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.

Biophysical wrote:Depends on what Stratagems they take. At least one prevents a turn 1 charge by infiltrators.

I'm not using infiltrators to do it-- too risky.

Dynamix wrote:
Edit :However isnt this a good reason for them being fake ? wouldnt GW risk these rules being stolen by a denial ?

If the rules are real and they say they are fake, that does not give up copyright protection. What we are talking about is a scenario where they aren't real and GW can't prove they are AND they denied it.

If they deny it, but then in court they can produce proof that they really were theirs, then no, they don't lose IP protection.

labmouse42 wrote:

Ian Sturrock wrote:If this is really just a fan's house rules, said fan should contact me, with a view to getting them published as generic future wargames rules (no specific-universe IP involved; use any models you like).

I don't believe I will have to put my money where my mouth is, though.

And this is why I don't think its a fan-ruleset.

If it was, then we would see someone stepping forward to claim credit.

I had a funny thought.
GW has denied the leaked rules, right? They've done it before. I get that.
But what if this really isn't theirs and they're using our reactions as a live lab?
They're watching how everybody loves/hates certain changes, additions, etc....

And lets face it, nobody believes them when the say one way or another.

alarmingrick wrote:

labmouse42 wrote:

Ian Sturrock wrote:If this is really just a fan's house rules, said fan should contact me, with a view to getting them published as generic future wargames rules (no specific-universe IP involved; use any models you like).

I don't believe I will have to put my money where my mouth is, though.

And this is why I don't think its a fan-ruleset.

If it was, then we would see someone stepping forward to claim credit.

I had a funny thought.
GW has denied the leaked rules, right? They've done it before. I get that.
But what if this really isn't theirs and they're using our reactions as a live lab?
They're watching how everybody loves/hates certain changes, additions, etc....

And lets face it, nobody believes them when the say one way or another.

I honestly think this is just a playtesting version, so that's why they said it wasn't real.

Fetterkey wrote:For sure. My army-- without substantial changes of any kind-- can now reliably charge with 10 Assault Terminators on turn 1. Way I see it, that's going to give almost any opponent pause.

I'm intrigued. The potential charge range of termis (out of a land raider) is actually less (12"+6", opposed to 12"+2"+Base width+6").

Unless you're talking about some weird Shrike shenanigans.

Dynamix wrote:

junk wrote:Considering how good these rules are, I'd be willing to invest in that venture.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dynamix wrote:And get whacked with GW Lawyers ?

By exchanging some terms with a home-brewed proprietary lexicon changing the document into a unique IP, combined with any public denial of GW that these rules are somehow owned by them, would make for a relatively unassailable position.

How I would laugh !

Edit :However isnt this a good reason for them being fake ? wouldnt GW risk these rules being stolen by a denial ?

Now your thinking. Want to publish a generic rules set and sue GW if they release a set 90% similar to yours?

Quick! Someone notify chapterhouse. Oh what sweet irony

Dribble Joy wrote:

Fetterkey wrote:For sure. My army-- without substantial changes of any kind-- can now reliably charge with 10 Assault Terminators on turn 1. Way I see it, that's going to give almost any opponent pause.

I'm intrigued. The potential charge range of termis (out of a land raider) is actually less (12"+6", opposed to 12"+2"+Base width+6").

Unless you're talking about some weird Shrike shenanigans.

Probably something involving librarians deep striking them onto homing beacons from scouts or scout bikes first turn.

ShatteredBlade wrote:
I honestly think this is just a playtesting version, so that's why they said it wasn't real.

It may be some sort of advanced W40k test version, with a lot of ideas coming directly from brainstorming and inspiration from other systems, and written by some sort of studio's tactical genius (Crrrreeeed !)

Then, it would be juged as too complicated or too much different from conventional W40k. So a rewrite with a lot of chopping would be demanded by GW bosses.
Finally a V6, significantly rewritten and toned down would hit the stores by July, with a bunch of not risky and timid changes.

Ravajaxe wrote:

ShatteredBlade wrote:
I honestly think this is just a playtesting version, so that's why they said it wasn't real.

It may be some sort of advanced W40k test version, with a lot of ideas coming directly from brainstorming and inspiration from other systems, and written by some sort of studio's tactical genius (Crrrreeeed !)

Then, it would be juged as too complicated or too much different from conventional W40k. So a rewrite with a lot of chopping would be demanded by GW bosses.
Finally a V6, significantly rewritten and toned down would hit the stores by July, with a bunch of not risky and timid changes.

If the real 6th ed turns out to be just 4th ed with a different hat on, I might be having a sale of my armies.

ShumaGorath wrote:Probably something involving librarians deep striking them onto homing beacons from scouts or scout bikes first turn.

Scout moves are 12", units using a Beacon must be placed within 6". So yes, you do have roughly a 25" (including base width) 'assault range' with Gate of Infinity (power is used at the beginning of the movement phase).

Hang back a few inches and you should be OK if you think they are going to pull this trick.

Dynamix wrote:And get whacked with GW Lawyers ?

We on the Interwebs use "handles" Mr Dynamix.

labmouse42 wrote:

Dynamix wrote:And get whacked with GW Lawyers ?

We on the Interwebs use "handles" Mr Dynamix.

I don't wanna be Mr. Pink!

You probably play a yellow space marine.
oh wait.. ^^

Dribble Joy wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Probably something involving librarians deep striking them onto homing beacons from scouts or scout bikes first turn.

Scout moves are 12", units using a Beacon must be placed within 6". So yes, you do have roughly a 25" (including base width) 'assault range' with Gate of Infinity (power is used at the beginning of the movement phase).

Hang back a few inches and you should be OK if you think they are going to pull this trick.

Can a libby join the squad that shrike infiltrates? If so thats effectively 10 assault terms on the opposing board edge almost anywhere first turn.

I think the movement turn should go
Phychic powers turn, Shooting phase, Movement, Assault and than consolidation.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
WAAAAAIIIIIT A MINUTE!!


Everyone go look at page 33.....

Orks Armor save is a 6
Imperial guard now have a armor save of 5

POWER ARMOR - 2+ Armor save.

Not Terminator but POWER armor. WTF!>?!?!?!?

Already said a thousand times.
It's a typo. The explanation just below talks about rolling 3 or more to pass a marine save.

Ravajaxe wrote:Already said a thousand times.
It's a typo. The explanation just below talks about rolling 3 or more to pass a marine save.

I know I hope they fix that 3 or more thing before release.

illuknisaa wrote:

Ravajaxe wrote:Already said a thousand times.
It's a typo. The explanation just below talks about rolling 3 or more to pass a marine save.

I know I hope they fix that 3 or more thing if it's the real release.

Fixed that a little....

ShumaGorath wrote:Can a libby join the squad that shrike infiltrates? If so thats effectively 10 assault terms on the opposing board edge almost anywhere first turn.

Infiltrators do not benefit from Beacons unless they have Deep Strike. Alas, getting a beacon that far across the board for the beginning of turn one isn't possible.
A Libby can Gate a unit anywhere on the table anyway.

Rented Tritium wrote:
If they deny it, but then in court they can produce proof that they really were theirs, then no, they don't lose IP protection.

Thats interesting considering the current dispute with Chapterhouse . I guess the GW denial could be used against them but the playtesters and staff would be able to attest to GW IP ownership / origin I suppose , but if someone was to publish first , is this like Science papers where the first to publish gets the credit ?



Anyway , fun to hypothesise , but the above isnt going to happen , shame , that would have been amusing

Dribble Joy wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Can a libby join the squad that shrike infiltrates? If so thats effectively 10 assault terms on the opposing board edge almost anywhere first turn.

Infiltrators do not benefit from Beacons unless they have Deep Strike. Alas, getting a beacon that far across the board for the beginning of turn one isn't possible.
A Libby can Gate a unit anywhere on the table anyway.

Gate has a 24 inch range and scouts with a land speeder storm can be virually anywhere on the board on turn one (holding a teleport homer). If the libby can infiltrate with shrike with a squad of assault terms they can also be anywhere on the board assaulting turn one. It's kind of a wacky and expensive combo though.

Seriously, how cool is the Special Training stratagem? If your enemy brings a ton of tanks, give a few key units Tank Hunters. If your enemy goes crazy with snipers, Shield your key units. All you've got to do is bail out first. If the opponent bails first, you at least get to control turn order. A lot of the other stratagems seem custom made to mitigate spamming and gimmick lists. It's brilliant game design, allowing armies that don't have a hard counter to a powerful meta list bring something to the table to take the edge off. All rolled into a rule that limits the power of winning the first turn roll. I am impressed.

Biophysical wrote:Seriously, how cool is the Special Training stratagem? If your enemy brings a ton of tanks, give a few key units Tank Hunters. If your enemy goes crazy with snipers, Shield your key units. All you've got to do is bail out first. If the opponent bails first, you at least get to control turn order. A lot of the other stratagems seem custom made to mitigate spamming and gimmick lists. It's brilliant game design, allowing armies that don't have a hard counter to a powerful meta list bring something to the table to take the edge off. All rolled into a rule that limits the power of winning the first turn roll. I am impressed.

I'll be impressed if GW actually ever releases it.

ShumaGorath wrote:
Gate has a 24 inch range

Ah, I though it was unlimited.

and scouts with a land speeder storm can be virually anywhere on the board on turn one (holding a teleport homer).

Reserves are deployed before the movement phase, but after scout moves (which are 12" standard). So you can't zip the scouts forward and DS a unit onto them in the same turn.

If the libby can infiltrate with shrike with a squad of assault terms they can also be anywhere on the board assaulting turn one. It's kind of a wacky and expensive combo though.

Infiltrate is no longer closer to the enemy, it's auto-DS on turn one. So those infiltrating termis won't need the libby anyway.

Or am I missing something? (tad drunkypoos at the mo)

Biophysical wrote:Seriously, how cool is the Special Training stratagem? If your enemy brings a ton of tanks, give a few key units Tank Hunters. If your enemy goes crazy with snipers, Shield your key units. All you've got to do is bail out first. If the opponent bails first, you at least get to control turn order. A lot of the other stratagems seem custom made to mitigate spamming and gimmick lists. It's brilliant game design, allowing armies that don't have a hard counter to a powerful meta list bring something to the table to take the edge off. All rolled into a rule that limits the power of winning the first turn roll. I am impressed.

I know, that's what I've been saying. It's a great element to the game system that not only gives players a consolation for going second, brings up a whole extra tactical aspect to the game and is something almost unique in wargaming.
I really hope it stays, the whole bidding process I can foresee to be epic fun on it's own.

ShatteredBlade wrote: I honestly think this is just a playtesting version, so that's why they said it wasn't real.

Even if it were exactly what was sent to the printers (will be sent, how long before release do they do this?) GW would deny it right up until release day. GW similarly denied the 5th edition leak and denied that the "mystery box" was Space Hulk right until the day they announced that it was, in fact, Space Hulk. GW's denial really doesn't mean anything one way or the other.

tuebor wrote:

alarmingrick wrote: I honestly think this is just a playtesting version, so that's why they said it wasn't real.

Even if it were exactly what was sent to the printers (will be sent, how long before release do they do this?) GW would deny it right up until release day. GW similarly denied the 5th edition leak and denied that the "mystery box" was Space Hulk right until the day they announced that it was, in fact, Space Hulk. GW's denial really doesn't mean anything one way or the other.

You're giving me credit for something i didn't say?!?
And honestly, as sloppy as somethings are in this version it can't be what's coming out.

I still have a doubt about how outflanking is supposed to work, please clarify this.

When the unit arrives, it is placed within 6” of one of the short table edges.

Does this mean that this arrival replaces unit's movement, or it is a bonus to his initial placement, and outflanker can now move normally, charge, go flat-out... ?

alarmingrick wrote:You're giving me credit for something i didn't say?!?
And honestly, as sloppy as somethings are in this version it can't be what's coming out.

Sorry, screwed up deleting most of the quote tree.

Of course it isn't, but that's not that point. Even if the exact PDF that were sent to the printers were leaked, GW would deny that it's actually 6th edition. The guy I quoted was looking for a way GW could deny and it and not be lying which isn't remotely necessary because GW has been more than willing to lie about leaks in the past.

Bonus.

junk wrote:Bonus.

Thanks !
Outflanking becomes scary for assault units then. 6" more reach for 16" charging genestealers, ouch !!

CSM chosen squads getting out of rhino, firing their 4 plasma guns / melta guns from a position up to 18" from table flanks. ouch !!