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.

I feel sort of the same way. Though this definitely reduced the metal-box quotient of the IG, it made SM comparatively way better, because they only have 1 special weapon to fire while moving anyway. These rules nerf mech vets ability to fire out the top hatch, but not mech marines, which I think isn't really solving the problem.

elrabin wrote:
If you move: 1 shot at range, or 2 shots within 12"
If you don't move: 1 shot at range, or 2 shots within 12"

If you are relentless: 1 shot at range, or 2 shots within 18"

So, it doesn't matter if you move or not? Why bother having a moving vs. standing still stat?

ShumaGorath wrote:

ph34r wrote:Yep, chimeras got the big nerf. At least you can bail out, shoot/orders, and then get back in. Different, and no relentless, but it works.

There was definitely a concerted effort to reduce the capability of metalbox hammer. I think it's good for the game. Chimeras+vets were bad for gameplay and awful for game and meta balance in general. 20 inch mass special weapon drops in every army skewed the game into weird places and made armies that weren't capable of doing the same in a cost effective fashion significantly less viable without pumping themselves full of ranged anti tank (which in many of those same codexes was significantly overcosted). The game turned into metalboxes because metalboxes were simply too capable a platform.

While i see your overall point, I really don't see 10 IG troopers, peeing in their Bawkes, as an OP unit. They're Freakin' IG troops!

ph34r wrote:I feel sort of the same way. Though this definitely reduced the metal-box quotient of the IG, it made SM comparatively way better, because they only have 1 special weapon to fire while moving anyway. These rules nerf mech vets ability to fire out the top hatch, but not mech marines, which I think isn't really solving the problem.

No, but combined with the altered rules for scoring objectives it should do well to put a nice stake in it's heart. Paying 200+ for a melta to stay in a rhino was never a particularly viable strat in fifth, and paying 200+ for a strafing run with a single melta will be just as much of a waste of points in sixth. People boxed up because it was the best way to hold objectives and have mobile heavy weapon firepower in a cheap package. The benefits of the cheap las/plas back are still around, but lets not fool ourselves into thinking that it was the contents of that box that made the army viable. Mechspam with marines involved longfangs and las/plas. The contents of the box could of been jelly beans and it wouldn't of mattered. The marines were there so that you could buy more cars.

While i see your overall point, I really don't see 10 IG troopers, peeing in their Bawkes, as an OP unit. They're Freakin' IG troops!

Which thanks to that metal box didn't matter in the slightest. A standard tac/grey hunter loadout can push 2 meltaguns when they dump out of a rhino. For that they're paying between 210-250. Mechvets in chimeras could push twice that with a much better vehicle for a third less and weren't forced to get out and become fodder. That freakin' ig troop costs half what the marine contemporary does and puts out more than twice the firepower per point. So long as boxhammer is the meta the squad that utilizes boxes best is king. Thats melta vets.

alarmingrick wrote:
So, it doesn't matter if you move or not? Why bother having a moving vs. standing still stat?

There isn't one.

ShumaGorath wrote: The contents of the box could of been jelly beans and it wouldn't of mattered. The marines were there so that you could buy more cars..

QFT - and why I hate the current meta. Coteaz/Razorspam lists are gross, and they win tournaments. Your army consists of 5 squads of 3 dudes in psybacks, one assault squad in a gunship, and three dreadnoughts?

"Oh, look, the Lord inquisitor has arrived to cleanse the ork horde from the battlefield."
"He must be leading quite an army!"
"Yes, 15 acolytes and three robots."
"The orks are doomed."

elrabin wrote:
So far, I don't believe we are aware of any units or characters that have Overwatch.

Hello dakka,

Coteaz haz overwatch and the unit he has joined.

Page 45 - I've Been Expecting You
Coteaz and any unit he has joined have the Overwatch
special rule, as described in the Warhammer 40,000
rulebook.

Last paragraph of page 14 in codex update

junk wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote: The contents of the box could of been jelly beans and it wouldn't of mattered. The marines were there so that you could buy more cars..

QFT - and why I hate the current meta. Coteaz/Razorspam lists are gross, and they win tournaments. Your army consists of 5 squads of 3 dudes in psybacks, one assault squad in a gunship, and three dreadnoughts?

"Oh, look, the Lord inquisitor has arrived to cleanse the ork horde from the battlefield."
"He must be leading quite an army!"
"Yes, 15 acolytes and three robots."
"The orks are doomed."

I haven't seen these lists winning big events. In general, I think that razorspam of all flavors is overblown.

After screwing around having my basic troop choice for SoB fight a tac squad of marines, I have to say It's quite confusing to remember assault comes before shooting.
But that's only because I'm so used to how the game works normally. Had this been brand new to me it wouldn't be near as strange.

I'm glad my sisters have their pistols in CC, it's not much, but it's definitely a nice touch being at least marginally more capable of killing space marines.

Oddly enough, I tried it twice and it ended up the side that went second won the match. Though I suppose that's just luck since in either case they managed to force a lost leadership check.

Out of the whole of it, however, I loved the rapid fire change most of all.
Other than heavy bolters and the exorcist the sisters have nothing that fires more than 24" away.
While the marines have at least the missile launcher to do damage at a distance. on top of all those other weapons at their disposal.
In 5th edition, the sisters or basic marines (and I assume most other rapid fire units) would have to wait for an enemy to march into their 24" range to attack them, which usually they'd only do with an overwhelming force, crazy speed, or inside a tank.
If they walked up to within their 24" range of an enemy, that enemy would be the first ones to get a shot on them next turn.

but with these rules, I can walk 6" and still fire once. I can put a fair flurry of bolts down the field and not have to stand still and take longer range attacks waiting for something to enter my range.

I know it's not much, and certainly a bit biased against only another basic troop choice, But DANG is it nice to be able to move and shoot at range.

Woah, looking on the internet, 40k pancake edition has got some people piiiiiisssssed. Regardless of the legitimacy of the rules, the rants I see reek of issues dealing with change of any type.

Anyway, back on topic, I was interested to see that the Repair rule (used by Techmarines and Mekboyz) can be used to permanently increase a vehicle's Multi-Targeting value, instead of performing a repair. It's a neat way to enable vehicles, and my Mek will actually be doing something in the first turns of the game.

otakutaylor wrote:After screwing around having my basic troop choice for SoB fight a tac squad of marines, I have to say It's quite confusing to remember assault comes before shooting.
But that's only because I'm so used to how the game works normally. Had this been brand new to me it wouldn't be near as strange.

I'm glad my sisters have their pistols in CC, it's not much, but it's definitely a nice touch being at least marginally more capable of killing space marines.

Oddly enough, I tried it twice and it ended up the side that went second won the match. Though I suppose that's just luck since in either case they managed to force a lost leadership check.

Out of the whole of it, however, I loved the rapid fire change most of all.
Other than heavy bolters and the exorcist the sisters have nothing that fires more than 24" away.
While the marines have at least the missile launcher to do damage at a distance. on top of all those other weapons at their disposal.
In 5th edition, the sisters or basic marines (and I assume most other rapid fire units) would have to wait for an enemy to march into their 24" range to attack them, which usually they'd only do with an overwhelming force, crazy speed, or inside a tank.
If they walked up to within their 24" range of an enemy, that enemy would be the first ones to get a shot on them next turn.

but with these rules, I can walk 6" and still fire once. I can put a fair flurry of bolts down the field and not have to stand still and take longer range attacks waiting for something to enter my range.

I know it's not much, and certainly a bit biased against only another basic troop choice, But DANG is it nice to be able to move and shoot at range.

You can actually fire both of your shots at that distance.

And fire three times when within 12

ChocolateGork wrote:
You can actually fire both of your shots at that distance.

And fire three times when within 12

No, you can't. The example given is for a weapon that is apparently rapid fire (2) 18" range. All current rapid fire weapons are rapid fire (1)

my bad

Illumini wrote:

The example given is for a weapon that is apparently rapid fire (2) 18" range. All current rapid fire weapons are rapid fire (1)

Anyone else think that'd be a great new statline for the Shruiken Catapult?
(Pure speculation, obv, but I did notice they neglected the ShrCat from the wargear list )

Same with every other rapid fire weapon in the game

Except bolters!

And none of these were amended in the faq's

ChocolateGork wrote:Same with every other rapid fire weapon in the game

Except bolters!

And none of these were amended in the faq's

amending them in the faq would be admitting that this leak would be real. Also, remember reading that anything that said Rapid Fire (2) or higher was 2 shots @ 18" or three @ 12" or 1 @ max range.

Sorry just downloaded this and took a peek at the classifications for Hull and Body I dont own a 5th edition book was the Body/Hull rule in that book?

ArchaonSon wrote:Sorry just downloaded this and took a peek at the classifications for Hull and Body I dont own a 5th edition book was the Body/Hull rule in that book?

Nope. It caused no end of problems too.

I don't know if anyone was interested but I posted a general overview on the rules on my blog:
http://yriel.blogspot.com/2012/01/6th-edition-rules-leak-and-eldar.html

The new rules look really cool and I'd love to play a few games with them. If GW polishes up the rules a bit 40k will be much improved. Right now the meta is limited by the rules set whereas 6th ed. will make a lot more ways of playing more effective.

McNinja wrote:

ChocolateGork wrote:
And none of these were amended in the faq's

amending them in the faq would be admitting that this leak would be real.

Doom of Malantai got errata improved, so I guess that convinces you.

I've read through about 40 pages of this thread and i haven't noticed a discussion of something really gamechanging.
In the discription of close combat weapons it lists them as strength 5 ap 6. Is this a typo or intentional?
This is quite a development if you ask me, as it could really change the current views on close combat.
For one, Wyches seem like they are going to be extremely good in leakhammer. With the change of weapon skill, a phantasm grenade launcher is going to standard, making wyches hit MEQ on 2+(and get hit on 5s) while wounding on 3s as well. Not to mention the poisoned attack from the pistol for higher T targets.
This is obviously balanced with the ability to shoot after assault, i just wanted to see what the community thinks about this issue.

Night's Blood wrote:I've read through about 40 pages of this thread and i haven't noticed a discussion of something really gamechanging.
In the discription of close combat weapons it lists them as strength 5 ap 6. Is this a typo or intentional?
This is quite a development if you ask me, as it could really change the current views on close combat.
For one, Wyches seem like they are going to be extremely good in leakhammer. With the change of weapon skill, a phantasm grenade launcher is going to standard, making wyches hit MEQ on 2+(and get hit on 5s) while wounding on 3s as well. Not to mention the poisoned attack from the pistol for higher T targets.
This is obviously balanced with the ability to shoot after assault, i just wanted to see what the community thinks about this issue.

I think what you are referring to is that close combat weapons use the str of the weapon profile, so a plasma pistol will have str 7, melta str 8, so it makes these weapons extremely effective, even if not fired at range.

DarknessEternal wrote:

McNinja wrote:

ChocolateGork wrote:
And none of these were amended in the faq's

amending them in the faq would be admitting that this leak would be real.

Doom of Malantai got errata improved

Wut? It's not changed at all in the 1.1 FAQ

gannam wrote:

Night's Blood wrote:I've read through about 40 pages of this thread and i haven't noticed a discussion of something really gamechanging.
In the discription of close combat weapons it lists them as strength 5 ap 6. Is this a typo or intentional?
This is quite a development if you ask me, as it could really change the current views on close combat.
For one, Wyches seem like they are going to be extremely good in leakhammer. With the change of weapon skill, a phantasm grenade launcher is going to standard, making wyches hit MEQ on 2+(and get hit on 5s) while wounding on 3s as well. Not to mention the poisoned attack from the pistol for higher T targets.
This is obviously balanced with the ability to shoot after assault, i just wanted to see what the community thinks about this issue.

I think what you are referring to is that close combat weapons use the str of the weapon profile, so a plasma pistol will have str 7, melta str 8, so it makes these weapons extremely effective, even if not fired at range.

Yeah, you're right. My printed copy made the "S" appear as a '5".
Even so, wyches still seem to get a significant buff in this.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

mortetvie wrote:I don't know if anyone was interested but I posted a general overview on the rules on my blog:
http://yriel.blogspot.com/2012/01/6th-edition-rules-leak-and-eldar.html

The new rules look really cool and I'd love to play a few games with them. If GW polishes up the rules a bit 40k will be much improved. Right now the meta is limited by the rules set whereas 6th ed. will make a lot more ways of playing more effective.

Agreed. btw your blog post was excellent and a much needed synopsis of the major changed. You may want to add a section on flyers because from my first reading they appear to be quite complicated, but very important.

DarknessEternal wrote:

McNinja wrote:

ChocolateGork wrote:
And none of these were amended in the faq's

amending them in the faq would be admitting that this leak would be real.

Doom of Malantai got errata improved, so I guess that convinces you.

I meant the Rapid Fire stats, I haven't seen anything for Doom of Malantai. Gw would have to make changes that directly match specific things in the pancake edition, and the Rapid Fire (2) thing is very specific, as nothing like it has been seen before in 40k.

The Doom now does 2 Wounds for each point the unit fails it's leadership test by, instead of 1. However it only goes off during it's own turn, instead of at the beginning of every shooting phase.

And it looks like Pods don't allow Defensive fire, so the Doom(which is normally given a Pod) can DS unmolested and suck in some wounds.

airmang wrote:The Doom now does 2 Wounds for each point the unit fails it's leadership test by, instead of 1. However it only goes off during it's own turn, instead of at the beginning of every shooting phase.

And it looks like Pods don't allow Defensive fire, so the Doom(which is normally given a Pod) can DS unmolested and suck in some wounds.

And not own itself beforehand because of a bad Instinctive Behaviour check, as it can't assault out of a pod.

Okay, so, interesting experience.

I now WANT to go second against Dark Eldar.

Because Zog me, they tore me apart by going second.

If I go second, at least I can get the Veiled (2) stratagem D:

Just something to check, though. DE player was using a Void Raven, so want to run the rules past you guys to see if we got it right:

1) player declares Void Raven is moving Super Sonic.
2)Player chooses a re-entry point on table edge, as well as a attack point.
3) Player moves Void Raven in straight line until it reaches table edge, then immediately places it on the re-entry marker
4) Player mvoes Void Raven in straight line from re-entry marker over attack marker, to a choice distance beyond.
5) Player drops bomb if available on target underneath line.
6) In shooting phase, Void Raven fires at any target within 2" of attack marker, even though it is facing away, having moved over and past attack marker

Correct? Errors? Chubaka?

no, it doesn't have to move over the target marker, it just has to move in a straight line from the entry marker towards the target marker at least 12". the target marker just shows where it can shoot.

Kharrak wrote:Okay, so, interesting experience.

I now WANT to go second against Dark Eldar.

Because Zog me, they tore me apart by going second.

If I go second, at least I can get the Veiled (2) stratagem D:

Just something to check, though. DE player was using a Void Raven, so want to run the rules past you guys to see if we got it right:

1) player declares Void Raven is moving Super Sonic.
2)Player chooses a re-entry point on table edge, as well as a attack point.
3) Player moves Void Raven in straight line until it reaches table edge, then immediately places it on the re-entry marker
4) Player mvoes Void Raven in straight line from re-entry marker over attack marker, to a choice distance beyond.
5) Player drops bomb if available on target underneath line.
6) In shooting phase, Void Raven fires at any target within 2" of attack marker, even though it is facing away, having moved over and past attack marker

Correct? Errors? Chubaka?

Yeah, my strategy for leakhammer was to try and go second, Between nightshields (which, i think, are going to be standard for my "beta strike" list) and Veiled the new de facto tactic against DE is to try and take away second turn.

It certainly can't shoot backwards. The marker thing is a restriction (it can't fire at anything further than 2" from the marker) not a permission to fire at targets near the marker regardless of other circumstances.