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.

So I finally played my first game of 6th yesterday. It was needlessly over-complicated, and time consuming. There were really a lot of things that felt like they changed them just to change them, instead of changing them to fix a problem or improve game play. The rules feel like a hodge-podge of bad ideas coupled with the worst elements of 8th edition Fantasy. Strangely enough, 8th edition Fantasy is the only one I truly ever liked. For the first time since second edition, I'm not at all interested in playing 40K anymore. Luckily I have at least one friend willing to play 5th edition with me until 7th rolls around.

I find it to be the best edition they've ever made.

DarknessEternal wrote:I find it to be the best edition they've ever made.

I'll second that one.

What in particular or specifically did you not like about it and find time consuming? You weren't very specific about any part of it. Did this not happen with 5th ed came out?

Play 5th till 7th comes out? Have fun playing that same friend for 6 years. No tournaments either.

Not to deny your opinion, which you are entitled to, but could you be a little bit more specific on the parts you consider to be bad?

I personally like the new, shooty friendly, rules since I play Tau and IG.

There were really a lot of things that felt like they changed them just to change them, instead of changing them to fix a problem or improve game play.

There is some truth in here. Instead of streamlining rules, GW changed several rules completely. Makes no sense to me.

I always base my decisions on as little life experience as possible. One game is surely enough...

I played a game of 6th and though I'll agree it's a tad over complicated, I think it's good.

acekevin8412 wrote:Not to deny your opinion, which you are entitled to, but could you be a little bit more specific on the parts you consider to be bad?.

Perhaps It's just that I'm a real fan of the 5th edition, because I really didn't like anything about 6th. I wasn't specific because there was no need to be.

I prefer 5th, but it's probably just a transitional thing (Read: I've played three games of 6th, and am not quite used to the rules yet).

Still, 6th is ok so far. If you've only played one game, give it another try.

Ah so you are one of the people where video games get dumbed down because things are "complicated". Well maybe 3rd edition or 4th edition will be more to your liking then.

Sorry, you don't really explain anything what you find what is wrong with 6th edition. Just broad generaization without any examples.

Good for you, you can still keep playing 5th edtion. Then again, you and your friends can CHANGE ANY RULE that you don't like?

Unnecessarily rude stuff redacted by Mannahnin.

Just kidding there, but it would help if you explained what is exactly "worthelss" in 6th edition. Overcomplicated and time consuming I can say what it 5th edtion. Also 5th editon was bland and boring. Maybe that is what you like, bland and boring game play.

hmmmmmm. *watches from distance, head nodding*

I'll check in later. I may agree with the thread host, for reasons I will withhold for the time being. But I have a bias/grudge due to personal experience with getting into 40k in the first place. So I'm probably not the one to talk...

Talk it out gang, looking forward to ALL your thoughts.

Lordhat wrote:I wasn't specific because there was no need to be.

I think others have shown that there is a need for you to be specific so we can understand what, specifically, you do not like in 6th compared to 5th.

I like 6th edition quite a bit more than 5th edition so far. In the beginning the rules of a new edition always feel complicated because you are not used to playing them. I expect 6th to flow as smoothly as 5th did when I get more used to the rules.

dufus0001 wrote:

Lordhat wrote:I wasn't specific because there was no need to be.

I think others have shown that there is a need for you to be specific so we can understand what, specifically, you do not like in 6th compared to 5th.

Actually I didn't intend to start a discussion about why 6th sucks or doesn't. I simply asked if I'm the only person here who feels like I do. There is no need for me to detail my reasons as I don't intend to debate them in any case.

6th is fine, but I really, REALLY dislike the random nature of everything.

Assault distance being 2d6 without a minimum is stupid... Rolling snake eyes for charge when you need 3 inches is bs, and not "cinematic"....

Also, random powers / warlord abilties are stupid as well. Give us the option to select what we want, rather than a bunch of disparate values, half of which are either godly for us, or have no effect at all.

I think it is an improvement over 5th, but I do reserve that it does a few things I don't agree with.

Warlord powers are cool, but I don't like how random they are. Same with Psychic powers. Rolling charge distance is something I could have done without. Everything else though, I think is pretty solid.

Im ok with 6th so far, even when assaulting got nerfed in general.

no assaults after reserves? that really sucks.
no fleet run for my orks? ugh...

but if you account for the 2D6 its like getting a waagh turn almost every turn if your within 12"

plus it made my orks with shootas. down right deadly. overwatch may only hit on 6s, but orks only hit on 5 and 6 anyways so its like a free round of shooting. assault or assaulted, shoota boyz do the same damage either way now.

heavy vehicles got tougher, while light vehicles got a little weaker..

just a few FAQs and everything will work out pretty good IMO.

Lordhat wrote:

dufus0001 wrote:

Lordhat wrote:I wasn't specific because there was no need to be.

I think others have shown that there is a need for you to be specific so we can understand what, specifically, you do not like in 6th compared to 5th.

Actually I didn't intend to start a discussion about why 6th sucks or doesn't. I simply asked if I'm the only person here who feels like I do. There is no need for me to detail my reasons as I don't intend to debate them in any case.

It's NOT a discussion about why 6th edition sucks it's a QUESTION about why YOU DON'T LIKE IT. That's all that you've said is you don't like it for not liking its sake. So far, the best conclusion I can asses is that you don't like it because it's not 5th edition.

Are you at least willing to answer the question of what army do you play and how does it play differently and what you do and do not like about that?

Well then, yes, I do agree that in a very broad and loose sense, sixth edition, as printed by Games Workshop, is not an improvement over previous editions.

If I may make one final attempt at getting your reasons, which I think we are all, for reasons benign or otherwise, curious to know. Could you give us one thing in particular that really stands out? In light of everything 'sucks'.

I for one, understand the use of flyers in the setting, but not in the game. Which is a rare line for me to draw in the sand. I believe there is a reason they were not in earlier versions. I would wager that it was the presence of expansions like Battlefleet Gothic and Apocalypse that cracked the door and let them sneak in. They are very powerful and that's for a reason: they freaking fly and they fly fast while being loaded with tank level gear.

Sadly now that they are in, they pretty much can't easily be taken out. It's like Magic: the Gathering, once they put Planeswalkers in, they can't easily take them back out of the game.

KnuckleWolf wrote:Well then, yes, I do agree that in a very broad and loose sense, sixth edition, as printed by Games Workshop, is not an improvement over previous editions.

If I may make one final attempt at getting your reasons, which I think we are all, for reasons benign or otherwise, curious to know. Could you give us one thing in particular that really stands out? In light of everything 'sucks'.

I for one, understand the use of flyers in the setting, but not in the game. Which is a rare line for me to draw in the sand. I believe there is a reason they were not in earlier versions. I would wager that it was the presence of expansions like Battlefleet Gothic and Apocalypse that cracked the door and let them sneak in. They are very powerful and that's for a reason: they freaking fly and they fly fast while being loaded with tank level gear.

Sadly now that they are in, they pretty much can't easily be taken out. It's like Magic: the Gathering, once they put Planeswalkers in, they can't easily take them back out of the game.

Yea, because its not like things like broadsides can ANNIHILATE fliers. If only there was some magical allies rule that allowed most everyone to take broadsides.

Fliers don't feel overpowered, when a single railgun shot can blow up 400+ points worth of units.

Horst wrote:

KnuckleWolf wrote:Well then, yes, I do agree that in a very broad and loose sense, sixth edition, as printed by Games Workshop, is not an improvement over previous editions.

If I may make one final attempt at getting your reasons, which I think we are all, for reasons benign or otherwise, curious to know. Could you give us one thing in particular that really stands out? In light of everything 'sucks'.

I for one, understand the use of flyers in the setting, but not in the game. Which is a rare line for me to draw in the sand. I believe there is a reason they were not in earlier versions. I would wager that it was the presence of expansions like Battlefleet Gothic and Apocalypse that cracked the door and let them sneak in. They are very powerful and that's for a reason: they freaking fly and they fly fast while being loaded with tank level gear.

Sadly now that they are in, they pretty much can't easily be taken out. It's like Magic: the Gathering, once they put Planeswalkers in, they can't easily take them back out of the game.

Yea, because its not like things like broadsides can ANNIHILATE fliers. If only there was some magical allies rule that allowed most everyone to take broadsides.

Fliers don't feel overpowered, when a single railgun shot can blow up 400+ points worth of units.

This is exactly why I'm not detailing my reasons. I don't intend to debate every little nuance and peeve.

Horst wrote:Assault distance being 2d6 without a minimum is stupid... Rolling snake eyes for charge when you need 3 inches is bs, and not "cinematic"....

Also, random powers / warlord abilties are stupid as well. Give us the option to select what we want, rather than a bunch of disparate values, half of which are either godly for us, or have no effect at all.

I would add wound allocation to those two and those are the biggest issues I have with 6th.

In my last game of 6th my friend botched two charges from ~5 and ~4 inches in a single round.

Allocation is not bad most of the time, except for those moments when you have to roll ~15 dice one at the time.

Lordhat wrote:So I finally played my first game of 6th yesterday. It was needlessly over-complicated, and time consuming. There were really a lot of things that felt like they changed them just to change them, instead of changing them to fix a problem or improve game play. The rules feel like a hodge-podge of bad ideas coupled with the worst elements of 8th edition Fantasy. Strangely enough, 8th edition Fantasy is the only one I truly ever liked. For the first time since second edition, I'm not at all interested in playing 40K anymore. Luckily I have at least one friend willing to play 5th edition with me until 7th rolls around.

Play at least 5 games and then come back to us. Playing 1 game does absolutely nothing as you still aren't used to some of the new rules. Honestly I like a lot of the new stuff. Of course I also hated 5th edition (though I began to warm up to it towards the end of its cycle).

Though I'm someone who really enjoyed the zaniness of Rogue Trader so that's why I like that there's more weird stuff now.

Lordhat wrote: This is exactly why I'm not detailing my reasons. I don't intend to debate every little nuance and peeve.

You don't intend on stating ANYTHING. What was the point of saying that 6th edition is worthless if you do not say what parts you don't like? You know why I didn't like 5th edition? Because wound allocation made absolutely no sense. Why does having a different kind of grenade put you into a totally different equipment group? And causing 3 power weapon wounds to a squad of 5 should kill 3 models, but usually will only kill one. HOW FREAKING HARD WAS THAT?

Just say ONE, just ONE thing you did not like about it compared to 5th edition. I dare you.

dufus0001 wrote:

Lordhat wrote: This is exactly why I'm not detailing my reasons. I don't intend to debate every little nuance and peeve.

You don't intend on stating ANYTHING. What was the point of saying that 6th edition is worthless if you do not say what parts you don't like? You know why I didn't like 5th edition? Because wound allocation made absolutely no sense. Why does having a different kind of grenade put you into a totally different equipment group? And causing 3 power weapon wounds to a squad of 5 should kill 3 models, but usually will only kill one. HOW FREAKING HARD WAS THAT?

Just say ONE, just ONE thing you did not like about it compared to 5th edition. I dare you.

Wound allocation is still a bit weird.
Disembarking from non-open topped vehicles.
Not being able to charge from a stationary non-open topped vehicle.

wuestenfux wrote:
Wound allocation is still a bit weird.
Disembarking from non-open topped vehicles.
Not being able to charge from a stationary non-open topped vehicle.

The point was to get the OP to actually say something about his own opinions and not just tell us all that he has one and isn't willing to share it.

LoneLictor wrote:I played a game of 6th and though I'll agree it's a tad over complicated, I think it's good.

Agreed but its heaps more fun in its current form than 5th was

Horst wrote:

KnuckleWolf wrote:Well then, yes, I do agree that in a very broad and loose sense, sixth edition, as printed by Games Workshop, is not an improvement over previous editions.

If I may make one final attempt at getting your reasons, which I think we are all, for reasons benign or otherwise, curious to know. Could you give us one thing in particular that really stands out? In light of everything 'sucks'.

I for one, understand the use of flyers in the setting, but not in the game. Which is a rare line for me to draw in the sand. I believe there is a reason they were not in earlier versions. I would wager that it was the presence of expansions like Battlefleet Gothic and Apocalypse that cracked the door and let them sneak in. They are very powerful and that's for a reason: they freaking fly and they fly fast while being loaded with tank level gear.

Sadly now that they are in, they pretty much can't easily be taken out. It's like Magic: the Gathering, once they put Planeswalkers in, they can't easily take them back out of the game.

Yea, because its not like things like broadsides can ANNIHILATE fliers. If only there was some magical allies rule that allowed most everyone to take broadsides.

Fliers don't feel overpowered, when a single railgun shot can blow up 400+ points worth of units.

They hit on a 6...

And you shouldn't have to bring a unit from another coded to deal with something that is very prevalent in the game.

I like a lot of what they did with 6th edition, they put in a ton of very cool and exciting things with it that add a lot to enhance the feel the of the game.

Unfortunately, they simultaneously added needlessly random mechanics, large numbers of needless new special rules and mechanics more suited to games with a model count 1/10th of an average 40k game, and destroyed the usefulness of vehicles that aren't flyers.


So, all in all, yet another side-grade, just as 4th and 5th were. Advancement junked up by poor mechanics and over-balancing.


This edition really is "Warhammer 40,000: Michael Bay Edition". It's all centered around making the game "cinematic", to the point of forcing it (thus...making such events routine and thus no longer cinematic). The designers very specifically stated at the Design Studio Open Day event they didn't write it as a balanced set of rules for a tactical engagement, rather as a framework within which to create memorable imaginary moments using Citadel models. It shows very much within the rules themselves and that is exactly how it should be treated. It's one of the most inherently unbalanced core rulesets 40k has had. If you're coming from the perspective of just throwing whatever you have down and rolling dice to see what sillyness turns up, this edition will be a lot of fun. If you are looking for a more balanced game where everything has a use and you're looking for a challenge, this edition is definitely not for you.

Normally I'd consider myself one of the former rather than the latter, but the ruination of tank utility (average lifespan is less than half what it was previously, and transports as anything other than battle-taxi's are worthless, something many forget as just about everything but trukk's and rhino's are intended to do other things as well, tanks are killed without any defensive ability with almost 100% certainty in assaults by almost anything, and all they got was the ability to still shoot on glances really) and the gross imbalance of Warlord powers and mission design makes it not very fun when the outcome can be pre-determined by both players a majority of the time.

I'm finding 6th more fun than 5th. It's also a little more of a PITA, but not so much that it detracts from my enjoyment.