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.

Yesterday I played my first 6th Ed. game. It was a lot of fun! Not sure if that was because the competitive factor was low due to "learning the rules", or because it was my forst game in months, or because 6th is the bees knees. I did however see tons of unnecessary rules.

Warlord Traits:
Because my Logan needs MORE special rules rules... nope
Because blood angels need more help deploying... nope

Psychic Powers:
Iron Arm and Mephiston... just picture him saying "i'm the Juggernaut, b***h! "

Look out sir!:
This was kinda cool at first, but after the 13th schmuck took a bullet for some terminator 'character', it got oldddddddd

Challenges:
We discovered it can be abused and essentially turns one CC into two which made it take even longer. I believe every assault had a challenge but one IIRC.

Overwatch/Snap Fire:
I was most excited to incorporate these into 6th ed. However the excitement dwindled when all those extra shots prove to mean nothing because you need 6s to hit. Not a single 6 was rolled for a single snap shot foe either player... /deflated.

My buddy and I are already discussing some house rules such as 6 + D6 charge range instead of 2D6 and a curtailment of the definition of 'character'.

What are some other people's first thoughts of early experiences with 6th Ed.?

Overwatch is supposed to be minor. If it were big then pretty much all assault would be dead. Having said that, never assault Flamers of Tzeentch
Also agree about warlord traits. They range from completely pointless to very powerful. -1 to reserve rolls, -1 from MOTF= not even worth playing as a demon army.
Everything else is fine. Challanges are fun

Overwatch is great. I did some number crunching of 40 gaurdsman with lasguns vs a necron tomb stalker. They managed to strip off 1 wound on overwatch despite needing 6's to hit and 6's to wound and it having a saving of 3+

Then in the following assualt 4 gaurdsman died and they killed the stalker with krak grenades. Exactly the right amount of wounds after the overwatch was resolved required to kill it.

Fantastic edition so far. I like 2d6 range for the charge. Your proposition just makes sure that every unit in the game will charge further than 6. 2d6 works well with pre-measure since you can see that you are 9" out and weigh the risks of attempting the charge where as before you just simply couldn't do it.

Challenges are cool because now you gotta think about your weapon loadout for those eventual sarge versus sarge fights instead of just taking the powerfist because it has the best odds to do the most wounds.

Overwatch was overhyped. It was never suppose to be game changing, just a little extra that you get to do during your opponents turn.

The new powers are really cool, tried telepathy and pyromancy and was pleased when I made Kantor punch his buddy.

Warlord is a little eh. Thankfully none of them really add too much but I felt bad when my opponent got 'subtract 1 from enemy reserve rolls' when I had no reserves and I got the useful extra die for run.

I've been a bit miffed with some VP conditions. Won the inititiative roll? You'll likely get the point for getting the first kill. Picked Drop Pods? Why, you're a linebreaker, no questions asked, my friend!

There are just so many special rules and caveats to the main functions of the game before it gets bogged down. If i was a noob, and had not been playing this game on and off since 2nd or 3rd edition, i would be completely intimidated by the deep ruleset.

Because blood angels need more help deploying... nope

Not like they can reserve an entire army anymore, 50% or less.

Psychic Powers:
Iron Arm and Mephiston... just picture him saying "i'm the Juggernaut, b***h! "

Pop him full of plasma, oh and he loses his wings, so he'll be sloowly moving to you.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Because blood angels need more help deploying... nope

Not like they can reserve an entire army anymore, 50% or less.

Psychic Powers:
Iron Arm and Mephiston... just picture him saying "i'm the Juggernaut, b***h! "

Pop him full of plasma, oh and he loses his wings, so he'll be sloowly moving to you.

Hahaha, look, I understand that the sky is not falling, and there is a solution to every problem. BUT even my army which is very well balanced does not have answers to EVERY scenario. I am still rolling with my 5th Ed army, trying to adjust to the needs of this edition. I have melta out the ass but not so much plasma. Lots of heavy weapons but rate of fire is lacking. There is give and take.

So far i love the new edition the terrain and missions are awesome!

Also i found over watch to be the perfect balance, i killed some but not a silly amount. Overall, a well thought-out rule set and very well done.

Haven't played my first game with 6th yet, still reading.

However, the rulebook is MUCH clearer on everything I've read so far. The layout beats the crap out of the 5th ed book.

-----

For the person saying that a newbie would be intimidated: A newbie is going to be intimidated no matter which game system they pick.

This week we're going to start a few games with just the minimum FOC necessary: 1 HQ, 2 Troops and work through the basic changes. That should take a couple games. Then we'll start adding in various unit types to see how they react. All in all I expect it to take our group around a month or two to fully grok 6th.

@OP: So you played one game and now have made your decision on the new ruleset?

Riiiiggghttt...

pretre wrote:@OP: So you played one game and now have made your decision on the new ruleset?

Riiiiggghttt...

Cool post brah

evilsponge wrote:

pretre wrote:@OP: So you played one game and now have made your decision on the new ruleset?

Riiiiggghttt...

Cool post brah

Thanks!

In general, I think making snap decisions about anything is probably a bad idea. He'll probably have a better idea of what's going on once he's played some more games. This is also why I find a lot of the 6th Ed Proposed Rules posts to be silly.

pretre wrote:@OP: So you played one game and now have made your decision on the new ruleset?

Riiiiggghttt...

To be fair, that is one more game than quite a few people gave it.

I'll reserve my opinion until I get a good few months of gaming in and a codex is released. I'm finding myself liking the new rules but we will see.

As for rules to abuse, move through cover on deep strikers will be very nice. Deep striking into ruins with no penalty in order to set up fire bases sounds fun.

Trickstick wrote:To be fair, that is one more game than quite a few people gave it.

I'll reserve my opinion until I get a good few months of gaming in and a codex is released. I'm finding myself liking the new rules but we will see.

Absolutely true. I think I've gotten in 3 or 4 games now and I am pretty excited. Everything has been nice and smooth and I have enjoyed it immensely.

Tentative optimism go!

As a DE player i hated the overwatch rule because every wych counts when they finally make to to CC.

but then i 1 shotted crowe with a fusion pistol when he tried to charge my harlequins....so im ok with it now.

pretre wrote:@OP: So you played one game and now have made your decision on the new ruleset?

Riiiiggghttt...

Nooooo, the name of the thread is "...First Thoughts..."

I wanted to see what other's experiences were. You don't have to contribute if you don't like the topic.

Except if you're talking about house ruling already, then you have made up your mind.

First thoughts would indicate that there were second thoughts coming up and not just 'Meh, let's change it since we initially didn't like it...'

I only said we were "discussing" them.

Another house rule is we may allow Wounds in a challenge to pour over. Currently it is ambiguous as to whether or not they should according to RAW. Although I believe the RAW supports the "wounds do not pour over" camp., allowing them to will cure some very obvious Challenge abuses. Examples are challenging a superior character with a far inferior character so that superior character is tied up while the unit gets punked. This also prevents a unit composed of multiple inferior characters from tying up a superior character for multiple turns. Further, from a "cinematic" POV, it makes no sense that a dual would occur and the extra attacks would be wasted on a body bag.

How about you play a couple more games before making big changes to the system? Just saying...

Is it a big change to play with one interpretation over another when it benefits the game?

Deuce11 wrote:Is it a big change to play with one interpretation over another when it benefits the game?

The problem is that you are basing your idea of whether it benefits the game on one game that you played with your buddy and your read through of the rules. A little more experience with the game may show you that it is unnecessary to make the change you propose.

I played a game today and have found it mostly good. I am a fan of overwatch as it as it doesn't often have that much of an effect but it can be good, and indeed a game changer.

Case in point, I had a squad in cover charged by 3 genestealers, I managed to kill one with overwatch, then the remaining two in combat. It shortened the combat by maybe a turn.

Likewise, snap shot for heavy weapons is a good thing in my opinion as it makes moving my squads (slightly) less painful as it doesn't negate the spent points completely.

I didn't have any challenges in the battle, so I can't comment, I do think the 2D6 charge can be good, even though it was pretty brutal (assaulted after only one turn of shooting).

Wall of flame is nice too.

Just my opinion

My point is that using one interpretation over another is not a change at all. That is how some people are playing right now without even considering that there is another interpretation.

Pour over wounds makes it an important choice whether or not to challenge. A peon challenging Mephiston to tie him up would now place a ton of pour over wounds on the unit. Without pour over wounds, one could tie Mephiston up for every round of combat that a character is available to challenge. That is simply abuse and not "cinematic", the proposed goal of this ruleset, at all. Add in LOSir! and that combat can go on for even longer.

(BTW, everything I am saying here IS based on my gaming experience. I am not expounding the thoughts of the internet.)

I'm really liking the new rules so far and especially the new varied terrain and missions.

My most memorable moment of the new rules so far is with my tau vs a mech guard player on the relic mission. I really should have lost that game but won by 1 victory point because my fire warriors picked up the relic and got a 4+ inv save from an archeotech artefact. They sat there making rude gestures at the guard while taking battlecannon and plasmadeath shots.

The plasmadeath russ almost destroyed itself with self induced glancing hits too, which was funny.

I'm really loving the new psychic powers. Grey Knights with Divination are just loads of fun. Giving your bog standard Strike Squaddies a 4++ suddenly teaches them how to properly utilize their swords, giving them a 3++ of their own in CC! That, and giving your dudes the ability to fire Overwatch shots at full BS is...amazing.

Need to pick up a copy of the rulebook, but not sure If i have time to game or not, only played a 2 day tournie with when 5th edition was around, Not like the hay days of 2nd,3rd and 4th when i would play atleast once a week.

I really like the 6th edition. Challenges are a lot of fun, the only thing being the wound overflow. I originally was really for the wound overflow, but I do not think the rulebook supports it. Also, I have come to terms that it should be allowed for someone to tie you up in combat. If a Sergeant in a squad was going against a monstrous melee character, he would do exactly what he does in the challenge. Just try to tie him up for as long as possible before dieing. He would probably understand his ability to kill the guy is very low, if existent at all. However, sacrificing himself and living as long as possible while keeping his attention is a needed sacrifice for the good of the team. This fits in with just about any 40k lore you can think of, so I'm alright with it. That situation is actually quite cinematic.

I'm quite liking the changes 6th Ed has made so far.

Loving the new psychic powers for my farseers though prescience has kind of rendered guide obselete. As people in my gaming club have found as well having the nearest models take the hits first also brings in another element you didn't have to think about before (pathfinders on the flank so the techmarine is nearer than the servitors was quite handy last game).

The changes to vehicles with the hull points is also good given my inability to ever roll better than stunned when it comes to vehicle damage rolls. Quite like how artillery is a bit more survivably now too.

Haven't had any challenges yet though primarily because we keep forgetting to issue any. Talking about it amongst though since so many of us play fantasy we'd just automatically assumed it worked the same way wounds etc do in fantasy.