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.

Nitros14 wrote:

Palindrome wrote:
On the other side of the coin the rumours fro fantasy 8th sounded really good before it was released and look how that turned out.

8th is the best ruleset Fantasy has ever had.

Since 8th Fantasy has become tremendously more popular.

Allegedly 8th has been a commercial failure, at at least has significantly underperformed. I have no hard details on this as GW will never release them but I have heard this from 3 different 'in the know' sources and I certainly have seen far less games played. I do know that my fantasy armies are now mouldering in their cases even though I had played fantasy since 4th ed.
I am sure that there are a plethora of threads about this very subject in the fantasy section though and my point was that good early rumours do not automatically mean that the released game will be good.

Nitros14 wrote:

Palindrome wrote:
On the other side of the coin the rumours fro fantasy 8th sounded really good before it was released and look how that turned out.

8th is the best ruleset Fantasy has ever had.

Since 8th Fantasy has become tremendously more popular.

Except among people who want a dice game to be perfectly predictable and non-random I guess.

In the same way that any game that hemorrhages players and sales becomes "tremendously more popular"! Like it if you want but eighth edition was a disaster that drove a significant portion of their playerbase away from the game. On it's face it's a bad game system that seems more designed to be a drinking companion or wacky board game for children than anything adults would enjoy. YMMV

Nitros14 wrote:
Since 8th Fantasy has become tremendously more popular.

Except among people who want a dice game to be perfectly predictable and non-random I guess.

I've heard the opposite. Guess we'll never know since only GW knows the truth and wouldn't tell us if things were going bad anyway.

And yeah, cute, but you missed the issue entirely if that's what you think is wrong with WHF and 40k. No one wants the random element completely gone, but too much randomness is just fething stupid and makes the game feel ultimately pointless, like nothing you did ever mattered because it was all down to chance in the end. If you have to roll for everything and nothing is predictable then you might as well skip playing the damn game and roll a single d6 at the start to determine a winner. Saves time, saves arguments, and saves you a lot of money since you don't even need an army to deploy.

If they intend on "balancing" vehicles like this, it's the most awkward and hamfisted way of doing it, and it really just makes dealing with vehicles in general rather frustrating if for nothing than the record keeping. Also not seeing how shaking/stunning should upgrade to blowing off guns and immobilzing the tank, to ultimately destroying it. That said, this sounds exactly like something GW would do.

It also doesn't help that this putzes gun tanks again, something that wasn't really necessary.

Vaktathi wrote:If they intend on "balancing" vehicles like this, it's the most awkward and hamfisted way of doing it, and it really just makes dealing with vehicles in general rather frustrating if for nothing than the record keeping. Also not seeing how shaking/stunning should upgrade to blowing off guns and immobilzing the tank, to ultimately destroying it. That said, this sounds exactly like something GW would do.

Again, armored vehicles are not shaken or stunned when hit by weapons. If they aren't damaged or destroyed nothing happens. The incoming fire may influence the behavior of the occupants, but no one gets hit with an RPG and decides to not move the tank. Shaken/stunned is inane and should of been removed from the game a decade ago for being silly. Any game mechanic that reduces the incidence of the logically impossible scenario of a shaken/stunned result is a mechanic that's on the right track.

To be honest I don't see a problem with this. It simply means that wieght of fire will be a lot more effective which takes away alot of the need for suicide melta sqauds.

Plus these are incomplete rumours, its a bit early to tell how they will play out.

I always assumed that stunned/shaken results simply meant minor damage that could be quickly repaired by the crew or an injured crewman.

Nitros14 wrote:

Palindrome wrote:
On the other side of the coin the rumours fro fantasy 8th sounded really good before it was released and look how that turned out.

8th is the best ruleset Fantasy has ever had.

Since 8th Fantasy has become tremendously more popular.

Not round these parts, oddly enough. Fantasy's all but dead here. There's so few players that games nights at the local GW are seriously struggling.

Palindrome wrote:
I always assumed that stunned/shaken results simply meant minor damage that could be quickly repaired by the crew or an injured crewman.

That's not really representative of how vehicular warfare works in the real world though. The vehicles occupants would rarely have the technical expertise to actually fix the vehicle they're driving and combat vehicles are generally designed without important easily broken and easily fixed systems. There's virtually nothing in or on a modern tank or aircraft that can be "fixed" by the occupants from within the vehicle without tools in a short period of time. Crew injury makes more sense, but that would logically result in a permanently reduced capability for the vehicle, not just one round of inaction.

Fantasy was dead around here in 7th, 8th brought it to life. Who knows obviously your experiences are very different. I certainly enjoy fantasy a lot more than 40k right now.

Rumours about commercial sales are just that. I'm sure people who hate 8th are all too willing to believe it's a commercial failure based on rumours.

Nitros14 wrote:Fantasy was dead around here in 7th, 8th brought it to life. Who knows obviously your experiences are very different. I certainly enjoy fantasy a lot more than 40k right now.

Rumours about commercial sales are just that. I'm sure people who hate 8th are all too willing to believe it's a commercial failure based on rumours.

Anecdotally the game seemed to suffer greatly from the intensely overpowered army books "designed for eighth" and eighth itself seemed to kind of push out the community that had cared about game balance and had been concerned about the direction balance had gone with recent army books. Whichever rumors you wish to believe go ahead and believe them, but I've never heard a single store owner or rumor state that fantasy is doing better after eighth and I've heard quite a few that state the opposite. Where there's smoke there is often fire.

I will LOL with 6th ed. turns out to be just minor fixes to wound allocation, flyer rules, cover changes, and minor changes to vehicle damage.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Palindrome wrote:
I always assumed that stunned/shaken results simply meant minor damage that could be quickly repaired by the crew or an injured crewman.

That's not really representative of how vehicular warfare works in the real world though.

Leman Russ look like they were designed in the 1920's yet they are supposed to be cutting edge sci fi technology. 40K bears very little resemblence to the real world.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Buttons wrote:I will LOL with 6th ed. turns out to be just minor fixes to wound allocation, flyer rules, cover changes, and minor changes to vehicle damage.

I won't, I will be slightly dissapointed that I won't be using my 40k armies for yet another edition but only briefly before I go back to playing decent games.

ShumaGorath wrote:Anecdotally the game seemed to suffer greatly from the intensely overpowered army books "designed for eighth" and eighth itself seemed to kind of push out the community that had cared about game balance and had been concerned about the direction balance had gone with recent army books. Whichever rumors you wish to believe go ahead and believe them, but I've never heard a single store owner or rumor state that fantasy is doing better after eighth and I've heard quite a few that state the opposite. Where there's smoke there is often fire.

Actually one of the nice things about 8th is the general balance of the army books. All of the new books have been really well balanced, Ogres slightly on the strong side, Tomb Kings slightly on the weak side Some of the old 7th edition books are still a bit too strong but nothing like 40k's Grey Knights.

One of the things I like about Fantasy is all the different varied armies that are viable whereas in 40k you see endless Grey Knights, Space Wolves and Blood Angels. Tons of 40k armies are in variously broken states (Tyranids, Chaos Marines, Tau, Sisters, Daemons, Eldar etc) while only Wood Elves and Brettonians are really bad.

Obviously anecdotally all I can say is how fantasy is doing around here. I can say that our local big Fantasy tournament Gottacon had a much bigger fantasy showing this year and that since 8th there's been a lot more people down to play fantasy.

I mean as fun as 7th and 30 power dice Daemons, the game being decided almost entirely by how well you could eyeball your charge distance and cavalry/monsters blowing up almost anything with a frontal charge was...

ShumaGorath wrote:

Palindrome wrote:
I always assumed that stunned/shaken results simply meant minor damage that could be quickly repaired by the crew or an injured crewman.

That's not really representative of how vehicular warfare works in the real world though. The vehicles occupants would rarely have the technical expertise to actually fix the vehicle they're driving and combat vehicles are generally designed without important easily broken and easily fixed systems. There's virtually nothing in or on a modern tank or aircraft that can be "fixed" by the occupants from within the vehicle without tools in a short period of time. Crew injury makes more sense, but that would logically result in a permanently reduced capability for the vehicle, not just one round of inaction.

I really don't like the look of these rumours. Far too much bookkeeping on vehicles. Maybe they are trying to swing it back to Infantryhammer?

Exceptionally poor balance killed 7th rather than the rules themselves. 6th was a much better edition though.

I have to laugh at some of the people in these threads saying how poorly 6th edition has been marketed and how they would never buy it...yet it is the same people slavering over any morsel in all of the rumor threads I have encountered.

I for one am excited to be a part of the ancitipation of what a new edition will bring and will almost assuredly buy the 6th ed starter pack, depending on the armies contained within, of course.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Nitros14 wrote:

Palindrome wrote:
On the other side of the coin the rumours fro fantasy 8th sounded really good before it was released and look how that turned out.

8th is the best ruleset Fantasy has ever had.

Since 8th Fantasy has become tremendously more popular.

Except among people who want a dice game to be perfectly predictable and non-random I guess.

In the same way that any game that hemorrhages players and sales becomes "tremendously more popular"! Like it if you want but eighth edition was a disaster that drove a significant portion of their playerbase away from the game. On it's face it's a bad game system that seems more designed to be a drinking companion or wacky board game for children than anything adults would enjoy. YMMV

And I say good riddance to those people-I love 8th. Hate it if you want, I think it's far superior to 7th. Randal from Clerks said it best: "You won't be missed."

Palindrome wrote:

Buttons wrote:I will LOL with 6th ed. turns out to be just minor fixes to wound allocation, flyer rules, cover changes, and minor changes to vehicle damage.

I won't, I will be slightly dissapointed that I won't be using my 40k armies for yet another edition but only briefly before I go back to playing decent games.

I personally like the current edition, perhaps infantry can use a boost and wound allocation and ID can be modified, but I sure don't want a complete overhaul.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Again, armored vehicles are not shaken or stunned when hit by weapons. If they aren't damaged or destroyed nothing happens.

Crews very much can be shaken and stunned in armored vehicles, something goes off nearby and shakes up the vehicle and the driver whacks his head on a panel, spalling may wound the loader and the commander has to take over, the crew may hop out temporarily to make sure it doesn't explode or to free a stuck track, the internal communication between the commander and driver may get cut, something may knock the engine and they have to restart it, etc. A lot of that is easily abstracted by the simple "shaken/stunned". There's a lot of stuff that may force a vehicle to either not shoot or not move for several seconds. FoW has a very similar state called "bailed" when the tank suffers a hit but isn't actually destroyed or has been bogged down in rough terrain, OGRE has "Disabled", etc.

demontalons wrote:Im not sure why so much angst is directed at things like stacked glancing, or after the first pen etc. Seems like an elegant way to reduce the power of mech without completely nerfing it.

You still have the advantages but now its easier to stop/suppress parking lots.

Transports need a nerf, not tanks. Transports have always been pretty easy to kill, it's the already underused battle tanks that are going to get hurt by these (unless they have av14, apparently). If you want to nerf transports, up the consequences to riders when they get destroyed. It's that easy.

Hollowman wrote:

demontalons wrote:Im not sure why so much angst is directed at things like stacked glancing, or after the first pen etc. Seems like an elegant way to reduce the power of mech without completely nerfing it.

You still have the advantages but now its easier to stop/suppress parking lots.

Transports need a nerf, not tanks. Transports have always been pretty easy to kill, it's the already underused battle tanks that are going to get hurt by these (unless they have av14, apparently). If you want to nerf transports, up the consequences to riders when they get destroyed. It's that easy.

It also doesn't help that it requires a lot more tracking/record keeping and makes overwhelming vehicles with weeny hits much easier than it should be.

According to this, all Grey Knights get a 5+ invul in close combat. Oh my god. Oh. My. God.

I read it all through and it seems nothing except the max 4+ to hit a flat-out vehicle benefits the Eldar. The Rapid Fire boost will make it even harded for Eldar to fight the IG. Fire Dragons now sucks against AV14. Holofields now become much worse due to the stacking of damage results. Wraithlords are now absolutley useless. Their strength was being unable to be hurt by stuff like bolters. With Rapid Fire being buffed, this nullifies them even more, I will probably never use them again. Vehicles being hit on a 5+ when going 12" instead of a 6+ really sucks, a lot of Eldar firepower will be useless against Orks, as we constantly have to go flat-out in order to avoid being destroyed.

Marzillius wrote:According to this, all Grey Knights get a 5+ invul in close combat. Oh my god. Oh. My. God.

I read it all through and it seems nothing except the max 4+ to hit a flat-out vehicle benefits the Eldar. The Rapid Fire boost will make it even harded for Eldar to fight the IG. Fire Dragons now sucks against AV14. Holofields now become much worse due to the stacking of damage results. Wraithlords are now absolutley useless. Their strength was being unable to be hurt by stuff like bolters. With Rapid Fire being buffed, this nullifies them even more, I will probably never use them again. Vehicles being hit on a 5+ when going 12" instead of a 6+ really sucks, a lot of Eldar firepower will be useless against Orks, as we constantly have to go flat-out in order to avoid being destroyed.

If the leaked edition is correct then its only base powerweapons that get the 5+.

According to this rumour (and indeed the leaked rules) all the codices will be getting FAQed and remember these are far from the entirety of the rules so throwing your teddy is a bit premature.

Nitros14 wrote:

Palindrome wrote:
On the other side of the coin the rumours fro fantasy 8th sounded really good before it was released and look how that turned out.

8th is the best ruleset Fantasy has ever had.

Since 8th Fantasy has become tremendously more popular.

Except among people who want a dice game to be perfectly predictable and non-random I guess.

Weird, because my experience has been similar to others'; in my hometown Fantasy was pretty popular 5th through 7th. Not as popular as 40K, but definitely the second most popular miniatures game system. After 8th? It all but disappeared. I think when I moved away there were maybe two people still playing it. I dunno how it is at the shops I go to now, since I only go to play Warmachine and that's on a different day than 40K and Fantasy, but most shops that are advertising GW game days seem to be advertising 40K nights, and not really mentioning WHFB.

EDIT: huh, apparently this was my 1000th post. wheeeeeee

Hollowman wrote: If you want to nerf transports, up the consequences to riders when they get destroyed. It's that easy.

Isn't that kinda how it worked in 4th though, and hardly anyone used transports because they were more of a liability than anything? You have to be careful with this stuff, you can't just outright nerf vehicles, and I imagine GW definitely doesn't want to since those vehicle parking lots probably make them a lot of money.

That and I'd like to actually have a reason to keep using my tanks. "They look cool" isn't a good enough reason to spend $30-40+ each on them.

let me point out the alternative............if you dont like 6th edition......keep playing 5th

Yeah but the problem there is that you'd have to keeping playing 5th.

No thanks.

If power weapons are now AP3 wouldn't give Terminators (and other 2+ save models) a HUGE boost as they would now have a 2+ save against all attacks in CC?

Seems a little harsh to me.

Hmm, if those rapid.fire rules are correct I'm going to have a lot of fun going Marine hunting with my Crisis suits...

Narhay wrote:I have to laugh at some of the people in these threads saying how poorly 6th edition has been marketed and how they would never buy it...yet it is the same people slavering over any morsel in all of the rumor threads I have encountered.

I'm not seeing any "slavering". What I'm seeing is a lot of people rolling their eyes thinking "Just release the fething thing GW! So these stupid contradictory rumours will stop."

We have seen practically no marketing from GW on this, and no, the pithy Youtube video does not count. They are trying to rerelease their premier game system with only 1 week of official prior announcement. New Line must really have a tight vice-like grip on GW's balls for them to not give them some wiggle room for this. This release will fall hard on it's arse as we all know the Internet is a "vocal minority" and little timmy is going to have this sprung upon him out of nowhere and now mummy has to drop £45 on a new rulebook with only a week's notice. If that was my mum I know exactly what she'd say.

Rant over.