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.

Looks like Collectors and Gamers is sold out in US now too.

Go go UPS!

Vaktathi wrote:

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.

There are deeper problems at the core of 40k right now.

: Power creep and unchanged legacy units (tac marines, gaunts, guardians haven't changed since third and are awful)

: The schism between effective and noneffective firepower (A double tapping marine plasma gun does 1.11 wounds to another marine, a bolter does .222, one plasmagun marine does equivalent damage to 2.5 bolter ones and yet only costs about 30% more than a normal marine.) This is a direct imbalance that strongly favors min maxing (which is why you see it everywhere).

: The logical inadequacy of multipurpose units in a game that only lets you do single actions (why take a mixed unit like tacticals or guardians when it's own loadout is contradictory? Can't fire the special and heavy at the same time and neither one is going to be good at killing the thing the bolters are "good" at killing meaning the opportunity cost and thus point value of the weapons themselves is wasted). Again, this directly favors min maxing over taking multipurpose or resilient units.

: A turn has been removed from shooting since third due to running and combats have been made vastly deadlier, but only some specific units can take advantage. This means that orks hit a tau line a turn earlier and the tau lose the game by default, but tyranids gain little since their turn of impact didn't increase with the addition of the run rules. The way GW has made up for quicker impact of assault units has been to power up shooting dramatically. That makes the game an all or nothing affair of tabling vs getting tabled. It's like a giant slow tower defense game.

: Transports in defense break the logical flow of the firing phase because an entire 200+ point block of shooting will typically be utilized on a single transport while leaving the occupants unscathed to then utilize their own firepower on the return on a softer and more valuable target. Being forced to sink 8 bolters into the side of a vehicle so that I can also fire 2 meltaguns at it is stupid. It breaks the game. It has always broken the game. It directly favors MSU and min maxing. This wasn't a problem in fourth because transports were prohibitively expensive and anti vehicle weaponry was still cheap, but the opportunity cost of transports became too good and obvious when the majority of them dropped 33% or more in cost.

: etc, there are other issues like the lack of a functioning morale system with layers of non working patches, the fundamental imbalance caused by random reserve rolls, exceptionally poor basic mission and deployment design, blah blah.

Sixth edition addresses almost none of these points, adds a lot of uneeded randomness, and makes it easier to minmax through allies and expanded for org selection. It's putting (ugly) lipstick on a pig, this games designers have no idea what they're doing.

ShumaGorath wrote: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.

That's one way to look at it.

Alternatively, (particularly given how many people are complaining about allies unbalancing everything) it could be seen as GW's way of encouraging people to build more rounded lists.

Whether or not it will achieve that will obviously remain to be seen, of course.

Wow those rumors gave me a.... Yeah. Death company just became a WHOLE lot better! Tac marines got a lot better too! Wyches on the other hand got the banhammer to the face :( wonder if dodge works on overwatch shots....

kirsanth wrote: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.

Wait... Tyranid players! Since ya'll cant take allies...

And most games are usually 2000 pts (at least where I live)...

At 2000pts, the FoC is doubled... could you drop in more awesome big bugs now? Or, ya'll can kinda do that now and it's now worth it?

Disclaimer: I'm a bug noob.. I like orks.. we eat bugs...

ShumaGorath wrote: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.

The Warlord bonus should be thought of as a possible bonus. Not something to build the army around. It would be ABSURD to build your army a specific way and then depend on a random Warlord bonus roll.

Weird. The system showed a double post, when I went to edit it, it changed it to one post and deleted my old post.

Anyway.

40K is a creaky system, as Shuma says. The justification that GW are trying to "encourage" us to play rounded armies is ridiculous.

It is totally possible to create a system where the majority of units are viable and spam and min maxing is not encouraged- privateer press have done so, as have other wargames designers.

The GW designers don't seem to want to change the broken core mechanics, it's as simple as that. This is poor form because expecting players to exercise restraint in a game with winners and losers is asking for trouble, not to mention extremely subjective.

For example, I've seen a few people posting about how excited they are to be able to run nurgle demons with epidemus and chaos marines. I consider that to be exploitative as epidemus is balanced by the paucity of ranged weapons available to mono nurgle. The defence that it is fluffy holds no water- you could use Ku'gath or a GUO or a herald as HQ, and not get he exploit, but I have not seen any one of these "fluff" players suggest that.

Therion wrote: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.

With an extra 6" movement, CCB's will at least get better positioning on the first turn. Plus, using Wraiths' and Scarabs' increased threat range to "encourage" units into the CCB's lessened threat range could make it a wash overall. As "that guy who always brings two CCB's," I can't say I'm thrilled about this change, but I think CCB's will have life yet (I'm also willing to admit they're pretty unreasonable in 5th...) Not sure that I find Imotekh any more appealing either. New Night Fight rules feel like a big "meh" in comparison to Night Fight in 5th.

Joe Mama wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote: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.

The Warlord bonus should be thought of as a possible bonus. Not something to build the army around. It would be ABSURD to hope for a certain result.

Seems like you will have games were one side randomly hits the jackpot on one roll right at the start and gets a distinct advantage. Some games they will do nothing.

Its random for the sake of random. This is really the random = fun edition. If you don't agree that random = fun, you're going to have a bad time.

Da Boss wrote:The defence that GW is trying to persuade people, ever so gently, to take more rounded forces is ridiculous. If they just built a game that worked, people would do that ANYWAY. Players shouldn't have to be relied on to exercise restraint in a game that has a winner and a loser, because someone will always exploit.

And it's not impossible. I hate to bring them up but PP manage with Warmachine and Hordes to have a complex game with a large variety of units and combos that is pretty well balanced. It's not perfect but it is leagues ahead of 40K, simply because it is more solidly designed.

Again, I find myself nodding along with Shuma's post.

I find that happens a lot. Maybe we can pull a "Face Off" and switch him and Ward.

To those who has seen the new rule books... what about the "40K stamp" icon that is used in Imperial Armour: Second Edition?

Is there anything said about those units in the new rule book? Or, does that "40K stamp" icon make an appearance?

Pyriel- wrote:

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

Skilled or not, when you blindly take a shot your accuracy is crappy.

I play nerf / airsoft / etc, and if you take aim, you get to line up the shot (I'm actually a pretty good shot), but when I'm making a quick responsive shot, say as when someone with a sword leaps from behind a tree, my accuracy goes all to hell, mostly cos there's a guy with a sword right in my face.

Maybe at half BS would have been more realistic, but also being it's free shooting, BS1 is fine.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, again, I think the simplest, most elegant way to balance allies for Tyranids is to allow them to ally more 'nids, and just outright use them as extra slots.
(So 2-3 HQ, 0-4 Elites, 3-8 Troops, 0-4 Fast Attack, 0-4 Heavy Support and 0-1 Fort. / 3-5 HQ, 0-7 Elites, 5-13 Troops, 0-7 Fast Attack, 0-7 Heavy Support and 0-1 Fort. )

ShumaGorath wrote:. This wasn't a problem in fourth because transports were prohibitively expensive and anti vehicle weaponry was still cheap, but the opportunity cost of transports became too good and obvious when the majority of them dropped 33% or more in cost.

Don't forget that in 4th, any penetrating hit forced passengers to disembark, vehicles were killed on a 4+ pen and 6+ glance, all pen's also stunned, and passengers were automatically pinned if the transport died, passengers took wounds on a 4+ if the vehicle was destroyed and took wounds on 4+ with rerolls if it exploded. Also, vehicles couldn't get cover saves, they could only get "hull down" which downgraded a pen to a glance on a 4+. In addition to being more expensive, being unable to hold objectives while embarked, etc.

hence why you only saw transports on Skimmer armies where they couldn't be penetrated and typically had lots of wargear that ignored skimmer drawbacks, and they were non-existent anywhere else.


There was a lot more to 4E transport discouragement besides just cost and availability of AT weapons. They were either invincible skimmers or they didn't see the table.

whembly wrote:
At 2000pts, the FoC is doubled... could you drop in more awesome big bugs now? Or, ya'll can kinda do that now and it's now worth it?

Disclaimer: I'm a bug noob.. I like orks.. we eat bugs...

yes and no

Sure, you could run a ton of big bugs, a TON of them, but they are still a little overcosted it seems, gaining FNP against power weapons is a great boon though.
the real power is you now have 6 non troop slots for each, meaning armies that are heavy in one area (bugs, orks, tau, ect.) aren't as restricted as before.

And with flyer rules on Flying MC's, 4 flying tyrants seem a little wild.

whembly wrote:Wait... Tyranid players! Since ya'll cant take allies...

And most games are usually 2000 pts (at least where I live)...

At 2000pts, the FoC is doubled... could you drop in more awesome big bugs now? Or, ya'll can kinda do that now and it's now worth it?

Disclaimer: I'm a bug noob.. I like orks.. we eat bugs...

Red Tide: 2500 pts ----- HQ ------------------------------- 1. Tervigon (190pts) - 1x Catalyst, 1x Onslaught 2. Tervigon (190pts) - 1x Catalyst, 1x Onslaught 3. Tervigon (190pts) - 1x Catalyst, 1x Onslaught 4. Tervigon (190pts) - 1x Catalyst, 1x Onslaught ----- Troop ---------------------------- 1. Termagant Brood (150pts) - 30x Termagant 2. Termagant Brood (150pts) - 30x Termagant 3. Termagant Brood (75pts) - 15x Termagant 4. Termagant Brood (75pts) - 15x Termagant 5. Termagant Brood (75pts) - 15x Termagant 6. Termagant Brood (75pts) - 15x Termagant 7. Tervigon (190pts) - 1x Catalyst, 1x Onslaught 8. Tervigon (190pts) - 1x Catalyst, 1x Onslaught 9. Tervigon (190pts) - 1x Catalyst, 1x Onslaught 10. Tervigon (190pts) - 1x Catalyst, 1x Onslaught 11. Tervigon (190pts) - 1x Catalyst, 1x Onslaught 12. Tervigon (190pts) - 1x Catalyst, 1x Onslaught

Eldarain wrote:I find that happens a lot. Maybe we can pull a "Face Off" and switch him and Ward.

/shudder


Also, re overwatch/snapfire and relative BS. Remember that this is a game, a lot of things aren't necessarily realistic. Maybe if they moved to a D10 system, we'd have more variety in types of modifiers, but we're on D6. BS1 Snapfire representing the chaos of being assaulted is fine.

Ovion wrote:Maybe at half BS would have been more realistic, but also being it's free shooting, BS1 is fine.

Perhaps people will actually start Master-Crafting their guns now.

@xttz: Most boring army ever. Also, what are you doing about vehicles?

... That's only an average of over 100 fresh gants every turn.

Plus the 120 you already have.

ermahgahd I need to buy more gants.

New rules seem good to me, I don't see a problem with them at all but I'm the type of person who'll find it funny to come up against this:

Jaws Priest
Jaws Priest
Jaws Priest
Jaws Priest
Grey Hunters w/ 2 flamers, PF, Wolf Standard, Drop Pod
Grey Hunters w/ 2 flamers, PF, Drop Pod (Deathwind)
Grey Hunters w/ 2 flamers, PF, Drop Pod (Deathwind)
Grey Hunters w/ 2 flamers, PF, Drop Pod (Deathwind)
Long Fangs 5x ML
Long Fangs 5x ML
Long Fangs 5x ML
Long Fangs 5x ML
Long Fangs 5x ML
Long Fangs 5x ML

I don't know if that's even legal, tbh, but I just knocked it up in Battlescribe. Exactly 2000 points, can't see how I'd cope against that with my Crimson Fists

xttz wrote:

whembly wrote:Wait... Tyranid players! Since ya'll cant take allies...

And most games are usually 2000 pts (at least where I live)...

At 2000pts, the FoC is doubled... could you drop in more awesome big bugs now? Or, ya'll can kinda do that now and it's now worth it?

Disclaimer: I'm a bug noob.. I like orks.. we eat bugs...

Red Tide: 2500 pts ----- HQ ------------------------------- 1. Tervigon (190pts) - 1x Catalyst, 1x Onslaught 2. Tervigon (190pts) - 1x Catalyst, 1x Onslaught 3. Tervigon (190pts) - 1x Catalyst, 1x Onslaught 4. Tervigon (190pts) - 1x Catalyst, 1x Onslaught ----- Troop ---------------------------- 1. Termagant Brood (150pts) - 30x Termagant 2. Termagant Brood (150pts) - 30x Termagant 3. Termagant Brood (75pts) - 15x Termagant 4. Termagant Brood (75pts) - 15x Termagant 5. Termagant Brood (75pts) - 15x Termagant 6. Termagant Brood (75pts) - 15x Termagant 7. Tervigon (190pts) - 1x Catalyst, 1x Onslaught 8. Tervigon (190pts) - 1x Catalyst, 1x Onslaught 9. Tervigon (190pts) - 1x Catalyst, 1x Onslaught 10. Tervigon (190pts) - 1x Catalyst, 1x Onslaught 11. Tervigon (190pts) - 1x Catalyst, 1x Onslaught 12. Tervigon (190pts) - 1x Catalyst, 1x Onslaught

That list dosent make tyranids any stronger then they are now. You will just be fighting 8x rune priests with JOTWW and 6x Long fangs etc.

pretre wrote:@xttz: Most boring army ever. Also, what are you doing about vehicles?

CC them with one of the 10 Tervigons.
Or glance to death with the Str5 large blast they have.

pretre wrote:@xttz: Most boring army ever. Also, what are you doing about vehicles?

glance them down, if they have more than 11 rear armor, well you have 10 tervigons to take care of it

you could get that army under 2000 too I think if you too minimium squads of tervi's

Joe Mama wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote: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.

The Warlord bonus should be thought of as a possible bonus. Not something to build the army around. It would be ABSURD to build your army a specific way and then depend on a random Warlord bonus roll.

Yeah but how many Tau players will be glad they got Furious Charge on their commander? Probably none unless they're playing Farsight in which case he would become awesome (S6 and I6 on the charge with a Power Weapon? Yes please).

Davylove21 wrote:New rules seem good to me, I don't see a problem with them at all but I'm the type of person who'll find it funny to come up against this:

Jaws Priest
Jaws Priest
Jaws Priest
Jaws Priest
Grey Hunters w/ 2 flamers, PF, Wolf Standard, Drop Pod
Grey Hunters w/ 2 flamers, PF, Drop Pod (Deathwind)
Grey Hunters w/ 2 flamers, PF, Drop Pod (Deathwind)
Grey Hunters w/ 2 flamers, PF, Drop Pod (Deathwind)
Long Fangs 5x ML
Long Fangs 5x ML
Long Fangs 5x ML
Long Fangs 5x ML
Long Fangs 5x ML
Long Fangs 5x ML

I don't know if that's even legal, tbh, but I just knocked it up in Battlescribe. Exactly 2000 points, can't see how I'd cope against that with my Crimson Fists

A hell load of Storm Talons and 6 DP-ing Sternguard would smash that.

Davylove21 wrote:New rules seem good to me, I don't see a problem with them at all but I'm the type of person who'll find it funny to come up against this:

I don't know if that's even legal, tbh, but I just knocked it up in Battlescribe. Exactly 2000 points, can't see how I'd cope against that with my Crimson Fists

Forget that

2x5 GH in Rhinos
6xTWC Lords
2xRune Priests

lol



Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:

pretre wrote:@xttz: Most boring army ever. Also, what are you doing about vehicles?

CC them with one of the 10 Tervigons.
Or glance to death with the Str5 large blast they have.

How do you move through the sea of gaunts to assault the vehicles though? lol Just seems interesting but ultimately ineffective.

@xttz: Most boring army ever. Also, what are you doing about vehicles?

Uh... that's a lot of MC...

/shudder

A Town Called Malus wrote:Yeah but how many Tau players will be glad they got Furious Charge on their commander? Probably none unless they're playing Farsight in which case he would become awesome (S6 and I6 on the charge with a Power Weapon? Yes please).

I think the idea is that you pick one of those three lists for your commander. The Tau commander wouldn't pick the personal list.

Dracos wrote:

Joe Mama wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote: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.

The Warlord bonus should be thought of as a possible bonus. Not something to build the army around. It would be ABSURD to hope for a certain result.

Seems like you will have games were one side randomly hits the jackpot on one roll right at the start and gets a distinct advantage. Some games they will do nothing.

Its random for the sake of random. This is really the random = fun edition. If you don't agree that random = fun, you're going to have a bad time.

I don't like the random Warlord power bit. But it is insane to claim "This edition is taking any semblance of army construction and tactics and it's throwing it out the goddamn window." Why would you not bother with tactics or army construction just because of a random roll for a Warlord power? Of course you would still bother with tactics and army construction. ShumaGorath made an absurd statement, one could even argue "nerdrage" or magical thinking.

Joe Mama wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote: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.

The Warlord bonus should be thought of as a possible bonus. Not something to build the army around. It would be ABSURD to build your army a specific way and then depend on a random Warlord bonus roll.

I scratched my head over them too, then shrugged and decided it's a free bonus. A couple of the Strategic powers would be nice for one of my Tyranid builds. The others would be mostly useless, but I might as well just roll for that one power or two since there's no downside. Now what do they add to the game? I dunno. But c'est la vie.