mid size skirmishing forces, not a balanced force meant to handle all roles in warfare. The force organization chart is meant to limit certain kinds of builds, which it does. The ability to change the force organization allows the codex designer to pick what kind of exceptions should be allowed and limit certain builds. If you run 9 Leman Russ, you are doing it because the codex was designed to allow a tank platoon with some support. If you want to run 9 Manticores you can't, because the designers felt 9 Manticores would be broken, or not match the fluff. All of this works fine - if there is a problem it is with the designers choices, not the force organization.

That doesn't mean the chart doesn't have it's limitations, or that something better can't be built. But it is just fine for what it does.

I find it interesting that most of the issues with the FOC aren't with the FOC itself rather that there are too many codexes that ingonre it yet nobody has really given any examples of how a % system would alleviate these issues.

As I tried to articulate a % system punishes high pts value armies rewards low pts value armies and doesn't have any real effect on any of the FOC shifting offenders due to FOC shifting moving units to the category that in either system is the least restricted.

Saying that maybe in the % system they wont be able to FOC shift is not in any way an endorsement for % over FOC as removing the ability and keeping the FOC would be largely the same.

The only benefit without a downside that offsets it is that a % system is superior for playing really high pts value APOC level games.

I don't buy the random psychic powers rumour. No one would ever field a Zoanthrope again if they couldn't count on it packing Warp Lance.

Percentages instead of FOC slots sounds more likely, but I'm not sure if I like it. At 2000 points, with 25% HQ/Elite/Heavy, as a Tyranid player I wouldn't be able to field any deathstar, nor 3 Trygons or 3 Dakkafexes, all builds I really like and use in tournaments.
I wouldn't be able to field 3x10 Ymgarls or 2x10 + 3 Venomthropes, which happen to be the build I'm planning.
Heck, you wouldn't be able to field 2 Tyrannofexes at 2000 points.

25% slots would imo be too restricting.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

All-Terminator armies are a well established part of the fluff, across multiple chapters. A FOC rule that does not permit this is a bad rule.

I'm sorry but no, there's only two, Gray Knights, and Dark Angels.

Dark angels have the only facilities able to reproduce their terminator armor only for them, to the point they can willfully put an entire chapter within it, rather than small squads at a time.

Ultramarines 1st Company vs Tyranids. Every marine chapter in existance can muster their 1st company terminators together if need be. Many will even have enough terminator suits to field an entire force the size of those usually appearing in a game of 40k. There are likely hundreds of chapters that could field multiple terminator squads at once-- enough to act as a single force for an operation.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Fetterkey wrote:
Yes, but if GW ruins the game, I will buy zero GW models, as my funds will be redirected to Defiance Games, Corvus Belli, or Privateer Press. Even from the most cynical point of view, GW has an incentive to make their games good.

Nothing about minor tweaks will "ruin the game" for the majority of their customers. That's the point of making relatively minor tweaks-- they change things just enough to justify calling it a new edition and making a tweak in the meta so people who are already their customers will slowly adapt to the new edition through purchases.

Another thing I'd add is that the customers who are informed and know about other miniature companies are not GW's target audience. They want teenagers who they get through their demo sales process and who equate the entire miniature hobby with Games Workshop. Those with more mature tastes like yourself are welcome to play and buy as well, but you're not core market.

We're all out of news and rumours then

FWIW I think the FOC would be fine with 2 tweaks - Make it so that no 'slot' can cost more than 20% of the army value (i.e. in a 1500 point game no more than 300 points can be spent on each FOC slot). This will stop some of the sillier death stars.

Then have every mission involve some element of both objective capture (to encourage MSU) and kill points (to discourage MSU). People should actually have to think about their army selection and have to either compromise or take risks.

$0.02

AlexHolker wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

All-Terminator armies are a well established part of the fluff, across multiple chapters. A FOC rule that does not permit this is a bad rule.

I'm sorry but no, there's only two, Gray Knights, and Dark Angels.

Dark angels have the only facilities able to reproduce their terminator armor only for them, to the point they can willfully put an entire chapter within it, rather than small squads at a time.

The Ultramarines and the Blood Angels are another two chapters that have fielded all-Terminator forces in the fluff. Hell, there's an entire game about Blood Angels doing it.

Fluff alone is not sufficient cause to include a gameplay representation of it on the table. If you operate of the premise that if it exists in the fluff it should have rules you rather have to seriously restrict the things that can appear in novels and such to only things that make gameplay sense or you allow the games integrity to be seriously comprimised by a bunch of bloat with little mechanical worth.

That Blood Angels could in theory field a full Terminator Force isn't the issue its that on the tabletop in the 40k skirmish game they are the fast jump infantry theme SM army allowing them to field forces that step on the toes of major themes of other SM armies that from a mechanical perspective can only really be justified by what makes them unique seems somewhat counter intuitive....

In the current BA codex. Their focus has changed drastically with each release. You have the 3rd edition BA rhino rush and before that, they were nearly codex compliant other than the Death Company. The White Dwarf codex that came between the 3rd ed and the current one was actually closer to their 2nd ed than either the 3rd ed or 5th ed versions.

You may think BA should be like X, but when it comes to talking about different editions, the definition of X has not been constant. There is no reason BA can't be totally different yet again with the coming of 6th.

frozenwastes wrote:In the current BA codex. Their focus has changed drastically with each release. You have the 3rd edition BA rhino rush and before that, they were nearly codex compliant other than the Death Company. The White Dwarf codex that came between the 3rd ed and the current one was actually closer to their 2nd ed than either the 3rd ed or 5th ed versions.

You may think BA should be like X, but when it comes to talking about different editions, the definition of X has not been constant. There is no reason BA can't be totally different yet again with the coming of 6th.

Save that in 5th ed GW seem to have realized that if your going to have seperate rule books for variant SM armies having each one have a flavour that distinguishes them helps to justify their existance beyond an excuse to sell the same kits for multiple armies. How many times do you see folks saying that DA should be rolled into Codex SM because they aren't different enough to warrant their own codex? Or how often DA players lament that everything that made them unique has been given out to all the other SM armies. But thankfully GW seem to have as I say realized the mistake and begun to give each SM codex unique units, themes and playstyles thus allowing them to continue to sell the core SM units which is the primary purpose of multiple SM armies but now they actually provide a mechanical worth along with it.

I'm not saying it wont happen though I don't see it happening soon with the way things have been going but I am definatly saying that people shouldn't want it too. How is having 6 mechanically homogenous armies for no other reason than "they can do it in the fluff" and a unique asthetic superior to having armies that while due to their nature have alot of core similarities but through themes and unique mechanics and units provide more varied playstyles?

Hell you can throw CSM in there and your up to 7 but it's like ive said elsewhere its the things that make Chaos unique that are important its why the rumored "Chaos Dragon" flyer is waaaaay better than if they got something akin to a Stormraven with spikes, hell there a novels with Chaos using Stormhawks it doesn't mean a Choas version needs to be added to the codex. Its like I said to a guy in my FLGS the other day if all you really want is to be playing an evil marine army that doesn't miss out on any of the SM toys then run a Codex SM list using Chaos models you don't need Codex Chaos Renegades......