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.

About 5 or 6 so far, watched about as many. Not the most stupendous number of games but enough to get something of a feel for it. My experience so far has been that it tends to be very "gimmicky". For instance, Warlord abilities can be either largely pointless (hooray I get to redeploy several units after deployment...but I deployed 2nd so it doesn't matter...) or can determine a game if the right one is rolled and used correctly.

A lot of mechanics put in also seem to be attempting to set up (or often force) "epic" moments, but often just end up being more exploitable than anything else, like Challenges. There's a lot of stuff that a game tries to put in that's more suited to a game with a fifth or a tenth of the number of models.

So far I kinda like it. Makes positioning of your troops MUCH more important.

I'm out. 6e nerfs both of my active armies pretty hard. Setting aside any issues with the actual edition change, I'm not willing to shell out three or four hundred dollars to make my armies playable again.

On the upside, 400+ points of Dust Warfare was well under $200, and has provided more fun than I've had with 40k for several months.

I dont think I dislike the 6E CORE rules of general movement, shooting and assaults.

My biggest complaints are the double FOC, Allies and Flyers.. Some people think this is fantastic and it allows people to start smaller armies etc and add them to their current ones etc.. I hear that point of view.

I simply dont like the direction based on being so blatantly sales directed as opposed to game directed.

I have been on the fence about quitting. I am a long term (15+ years) player and I have survived all of the crap that GW has vomited forth as far as editions.
6E seems to have intentionally targeted Orks as the bastard children of the game and that pissed me off pretty bad.

I have now played over 20 6E games and they were all very disappointing. I can stand losing but not when it just seems like my army withers to the slightest touch. I recently played a 2000 point match with nearly 300 models on the table and none of them made it to the enemy because of the wound allocation.
Ork vehicles are a friggin joke now. I haven't had anything but a BW make it to turn 3. Ork flyers might as well be made of tissue paper.
Having said all of that though, I love Orks and I am hoping for a massive turn around when our codex is released.

My buddy insists on staying with 4th Edition, because he refused to re-buy all his books even for 5th because he did that all once already with 4th edition. So 6th is right out.

But then again, all my stuff is from back in the 3rd/4th editions, too, so it works out just fine by me. It lets me still use my Necrons without updating (except for the always cool Night Scythes and Stalkers that will be fun to VDR into our 4th games), my converted and lovingly painted Legion of the Damned army (using the Cursed founding rules) won't become just a variant paintjob of one of the big four chapters, and my Kroot Mercs (that I spent so much time and money converting but GW has made unplayable in the current editions), and 4th edition lets my Sisters of Battle characters keep all of their wargear. Oh, and my 13th Company Space Wolves get to keep their Wolfen squads.

I would rather spend the effort and money to put together a playable 2nd edition set for my Space Marines, Chaos and Orks than to update everything to 6th, frankly, because it has far more differences to add a "new" feel to our games.

I think 6th seems like a unilateral improvement over all editions other than 2nd

I shelved my 40k back in the 2nd-3rd transition as it was becoming obvious what way the wind was blowing. I've read through 6th and it seems obvious things are, once again, going around in circles. One step forward, one to the side, and one backward, rinse and repeat. More random elements, some of which address a few exploitable elements of the last edition and some which just seems to have been put in for the sake of it. Some people praising, some raging, over what, in the end, isn't that big a change nor that much of an improvement or that much of a step back.

They're still in the Cycle. It isn't the edition which will bring me back to 40k, this time, either.

I think I'll continue playing 2nd edition, our group is quite happy with that. I can't afford another rule book anyway. If I did buy it, it would look nice on the shelf next to the other 5 I guess. nice to know I'm now 4 editions out of date, instead of 3!

I don't actually "play" the game that much, I just like painting models and reading the fluff. I don't really have a problem with 6E's new rules, so when I do play, I'll be happy to play by 6E's rules. I do, however, have a problem with the direction of the fluff in the more recent codices. Particularly the ones written by Matt Ward. But that's another topic for another time.

Raises hand.

I'm not going to be playing it. I might return in 7th ed. Doubt it.

I've read the rules and watched a couple of games being played. It's no longer the game I fell for back in 1987. Sure, we had a falling out back in 1992-1997 or so, but we made up and continued along for a while before just drifting apart again. It's a bit like 2nd edition, but not ( and if I wanted to play 2nd ed, I can just play 2nd ed).

Fortunately, I was not introduced to gaming through a GW store (there weren't any here in 1987) and am fully aware that other games exist and can fill that void in my black soul.

My 40k (marines, eldar and guard) will get use as various things in Tomorrow's War (where you buy a rulebook, choose your scale and use what you have in that scale) or 2nd ed 40k (seeing a resurgence in my area) and otherwise, Infinity scratches my SF itch.

Just play 6th edition.
It's only the most minor changes that balances the game, it's not like entire units or armies are un-playable.

I could understand being angry about losing the squats and quiting (If you played them) but it's just a rule change. Tiny ones at that.

I think it's the best edition yet

I'm still getting used to it, but I think I prefer 6th. Either I'm doing it completely wrong, or everyone that's complaining about the allocation in combat is over exaggerating. Over all it's pretty similar, there's just a lot more to have to think about....is it worth brining my melta's to the front of the squad yet? Do I have a back up plan if I roll 6 when I need 7" to get into combat? What if I cant just keep my heavy support sat in this forest all game?

I love that writing a list is no longer the most important part of a game, you actually have to react and make decisions as things might not go 100% according to plan.

KrimsunBaron wrote:Just play 6th edition.
It's only the most minor changes that balances the game, it's not like entire units or armies are un-playable.

I could understand being angry about losing the squats and quiting (If you played them) but it's just a rule change. Tiny ones at that.

I think it's the best edition yet

The lose-with-no-models-on-the-field kills pretty much every Null Deployment army apart from Drop Pods and Daemons.
The no more than 50% of models in reserve hurts that too.
The can't assault out of reserve kills traditional Webway Portal Armies. (Being the whole point of taking the 100+pts of models for the webway portal was so your slow, expensive heavy hitters, or incredibly fragile models could reach combt before being wiped off the board.)

But other than that (and as far as I know, it pretty much killing my WWP list), yes, it's a pretty good edition. xD

Ovion wrote:The lose-with-no-models-on-the-field kills every Null Deployment army apart from Drop Pods

And Daemons. Daemons can still do it.

My group is plowing through our rulebooks now. My first game is still 2 weeks away. We're all pretty excited about what we've seen so far.

I started 40k about a year ago and had a pretty good teacher and a good grasp on the basics. Now though i have moved and reading 6th on my own, it seems way more complicated and odd then when I read through 5th on my own. Not sure if I get it.

6th edition seems to be going even farther along the line where working/exploiting the meta matters a thousand times more then having a cool, fun, thematic game. And that's not what I spend all the time painting my minis to do.

Ever since sometime near the beginning of 4th edition for me each year the game (and lots of it's players) has seemed to become more and more "cold and calculating" than the "jovial and nerdy" feel that got me so deep into the game originally.

I honestly think White Dwarf has helped a lot with that, though, by killing the old days of fun and becoming an ad magazine. It helped me feel like a part of the gaming community, and I think that if I didn't have Dakkadakka, I couldn't care less about 40K right now.

I won't be playing 6th I'll be playing 5th. Why? Well, in the 5 or 6 years that 5th was out, I got one training game due to a fixation with playing fantasy! Now that 6th is out, I was able to snap up the 5th edition mini rulebook for peanuts. Plus, I've managed to persuade some people to play 5th who have never played 40k in their lives. It's a win win.