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.

Pyriel- wrote:

Codex SM is generally the first one released after an edition shift. i doubt you'll be waiting long..

Try waiting 10+ years for an update for yor army

Well BT need to be updated first, as do DA, tau, eldar, orks, tyranids and chaos so yeah, SM players will be stuck with useless tac squads taken just because they have to for many years to come.

And yes, I have been waiting long for an army update, I played GK since they were first released and it´s been a long wait.

Wait dose needing a update and the time waited, have to do with when GW will make Codex? After the start set Armys, Codex:SM will be next.

Kurce wrote:

MPJ wrote:I'm starting to feel that preordering the collector's edition was a waste of time and money lol
Even though 40K is set in the future and guns should be paramount, I LOVE assaulting, running in and chopping up the enemy, but maybe GW don't want me to do that any more
Without the book actually being in our hands, these rules are still rumours, regardless of the accuracy, so things may still change and/or the updates could lessen the 'nerfs'
That being said, if the rules are genuine and there aren't any remedies in the updates, maybe saying goodbye to a game I've been playing since third is appropriate
Don't get me wrong, I enjoy more shooting armies too, but when it seems my favourite armies Dark Eldar and Tyranids are being made somewhat redundant, especially against MEQ (which I usually face), it's hard to stay invested in the game
I want at some point to collect Necrons, but I don't want to feel forced into doing so, as I do feel now, but hell, guess its a damn waiting game now
Just wish I didn't have to potentially lose £80 just to find out my armies suck lol

Your second sentence reminded me of a guy that my brother knows.

Him: "I will never play 40k to be honest."
Me: "Why?"
Him: "Because I refuse to play a game where forty-thousand years into the future, wars are still won by running across the battlefield and stabbing the other guy with a knife."
Me: "Hmm... you have a good point."

I can see his point, but assault as always been more fun than shooting, at least in my opinion

kirsanth wrote:I am mildly offended that the lack of Genestealer cults is offensive to me; I never liked them, but to have them denied at this level is basically spiteful.

What the what?

The warlord traits make me physically angry. I think that more than anything else in this edition could drive me out of 40k. It's like everyones leader gets to feel like a chaos possessed marine now. I mean, what the hell. Furious charge in your opponants deployment zone and counter attack in yours is on the same d6. Those are diametrically opposed tactics and whether it's useful at all is based entirely on your army.

This edition is taking any semblance of army construction and tactics and it's throwing it out the goddamn window. GW is killing itself.

hmm. . . double posted!

pretre wrote:What the what?

lol

I mean the lack of available allies for Tyranids.
Genestealer cults are the obvious tie in for allies, but no. . . .

Even if I think they were a silly idea, they are still a largely invalidated idea.

TedNugent wrote:From an RP standpoint, that would be silly. Bullets travel faster at closer ranges and you have a smaller time window in which to avoid what was an already very small time window. At point blank the impact from a bullet is almost instantaneous, whereas at maximum range you may have several seconds before impact.

This is totally wrong. It's possible to dodge gunfire at close range, because the angles involved mean that a smaller movement from you necessitates a larger movement from the gun tracking you. When Trinity said "Dodge this" in The Matrix, that was ironically one bullet that even a normal human could actually have dodged. Obviously, dodging after the shot is fired is impossible at close distances, but it's basically impossible at long distances too, and at close distances sudden movements may throw the attackers off.

TedNugent wrote:Then again, the idea of "hull points" is ridiculous from an RP standpoint, and it's in the game, so I don't know.

In real life, vehicle crews often abandon their tanks if they take one penetrating hit. Allowing vehicles to withstand multiple penetrating and glancing hits is generous from that perspective. If you don't like hull points, think of them as "crew morale points." For flyers, on the other hand, the idea of hull/"structural integrity" points actually makes sense.

TedNugent wrote:

Fetterkey wrote:If losing 2-3 toughness 3 models is a "devastating blow," go home and rethink your army list.

You must be kidding. It's an assault unit. To lose that many models -before- an assault in an assault unit is devastating, especially for a unit that relies on high initiative like Eldar. It could very easily shift momentum and allow another similarly costed unit to tip the balance.

That's simply ridiculous-- a certain number of casualties are naturally expected before you get into assault. If you think the rules should allow your assault units to charge without ever being exposed to danger on the way in, I think it's safe to say you're out of touch with game balance as a whole.

wuestenfux wrote:Well, I wouldn't care about losing 2 Wyches from a 10 men/girls squads. Winning also depends on when, where, and what to charge.

Quite.

N.I.B. wrote:If FNP unlike currently won't work on Instant Death, along with nerfed cover saves, it sounds like GW have sold their last Tyranid Warriors and Raveners. That's basically a huge nerf to FNP overall, regardless if it gets a slight boost when used on MC's.

FNP already doesn't work on Instant Death.

Goresaw wrote:I agree with you on the fact it doesn't treat eveyone fairly.. but just not in the way you are thinking.

When I think about alibative wounds, I think about one of the worst troop choices in the game... the SM tact squad. You are paying for... and MUST pay for, 8 very expensive alibative wounds.

You're still in a 5th edition mindset. Think 6th edition. Tactical Marines aren't ablative wounds anymore-- they can shoot their bolters at 24" on the move to provide effective anti-infantry fire.

A lot of the "sky is falling" stuff in this thread and elsewhere is grounded in lack of understanding of either the rules changes or the current rules. 6th edition looks, from where I'm standing, to be a breath of fresh air that will revitalize 40k as a whole. Before you start freaking out, just breathe, sit down, and think about it for five minutes. Everything is going to be all right...

Therion wrote:

Fast skimmer can move 12" in the movement phase, 18" flat out in the shooting phase, for a total of 30".

Big nerf number one to Necrons. Catacomb Command Barges do the sweeping attack in the movement phase, and a movement phase move of 12" is absolutely pitiful.

Imotekh just replaced the Overlords in a thousand Necron armies all over the world, and since Annihilation Barges were already replaced by Doom Scythes, the sales of that CCB/AB kit crashed.

Wow, never thought about that...12'' would require us to be in like max 6'' to the enemy...ehm...Please do not circumvent our word filter. Thanks. Manchu? I hope that this gets FAQ'd, else...footslog it is!

I'm loving that tape measure. I'm tempted to buy it, not just for wargaming, but to walk around my local DIY store

This is totally wrong. It's possible to dodge gunfire at close range, because the angles involved mean that a smaller movement from you necessitates a larger movement from the gun tracking you. When Trinity said "Dodge this" in The Matrix, that was ironically one bullet that even a normal human could actually have dodged. Obviously, dodging after the shot is fired is impossible at close distances, but it's basically impossible at long distances too, and at close distances sudden movements may throw the attackers off.

You don't dodge things before they are existent. To dodge something it has to be corporeal and imminent. Also, no one dodges bullets, you have to be aware of something to dodge it as well. Avoiding something and dodging it aren't the same.

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:I'm loving that tape measure. I'm tempted to buy it, not just for wargaming, but to walk around my local DIY store

Man i love it when kids get a grip on sarcasm.

Wait a minute, you were joking? right?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ShumaGorath wrote:

This is totally wrong. It's possible to dodge gunfire at close range, because the angles involved mean that a smaller movement from you necessitates a larger movement from the gun tracking you. When Trinity said "Dodge this" in The Matrix, that was ironically one bullet that even a normal human could actually have dodged. Obviously, dodging after the shot is fired is impossible at close distances, but it's basically impossible at long distances too, and at close distances sudden movements may throw the attackers off.

You don't dodge things before they are existent. To dodge something it has to be corporeal and imminent. Also, no one dodges bullets, you have to be aware of something to dodge it as well. Avoiding something and dodging it aren't the same.

You my friend have never seen the Matrix...

You my friend have never seen the Matrix...

The matrix isn't an accurate representation of things in 40k or real life. Neo would kick a demon princes ass.

Fetterkey wrote:

You're still in a 5th edition mindset. Think 6th edition. Tactical Marines aren't ablative wounds anymore-- they can shoot their bolters at 24" on the move to provide effective anti-infantry fire.

Why is it that 10 bolter wounds at 24" suddenly makes or breaks a unit? yeah, it adds a bit more utility. It doesn't revolutionize the unit or change its role. You're talking what, 2 dead guardsmen in cover? 1 dead Space Marine?

A lot of the "sky is falling" stuff in this thread and elsewhere is grounded in lack of understanding of either the rules changes or the current rules. 6th edition looks, from where I'm standing, to be a breath of fresh air that will revitalize 40k as a whole. Before you start freaking out, just breathe, sit down, and think about it for five minutes. Everything is going to be all right...

This is the refrain we heard with 4th, then 5th as well. I apologize for this, I don't mean to pick on you specifically, but this phrasing is something I want to address.

It's always going to "be a breath of fresh air", literally those *EXACT* words thrown about, that exact phrase brought out, every 4 years like clockwork. So far, we've had a lot of rules and mechanics changes, but the same types of systemic problems, even if the specific problems change, we never really end up with fewer or less intense problems. With 4E it was skimmers vs non-skimmers/rending/consolidations, with 5E it was transports, cover and KP's, with 6E it will likely be hull points and some other stuff. Notice that a lot of those are vehicle related, GW doesn't know what it wants vehicles to be and hasn't managed to fine a point they like since the 3E reboot.

Mohoc wrote:

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:@Bladewalker - well with 5th you probably did get it slightly early, as that was the norm back them on pre-orders.

Sadly since they changed to the White Dwarf one week till release method, they send things to get to you for the Monday, while those who preorder last minute, don't even get it sent to the monday after.

I suppose there is a slim chance it might turn up on the Saturday, but I have a feeling they send via ups with a specific deliver day.

That is because they want you to go to your FLGS to buy your copy.

GW has already mailed out my copy.

Vaktathi wrote:
It's always going to "be a breath of fresh air", literally those *EXACT* words thrown about, that exact phrase brought out, every 4 years like clockwork. So far, we've had a lot of rules and mechanics changes, but the same types of systemic problems, even if the specific problems change, we never really end up with fewer or less intense problems. With 4E it was skimmers vs non-skimmers/rending/consolidations, with 5E it was transports, cover and KP's, with 6E it will likely be hull points and some other stuff. Notice that a lot of those are vehicle related, GW doesn't know what it wants vehicles to be and hasn't managed to fine a point they like since the 3E reboot.

That's the GW way. Distract them from the original problems with new problems. From what I can see GW's using a plaster to fix a broken leg here.

streamdragon wrote: 'As they were represented in the past' is fairly immaterial now, since they haven't been represented in years. True, they're not really Tyranids + IG, they're really more IG + Genestealers. Well, with Genestealers in the Nid book...

Take your IG army, grab a Tyranid Prime, Genestealers + Broodlord, Ymargl Genestealers... Look! A genestealer cult.

And that's how everyone would ally those armies, right?

The ally system is what it is, and the state of GCults is what it is. I'd rather stick with 100% counts-as than get some kind of half-baked GCult that still needs counts-as, while opening the door to Tyranid armies with Hydras and IG armies with Hive Tyrants.

Like I said, GCults will either get a real army list someday or they won't.

Ok, usually I sneer at GW's goofy little gaming "extras" that incorporate their IP (hello "hand flamer" airbrush and "targeter" LoS finder), but... I NEED that tape measure like the breath of life itself.

I like the tape measure, honestly

It's been a good few years since anyone called me a kid.

Back OT. Surely by now somebody (or some ninjas) would have busted into the GW warehouse and looked through a rulebook. It's funny how people know everything about something months in advance, but when it's five days from going on sale, they're clueless.

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Back OT. Surely by now somebody (or some ninjas) would have busted into the GW warehouse and looked through a rulebook. It's funny how people know everything about something months in advance, but when it's five days from going on sale, they're clueless.

Ummmmm, there's a guy on Reddit with the rulebook. There's a link earlier in the thread.

ShumaGorath wrote:

You my friend have never seen the Matrix...

The matrix isn't an accurate representation of things in 40k or real life. Neo would kick a demon princes ass.

40k is a game based in a Science Fiction.

I do not think anyone has post this yet, its very short and gives little concrete but it does to me at least suggest possibly that allies will not be an optional rule but rather a core rule (whether or not that means core for most tourneys I do not know)

and yes I was just as vague as they were in their video but remember I am not GW

Grimtuff wrote:

That's the GW way. Distract them from the original problems with new problems. From what I can see GW's using a plaster to fix a broken leg here.

I really just get the impression that in general, they don't know what they want the game itself to do either. We've got armies larger than Flames of War companies on tables at a scale way larger, with lots of mechanics more appropriate to a 10-20 model game, and the whole thing just feels more and more confused and without direction, like they're just throwing stuff at certain problems without testing the fix and throwing other stuff in because "it sounds cool" and sending it out the door.

And it's infuriating because they obviously put a ton of effort into a release like this and actually getting it right (or mostly so) wouldn't really be any more effort than the side-stepping and fumbling they've been doing.

ShumaGorath wrote:

This is totally wrong. It's possible to dodge gunfire at close range, because the angles involved mean that a smaller movement from you necessitates a larger movement from the gun tracking you. When Trinity said "Dodge this" in The Matrix, that was ironically one bullet that even a normal human could actually have dodged. Obviously, dodging after the shot is fired is impossible at close distances, but it's basically impossible at long distances too, and at close distances sudden movements may throw the attackers off.

You don't dodge things before they are existent. To dodge something it has to be corporeal and imminent. Also, no one dodges bullets, you have to be aware of something to dodge it as well. Avoiding something and dodging it aren't the same.

You dodge by moving like crazy when you see the gun come up. There are tons of YouTube videos out there of robberies, police encounters, etc. showing how this is possible.

Vaktathi wrote:It's always going to "be a breath of fresh air", literally those *EXACT* words thrown about, that exact phrase brought out, every 4 years like clockwork. So far, we've had a lot of rules and mechanics changes, but the same types of systemic problems, even if the specific problems change, we never really end up with fewer or less intense problems. With 4E it was skimmers vs non-skimmers/rending/consolidations, with 5E it was transports, cover and KP's, with 6E it will likely be hull points and some other stuff. Notice that a lot of those are vehicle related, GW doesn't know what it wants vehicles to be and hasn't managed to fine a point they like since the 3E reboot.

I think there is a constant arc of improvement from Rogue Trader to the present day, and that each edition has been better than the previous. 5th edition is clearly much more balanced than 4th edition. 6th edition looks to address the (relatively minor) balance issues with 5th edition while providing bold new options as well.

Gitkikka wrote:Ok, usually I sneer at GW's goofy little gaming "extras" that incorporate their IP (hello "hand flamer" airbrush and "targeter" LoS finder), but... I NEED that tape measure like the breath of life itself.

Haha I'm right there with you. I would have liked to see a more detailed Allies system put into place, whereby each army has limitations placed on what they have access to in each of the other codexes beyond a HQ/Troop than have at it system. Sadly GWs current Rulebook/Codex release scheme has led to the more open-ended system

streamdragon wrote:

gorgon wrote:I predict that Harpies will be a must have. And I'm not kidding, I have a feeling that they'll make it so that every Tyranid player wants 3 of them. Or more at 2000+!

Regarding Genestealer Cults, the problem is that they really are their own army, at least they were as they were represented in the past. They're not Tyranids plus IG. Either someday they'll get a real codex or they won't. Scale isn't the issue, as GCults have been known cause planetary-level rebellions. It's fluffilogically correct for Tyranids not to have allies. Whether it's fair or balanced to approach game design that way...well, enough people have already said their peace on that.

I'm also kinda surprised at the missions. I've never seen a "carry the football" scenario executed well.

'As they were represented in the past' is fairly immaterial now, since they haven't been represented in years. True, they're not really Tyranids + IG, they're really more IG + Genestealers. Well, with Genestealers in the Nid book...

Take your IG army, grab a Tyranid Prime, Genestealers + Broodlord, Ymargl Genestealers... Look! A genestealer cult.

Only we don't get to do that.

Not to mention lictors and other infiltrating species that would be stalking through the area reaping havoc. Plus stealer cults are not instanteously devoured in an invasion. Often when an splinter force draws near, the genestealer cults will begin creating havok upon the civilization so as to reduce the planet's defenses, as an invasion actually makes landfall and progresses, these activities only intensify. So there is no reason why an IG cult wouldn't spring forth from the ranks during a Tyranid raid on an imperial bastion, vicously attacking the defenders as the nid's scale the walls.

The warlord traits make me physically angry. I think that more than anything else in this edition could drive me out of 40k. It's like everyones leader gets to feel like a chaos possessed marine now. I mean, what the hell. Furious charge in your opponants deployment zone and counter attack in yours is on the same d6. Those are diametrically opposed tactics and whether it's useful at all is based entirely on your army.

This edition is taking any semblance of army construction and tactics and it's throwing it out the goddamn window. GW is killing itself.

This!

Besides the power level thing, should a cheap IG HQ get the same powers/abilities like a 1000 year old chaos marine sorceror?

Also I dont get the snap and overwatch things, apparently training and experience means NOTHING in the future when you sire your weapons while moving or while being assaulted.
A blind gakking grot has all of a sudden the same skill as a marine first company sergeant and the same chances to hit things.
w t f

alphaomega wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

You my friend have never seen the Matrix...

The matrix isn't an accurate representation of things in 40k or real life. Neo would kick a demon princes ass.

40k is a game based in a Science Fiction.

I think you mean Science Fantasy.

Who has time to go through 94 pages? I'm too busy painting miniatures in order to shame people who are posting in that thread about unpainted armies in the discussion forum

If there is a link to the rulebook, then why are people still fretting about allies.

My view on allies is perfectly clear - ban the F*****s!!

I don't want to ally with orks, I want large templates landing on top of them. I don't want eldar in my IG army, I want to be greasing the axles of my tanks with them

The community is big enough and old enough to adapt to any GW ruling.

gorgon wrote:

streamdragon wrote: 'As they were represented in the past' is fairly immaterial now, since they haven't been represented in years. True, they're not really Tyranids + IG, they're really more IG + Genestealers. Well, with Genestealers in the Nid book...

Take your IG army, grab a Tyranid Prime, Genestealers + Broodlord, Ymargl Genestealers... Look! A genestealer cult.

And that's how everyone would ally those armies, right?

The ally system is what it is, and the state of GCults is what it is. I'd rather stick with 100% counts-as than get some kind of half-baked GCult that still needs counts-as, while opening the door to Tyranid armies with Hydras and IG armies with Hive Tyrants.

Like I said, GCults will either get a real army list someday or they won't.

Fluff is malleable; that's the Golden Rule. Not long ago a Necron alliance with anybody would have seemed impossible, and now it's completely reasonable. Furthermore, there is no extant fluff that details exactly what happens when a Hive Fleet goes into full-scale conflict with a planet suffering a Genestealer infestation. All we have are a few lines that tell us a Cult's eventual doom is signaled by the arrival of a Hive Fleet. Nothing more detailed than that.

One half-page story about a Magus spreading the word that the creatures of the Hive Fleet were the avenging angels of the reborn Emperor would solve every conceivable background gap, with about as much effort as it takes to make a chunky post on Dakka.

So ultimately it's a missed opportunity. The rest of the allies matrix is extremely lenient, and much of it is no more eyebrow-raising than a full Tyranid/IG alliance would be. I don't see a good reason why Tyranids should have to live up to their fluff religiously while other armies have the flexibility and progressive, living background to justify odd alliances.

Pyriel- wrote:Besides the power level thing, should a cheap IG HQ get the same powers/abilities like a 1000 year old chaos marine sorceror?

Also I dont get the snap and overwatch things, apparently training and experience means NOTHING in the future when you sire your weapons while moving or while being assaulted.
A blind gakking grot has all of a sudden the same skill as a marine first company sergeant and the same chances to hit things.
w t f

I dislike the random general attributes in principle, but you're right the execution also seems to lack flavour. So bad in principle, and bad in execution.

The BS1 thing also seems very clumsy. I don't know a fix for it, but it really just feels like a way to give another shooting phase. Somehow my captain shooting his bolter at incoming assaulters has the same skill as an ork.

The more I read about this edition, the more pessimistic I am. I like the idea of hull points, and the buff to rapid fire. But my 30 wychs are really hurting in my DE army as far as I can tell. I'm going to reserve judgement until after I play some games, but many of the rules seem stupid. Don't even get me started with allies.

Fetterkey wrote:

I think there is a constant arc of improvement from Rogue Trader to the present day, and that each edition has been better than the previous. 5th edition is clearly much more balanced than 4th edition. 6th edition looks to address the (relatively minor) balance issues with 5th edition while providing bold new options as well.

See, I personally never found 5E to be better than 4E ultimately, just different.

We had as many balance issues in 5E as we did in 4E, just with different things. 4E had assault cannon spam SM's, 3.5E CSM abuse/Lash-spam, invicible Eldar Skimmerspam, etc. whereas in 5E we had Razorfangwolf Spam, tankspam, Psybolt GK's, etc. In 4E we had issues where non-skimmer tanks and especially non-skimmer transports were of little or no value and weird "alpha/gamma" mission levels, and in 5E we had issues with KP's and wound allocation. Different issues, same problems.

If you're looking for a break from 5E's issues, yeah, 6E will probably deliver you from most of them, but there are several already apparent things that already look like they will be consistent bugbears, and unless GW does more to control their codex releases, the issues on that end won't stop either, so we'll end up with similar situations to 3E/4E/5E, even if the specifics are different.