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.

That would be great if the book was full color.

OMGF, with all these comment on what unit moved how fast we can't keep track of it.

How the hell do you guys play other games? I guess you guys wouldn't be able to play Battletech. 40K=checkers and Battletech=chess.

It's not that hard, have some counters to show that a unit moved and has a modifier like +1 or +2, something like people do now with multi wound units? It's not that hard. Also just like how GW made templates and counters for 5th edtion for units that have ran or gone to ground etc etc.

You do it now, you are just whining and complaining about nothing.

Yeah but the more complex games either/have datasheets/ less models/ or simply take forever.

Grot 6 wrote:

Adam LongWalker wrote:

megatrons2nd wrote:

KingCracker wrote:Am I the only person that thinks most of what BOK says is total BS? It seems like he just dumps a metric crap ton of ideas that range from possible all the way up to yea friggin right. Then the ones he pegs or gets close enough to, claims its why he is right and the others are shrugged off as bad intel or early writtings. Personally, I think the majority of that list sounds like terrible ideas.

If it is true, then 6th edition can kiss my ass

I'm fairly certain he himself did not post these, but it was posted by someone else on his sight.

Again I am being civil on my comments concerning BoK, however if this site has a dubious past for stating dubious reports, regardless of whom wrote the article, the only conclusions to me are this is a simple stunt to gain readership on to that site.

+1to that sentiment. Good call !

Yea

Except Ghost 21 (whom one could hardly call as being in league with BOK) said that the rumors lined up with what he had seen as well.

As a Nid player, the farther we get from 5th Edition and its internal hate machine, the better.

Ive been on DAKKA awhile now, and Ive seen MANY rumors threads pop up. I can tell ya, that most the crap thrown around in those threads is just that, crap. Some might sound good, some like utter junk, no one really knows WTF GW is thinking. So Ill read them sure....but Im done thinking this guy is right and that guy is wrong, they have ALL said stuff that was so far off it was sad

Not sure if posed already, but Ghost 21 posted the following on the Warseer thread:

Ghost 21 wrote:im not saying 2nd ed didnt have problems, its just i havent enjoyed 40k since

prehaps im harking for a time where squats were there

but really if you didnt like overwatch n those sort of rules you wont like the changes

Ghost 21 in responce to Draconis wrote:

Draconis wrote:Imagine if it was broken down into forces of good versus evil. It would look a little something like this:

Good
Blood Angles
Eldar
Grey Knights
Imperial Guard
Space Marines (Vanilla)
Space Wolves
Sisters of Battle
Witch Hunters

Warp
Chaos Daemons
Chaos Space Marines
Dark Eldar

Solo Forces
Orks (they fight everyone)
Tyranids (they eat everyone)
Necrons
Chuck Norris

Bit of a size disadvantage in armies

urm (you do know theres going to be 2 new "armies" right to add to that list?)

hides

and in response

BramGuant wrote:

ghost21 wrote:
urm (you do know theres going to be 2 new "armies" right to add to that list?)

hides

As far as I know "Traitor Legions" and "Holy Inquisition", that is.

So... where do the Tau fit in on that list?

Guildsman wrote:So... where do the Tau fit in on that list?

We're above "good" under "greater good".

Guildsman wrote:So... where do the Tau fit in on that list?

What? You didn't see Tau? It's at the bottom of Solo Forces. Tau is spelled C-H-U-C-K N-O-R-R-I-S, if you weren't aware.

Theduke07 wrote:Yeah but the more complex games either/have datasheets/ less models/ or simply take forever.

Sounds like someone who has never played a 'more complex' game before...

Anyway, Bramgaunt is better known for his rumor accuracy than Ghost 21, IIRC. Interesting that he seems to be agreeing with this as well, although I'm slightly concerned that "Holy Inquisition" is a faction when we already have that in the form of Codex: Grey Knights...

To be fair, no rumour poster other than ghost21 or the BoK owner have commented on the 6th edition rumours yet. BramGaunt only speaks about old rumours on Chaos and Inquisition.

SkaerKrow wrote:Vanilla Marines =/= Blood Angels =/= Space Wolves =/= Black Templar =/= Dark Angels.

Maybe not 100%, but you can't close your eyes to how outrageously similar they all are. The differences are quite negligible. Ask any non-SM player, they use the same strategies no matter what color his opponent's SMs are.

Archonate wrote:

SkaerKrow wrote:Vanilla Marines =/= Blood Angels =/= Space Wolves =/= Black Templar =/= Dark Angels.

Maybe not 100%, but you can't close your eyes to how outrageously similar they all are. The differences are quite negligible. Ask any non-SM player, they use the same strategies no matter what color his opponent's SMs are.

Some wear robes, some have nipples and ugly wings, some right slowed looking wolves, and some look like dudes in futuristic armor.

EDIT:

I want so much for the Legions codex to be true.... so it must not be. For now I'll just keep playing warmachine.

Archonate wrote:

SkaerKrow wrote:Vanilla Marines =/= Blood Angels =/= Space Wolves =/= Black Templar =/= Dark Angels.

Maybe not 100%, but you can't close your eyes to how outrageously similar they all are. The differences are quite negligible. Ask any non-SM player, they use the same strategies no matter what color his opponent's SMs are.

Man no wonder people whine if they're fighting SW or BA like Vanilla marines

I have Blood Angels (DoA style). But I play mostly Non SM armies and I would never play the same way I do against SW as I would aginst BA or even VSM for that matter.











Edited for Grammar

Considering we already keep track of if units move for the purposes of their own shooting, assaulting vehicles, and so on, I really don't see this being an issue. If anything, I see it as something to add depth to the game.

Archonate wrote:Maybe not 100%, but you can't close your eyes to how outrageously similar they all are. The differences are quite negligible. Ask any non-SM player, they use the same strategies no matter what color his opponent's SMs are.

I'm sorry, but you literally have no idea what you're talking about on this subject.

ThirdUltra wrote:No problem; I can totally understand where you're comming from on that though....

Cheers!

Hah, what man wouldn't! who needs erm! anyways...

wyomingfox wrote:Except Ghost 21 (whom one could hardly call as being in league with BOK) said that the rumors lined up with what he had seen as well.

As a Nid player, the farther we get from 5th Edition and its internal hate machine, the better.

I thought he said this in the direction of what he heard, way he said it made it sound like these rumours have had a bit of chinese whispers played, still if these are even in the right ball park then I will be playing a hell of a lot more 40k than fantasy!

Brother SRM wrote:Considering we already keep track of if units move for the purposes of their own shooting, assaulting vehicles, and so on, I really don't see this being an issue. If anything, I see it as something to add depth to the game.

Absolutely. I think keeping track would be more intense and add more strategy and skill to the game.

I'm not sure about skill; most people would keep track with tokens. Definitely adds a consideration for target priority, though.

SkaerKrow wrote:

Archonate wrote:Maybe not 100%, but you can't close your eyes to how outrageously similar they all are. The differences are quite negligible. Ask any non-SM player, they use the same strategies no matter what color his opponent's SMs are.

I'm sorry, but you literally have no idea what you're talking about on this subject.

I beg to differ. As someone who plays IG, CSM's, Tyranids, Eldar, Tau, GK's, and SoB, who has played in dozens of events in multiple states and cities, and plays at least once a week, sometimes up to 3 games a week, they really aren't all that different, and don't require a significantly different strategy aside from the fact that some (SW's, BA's) are just outright better than others. You may change some tactical decisions based on various things, but often every list is capable of forcing the same potentialities at you.

They're similar enough that many players treat them as one army with respect to playing them (e.g. they'll play SW's one week, BA's the next, and Vulkan marines at the tournament at the end of the month, all with the same collection of models).

For many armies, when faced with SW's, SM's, DA, BA's, etc, they really will use pretty much the exact same strategy because that's all there really is to do against them. The only difference is the differing degrees to which it functions based on the competitiveness of the particular marine book they are facing. Sometimes it will work a lot, others it needs a hefty bit of luck, but often there's only a small handful of changes you can really make when facing MEQ armies that don't involve list changes.

I'm all for these changes, all of them appeal to me. I understand the doubts and hope these rumours have an ounce of truth.

Eldar will be harder to hit and space marines will have their usual heavy armour. Balance.

Why do people keep quoting this ghost21 character like he's some kind of gospel? Has he been right about much before? The only rumour I've seen him 'confirm' is that Sisters definitely won't be getting a WD codex. Yeah.

Vaktathi wrote:I beg to differ. As someone who plays IG, CSM's, Tyranids, Eldar, Tau, GK's, and SoB, who has played in dozens of events in multiple states and cities, and plays at least once a week, sometimes up to 3 games a week, they really aren't all that different, and don't require a significantly different strategy aside from the fact that some (SW's, BA's) are just outright better than others. You may change some tactical decisions based on various things, but often every list is capable of forcing the same potentialities at you.

Going by that logic, most every list in 40k can force the same potentialities from you, so they're all comparable (with an exception for Daemons, since they break most every mold out there). In practice, the only things that Space Marine codexes have in common are lots of AV 11 transports, S4 AP5 shots, and 3+ saves. Sure, Blood Angels might have Tactical Squads, but how often do you actually see them? The same is true with Space Wolves and Jump Infantry. Do you not make any special consideration when fighting a Lucifer Pattern Vindicator, knowing the extended range that it has thanks to its greater maneuverability when firing? Those wrinkles, small individually but with a greater impact when taken as a whole, are one of the key elements that gives identity to all of the armies in the game. Knowing them and responding accordingly is one of the elements that separates tournament players from casuals.

Beyond all of that, the original argument here was that all Space Marines were equally powerful (and top tier ), and even you admit that Blood Angels and Space Wolves stand above Vanilla, Dark Angel and Black Templar Space Marines. They aren't all just the exact same army with Blood Fists or Wolf Fists instead of Ultra Fists.

the_trooper wrote:

Archonate wrote:

SkaerKrow wrote:Vanilla Marines =/= Blood Angels =/= Space Wolves =/= Black Templar =/= Dark Angels.

Maybe not 100%, but you can't close your eyes to how outrageously similar they all are. The differences are quite negligible. Ask any non-SM player, they use the same strategies no matter what color his opponent's SMs are.

Some wear robes, some have nipples and ugly wings, some right slowed looking wolves, and some look like dudes in futuristic armor.

Sad as it sounds, these differences are more significant to me than those of their different codices. As long as I know that they're just a bunch of T4 3+ Svs, I won't lose to them.

Back to the topic: I'm also excited to see them change wound allocation. 5th ed made a few idiotic changes that resulted in longer games and more debatable rules interpretations. Wound allocation was one of those things. I knew the moment I read it that it would be revised in 6th ed. I was hoping that TLoS would also be withdrawn, as it stifled certain modeling liberties and is just lazy. 4th ed. had the most spectacular, simple LoS rules...

Some more hints from Ghost 21 in regards to the post below

Ghost 21 wrote:urm (you do know theres going to be 2 new "armies" right to add to that list?)

hides

Ghost 21 wrote:one is "warp" based...the other isnt marines

Ghost 21 wrote:i wish i could tell you it was enslavers but it isnt

Ghost 21 wrote:they both exist in fluff.... n thats all i can nod too

I think it was said they were Chaos Legions and an Inquisitor book.

I think the case for SM diversity is being a bit overstated by some. I find it far easier to learn to play against a new SM codex just because there are so many similar parts. SM varieties aren't identical to each other. But the many similarities create a kind of shorthand for me and probably most players. Long Fangs are Devs plus X and Y. Grey Hunters are tacticals with A and B. BA rhinos are the same thing plus fast.

Same thing follows for gameplay. The SM armies play differently, but facing them there are some things that apply across the board. There's just not a coherent argument for claiming SM armies are as different from one another as other armies. Contrast SM with Eldar/DE. Falcons aren't Raiders plus X and Y, and the two don't play anything alike.

Back on topic, I really don't know what to make of the Inquisition rumor. Doesn't make a lick of sense to me. Codex: Stormtroopers? Think there's much more potential for AdMech, among others.

Heading into wishlisting and arguing territory here.

Thread in danger of being closed unless there's a way to keep it on topic and relevant...