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.

lord_blackfang wrote:

ColeFournier wrote:EDIT,
Just skimmed through the new errata that was posted while I was posting...

when disembarked from moving vehicle unit can advance, but not charge

That is a pretty huge Rhino Nerf... Like.
Maybe Too Huge.

Pssst... you've been playing it wrong for two editions.

Man, they nerfed Rhinos so hard they got nerfed retroactively!

lord_blackfang wrote:
Pssst... you've been playing it wrong for two editions.

i actually lol'ed at this, thats ok, thats very accurate, because i started in 03 which was 4, but never been a tourney player and the people i play with are pretty lax, the more you know

Don't be too hard on the guy, fellas. He's from Wisconsin, after all. All that cheese has clouded his mind.

i am actually from saint louis, but attend school in wisconsin, but yes, i definitely do eat alot of cheese!

My only request is, clear up the wound allocation stuff if you can.

That is pretty important for a few armies, especially tons of multi-wound models like nids. So does a Tervigon lose the 5 wounds it has left in the abandon phase because it took 1? Its not an IC...

I think it only applies for squads, which a Tervigon isn't. However, a Carnifex brood...

EDIT:

Nevermind. Forgot that all Tyranids have to take exact same weapons so wound shenanigans can't happen with them.

puma713 wrote:Also, amazing how much intact information he has. As if this is all already written. Thought GW was cracking down on secrecy. Whoever the source is must have pages and pages of info that he's just spilling. That's what makes it seem fake to me.

If the book comes out next year, it has to be written already, or close to finished by now, with the core set in stone. GK at least would have been written with 6th in mind and all people testing new codicies would be doing so with 6th in mind. In order to do so, they'd need access to the rules. Really, I'm not particular surprised by how precise those rumors are, provide they're based on actual GW product.

The fake BA dex was a lot of work .. But making a bunch of fake FAQs to go with your fake rulebook? Either we are dealing with "that which has no life" or GWs Iron Curtain isnt as secure as they think it is

i believe it is an adamantium curtain, iron is outdated

Kurce wrote:I think it only applies for squads, which a Tervigon isn't. However, a Carnifex brood...

EDIT:

Nevermind. Forgot that all Tyranids have to take exact same weapons so wound shenanigans can't happen with them.

So sounds like they just want to punish people using diversified nobs and paladins. Is there any other army that can do what they do? Tau Battlesuits I guess, they can be equipped differently.

lord_blackfang wrote:

ColeFournier wrote:EDIT,
Just skimmed through the new errata that was posted while I was posting...

when disembarked from moving vehicle unit can advance, but not charge

That is a pretty huge Rhino Nerf... Like.
Maybe Too Huge.

Pssst... you've been playing it wrong for two editions.

FML.

daedalus-templarius wrote:So sounds like they just want to punish people using diversified nobs and paladins. Is there any other army that can do what they do? Tau Battlesuits I guess, they can be equipped differently.

SW TWC, Orc Nobz, GK Paladins, Deamon BC, Tau Battle Suits. Not sure about Farseer/Warlock squads?

There is plenty to love about vehicles in this theoretical 6th edition, including transports.

Speed: Vehicles are more reliable for clearing through terrain, being able to surge through it. For capturing objectives, infantry would be surging 12" or advancing 6" if there is terrain in the way (assuming not to many units outside of bikes/jetpacks can go flat out). With a transport, they'll be able to surge 12" regardless and disembark 4".

Offense:You can also now fire out of the firepoints even if the vehicle surged 12" (so 24" threat with all weapons, since the range is limited to 12"). Tank shock/ram is a lot more deadly/disruptive.

Defense: With ranged fire being able to direct some of the wounds (not clear still on what torrent of fire/blows does), you will be losing your specials more often, so having a hull between yourself and the opponent will be useful. Other infantry now won't grant you cover saves, and most terrain we currently treat as 4+ will only give you a 6+ (vegetation) or 5+. Vehicles can provide mobile cover even if you don't embark in them.


Outside of transports, I'm going to be squadroning my Russes like a sonofabitch! Even penetrating strikes roll -1 on the chart (AP1 weapons just make a flat roll), so vehicles are tougher, and as long as you're squadroned you can replace immobilized results with a weapon destroyed.

Add on top of that being able to split your fire, and I'll be loooooovin' my battle tanks if this stuff is true.

Dark Eldar also look to be sexy. No more +1 on the damage chart for being opened top, so an effective reduction of 2 for most damage results against them. Their 5+ cover shields are actually quite valuable now, since skimmers lose their 4+ for going flat out (instead they are more difficult to hit, so now DE skimmers will be more difficult to hit AND get a cover save). Finally, all lance weapons without a number default to Lance (2), so all AV is 12 as before, but they ignore all modifiers for the damage chart (so effectively function as AP1). Sexy sexy sexy.


Honestly, now that I've read all 20 pages of the spoiler (yes, it really is that long... and that's with 0.5" margins), I would be ecstatic if this is true. As in, over the moon this game rocks ecstatic. I barely play 40k anymore since 5th edition has become so stale.

wyomingfox wrote:

daedalus-templarius wrote:So sounds like they just want to punish people using diversified nobs and paladins. Is there any other army that can do what they do? Tau Battlesuits I guess, they can be equipped differently.

SW TWC, Orc Nobz, GK Paladins, Deamon BC, Tau Battle Suits. Not sure about Farseer/Warlock squads?

Warlocks only have 1 wound and Farseers are ICs, so they wouldn't really be affected. Still not very pleased with this change if it comes about. I thought they were pretty aware of this and it was endorsed, as it is a way to give these units some real durability.

Probably true, but it helps explain why Tyranids...the traditional poster boy of multiwound units...didn't benefit from any of these shenannigans when the new codex came out.

So I'm a little lost about whats happening to csm. are they getting renamed our are they going to be taken out and updated thro white dwarf.

Omegus wrote:There is plenty to love about vehicles in this theoretical 6th edition, including transports.

I am intrigued by this from the rumor:

Fire point: can fire if vehicle has advanced or surged, but only 12” regardless of weapon type, embarked troops are relentless

So now, for instance, a regular tactical squad with a melta and a multimelta in a rhino can fire both if the Rhino moves 12" (but only at targets 12" or less away). However, camping, say, a unit of Jokeros in a Chimera in the backfield will be pretty pointless.

randyc9999 wrote:I am intrigued by this from the rumor:

Fire point: can fire if vehicle has advanced or surged, but only 12” regardless of weapon type, embarked troops are relentless

So now, for instance, a regular tactical squad with a melta and a multimelta in a rhino can fire both if the Rhino moves 12" (but only at targets 12" or less away). However, camping, say, a unit of Jokeros in a Chimera in the backfield will be pretty pointless.

Just don't move the joker Chim and you're fine.

imo: with these rules - Swarms are now even more useless...

Revarien wrote:imo: with these rules - Swarms are now even more useless...

How so? (And is that even possible?)

dajobe wrote:i believe it is an adamantium curtain, iron is outdated

I heard they upgraded the curtain to finecast. The leak escaped through an airbubble.

lol

pretre wrote:Just don't move the joker Chim and you're fine.

I'm not so sure. It sounds like the rule is that fire points only allow you 12" range shooting, regardless of its distance moved ...

Frogboy14 wrote:So I'm a little lost about whats happening to csm. are they getting renamed our are they going to be taken out and updated thro white dwarf.

The rumor is that they will release a Codex: Chaos Legions, which will cover true chaos space marines and legion specific units/rules (think black legion, world eaters, etc). This book will not invalidate Codex: Chaos Space Marines though. The current book will then receive a white dwarf update for Codex: Regenade Marines (think red corsairs).

Some people are hoping that the white dwarf release will maybe be something more like Codex: Imperial Traitors and include Legion of the Damned, Traitor Guard, and Renegade Marines etc.

htj wrote:

Revarien wrote:imo: with these rules - Swarms are now even more useless...

How so? (And is that even possible?)

Template weapons causes instant death (2)... :/

Revarien wrote:

htj wrote:

Revarien wrote:imo: with these rules - Swarms are now even more useless...

How so? (And is that even possible?)

Template weapons causes instant death (2)... :/

Pff, well done GW on achieving the impossible and making swarms suck even more.

I would like to see some options for activating units one at a time, and then switching back and forth. that way there is no real advantage to going first and it plays more like chess.

htj wrote:

Revarien wrote:

htj wrote:

Revarien wrote:imo: with these rules - Swarms are now even more useless...

How so? (And is that even possible?)

Template weapons causes instant death (2)... :/

Pff, well done GW on achieving the impossible and making swarms suck even more.

No, my Scarab Swarms! They were rumored to be so good in the next codex!!!

Frogboy14 wrote:So I'm a little lost about whats happening to csm. are they getting renamed our are they going to be taken out and updated thro white dwarf.

From the rumors, there will be a new codex that focuses on the Legions with cult-specific units and daemons, while the current book will get updated in White Dwarf to represent renegades.

htj wrote:

Revarien wrote:imo: with these rules - Swarms are now even more useless...

How so? (And is that even possible?)

Template weapons AND blast weapons are ID against Swarms.


On the plus side, my IG psykers will be able to try cancelling out psychic powers without a hood. That's what hurts the most about allies being phased out completely. Couldn't care less about the mystics, but losing all forms of psychic defense hurts.

warpcrafter wrote:

Marthike wrote:The multiple wound consolidation death thing is just bull. Why does one model have to die because he is the first to take a wound also you don't abadon people in war.

Oh hi paladin you have a broken arm, you can't fight demons anymore so we gonna leave you to die. bye bye. What about tyranid warriors? 3 wound each, one take a wound so it dies?

Transports are useless if infantry can move 18", now with BA you just don't bother with shooting and just charge ahead and fleet and kill everything you see.

Tyranid Warriors aren't allowed individualized equipment like Nobs, so you would have to remove whole models anyway, so this is not really an issue.

I was exactly this dubious when I first read The Dude's thread about 5thE rumors on Warseer, but that turned out to be the real deal, so I'm not discounting anything yet.

Marthike, the scenario you're describing is exactly what happens and has happened to identical multiwound units since 3rd edition. Ogryn and Nid Warrior units that have identical models have to do exactly what you're describing. The problem is that 5th edition came out with a ridiculous rule that allowed you divvy up the wounds ONLY if the models had different wargear. I wouldn't have had too much of a problem if they had done it for all multiwound models as at least that would have been consistent (still overpowered but at least consistent) but 5th edition instituted the ability to survive a wound ONLY because you bought a pistol that your buddy next to didn't. Five models with identical gear? They die sequentially. Those same five models armed exactly the same except that one has another CCW/pistol/different CCW/different pistol? Now they can soak up fire twice as well. The rule was needlessly confusing and led to endless debates at my local store because people had no clue how to use it. It added nothing to the game except for the more potential for abuse. Does that screw over armies that are built entirely on the premise of (ab)using that rule? Sure... but that's the risk you take when building a one-trick pony gimmick army.