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.

andrewm9 wrote:
A Strength 4 hit against 10 guardsmen inside a Chimera is serious business for them considering a 5+ save with a T of 3. if you have a line of them and a deffrolla hits them you might very well lose 3 to 4 squads of guys along with their rides.

It's not that serious compared to 4th, where you could end up with a s5 explosion that rerolls to wound. A line of them getting deffrolla'd is a somewhat rare situation though, as any IG army should have the guns to deal with that on the side armor. That explosion is kinda scary for 10 Guardsmen, averaging about 4-5 kills, but for Marines it's a complete and utter joke. On average you might lose 1 or 2 Marines for riding in a cheap transport. I think upping it to strength 5 for those inside and strength 4 for those outside would be enough to make them a little more dangerous without making them rolling coffins again.

NuggzTheNinja wrote:
One issue I have with this edition is wounding: if a model is hit with something double its toughness, it should wound automatically. Not really sure how T3 models can survive a hit from a lascannon anywhere in the body...

It could take your hand off but otherwise leave you unharmed...

NuggzTheNinja wrote:I notice that one of the main complaints seems to be the ubiquitous 4+ cover.

An unintended consequence of reducing the save to 5+ is that getting the first turn (or striking first) will be even more important, and armies that focus on long range fighting will have a significant advantage compared to 5th edition. Just an observation really...and this is coming from a Mech IG player. Basically, if we reduce the cover dynamic too much, it'll be entirely possible to blow an opponent off the field in one turn.


One issue I have with this edition is wounding: if a model is hit with something double its toughness, it should wound automatically. Not really sure how T3 models can survive a hit from a lascannon anywhere in the body...

I know about the last point...

"Eat my Multi Melta, Random Guardsman!"

"What the !"

KoganStyle wrote:I couldn't stand TLOS - because the terrain made by GW is not in the same scale as the vehicles, meaning that hiding behind a hill out of sight was impossible (Devilfish on a flying base). Sure I'm hull down but I'd rather my opponent not shoot me at all!

So use bigger terrain...?

GW's 'hills' aren't supposed to represent anything other than what they are, which is a small mound. A 'hill' to scale would be the entire table.

If you want LOS blocking hummocks on your table, just make some. Or if you really want to stick to terrain made by GW, use more buildings.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

NuggzTheNinja wrote:
One issue I have with this edition is wounding: if a model is hit with something double its toughness, it should wound automatically. Not really sure how T3 models can survive a hit from a lascannon anywhere in the body...

It could take your hand off but otherwise leave you unharmed...

A fighter who suffers amputation of an extremity, like the hand, is not going to be keeping up with his brosephs, shooting and assaulting things. In rare cases people do override extreme pain and delay incapacitation, but a man without a hand is no longer going to answer "up" when they call his name.

Sasori wrote:

candy.man wrote:The big complaints for 5th edition as far as I am aware are the following:

• Codices. Codex quality has largely declined from previous editions and releases have largely focused on IoM/Space Marines (with only a small handful of non IoM/SM releases).

Ideally 6E edition would need to target these 4 aspects if they wish to target the criticisms of 5E.

I STRONGLY Disagree with the bolded statement. 4th Edition was the edition of bland and uninspired codexes. Every dex in 5th has been leaps and bounds above any 4th edition ones.

And if you played third, you’d “STRONGLY” disagree with your rebuttal. In third, all factions got codex/model updates (not only IoM) and older books like DE got extensive WD rules updates. Codex design was largely better as it was not reliant on SCs to represent sub factions (as this could be represented with internal chapter/legion rules in the codex as well as chapter approved rules published in WD). I will agree that 5th is better than 4th in terms of codex design.

I hate what they did to skimmers. Fish of Fury, you will be missed :(

candy.man wrote:In third, all factions got codex/model updates (not only IoM) and older books like DE got extensive WD rules updates.

Everybody got new codexes because 3rd ed rendered the 2nd ed books obsolete. And what we got instead were bland, rushed out affairs that were largely lacking any real flavour.

And the DE update was for 4th edition. They only entered the game with an actual codex in 3rd.

im2randomghgh wrote:I hate what they did to skimmers. Fish of Fury, you will be missed :(

Only missed by Tau players, lol. That was one of the worst, most horribly mechanics exploitative tactics this game has ever seen.

I like 5th better than 4th and I started playing in 2nd!

I, like you, am a newer player coming in right as 5th ed came out. I like the system and generally I find that people just bitch about anything GW does anyway. It IS the internet after all.

Not to say 40k is flawless, however.

Veteran Sergeant wrote:

im2randomghgh wrote:I hate what they did to skimmers. Fish of Fury, you will be missed :(

Only missed by Tau players, lol. That was one of the worst, most horribly mechanics exploitative tactics this game has ever seen.

And it was beautiful.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ZacktheChaosChild wrote:I, like you, am a newer player coming in right as 5th ed came out. I like the system and generally I find that people just bitch about anything GW does anyway. It IS the internet after all.

Not to say 40k is flawless, however.

That's because they feth up so often. And charge too much. And don't give a feth about their customers.

Or because, like he said, it is the Internet and people like to bitch. Keep on keeping on though, Angry GW Guy!

im2randomghgh wrote:

ZacktheChaosChild wrote:I, like you, am a newer player coming in right as 5th ed came out. I like the system and generally I find that people just bitch about anything GW does anyway. It IS the internet after all.

Not to say 40k is flawless, however.

That's because they feth up so often. And charge too much. And don't give a feth about their customers.

Actually, I'm sure that the reason for 5th edition's super tough vehicles was because people were complaining about how easy necrons were popping their vehicles in 4th. It's nice when a company listens to their fans, but the truth is that the fan are the worse people you want to take advise from.

Luke_Prowler wrote:

im2randomghgh wrote:

ZacktheChaosChild wrote:I, like you, am a newer player coming in right as 5th ed came out. I like the system and generally I find that people just bitch about anything GW does anyway. It IS the internet after all.

Not to say 40k is flawless, however.

That's because they feth up so often. And charge too much. And don't give a feth about their customers.

Actually, I'm sure that the reason for 5th edition's super tough vehicles was because people were complaining about how easy necrons were popping their vehicles in 4th. It's nice when a company listens to their fans, but the truth is that the fan are the worse people you want to take advise from.

Because listening to your target demographic (wargamers) is a BAAAAAD thing /sarcasm

People do like to bitch, but there's a reason no one bitches about good things like Warmahordes.

Lesee.....

Combined vehicle damage table making tanks entirely too resilient.

Wound allocation silliness.

Cover saves. They've never been easier to get than in this edition, and I haven't liked them since they showed up in 3rd.

Not being able to directly target models in base to base contact with you in CC unless they are ICs. Hidden power fists perplex me to no end.

The prevalence of Eternal Warrior, Feel no Pain, and 3++ saves.

Kill Points. My god, please kill these. Victory points and margin of victory was SO much better. A 10 man, 600+pt unit of GK Paladins is only 1 KP, while 10 Imperial Guardsmen in a Chimera is double that.

I know that everyone seems to love it, but I hate Reserves. Outflanking and Deep Striking are fine. I hate that if I feel like it, I can just reserve my entire army. Combined with random game length (another thing I hate), it means that on average games of 40k can be as few as three or four 'real' turns.

Random game length. It's thrown out for just about every tournament I've ever been in. I seriously don't see it's purpose. Just stick to 6 turns.

Panzerboy26 wrote:
Kill Points. My god, please kill these. Victory points and margin of victory was SO much better. A 10 man, 600+pt unit of GK Paladins is only 1 KP, while 10 Imperial Guardsmen in a Chimera is double that.

I know that everyone seems to love it, but I hate Reserves. Outflanking and Deep Striking are fine. I hate that if I feel like it, I can just reserve my entire army. Combined with random game length (another thing I hate), it means that on average games of 40k can be as few as three or four 'real' turns.

Random game length. It's thrown out for just about every tournament I've ever been in. I seriously don't see it's purpose. Just stick to 6 turns.

I agree with most of your post, but I've got to reply to the three points above.

- Kill Points are something I hated at first. Your example shows they can be utterly ridiculous. However, they are the single penalizing factor for MSU spam armies. My fairly standard Chaos Marine army only stands a ghost of a chance against a venom/trueborn spam DE army, but with Kill Points I at least have the possibility of doing okay.

- Reserves keep the game steady and mobile. An all-reserves army is annoying to fight, I agree, but outflanking units add a lot to the game.

- Random game length isn't a bad thing. First of all, it mitigates the last-turn skimmer jump. You know, the classic Eldar maneuver where they have all their falcons, jetbikes, or what have you move flat out/turbo boost/whatever onto every objective. It prevents this kind of late game dickery. Also, it means you'll take some risks. If it's the bottom of turn 6, and your guardsmen are holding an objective, do you risk running out to blow up that land raider and save it, or do you just hunker down and hope the game ends at the end of this turn? It's less predictable and more dynamic.

Panzerboy26 wrote:Lesee.....

Combined vehicle damage table making tanks entirely too resilient.

Wound allocation silliness.

Cover saves. They've never been easier to get than in this edition, and I haven't liked them since they showed up in 3rd.

Not being able to directly target models in base to base contact with you in CC unless they are ICs. Hidden power fists perplex me to no end.

The prevalence of Eternal Warrior, Feel no Pain, and 3++ saves.

Kill Points. My god, please kill these. Victory points and margin of victory was SO much better. A 10 man, 600+pt unit of GK Paladins is only 1 KP, while 10 Imperial Guardsmen in a Chimera is double that.

I know that everyone seems to love it, but I hate Reserves. Outflanking and Deep Striking are fine. I hate that if I feel like it, I can just reserve my entire army. Combined with random game length (another thing I hate), it means that on average games of 40k can be as few as three or four 'real' turns.

Random game length. It's thrown out for just about every tournament I've ever been in. I seriously don't see it's purpose. Just stick to 6 turns.

This.

Is there any reason Lysander WOULDN'T take that plasma shot on his SS instead of letting his sternguard get hit?

Is there any reason I can't put both plasma hits on one termie and the bolter hits on the rest? The unit with the plasma gun is probably firing at an individual, not spray-and-pray.

im2randomghgh wrote:People do like to bitch, but there's a reason no one bitches about good things like Warmahordes.

Er... plenty of people bitch about Warmahordes.

Panzerboy26 wrote:Random game length. It's thrown out for just about every tournament I've ever been in. I seriously don't see it's purpose. Just stick to 6 turns.

If you're just playing meatgrinder style missions, yes, the random game length isn't as useful. However, in objective-based games, it prevents people from hanging back where its safer and just rushing out to grab objectives on the last turn. Having a set game length can give a huge advantage to the player going 2nd in an objective or land-grab mission.

insaniak wrote:

im2randomghgh wrote:People do like to bitch, but there's a reason no one bitches about good things like Warmahordes.

Er... plenty of people bitch about Warmahordes.

TBH I don't think I've seen anyone attack Privateer Press.

The only thing I dislike is wound allocation.

Edit: also go back to victory points instead of kill points

Billagio wrote:The only thing I dislike is wound allocation

That's because it is awful

The whole b*tch cause its the internet is certainly true. lol You rarely see non-b*tching threads go 15 pages *cough* gk op thread *cough* Ask what gw does right and it'd last maybe a page and people are still spending money so guess they just like to be cranky.

Draigo wrote:The whole b*tch cause its the internet is certainly true. lol You rarely see non-b*tching threads go 15 pages *cough* gk op thread *cough* Ask what gw does right and it'd last maybe a page and people are still spending money so guess they just like to be cranky.

Well the beat this unit thread is several hundred pages long so...

Brother SRM wrote:

Panzerboy26 wrote:Kill Points. My god, please kill these. Victory points and margin of victory was SO much better. A 10 man, 600+pt unit of GK Paladins is only 1 KP, while 10 Imperial Guardsmen in a Chimera is double that.

I know that everyone seems to love it, but I hate Reserves. Outflanking and Deep Striking are fine. I hate that if I feel like it, I can just reserve my entire army. Combined with random game length (another thing I hate), it means that on average games of 40k can be as few as three or four 'real' turns.

Random game length. It's thrown out for just about every tournament I've ever been in. I seriously don't see it's purpose. Just stick to 6 turns.

I agree with most of your post, but I've got to reply to the three points above.

- Kill Points are something I hated at first. Your example shows they can be utterly ridiculous. However, they are the single penalizing factor for MSU spam armies. My fairly standard Chaos Marine army only stands a ghost of a chance against a venom/trueborn spam DE army, but with Kill Points I at least have the possibility of doing okay.

- Reserves keep the game steady and mobile. An all-reserves army is annoying to fight, I agree, but outflanking units add a lot to the game.

- Random game length isn't a bad thing. First of all, it mitigates the last-turn skimmer jump. You know, the classic Eldar maneuver where they have all their falcons, jetbikes, or what have you move flat out/turbo boost/whatever onto every objective. It prevents this kind of late game dickery. Also, it means you'll take some risks. If it's the bottom of turn 6, and your guardsmen are holding an objective, do you risk running out to blow up that land raider and save it, or do you just hunker down and hope the game ends at the end of this turn? It's less predictable and more dynamic.

Brother SRM is objectively ( ) correct on all counts.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

insaniak wrote:

candy.man wrote:In third, all factions got codex/model updates (not only IoM) and older books like DE got extensive WD rules updates.

Everybody got new codexes because 3rd ed rendered the 2nd ed books obsolete. And what we got instead were bland, rushed out affairs that were largely lacking any real flavour.

Agreed.

insaniak wrote:And the DE update was for 4th edition. They only entered the game with an actual codex in 3rd.

They got both of their updates in third ed. First getting vehicle upgrades in White Dwarf, then getting a revised (with a somewhat confusing "2nd edition" stamp on the cover) codex with the vehicle upgrades included, and some expanded and altered rules and units (like the introduction of a Wych HQ other than Lilith). The Dark Angels also got a revised "2nd edition" codex in 3rd edition. It got rid of that godsawful rule where every and any unit would refuse to move if they were in shooting range of the enemy at the start of their turn and you rolled a 1. It replaced it with them instead refusing to move (instead of Falling Back) if they failed a Morale test from shooting. And gave them some additional stuff, like Plasmacannons in tac squads.

Draigo wrote:The whole b*tch cause its the internet is certainly true. lol You rarely see non-b*tching threads go 15 pages *cough* gk op thread *cough* Ask what gw does right and it'd last maybe a page and people are still spending money so guess they just like to be cranky.

New Release threads quite regularly span out just as long as the complaint threads, and are often quite positive overall.

Mannahnin wrote:They got both of their updates in third ed. First getting vehicle upgrades in White Dwarf, then getting a revised (with a somewhat confusing "2nd edition" stamp on the cover) codex with the vehicle upgrades included, and some expanded and altered rules and units (like the introduction of a Wych HQ other than Lilith). The Dark Angels also got a revised "2nd edition" codex in 3rd edition. It got rid of that godsawful rule where every and any unit would refuse to move if they were in shooting range of the enemy at the start of their turn and you rolled a 1. It replaced it with them instead refusing to move (instead of Falling Back) if they failed a Morale test from shooting. And gave them some additional stuff, like Plasmacannons in tac squads.

Space marines got White Dwarf updates as well near the end of fifth (I remember “cut and paste” codex rules written in White Dwarf). Space marines also got bucket loads of variant lists in Chapter approved. IG also got a second codex during third edition. There were also quite a few expansion books introduced in third, which gave most armies some sort of new toy/variant list to play with.

Main point being is that third edition can’t be solely judged on the early third edition codices without also taking into account the revised codices, chapter approved rules updates and expansion books.

Brother SRM wrote:
I agree with most of your post, but I've got to reply to the three points above.

- Kill Points are something I hated at first. Your example shows they can be utterly ridiculous. However, they are the single penalizing factor for MSU spam armies. My fairly standard Chaos Marine army only stands a ghost of a chance against a venom/trueborn spam DE army, but with Kill Points I at least have the possibility of doing okay.

- Reserves keep the game steady and mobile. An all-reserves army is annoying to fight, I agree, but outflanking units add a lot to the game.

- Random game length isn't a bad thing. First of all, it mitigates the last-turn skimmer jump. You know, the classic Eldar maneuver where they have all their falcons, jetbikes, or what have you move flat out/turbo boost/whatever onto every objective. It prevents this kind of late game dickery. Also, it means you'll take some risks. If it's the bottom of turn 6, and your guardsmen are holding an objective, do you risk running out to blow up that land raider and save it, or do you just hunker down and hope the game ends at the end of this turn? It's less predictable and more dynamic.

I don't think swinging the game in favor of death-star hyper-elite units is any better than swinging it in favor of spam. The remedy for your chaos being able to take on Venom Spam is, sadly, a better chaos book. It's the oldest book in 40k now, and it sorely needs to be re-written. I promise the 3rd ed Chaos book would have little problem taking down venom spam.

I have no problem with things outflanking, as that requires units to have special rules in order to do it. You can't simply decide to outflank your entire army on a whim (well, most can't). You can, however, decide to start with nothing deployed, and just roll on the table. This means that turn 1, nothing happens. Not really. The other players moves around a bit, and waits for the other player to show up. Combined with Random Game length, it means that a game can 'start' on turn 2, and end on turn 5. It's a wet dream for point-denial players.

It's also something that's absent from competitive play, so all of those things still work. Honestly, I only have a 'real' objection to it in conjunction with the Reserves rule. Take the Reserves rules out, and I'd have far less problem with it.

Mannahnin wrote:The main complaint I ever see about 5th is how the wound allocation rules work, and how they produce unrealistic and dumb outcomes. Like if I have a squad of three marines all with different equipment, and you're shooting at them with a squad if IG armed with 3 meltaguns and a bunch of lasguns, you're better off NOT shooting the lasguns. Because if you do, and inflict any wounds with them, I can use those to help me dump off multiple melta wounds onto a single model.

That is a big one, its unrealistic that not shooting all your squads will produce more kills than shooting everything you've got.

I think the only one I've heard was the fact that you can't pick out models that are squad upgrades, ever, unless you've got a fancy shooting attack (like an assassin or Jaws). While I tend to exploit this being an Ork player, I've had people complain about the fact that my Nobs can just rip through things, and can't be killed because the player has to go through 29 other boys to even start wounding the Nob.

I, personally, have no complaints with the system.