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.

Leggy wrote: It makes me feel less spiteful for adding you to my ignore list.

, meh.

ShatteredBlade wrote:I would not be surprised if they gave Tau a WD codex and BT an actual Codex.

I have only heard the rumor for BT WD but every rumor source is saying something different. On the up side the if you own stocks in salt you are probably a millionaire at this point. =]

I wish they would stop the practice altogether. You get the description of your army then have to wait a month to actually play them.... really?


My personal preference on the matter: I actually hope Tau get a codex after 6th. That way it will be a fully developed 6E codex, not a hybrid.

Wrath wrote:

Leggy wrote: It makes me feel less spiteful for adding you to my ignore list.

, meh.

ShatteredBlade wrote:I would not be surprised if they gave Tau a WD codex and BT an actual Codex.

I have only heard the rumor for BT WD but every rumor source is saying something different. On the up side the if you own stocks in salt you are probably a millionaire at this point. =]

I wish they would stop the practice altogether. You get the description of your army then have to wait a month to actually play them.... really?


My personal preference on the matter: I actually hope Tau get a codex after 6th. That way it will be a fully developed 6E codex, not a hybrid.

Apparently all codex's for the last 1.5 years have been written with 6th in mind,

elrabin wrote:
IMO trying to interpret early draft rules strictly as written is not helpful. They are early, incomplete, and rough. Whether you believe that line is flavor or not, it's clear that it is intended for the Rail Rifle and Rail Gun (solid shot) to be Rail weapons. Since it's obvious this is the intent, it is likely that Rail will be added to the weapon types of these two weapons in the new codex or in the codex update.

Edit: Assuming, of course that pancake is legit, and that Rail stays a special rule.

I think it's almost certain that "Rail" will be included on one or more varient of Railgun in the NEXT CODEX. However, I sincerely doubt they'll kept the same profile and points.
As for the current Codex and Codex update, they tend to just give "get you by" rules when changing editions. Do you honestly think they want to change your single shot, high-strength weapons into an apocalyptic line-of-death megacannon for free?

Leggy wrote:

elrabin wrote:
IMO trying to interpret early draft rules strictly as written is not helpful. They are early, incomplete, and rough. Whether you believe that line is flavor or not, it's clear that it is intended for the Rail Rifle and Rail Gun (solid shot) to be Rail weapons. Since it's obvious this is the intent, it is likely that Rail will be added to the weapon types of these two weapons in the new codex or in the codex update.

Edit: Assuming, of course that pancake is legit, and that Rail stays a special rule.

I think it's almost certain that "Rail" will be included on one or more varient of Railgun in the NEXT CODEX. However, I sincerely doubt they'll kept the same profile and points.
As for the current Codex and Codex update, they tend to just give "get you by" rules when changing editions. Do you honestly think they want to change your single shot, high-strength weapons into an apocalyptic line-of-death megacannon for free?

When i'm paying 100 points for a t4 model with the gun, I'd say it's more than acceptable with the current codex and all it's flaws.

Leggy wrote:

Wrath wrote:

Leggy wrote:"It clearly states" must be the most frequently misused phrase in this entire thread.

Rail:
"Psionic lances, alien sonic weapons and of course the Tau weapons of the same name count to the most common weapons of this type."
PDFhammer p. 65 <86>

It's ok, we can keep quoting word for word it till you understand. It takes some longer than others.

Feel free to quote it as many times as you like. It does not make it a rule. It's still fluff. Until the "rail" special rule is included in the weapon profile of Railguns or Rail rifles they simply don't have the rule.
Thank you for including the insult, also. It makes me feel less spiteful for adding you to my ignore list.

Out of interest, are Plasma Grenades assault grenades or do they do nothing at all?

In either case, these are allegedly playtest rules. This makes the quoted text rules and your own interpretation of them feedback worthy, but not binding on how to play test the rules. I also wish to remind you that more than once do GW intermix rules and fluff, where for instance, a weapon which is described in fluff as being a fire-based weapon also has effect on actual gameplay. You simply can't ignore descriptions of the fluff when it can be directly transcribed onto gameplay.

This pdf is a fake, you can tell by how rules-lawyery the language is. GW doesn't write that way in rules books or FAQs, but people in YMDC threads here do.

tetrisphreak wrote:

Leggy wrote:

elrabin wrote:
IMO trying to interpret early draft rules strictly as written is not helpful. They are early, incomplete, and rough. Whether you believe that line is flavor or not, it's clear that it is intended for the Rail Rifle and Rail Gun (solid shot) to be Rail weapons. Since it's obvious this is the intent, it is likely that Rail will be added to the weapon types of these two weapons in the new codex or in the codex update.

Edit: Assuming, of course that pancake is legit, and that Rail stays a special rule.

I think it's almost certain that "Rail" will be included on one or more varient of Railgun in the NEXT CODEX. However, I sincerely doubt they'll kept the same profile and points.
As for the current Codex and Codex update, they tend to just give "get you by" rules when changing editions. Do you honestly think they want to change your single shot, high-strength weapons into an apocalyptic line-of-death megacannon for free?

When i'm paying 100 points for a t4 model with the gun, I'd say it's more than acceptable with the current codex and all it's flaws.

I wouldn't. I pay more than that for a conversion beamer on a techamrine and he's less resilient. Hell, I pay that for two devs with lascanons which will score less hits at less strength with less armor every time. Broadsides were already great, this would make them legitimately overpowered. It would make rail rifle squads ridiculous as well.

Fearspect wrote:This pdf is a fake, you can tell by how rules-lawyery the language is. GW doesn't write that way in rules books or FAQs, but people in YMDC threads here do.

Here's the thing, even though I do not deny that there is a rather overwhelming chance (risk?) that the PDF is not from GW, it is written in a way I'd expect GW to write their rules if they put some extra effort into the process. It still writes like GW, but with fewer mistakes, as if the company suddenly matured in it's rules-writing process. At the same time, it is a bit on the sloppy side compared to what some people in YMDC could've produced not to mention lacking in crippling effect on certain armies and no obvious (type of) winner. It's managed to lift the most beat-down armies without obviously bringing hate onto any specific other army (which would create a huge loser in an unrelated codex).

A set of FAQs were released last week, compare the language.

Fearspect wrote:A set of FAQs were released last week, compare the language.

The FAQs for codexes that followed the rules pdf left something to be desired as well.

Something I've been thinking about since reading this originally is why the Annihalation point values are variable. Like, why it isn't just every 50pts worth of models is worth 1 victory point, etc.

What I've come up with is that after lots of playtesting, the creators of this realized that lists would only be used that maximized their kill point/army point ratio.

So, example:

I play Tyranids. A min squad of termagants is 10 gants, 50 points. If I knew 50 points was 1KP, i'd never have squads of 11 or 12 termagants, as that would be giving my opponent essentially free KP's. However, if I don't know what the ratio is, it may be in my benefit to add some. If 40pts = 1KP, a squad of 10 gives 2KP! Eeek! Maybe I want to beef them up to 16. Or, it might be 60 per KP games, so I'd want to have 14, as 16 would give too many KP's again! AAARG!

With variable KP/Army point ratios there is no perfect number of models for a unit. This encourages people to just play their stupid lists and stop worrying about how many KP's it might be worth, since you're not going to know anyway.

Make sense to anyone? This to me is also one more reason I think this was a real playtest document, and not a fake made by a homebrew group. That sort of thinking requires lots of playtesting to uncover, not just a few games with your friends.

Nalathani wrote:Something I've been thinking about since reading this originally is why the Annihalation point values are variable. Like, why it isn't just every 50pts worth of models is worth 1 victory point, etc.

What I've come up with is that after lots of playtesting, the creators of this realized that lists would only be used that maximized their kill point/army point ratio.

So, example:

I play Tyranids. A min squad of termagants is 10 gants, 50 points. If I knew 50 points was 1KP, i'd never have squads of 11 or 12 termagants, as that would be giving my opponent essentially free KP's. However, if I don't know what the ratio is, it may be in my benefit to add some. If 40pts = 1KP, a squad of 10 gives 2KP! Eeek! Maybe I want to beef them up to 16. Or, it might be 60 per KP games, so I'd want to have 14, as 16 would give too many KP's again! AAARG!

With variable KP/Army point ratios there is no perfect number of models for a unit. This encourages people to just play their stupid lists and stop worrying about how many KP's it might be worth, since you're not going to know anyway.

Make sense to anyone? This to me is also one more reason I think this was a real playtest document, and not a fake made by a homebrew group. That sort of thinking requires lots of playtesting to uncover, not just a few games with your friends.

I wondered the same thing, but your conclusion i think is spot on. Its the subtle things in this PDF that make me believe its real.

really makes for no throw away units either. at least not pricey ones.

for instance, my reavers were 166 pts. and we got the per 40 pts anni. value. that made my reavers worth 5 victory points! i still used them as i did in the past (as a distraction) and was mortified at how many points I gave up for losing them without so much as a care. won't be doing that ever again!

Assuming this document is a fake, we have to also assume, based on the coherence and elegance of the rules, that it was written by a dedicated group of intelligent gamers that vigorously playtested it.

Knowing the fastidious nature of many wargamers, and their penchant for overanalysis, combined with the fact that the rules seem to have been written liberally and without direct bias towards a certain play style, and then considering the intricate interplay between disparate rules throughout the entire document, four possibilities emerge:

1. Lex Luthor wrote these rules, using them as a way to bait the entire justice league into a massive multiplayer game where he will defeat them all with a rail-spam tau list.

2. These rules were written by a consortium of autistic savants who use tabletop wargaming as their only means of communication; one of whom is a tyranid player who was tired of getting destroyed by IG VetSpam lists.

3. My personal belief - This document was created by the combined effort of the 40k Fairy liberation front; a shadowy council of selfless wargamers that strive to defend the efforts of the 40k fairy, a magical sprite who flies around the world every night harvesting the dreams from every player's secret wishlist, ostensibly to create updated codices to leave under their pillows, if not for the intervention of the night thief, who stalks the 40k fairy from home to home, collecting these codices and consuming them, because he thrives on devouring the potential happiness of wargamers. The 40k Fairy Liberation front, essentially being a group of lazy and out of shape wargamers who too often fall into senseless bickering to actually do anything useful, underwent a shift in leadership, as a charismatic young player assumed control of the group and gave them the sense of purpose required to intervene and stop the night thief.

Now bear with me, because this is where the speculation comes in, but I think that the 40K Fairy Liberation front actually managed to capture the night thief and force it to regurgitate all the codex updates, erratas, and faqs written by the 40k fairy, and together combined them by dipping them into the molten magma of an icelandic volcano. Once the rules fragments were white hot, they were hammered together by a silver giant with an arm made of the purest finecast, and cooled in a massive, naturally occuring pool of diet dr. pepper.

The rulebook was entrusted to a lone wargamer, who carried it all the way to the internet, where it was finally set free to live forever among the bits and bytes of information that make up the collective awareness of the wargaming community.

4. It's an early work draft of a GW rulebook.

I'm comfortable operating under the assumption that the rail rifles and smaller rail guns get the rail rule. As written this is not the case yet, but that fluff description seems to indicate that as the design intent.

elrabin wrote:Whether you believe that line is flavor or not, it's clear that it is intended for the Rail Rifle and Rail Gun (solid shot) to be Rail weapons. Since it's obvious this is the intent,

So I guess you also believe psychic lances and alien sonic weapons also implicitly have the Rail special rule.

More buffs for tyranids, I guess. And I suppose an argument about whether Noise Marine weapons count as "alien" or not.

I think the alien sonic weapon is a reference to the Vibro Cannon, which as far as I can tell isn't a sonic weapon as such.

junk wrote:Assuming this document is a fake, we have to also assume, based on the coherence and elegance of the rules, that it was written by a dedicated group of intelligent gamers that vigorously playtested it.

Knowing the fastidious nature of many wargamers, and their penchant for overanalysis, combined with the fact that the rules seem to have been written liberally and without direct bias towards a certain play style, and then considering the intricate interplay between disparate rules throughout the entire document, four possibilities emerge:

1. Lex Luthor wrote these rules, using them as a way to bait the entire justice league into a massive multiplayer game where he will defeat them all with a rail-spam tau list.

2. These rules were written by a consortium of autistic savants who use tabletop wargaming as their only means of communication; one of whom is a tyranid player who was tired of getting destroyed by IG VetSpam lists.

3. My personal belief - This document was created by the combined effort of the 40k Fairy liberation front; a shadowy council of selfless wargamers that strive to defend the efforts of the 40k fairy, a magical sprite who flies around the world every night harvesting the dreams from every player's secret wishlist, ostensibly to create updated codices to leave under their pillows, if not for the intervention of the night thief, who stalks the 40k fairy from home to home, collecting these codices and consuming them, because he thrives on devouring the potential happiness of wargamers. The 40k Fairy Liberation front, essentially being a group of lazy and out of shape wargamers who too often fall into senseless bickering to actually do anything useful, underwent a shift in leadership, as a charismatic young player assumed control of the group and gave them the sense of purpose required to intervene and stop the night thief.

Now bear with me, because this is where the speculation comes in, but I think that the 40K Fairy Liberation front actually managed to capture the night thief and force it to regurgitate all the codex updates, erratas, and faqs written by the 40k fairy, and together combined them by dipping them into the molten magma of an icelandic volcano. Once the rules fragments were white hot, they were hammered together by a silver giant with an arm made of the purest finecast, and cooled in a massive, naturally occuring pool of diet dr. pepper.

The rulebook was entrusted to a lone wargamer, who carried it all the way to the internet, where it was finally set free to live forever among the bits and bytes of information that make up the collective awareness of the wargaming community.

4. It's an early work draft of a GW rulebook.

Junk, you are hysterical.

junk wrote:Assuming this document is a fake, we have to also assume, based on the coherence and elegance of the rules, that it was written by a dedicated group of intelligent gamers that vigorously playtested it.

Knowing the fastidious nature of many wargamers, and their penchant for overanalysis, combined with the fact that the rules seem to have been written liberally and without direct bias towards a certain play style, and then considering the intricate interplay between disparate rules throughout the entire document, four possibilities emerge:

1. Lex Luthor wrote these rules, using them as a way to bait the entire justice league into a massive multiplayer game where he will defeat them all with a rail-spam tau list.

2. These rules were written by a consortium of autistic savants who use tabletop wargaming as their only means of communication; one of whom is a tyranid player who was tired of getting destroyed by IG VetSpam lists.

3. My personal belief - This document was created by the combined effort of the 40k Fairy liberation front; a shadowy council of selfless wargamers that strive to defend the efforts of the 40k fairy, a magical sprite who flies around the world every night harvesting the dreams from every player's secret wishlist, ostensibly to create updated codices to leave under their pillows, if not for the intervention of the night thief, who stalks the 40k fairy from home to home, collecting these codices and consuming them, because he thrives on devouring the potential happiness of wargamers. The 40k Fairy Liberation front, essentially being a group of lazy and out of shape wargamers who too often fall into senseless bickering to actually do anything useful, underwent a shift in leadership, as a charismatic young player assumed control of the group and gave them the sense of purpose required to intervene and stop the night thief.

Now bear with me, because this is where the speculation comes in, but I think that the 40K Fairy Liberation front actually managed to capture the night thief and force it to regurgitate all the codex updates, erratas, and faqs written by the 40k fairy, and together combined them by dipping them into the molten magma of an icelandic volcano. Once the rules fragments were white hot, they were hammered together by a silver giant with an arm made of the purest finecast, and cooled in a massive, naturally occuring pool of diet dr. pepper.

The rulebook was entrusted to a lone wargamer, who carried it all the way to the internet, where it was finally set free to live forever among the bits and bytes of information that make up the collective awareness of the wargaming community.

4. It's an early work draft of a GW rulebook.

Dang, it's a pitty I can't fit all that into my signature xD

junk wrote:Assuming this document is a fake, we have to also assume, based on the coherence and elegance of the rules, that it was written by a dedicated group of intelligent gamers that vigorously playtested it.

Knowing the fastidious nature of many wargamers, and their penchant for overanalysis, combined with the fact that the rules seem to have been written liberally and without direct bias towards a certain play style, and then considering the intricate interplay between disparate rules throughout the entire document, four possibilities emerge:

1. Lex Luthor wrote these rules, using them as a way to bait the entire justice league into a massive multiplayer game where he will defeat them all with a rail-spam tau list.

2. These rules were written by a consortium of autistic savants who use tabletop wargaming as their only means of communication; one of whom is a tyranid player who was tired of getting destroyed by IG VetSpam lists.

3. My personal belief - This document was created by the combined effort of the 40k Fairy liberation front; a shadowy council of selfless wargamers that strive to defend the efforts of the 40k fairy, a magical sprite who flies around the world every night harvesting the dreams from every player's secret wishlist, ostensibly to create updated codices to leave under their pillows, if not for the intervention of the night thief, who stalks the 40k fairy from home to home, collecting these codices and consuming them, because he thrives on devouring the potential happiness of wargamers. The 40k Fairy Liberation front, essentially being a group of lazy and out of shape wargamers who too often fall into senseless bickering to actually do anything useful, underwent a shift in leadership, as a charismatic young player assumed control of the group and gave them the sense of purpose required to intervene and stop the night thief.

Now bear with me, because this is where the speculation comes in, but I think that the 40K Fairy Liberation front actually managed to capture the night thief and force it to regurgitate all the codex updates, erratas, and faqs written by the 40k fairy, and together combined them by dipping them into the molten magma of an icelandic volcano. Once the rules fragments were white hot, they were hammered together by a silver giant with an arm made of the purest finecast, and cooled in a massive, naturally occuring pool of diet dr. pepper.

The rulebook was entrusted to a lone wargamer, who carried it all the way to the internet, where it was finally set free to live forever among the bits and bytes of information that make up the collective awareness of the wargaming community.

4. It's an early work draft of a GW rulebook.

It's only a matter of time before that charismatic young leader is seduced by the power of the internet, falls from grace and becomes the new night thief.

DarknessEternal wrote:

elrabin wrote:Whether you believe that line is flavor or not, it's clear that it is intended for the Rail Rifle and Rail Gun (solid shot) to be Rail weapons. Since it's obvious this is the intent,

So I guess you also believe psychic lances and alien sonic weapons also implicitly have the Rail special rule.

More buffs for tyranids, I guess. And I suppose an argument about whether Noise Marine weapons count as "alien" or not.

Yeah, I think some of those are probably going to get the rail rule. It's less clear since they weren't mentioned by name, but yeah. It's reasonable to guess that rail will show up on more of those beamy long range guns.

Sorry if this was discussed... but, just a quick question as my gaming group was discussing this...

In this "maybe 6ed" ruleset, does the player have the option to use the weapon's shooting STR in their CC assaults? If so, is that only on the first round of assault, then CC attacks are using the model's STR? Or is it for all CC attacks?

Vetric wrote: It's only a matter of time before that charismatic young leader is seduced by the power of the internet, falls from grace and becomes the new night thief.

That always seems to be the way of these things, and why GW is able to so effectively consolidate its power.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

whembly wrote:Sorry if this was discussed... but, just a quick question as my gaming group was discussing this...

In this "maybe 6ed" ruleset, does the player have the option to use the weapon's shooting STR in their CC assaults? If so, is that only on the first round of assault, then CC attacks are using the model's STR? Or is it for all CC attacks?

This only applies to pistols. You may choose to shoot once with a pistol instead of using your statline attacks, using the profile of the pistol for S and AP. Otherwise, all cc attacks are made with CC weapons.

This only applies to pistols. You may choose to shoot once with a pistol instead of using your statline attacks, using the profile of the pistol for S and AP. Otherwise, all cc attacks are made with CC weapons.

Gotcha... thanks...

One dude made it sound like on the first turn, you can make the same # of attacks in profile, but use your weapon's STR instead... talk about all kinds of broken there (imagine 15 Mekboys toting KMB)...

Still... this makes Fusion pistols (Harlies anyone?) and Blast pistols (DE crew) more cost effective.... maybe...

THANKS!

Has anyone else realized assalting armies pretty much auto-win in the new rules? If you beat a unit in combat, you can do a sweeping advance to kill them completely, but if this FAILS... well, under the new rules, if a broken unit is within 12" of an unengaged enemy unit at the BEGINNING of its movement phase, it is immediately destroyed. Since a fall back move is your base move + D6, and since Consolidation after combat is now an auto-3" for victories units, there is literally no way a broken unit would ever NOT get caught by this unless it was jump infantry, and that's if you roll high.

That really sucks.

ShumaGorath wrote:
I wouldn't. I pay more than that for a conversion beamer on a techamrine and he's less resilient. Hell, I pay that for two devs with lascanons which will score less hits at less strength with less armor every time. Broadsides were already great, this would make them legitimately overpowered. It would make rail rifle squads ridiculous as well.

With the Rail rules, you won't be able to screen your rail units. Even worse, you can't fire over your own units, or anything that is locked in combat. So to be effective, rail units need to be forward-deployed, which makes them more vulnerable. This is very different from 5e where HH and Broadsides would be kept behind other units, or in a back corner.

The point is that CC is decisive. Auto-win, though, is an extreme conclusion. Shooting has improved as well, with pinning imposing cumulative leadership penalties; directed hits, more accurate blast markers, deadlier templates, reversed turn order, fixed movement for accurate judgements of threat, etc... The game is just deadlier all around, it's faster and smoother, like a tequila milkshake with an ounce of anti-freeze.

creeping-deth87 wrote:Has anyone else realized assalting armies pretty much auto-win in the new rules? If you beat a unit in combat, you can do a sweeping advance to kill them completely, but if this FAILS... well, under the new rules, if a broken unit is within 12" of an unengaged enemy unit at the BEGINNING of its movement phase, it is immediately destroyed. Since a fall back move is your base move + D6, and since Consolidation after combat is now an auto-3" for victories units, there is literally no way a broken unit would ever NOT get caught by this unless it was jump infantry, and that's if you roll high.

That really sucks.

I'm pretty sure it tells you to ignore the unit you just fought.

Everything is more deadly, including shooting. Pancake edition seems to allow both shooty and assaulty armies

creeping-deth87 wrote:Has anyone else realized assalting armies pretty much auto-win in the new rules? If you beat a unit in combat, you can do a sweeping advance to kill them completely, but if this FAILS... well, under the new rules, if a broken unit is within 12" of an unengaged enemy unit at the BEGINNING of its movement phase, it is immediately destroyed. Since a fall back move is your base move + D6, and since Consolidation after combat is now an auto-3" for victories units, there is literally no way a broken unit would ever NOT get caught by this unless it was jump infantry, and that's if you roll high.

That really sucks.

Reread the Surrounded rule. It's checked at the end of it's own Movement phase, so it should have plenty of time to move away.

elrabin wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:
I wouldn't. I pay more than that for a conversion beamer on a techamrine and he's less resilient. Hell, I pay that for two devs with lascanons which will score less hits at less strength with less armor every time. Broadsides were already great, this would make them legitimately overpowered. It would make rail rifle squads ridiculous as well.

With the Rail rules, you won't be able to screen your rail units. Even worse, you can't fire over your own units, or anything that is locked in combat. So to be effective, rail units need to be forward-deployed, which makes them more vulnerable. This is very different from 5e where HH and Broadsides would be kept behind other units, or in a back corner.

Or you could, y'know, just move the intervening units so that they aren't blocking the firing models. Broadsides have a thing in them called shield drones which count as part of the squad.