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.

http://www.frontlinegaming.org/2012/01/17/40k-video-battle-report-6th-ed-rumored-rules/

Here’s another Video Bat Rep using the 6th ed rumored rules for you all. In this one, Frankie and I give it another go, this time with Crons and Shrike Marines to try out some new rules. Again, we aren’t digging into the competitive match ups yet as we still want to feel our way through the rules and just experiment a bit. We’ll get to the math-ups everyone wants to see in the next game, we just wanted to familiarize ourselves with the lay of the land a bit more.

There are a few things we’d like to see changed, but on the whole, still an amazing rule set, really digging it.

Enjoy the show!

Awesome batt rep as always, maybe next time you could make it a bit more granular. Walking us through at least one whole game turn pointing out the new rules that are being implemented and how they impact the overall game play.

Hey Reece,

I noticed your Dread caused a "Weapon Destroyed" against the Monolith. That implies you rolled a "6" to damage it ( 6 - 3 = 3 "weapon destroyed). If that had been the case, the monolith would have lost its structure point, but it sounds like you guys didn't play it that way.

Other then that, good report. DO ORKS!

Good bat rep. I'd like to see how Tau, Eldar or Deamons do under the new rules. See if the old guys get a buff.

That being said, that other guy is incredibly quiet. I have a hard time hearing him on my speakers. Maybe he just has a special, deep voice that doesn't show up unless you have a subwoofer but I doubt thats the case

Heh I heard him fine but I have a subwoofer as well...

I loved the batrep, you guys do an awesome job. As for the stubborn necron block, I think the issue was haphazardly assaulting it. Had shrike, the dread, and/or the scouts joined in, or alpha struck in, they may have swung things.

As for the monolith, while it is very tough should it prove to be a superheavy, it cant score objectives and any pen that rolls a 6 makes it "just" a tank. So by focusing on objectives and "phasing out" the warriors, even with the lith blasting away you will come out ahead.

Love to see a no mech game just a massive horde of chaos (marines or demons) vs grey knights. Old rivalries and all that ;P

Broken units make a fall back move only at the time they break, (move +D6″). They are destroyed if they are within 12″ of an un-engaged enemy unit at the end of their movement phase. Also they may not make Support, Psychic, or Assault actions.

Basically in practice it means that you have to fall back when you’re ‘scared’ to the point that you break but subsequent turns are spent trying to reposition yourself (away from the enemy) to a place where you can rally and come back with a vengeance. A broken unit may leave the table voluntarily, and prevent the enemy from getting Kill Points for that unit.

Thanks for the video, Keep them coming!


Alright so the chosen "squad leader" at the beginning of the game becomes a character (if a character is part of a squad at the start of the game it becomes the squad leader automatically i think). This has benefits in that you can use directed hits, but so can enemy squad leaders chosen from the start of the game (not the grunts that get field promoted if the 1st leader dies). Since single-model units are indeed squad leaders, does that mean a dreadnought, trygon, or c'tan has the directed hits rule in CC? Further to the point, dreads shouldn't fear power fists anymore because they'll swing first with their DCCW's and just snipe the fist in a s10 ap 2 hit.

Another issue from a playtest book that i think will be different when the final verson hits.

tetrisphreak wrote:
Alright so the chosen "squad leader" at the beginning of the game becomes a character (if a character is part of a squad at the start of the game it becomes the squad leader automatically i think). This has benefits in that you can use directed hits, but so can enemy squad leaders chosen from the start of the game (not the grunts that get field promoted if the 1st leader dies). Since single-model units are indeed squad leaders, does that mean a dreadnought, trygon, or c'tan has the directed hits rule in CC? Further to the point, dreads shouldn't fear power fists anymore because they'll swing first with their DCCW's and just snipe the fist in a s10 ap 2 hit.

Another issue from a playtest book that i think will be different when the final verson hits.

I mentioned that in another thread but to answer your question, Yes, I do think that solo-MCs, dreads, Units of 1 etc, are going to get the 'charactor' buff. It's more of how the designers want to make targeting (for LOS, being in terrain, etc) much more streamlined and faster. I don't think that the byproduct of Direct Hits is something that they are going to take away. Just think of Kairos, from a fluffy standpoint, that thing would know exactly who it wanted to kill each swing. Remeber too that directed hits in ranged attacks need to be within 12" (if I remember right) and even though you get to choose (if I remember right) your opponent still gets to choose which armor group you have to start with. Making Directed Hits in CC much less threatening if you can somehow give your squad leader a variable save compared to your grunts...a simple power sword would do the trick in most instances.

Directed hits can only be performed by covering fire, snipers, and characters.

Characters are only squad leaders and Independent characters. A codex has to specifically say it is an independent character to get the buff.

And that is also taking into account the types of weapons that can't use directed hits.

I am enjoying seeing the pdf in action. I wish my group was at all interested in playing these. I may have to do the unthinkable and play a game against myself.

A few things stuck out this time that aren't already mentioned.

--Jumpers may have a 9" move, not 8. There's a contradiction between the text and the summary. If 9 ends up being right, it would mean fleet flyers have the largest charge range in the game I think -- 22" vs 21" for cav (there's no fleet cav that I know of but I am probably wrong). Well I guess fleet units in fast open topped vehicles have a bigger threat range (8" combat + 16" charge = 24") and storm ravens with jumpackers may be even faster (16" cruise + 9" engage = 25").

--Not sure how you guys did the bidding. If Reese bid 0, Franky (sp) would have to bid 1 or fold. If he folds you would win by virtue of going first and no one would get stratagems, or he could bid 1 and then force you to bid 2 if you really wanted to go first (not the 1 you ended up somehow giving to him -- if you go first and bid 0 you could never give him just 1 point).

Pretty much if you win the deployment roll you have a certain amount of leverage (sort of like being on the button in heads up texas hold em). I think as is right now the stratagems seem to be much better then going first or second, so not sure how often people will bid all that much under these rules. Could be wrong though.

tetrisphreak wrote:Alright so the chosen "squad leader" at the beginning of the game becomes a character (if a character is part of a squad at the start of the game it becomes the squad leader automatically i think). This has benefits in that you can use directed hits, but so can enemy squad leaders chosen from the start of the game (not the grunts that get field promoted if the 1st leader dies). Since single-model units are indeed squad leaders, does that mean a dreadnought, trygon, or c'tan has the directed hits rule in CC? Further to the point, dreads shouldn't fear power fists anymore because they'll swing first with their DCCW's and just snipe the fist in a s10 ap 2 hit.

Another issue from a playtest book that i think will be different when the final verson hits.

Yup single model units are themselves squad leaders by my reading. However, coarse and two handed weapons cannot make directed attacks. DCCW is a coarse weapon. Basic attack is a two handed weapon. So no way your run of the mill dread can snipe the fist. Librarian dread is the only dread I know of that can due to his force weapon.

MCs and guys like Meph with non-coarse one handed weapons can direct attacks though and that is pretty big. However, a simple addition of a power weapon, armor upgrade, sheild etc and the fist will be much harder to snipe as they will be a different armor group.

Also note, with new grenade rules and walkers getting hit on rear armor in cc, its gonna be a race against time for walkers and dreads in cc with troops. Frankly I think walkers are pretty heavily nerfed in these rules and will likely get some tweaks in an official ruleset..

Directed hits can only be performed by covering fire, snipers, and characters.

Characters are only squad leaders and Independent characters. A codex has to specifically say it is an independent character to get the buff.

Except the rules say every unit picks a squad leader, mentions units can be made up of just a squad leader, and then says squad leaders are characters.

It does get contradictory with squadron rules though (which say squadron leaders are not characters but still count as squad leaders). So I suppose an argument could be made against walkers becoming squad leaders. But outside that not sure your POV is supported.

Thanks for pointing out errors again, guys. As many sets of eyes as possible helps to catch things.

I said the wrong result with the monolith, I rolled a 3 which went down to a 1, I just brain farted when I said it. we played it right.

With the bidding, I bid 1 but said it off camera, sorry about that. We missed that in editing. Frankie accepted knowing he could buy stubborn for 1 point! haha, I thought it was a 2 point bid.

All these subtle differences really change the game on a tactical level. It will take a lot of unlearning and relearning to get it all into our heads.

You guys are right, some of these rules are worded wrong, or inconsistent. This must be a draft of the rules (if it is real) and while I still think it is a vast improvement, I feel that it does need some last minute polishing.

So one question Reecius...Are 20 man blobbed warriors with stubborn "crazy good"?


Seriously though, nice report. Normally I hate video reports because I can usually read through what happened faster than someone can explain it, but you guys keep it short, sweet, and to the point. Looking forward to more

I don't think the blob was broken. I mean it has stubborn, but with a few tank shocks or one missed check after assault would destroy the whole thing. The blob will shine, or fall like a lead balloon due to putting so many points in one unit. I also think maybe a more optimized list verse that blob will be much more effective, like maybe missile wolves or blood angels would tear through it and the stubborn wouldn't be so impactful after their numbers dropped.

I also don't think the Monolith is broken because one 6 like any other tank and it is severely crippled. It basically got its liquid metal buff back do to being a super heavy which means AP1 doesn't screw it anymore. A couple las canons or melta guns and its toast.

Would like to see a video minus so much editing ironically. I actually would love to see the process and mechanics in action. In a few months, this would be a bad practice but for a few here I think less editing would allow us to further grasp the rules and get a better feel with you folks. Either way, thanks for sharing. Like you said, and from what I noticed in my first few looks, the new rules are obviously as draft and I think things will only be clearer and better in design when it hits shelves.


Thanks again,

Corsair

The game seems TOO killy. I never thought I would say that but stuff is all but dead by turn 3. Not sure I want to put out bigger 2000+ armies only to put 3/4 of it away in the first 2 turns. Land slide scoring of the objectives is worrie some too. I want close games, not blow outs.

It is just my opinion that stuff is easier to kill in this version of the rules. I'm not sure that is a good thing. Last time something was easier to kill, vehicles in 4th, people stopped using them because it wasn't fun.

Inquisitor_Dunn wrote:The game seems TOO killy. I never thought I would say that but stuff is all but dead by turn 3. Not sure I want to put out bigger 2000+ armies only to put 3/4 of it away in the first 2 turns. Land slide scoring of the objectives is worrie some too. I want close games, not blow outs.

It is just my opinion that stuff is easier to kill in this version of the rules. I'm not sure that is a good thing. Last time something was easier to kill, vehicles in 4th, people stopped using them because it wasn't fun.

I talked about this earlier some, too. Here's what I think.

1) You are going to have to buy troops. A lot of troops. They have x2 advantages that I can see out of the Leaked Codex.
a) They can be bought in large bricks. Making them last longer.
b) They score 3 points instead of 1 like alot of the rest of the codex options.

2) Reserve if you don't think you have the ass to survive into the late rounds. No one is saying you have to put all your models down and get counter assaulted/dropped onto by your opponent's reserves. Be tatical with your stuff.

3) Establish how many toys you really need to be "killy enough". Just about everything got a boost in 6th (more killy anyways) so perhaps troop choices can do enough for you that you don't need to max your elite,fast attack, heavy support slots.

4) It's 40k but it's not 5th edition. This is a different game than before. Stuff is going to die if it's on the table, it's as simple as that. Reserves got a boost for a reason. Things that are holding an objective get a bonus at the end of the game for a reason. Be smart about your units. There are very little throw away units anymore.

5) This version of 40k makes nearly all units appearing in a codex pretty good at something. Therefore, it's my opinion that everyone will have alot of "old models" lying around ready to become "new models" once this doc is official. How is GW going to make more money when you already have 2000 pts of Space Marines lying around? Well, make a game that requires 2500pts (or higher). This game is going to do that. It's fast, so the extra points don't slow the game down as much as they will actually give those that aren't smart with their models, something to move in the later turns.

I think the lesson here is:

If your opponent has a huge brick of 2 characters with scythes/shackles, res orb, and 20 dudes that get back up... You let him go first and don't give him the 1 point he needs to make that insane block stubborn

Or just don't feed it piece meal the full gamer and instead smash it with a faking brick so to speak

Nice report. These rules seem really awesome. I look forward to more reports. As others have said, I am interested to see some older armies in action.

Also, in the report, you talk about the difference between a charge move and an engage move. Would you mind explaining the difference?

a charge move is both a standard move (your base speed+fleet bonus etc.) plus an assault move (your base speed+fleet bonus etc.) added together. if you declare a charge, you cannot fire in the shooting phase with the unit you charged with.

for the basic everyday foot troop that would be a 12" charge move.

an engage move is an assault move (your base speed+fleet bonus etc). if by some chance you are not in CC during your shooting phase, you can shoot as though you had moved that turn.

for the basic everyday foot troop that would be a 6" engage move.

That terrain is looking really nice.

Hahaha, yeah, that brick with stubborn is CRAZY good! Haha.

The game is super fun, but those strategy points can be a bit much. Super Heavies might be a bit much for tournament play but I am happy to see them in regular 40K.

And thanks Junk, the terrain is our studio's and we make custom tables for sale like that if anyone's interested.

@thread
As for how I handled the brick, we were playing more to explore the rules than to really employ serious tactics. We were just trying a lot of stuff out to see what worked and what didn't.

And, charging it was better than getting charged, which Frankie would certainly have done. Had Shrike not broken, I would have added him to the melee, which would have helped a ton.

I really dont think stubborn makes the brick crazy good. I think it makes the brick playable in the first place. For example, if it didnt have stubborn, when you won by 6, he would have a 1/6 chance of passing followed by a 1/3 chance of not losing everything to sweep.

As others said, opening with 0 seems to be the smart play, unless you have a strategy in mind--like you open with 5 when running immotek so you can seize on a 4+ to get 2 SP of your own.

The thing is, the lack of stubborn makes the brick have a weakness, which is good.

With Stubborn, it is crazy good. Not unbeatable, but just a bit overpowered. You can essentially just shove that thing down the other player's throat and many armies can't deal with it. If there had been a Lord in there too, also with Scarabs for example, that unit could walk through damn near anything.

The point being though, that the Strategm points need a little more work, IMO.

I think that in many cases though that yes, bidding 0 is the smart play.

I played against 20 immortals today with IG. Shooting is now powerful enough that 20 MEQ can dissapear very quickly. After turn 2, only a lord with one wound and a stupid cryptek that stood back up escaped from the board. Granted, my opponent rolled poorly for saves, but even with normal rolling, I would probably have taken them down to a minimal unit in another turn or so.
20 normal warriors have 4+ save, making them a lot easier to kill with shooting.

I do agree that the stratagem points need a lot of work though. The concept is really cool, but it is also horribly flawed as it is now. I think it might work if the person "losing" the bet gets half of the offered stratagem pts or something. The stratagems also need to be seriously redone. The stubborn/tankhunter 1pt stratagem outshines pretty much all the others.

Deployment also needs work IMO. Now, it is too good to win that roll. You get to choose your side, you get to start the bidding (with zero), and you get to place one more objective than your opponent. Again, the concept is very cool, but the execution is flawed.

I also played against two monoliths... man those things are mean. I had 5 meltaguns shooting at it for two turns in meltarange + I charged it with meltabomb vets two times... I managed to land one shaken that stuck... luckily it doesn't have a huge damage output

Smart use of reserves seems vital with these rules.

10 melta shots is 8 hits and call it 4 pens, so roughly what, .75 expected 6's to strip the superheavy rule. 20 charging meltabomb attacks sadly need 6's to hit a moving vehicle, where they only needed 4's to hit the slow monolith now, so combined with the 10 melta shots you have ~68% chances of at least stripping the structure point. Plus you dont get to attack vehicles again in your own turn now, which is a shame. It gets a lot easier in assault if you can stun the beast first.

Still, melta vets with demo are one of the killier units versus vehicles, and they clearly struggle with the monolith. They would have killed 3 land raiders by the time they kill a single monolith.

On a side note though, manticores are really decent at stripping structure points. Even if you scatter 6 inches, your 5 inch template should still be touching the monolith. Then, despite having -6 to damage on a pen if the hole is not over, you still just need an unmodified 6.

You guys don't have nearly enough terrain.

Just a point to make about the Monolith's "Weapon Destroyed" result. If you take a Damaged - Weapons result on the table (for any vehicle, not just a Super Heavy that will lose a structure point since you had to roll a 6 to get that result), you reduce the BASE multi-targeting by 1. Since you double Multi-Targeting to determine how many weapons you can fire if you are stationary, a vehicle with Multi-Targeting 3 can fire 6 weapons, but that same vehicle can only fire 4 if it suffers Damaged - Weapons. The baseof 3 is reduced by 1, then doubled to 4 if it's stationary.

As a side note, a Stromraven that only moves at Combat Speed (thus counting as stationary) has Multi-Targeting 3, but the Gunship rule allows it to make 18 shooting actions. If it suffers a Damaged - Weapons, that number drops to 12, and a second result drops it to 6, which is still enough for it to fire the Assault Cannon, the Multi-Melta and both Hurricane Bolters at different targets until it suffers the third result. Hell, with Multi-Targeting 2 + Gunship (One Damaged result), it can fire all of its guns and all of its missiles at different targets, which is absurdly good considering they are S8 AP1 with a massive range and if it goes first it will hit anything on a 2+ unless it's Supersonic. Grey Knights Stormravens can lay waste to anyone fielding Psykers with their Missiles, and each one can hit a different unit and will almost never deviate.

I hadn't noticed the Monolith was listed as "Heavy" in the Codex (with an Asterisk next to it? Wonder what that means....), which suggests to me that A)These rules are legit because the Necron codex was written with 6th ed in mind, and that makes much more sense in these rules than in 5th edition, and B)Holy crap why!? That's going to make Tri-Monolith lists absolutely bestial!

Yeah, Tri-Monoliths at 200pts a pop will be too good. I think these are draft rules and that what we will get in the end will be different, but by how much (if at all) is anyone's guess.

Reecius wrote:Yeah, Tri-Monoliths at 200pts a pop will be too good. I think these are draft rules and that what we will get in the end will be different, but by how much (if at all) is anyone's guess.

Draft rules or no, they would have to change what "Heavy" does in the actual rules set, since Monoliths have it in their codex. That or strip it from them with a codex update. I can see fielding 3 of them in just about every list as moving LoS blocking terrain with decent firepower.

One thing I noticed that is rather annoying. Preferred Enemy as far as I can tell does not work against vehicles, which means units of mixed Destroyers that fire at vehicles with the Heavy Gauss Cannons will lose Preferred Enemy Everything for the rest of the game, since they fired at a unit that is not their Preferred Enemy. Seems a little odd.

Aldarionn wrote:As a side note, a Stromraven that only moves at Combat Speed (thus counting as stationary) has Multi-Targeting 3, but the Gunship rule allows it to make 18 shooting actions. If it suffers a Damaged - Weapons, that number drops to 12, and a second result drops it to 6, which is still enough for it to fire the Assault Cannon, the Multi-Melta and both Hurricane Bolters at different targets until it suffers the third result. Hell, with Multi-Targeting 2 + Gunship (One Damaged result), it can fire all of its guns and all of its missiles at different targets, which is absurdly good considering they are S8 AP1 with a massive range and if it goes first it will hit anything on a 2+ unless it's Supersonic. Grey Knights Stormravens can lay waste to anyone fielding Psykers with their Missiles, and each one can hit a different unit and will almost never deviate.

Despite its name, the Stormraven does not have the Gunship special rule.

Aldarionn wrote:I hadn't noticed the Monolith was listed as "Heavy" in the Codex (with an Asterisk next to it? Wonder what that means....), which suggests to me that A)These rules are legit because the Necron codex was written with 6th ed in mind, and that makes much more sense in these rules than in 5th edition, and B)Holy crap why!? That's going to make Tri-Monolith lists absolutely bestial!

The fact that the Necron codex was written with 6th edition in mind does not mean the rules are legit; the rules writer(s) presumably know this too, and could have incorporated elements like that into the rules leak on purpose to make it seem more authentic, having already seen the Necron codex. On the other hand, I think someone analyzed the file and found it was dated prior to the Necron codex coming out; that said, I believe computer timestamps are relatively easy to fake.