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.

 Dakkamite wrote:

 Flinty wrote:

 Dakkamite wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:
On the whole, I've found 6th has less 'stupid' rules that previous, and fixed a lot of the issues, like highly trained marines just standing there and doing nothing while being charged by a mob of orks,

What I don't get is why people get their panties in a twist over this, but everyone is ok with "my army sits there and gets shot at because you roll first turn"

The player turns are supposed to be simultaneous, so the marines aren't doing nothing, the previous shooting phase was them firing at the incoming mob.

Yet GW fixes the one and leaves the parody of strategy that is first turn untouched.

Yet it is not usually a surprise who gets first turn, so the tactical challenge is to limit the opportunity of your opponent to do that damage. Is it totally fair, probably not, but it is part of the gaming challenge.

 Dakkamite wrote:
What I don't get is why people get their panties in a twist over this, but everyone is ok with "my army sits there and gets shot at because you roll first turn"

Who said everyone is ok with this? 40k's entire turn structure is just stupid, it should be updated to a system of alternating unit activations where both players move/shoot/assault at the same time.

 pretre wrote:

 Icculus wrote:

Pretre wrote:You think that is bad, you should have been around when sweeps/consolidates could contact new units.

Well that sounds terrible. glad I don't have to deal with that.

3rd edition: When Blood Angels ruled the galaxy. Rhino Rush, move forward with your turbo boosted rhinos, disembark, assault, kill whatever you assaulted, consolidate into the next one. Rinse. Repeat.

That was a nightmare for my gunline guard. It was like pacman...

 Flinty wrote:

Yet it is not usually a surprise who gets first turn, so the tactical challenge is to limit the opportunity of your opponent to do that damage. Is it totally fair, probably not, but it is part of the gaming challenge.

Theres very little means of doing this. Theres no LoS blocking terrain, no worthwhile way to conceal units behind others, no real choices to be made - you simply hope he doesn't roll a "hit" with his S10 AP1 pie plates and then watch your chances of victory slip away to nothing when he does.

The closest thing to a defense against this is reserves, but then he gets to use *his* key units right off the bat but yours still effectively miss a turn (or three)

Who said everyone is ok with this? 40k's entire turn structure is just stupid, it should be updated to a system of alternating unit activations where both players move/shoot/assault at the same time.

Very much this. IGOUGO is fine in some situations, such as Warmachine wherein theres very little ability to "alpha strike" the other guy before he gets a go, but with the range and power of 40k guns its a dreadful setup

 Dakkamite wrote:
Theres very little means of doing this. Theres no LoS blocking terrain, no worthwhile way to conceal units behind others, no real choices to be made - you simply hope he doesn't roll a "hit" with his S10 AP1 pie plates and then watch your chances of victory slip away to nothing when he does.

You don't play with LOS blocking terrain, fortifications, or even other units? Strange way to play 40k.

Very much this. IGOUGO is fine in some situations, such as Warmachine wherein theres very little ability to "alpha strike" the other guy before he gets a go, but with the range and power of 40k guns its a dreadful setup

I don't play WM/H but I thought one of the central tenets of WM was that you could do a first turn caster kill and win the game right off.

 Byte wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 Icculus wrote:

Pretre wrote:You think that is bad, you should have been around when sweeps/consolidates could contact new units.

Well that sounds terrible. glad I don't have to deal with that.

3rd edition: When Blood Angels ruled the galaxy. Rhino Rush, move forward with your turbo boosted rhinos, disembark, assault, kill whatever you assaulted, consolidate into the next one. Rinse. Repeat.

That was a nightmare for my gunline guard. It was like pacman...

Cannot unsee/hear.

I miss the old waagh :(

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
WS needs a 2+ and 6+ option. Elites should not be hitting only on 3+! Skarbrand should be skillfully knocking tau around!

This. I think the WS table should be closer to the WHFB to wound table than it currently is now.

A few things come to mind....

Unwieldy...couldnt it have just been an inititive modifier...( I can move at the speed of light, but this damn hammer is SOOO HEAVY!! )

First Turn Alpha Strike...Your telling me that armies line up...wait for the whistle...THEN strike!!! I think its safe to assume that those skimmers were, just a moment ago moving at a pretty fast rate of speed.

And as others have said.. the you go , I go turn sequence..ive played the most recent edition of Epic as well and 40K wouold TOTALLY benefit from that style of turn play.

Markerlights making the tau a bs 10 army

zilka86 wrote:
Markerlights making the tau a bs 10 army

No, markerlights can potentially make a single unit in the tau army BS10. They cannot make the army BS10.

Statistically, you need 14 markerlights to get enough to make a single unit BS10. That's just not worth it.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Statistically, you need 14 markerlights to get enough to make a single unit BS10. That's just not worth it.

zilka86 is a troll (and probably a previous troll returning under a new name), just look at their recent thread about how markerlights are "overpowered". Trying to argue with them is pointless.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

zilka86 wrote:
Markerlights making the tau a bs 10 army

No, markerlights can potentially make a single unit in the tau army BS10. They cannot make the army BS10.

Statistically, you need 14 markerlights to get enough to make a single unit BS10. That's just not worth it.

When you reply to the trolls, the terrorists win.

 pretre wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

zilka86 wrote:
Markerlights making the tau a bs 10 army

No, markerlights can potentially make a single unit in the tau army BS10. They cannot make the army BS10.

Statistically, you need 14 markerlights to get enough to make a single unit BS10. That's just not worth it.

When you reply to the trolls, the terrorists win.

So if a terrorist replies to a troll, does the universe implode?

 pretre wrote:

 Dakkamite wrote:
Theres very little means of doing this. Theres no LoS blocking terrain, no worthwhile way to conceal units behind others, no real choices to be made - you simply hope he doesn't roll a "hit" with his S10 AP1 pie plates and then watch your chances of victory slip away to nothing when he does.

You don't play with LOS blocking terrain, fortifications, or even other units? Strange way to play 40k.

Seconded. From my very first forays into the game in the early-ish years it has been possible to use books as hills and random chunks of polystyrene as bunkers to break the battlefield up.

Not a troll just that markerlights are broken buy truning tau in to a bs 10 Army

zilka86 wrote:
Not a troll just that markerlights are broken buy truning tau in to a bs 10 Army

You keep saying that. I do not think it means what you think it means.

 pretre wrote:

You don't play with LOS blocking terrain, fortifications, or even other units? Strange way to play 40k.

The TO sets out the terrain at any given tournament (which is what I'm referring to, because friendly play you can homerule anything you like), and in most cases, this means an almost flat field with some token trees in a corner where they won't get in the way. Perhaps a partial ruin in the centre and some area terrain that give cover but do not block LoS, especially once unit movement is considered. And finally, with so much IG and IG allies around that flat out laugh at LoS... yeah, my point still stands.

With regards to other units, the keyword was "worthwhile". 5+ cover is not worthwhile.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

zilka86 wrote:
Not a troll just that markerlights are broken buy truning tau in to a bs 10 Army

You keep saying that. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dakkamite wrote:
The TO sets out the terrain at any given tournament (which is what I'm referring to, because friendly play you can homerule anything you like), and in most cases, this means an almost flat field with some token trees in a corner where they won't get in the way. Perhaps a partial ruin in the centre and some area terrain that give cover but do not block LoS, especially once unit movement is considered. And finally, with so much IG and IG allies around that flat out laugh at LoS... yeah, my point still stands.

As does mine. If your TO is not putting down 25% coverage with a mix of terrain, then he isn't doing his job (or really following the terrain rules). I would assist him in developing his terrain stock so he can put down real terrain.

With regards to other units, the keyword was "worthwhile". 5+ cover is not worthwhile.

Good thing there's fortifications!

Overwatch and not being able to charge out of non open topped vehicles. When I play against Tau and charge them and they get like 48 shots from rapid fire and supporting fire (or whatever it's called) my entire squad is pretty much dead once they get into combat. It is absurdly overpowered. Not to mention I don't get bonus attacks for charging them -_-

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
WS needs a 2+ and 6+ option. Elites should not be hitting only on 3+! Skarbrand should be skillfully knocking tau around!

This!

And carry it to Fantasy too, please, so WS can have some meaning in that game too.

Only being able to take 1 armour save or 1 invulnerable save or 1 cover save. Would the bullet not go through the wall, then go on to the shields, and if it manages to get through both, would the armour not stop the projectile travelling at a snails pace?!

 migs6357 wrote:
Only being able to take 1 armour save or 1 invulnerable save or 1 cover save. Would the bullet not go through the wall, then go on to the shields, and if it manages to get through both, would the armour not stop the projectile travelling at a snails pace?!

I used to think the same way, but let me tell you two reasons why i think they do this (and why though i used to agree with you, i now like that you can only take one).

1) This speeds up the game only having one save per entity means a cut down of die rolls (and a quickening of casualties)

2) Functionally it means you can pass out more invulnerable saves via terrain ruiles or just on the models period without worrying about defensive creep.


I like to think of it like this: if its strong enough to punch through a forcefield, the armor's got no chance of stopping it.

I mostly like 6th personally. Though things are rather dumb. I absolutely HATE challenges. It's such a stupid rule set imo. In fact everyone in our group doesn't even use challenges. It goes past bad rules writing, and even just feels weird fluff wise.

I hate how spotlights work. Really, I'm gonna fire my weapons and THEN fire up my spotter to light up my target? Really?

Yeah, the 1st turn "let me blow your gak up while you stand there in horror" thing is really annoying. Before we knew what the actual rules to the game were, my friends and I would just do:
P1 Move
P2 Move
P1 Shoot
P2 Shoot.

Looking back at it now, 2nd turn would have a pretty big advantage of being able to react to both P1 deployment and then subsequent movement, but I guess the shooting would still make up for it.

Then you could have a simultaneous assault phase where both players take turns declaring their assaults. Two units assaulting each other would both benefit from their assault bonuses and they move toward each other; resulting in less failed charges.

You could also have a cool rule where you can intercept assaulting units by declaring a charge against them, but this would deny overwatch to the unit they are intercepting for and you can't intercept more than one unit at a time.

You obviously can't fire overwatch if you're declaring an assault with that unit.

I think this would also fit in with the 6th edition paradigm of having shooting units supported by assault units.

Let see:

Champion of Chaos!
Nothing is "better" than forced challenges no matter the odds.
Also the challenge rules themselves. Why should I be penalized for refusing to fight a single character when I can eat up the entire unit in one go instead? :(

No charging out of rhinos also make my berserkers a little sad. Let them lose the extra charge attack or something if a limitation is necessary or give CSM more assault vehicles

ConsecratedIron wrote:
Im a marines player and I think ATSKNF to some degree is stupid. It makes sense when compared to the fluff, but it eliminates a mechanic of the game that is huge for other armies.

This. The rule does make sense from a fluff standpoint, but it needs to be toned down.

 pretre wrote:

 Dakkamite wrote:
Theres very little means of doing this. Theres no LoS blocking terrain, no worthwhile way to conceal units behind others, no real choices to be made - you simply hope he doesn't roll a "hit" with his S10 AP1 pie plates and then watch your chances of victory slip away to nothing when he does.

You don't play with LOS blocking terrain, fortifications, or even other units? Strange way to play 40k.

Very much this. IGOUGO is fine in some situations, such as Warmachine wherein theres very little ability to "alpha strike" the other guy before he gets a go, but with the range and power of 40k guns its a dreadful setup

I don't play WM/H but I thought one of the central tenets of WM was that you could do a first turn caster kill and win the game right off.

That's a fault with WM/H, not the alternating unit system. I personally think 40k could benefit from this system, since IGOUGO slows the game down a bit and it definitely makes the inactive player bored in longer games (as opposed to alternating system, or an initiative based system like Force on Force where the "inactive" player still stays interested. I played 40k using FoF rules and everyone loved it)

 AL-PiXeL01 wrote:
Let see:

Champion of Chaos!
Nothing is "better" than forced challenges no matter the odds.
Also the challenge rules themselves. Why should I be penalized for refusing to fight a single character when I can eat up the entire unit in one go instead? :(

No charging out of rhinos also make my berserkers a little sad. Let them lose the extra charge attack or something if a limitation is necessary or give CSM more assault vehicles

Yeah actually, also it should've worked if you killed a squad, like pain tokens.

As it is you need the enemy to bring sarge's, and not alotta armies actually do that anymore.

Considering that Chaos is forced to take them, but yet C:SM and DA don't..It's just weird.

I really wish you could assault out of a vehicle if it hadn't moved yet that turn.

I'd like charge distances to be initiative (max 6) +d6

Marker lights should be assault weapons

Furious charge should still add +1 Init

BTW, I almost always choose to go last. I've regretted gong first, but never going last. What are you guys doing that going second is crippling you so?