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 played dozens of games of 4th, but almost none since 2006. I have yet to play 5th. I'll probably play 5th just to see, but I'm finding my miniatures satisfaction through other games.

in al the years in 4 ed I micht have played 40 -50 games
3ed I played way more game's and now in 5ed I play way more but mostly apoc

Since 5th? I've hardly played since 3rd came out.

I've played quite a bit since 5th came out. I find some of the 5th edition rules kind of stupid, like fearless wounds. It makes fearless almost a drawback since I haven't failed a morale test ever. Go figure. But I like it for my CSMs so far. The real problem is a lot of people I play with are starting to hate it. A lot of them play nids and can't get cover for the TMCs as easily as they used to. Some play Tau and their troops usually end up getting shot to death. Eldar are fine but he just doesn't play much anymore. Demons and CSMs are pretty active though. And our one orc player always plays when he shows up.

We're all kind of switching to fantasy right now.

H.B.M.C that what I thout of the 4ed

I'm learning a whole new game. I have a few issues with 5th, but the orks are bringing me back to painting again.

5th Edition is still new. Give it some time, either that or give it six months when we get Edition 5.1. the "Collectors " Edition, now with sustained fire dice, again.

Getting in one or two games a week. It's not the switch to 5th that has thrown me for a loop, as much as how much I love Apocalypse games. I'd rather get in one big game than two little ones.

My group is playing a lot less. We've found 5th to be heavily skewed in favour of some of our armies, and that's not too much fun for either side.

Once you re-skew your armies away from 3rd / 4th Edition concepts, then 5th will be better. Which is not much different from how players had to reskew from 2nd to 3rd.

Many more games here. HBMC, I love the way you bag on the ruleset without actually playing any games - you should go find a BattleTech board to drag down ;-)

I have played about the same amount so far, but my group likes everything better. I want to play more. I wonder how many of the 5th ed haters have not updated any of their terrain to "rebalance" the boards. There should still be a mixture of LOS and non LOS blocking terrain on the board. Make some.

Typeline wrote: I find some of the 5th edition rules kind of stupid, like fearless wounds. It makes fearless almost a drawback since I haven't failed a morale test ever.

In a losing combat, you are going to take a -1 to LD for every wound you lose the combat by. This is an eminently failable check, in many many situations, even for LD 10 units. Fearless is both a plus and a minus, based on situations. You also have access to LD 10 troops, or LD 10 with reroll troops. I don't see the problem.

biztheclown wrote:
In a losing combat, you are going to take a -1 to LD for every wound you lose the combat by. This is an eminently failable check, in many many situations, even for LD 10 units. Fearless is both a plus and a minus, based on situations. You also have access to LD 10 troops, or LD 10 with reroll troops. I don't see the problem.

That if my fearless guys lose a combat they take wounds, that is the problem. I don't really see why they need to. I paid for fearless. I run normal CSMs and have never, ever failed a morale test with them.

yeah,
I agree you should only take the fearless wounds should you fail a Moral check (with modifiers)...

But then again i have 3+ saves with FNP reroll and hav not lost many troops to the fearless wounds.

Panic.

Walkers don't take wounds from No Retreat!

Games of 4th = 0
Games of 5th = 1. Won't play it again.

So I guess I've increased my games by a million percent?

Somnicide wrote:Many more games here. HBMC, I love the way you bag on the ruleset without actually playing any games - you should go find a BattleTech board to drag down ;-)

Don't need to play the game to hate the ruleset. Anyone with a modicum of reading comprehension and experience with the previous two editions can do it.

I've already made it clear in other threads how I think 5th Ed is a major step forward compared to the drek that was 4th Ed, but at the end of the day, there are certain dealbreakers that stop me from playing 5th. The vehicle rules are the first part of this, the missions (or lack thereof) are the next, and the true LOS that isn't true LOS is the next.

BYE

yeah,

awww go on give it a go!!

PAniC..>>>

Oh I will, but I'm not going to keep playing it. The vehicle rules are too dumb, and while I'm really looking forward to the new Mainre Codex, I know now that, more than ever, any semblance of rules balance at GW has gone out the window in favour of just pushing shiny new model kits - even more so (and more overtly) than ever before.

So I've given up on GW's ability to write rules and given up on them completely as a company capable of making a good rules system. Period. They've stopped caring - the new Marine Codex being a clear intention of that - and that's fine, I have no problem with that, I just won't be part of it.

Why do you think I've stayed out of the army list and tactics threads since 5th Ed came out? I have nothing to offer and nothing to add there as I don't play the game. I stopped reading the YMDC forum months ago. I stick to here, the discussion forum, and the proposed rules forums, and that'll be me.

I'll get involved when the Guard Codex gets ruined... sorry... re-released, just so I can get up to speed with how they work, but that's it.

BYE

Wraithlordmechanic wrote:So I guess theres no real consensus on the point some people love it others hate it.

I think part of why I play less is that it finally sank in just how nerfed my blood angels are in 5th when I played against a good friend of mine who plays space wolves; I used to beat him more often than not in close combat heavy games- now I cant rely on my troops in cc like I used to. blood angels used to be on par with chaos, bt's and sw's in the assault phase now i'm just red ultramarines...

I have other armies but my bloody boys are where the heart is (or something)



(P.S. now I'm just ranting....)

If you are doing poorly in CC then you must not be using dante or lemartes. With these two BA are actaully a pretty decent list. I don't normally liek special characters, but it seems like they are going to force us to consider them just another HQ to choose from in the current system. Like all MEQ they can struggle against certain armies that can load up on low AP weapons(can you say dark eldar ... I've been playing 2500 point games and dark eldar can spam dark lances and ap 2 blasts like you would not believe). But in most games they do well. Prefered enemy is now the Uber and makes for a pretty nasty assault phase for your opponents. Vetran assault sqauds and all your other assault squads t obe honest really benefit from the 12" bubble of prefered enemy from dante. Add lemarts and anyone within 6 loses a WS and that means reroll to hit needing 3's. Death company that hit with almost every single attack are RUTHLESS. So are veteran squads with LC. You won't be able to change your playstyle very often due to the limited options, but you will be pretty effective on the field.

Try a core of dante/ lemartes + DC or veterans, troop assault squads and a dev squads with plasma cannens and a pair of balls and you will see that your space wolf buddy will be not so happy to see a wave of blood rolling over him.

Meph

Haven't got much wargaming done lately unfortunately, been busy with a new job and stuff. I'm looking forward to trying some games of 5th. While some stuff is stupid, I expect to have fun with other bits and pieces. Like many here, TLOS and the vehicle rules bug me, but the new assault resolution and stuff sorta balances it out and makes it more interesting.
WHFB I was playing a lot, until I got tired of certain aspects. MSU elf armies, bret all cav of doom, and crazy VC don't make for fun games for my "not too overpowered" common orc and goblin horde. Still, it's good for a friendly game every now and then but I've found that at the competative level it's just not fun for me.
Recently any wargaming I have done has been Warmachine/Hordes, which is great fun in a totally different way. I wish the models required less pinning to put together, and I'd be much more motivated to work with them! (Want a cryx and circle army to go with my trolls and cygnar, and then there's the Dwarf merc army I keep promising myself...)
I think I'll probably play less games of 5th, but not because it's worse than 4th. Because I'll be off playing PP and LOTR more often than I used to.

I've played several games of 5th, but I definitely miss 4th. I want area of terrain rules back, it was so much better than this TLOS crap. And while the new S4 defensive weapons don't affect me much, I feel bad for tau players.

Oh, and I hate that only troops are scoring. If troops aren't getting used, it's because they suck compared to other choices in the codex. So make them better. And give my termies back the ability to hold objectives. They're friggin termies for Tzeentch's sake!


But mainly, I've given up on GW ever supporting their rules. Apparently, GW recently blamed it's customers for not enjoying the rules, in the form of Jervis telling us to "Just Say Yes" to rules disputes. And that we should assume that GW already knows about rules problems (and by extension does not care).

Since that is their attitude I will simply give more of my money to other companies who do write good rules. Although alternative games are hard to find, I will do my level best to avoid GW from now on.

i think the only bugger in 5th is TLOS. and how vehicles get a cover save. and cmon, TLOS? its not like in a real situation the soldier is gona be there sticking his arm/leg/head out, ofcourse its a given that he's hugging the cover. perhaps an army modelled to be in the crouching position?

If you are doing poorly in CC then you must not be using dante or lemartes. With these two BA are actaully a pretty decent list. I don't normally liek special characters, but it seems like they are going to force us to consider them just another HQ to choose from in the current system. Like all MEQ they can struggle against certain armies that can load up on low AP weapons(can you say dark eldar ... I've been playing 2500 point games and dark eldar can spam dark lances and ap 2 blasts like you would not believe). But in most games they do well. Prefered enemy is now the Uber and makes for a pretty nasty assault phase for your opponents. Vetran assault sqauds and all your other assault squads t obe honest really benefit from the 12" bubble of prefered enemy from dante. Add lemarts and anyone within 6 loses a WS and that means reroll to hit needing 3's. Death company that hit with almost every single attack are RUTHLESS. So are veteran squads with LC. You won't be able to change your playstyle very often due to the limited options, but you will be pretty effective on the field.

I'm well aware of what dante and lemartes do in 5th -but- that's only two units that are great in combat. BT's with a 50 pt vow can make an entire army - whether 1000pts or 10000 points- hit on 3's in combat. And again every single SW unit (except for long fangs i think) have counter attack so they might as well get an extra attack on profile.
I like to play big games but I only get 1 DC and dante can only join one unit at a time. everyone else are just red ultramarines...

I've probably been playing as many games as I did in 4th but I'm losing more than I was then. Need to get a handle on a playstyle that works for me for 5th ed.

Ozymandias, King of Kings

Ozymandias wrote:Need to get a handle on a playstyle that works for me for 5th ed.

Wait a few months and you can start using a real Codex.

BYE

Mephistoles1 wrote:
If you are doing poorly in CC then you must not be using dante or lemartes.
...

And this is exactly why 5th ed simply isn't as much fun for me, or the people I play with. You're not winning? Well, add these special characters and change all that. If I wanted to play a named hero game, I'd play heroclix - that's the point of heroclix. I want to play a game about strategy and tactics, not about whose special character with special rules can beat the other person's special character with special rules.

I like it just fine. More tactically interesting than 4th in respect to line of sight and terrain. Vehicle rule changes hardly affects my IG in the least since I rely predominantly on ordnance, and the improved damage table lets them live a lot longer. The only glaring weakness that directly affects me in 5th ed over 4th is the kill points rules, but hopefully that will change with the new codex.

Honestly, I have never had any problems with the new TLOS rules and the people who do can rarely convince me that it's a valid issue.

It will be a lot more now that I don't have to play cookie cutter tri-falcon lists as much. Another plus is MC don't get auto cover saves all over the place because of true LOS. Troops have recieved a huge boost with 4+ saves all over the place. I personally like the increase for troop slots as they should IMO be a majority of points in a army list.

I'm still getting about the same # of games as I used to. 2 on Wednesday, one on Thursday, one over the weekend, unless there's an RTT, then 3 over the weekend.

I don't play any fewer games, but I'm not buying quite as much stuff.