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.

Sephyr wrote:It's a mild nerf if you are a Marine-equivalent. MeQs can eat the incoming overwatch, have power fists choices on almost all squads, access to TH/SS if they want to get serious.

For rest? Colossal nerf.

Fragile CC specialists not making it to combat, getting nuked via overwatch. Rare AP 2 weapons and often none that you can sing before the enemy has decimated your squad. Heck, you only need 1 2+ save in a unit to mess you a qhole unit of AP3 banshees/incubi.

The old adage of "shoot the choppy, chop the shooty" doesn't hold anymore. For khorne's sake, do NOT try to chop the shooty! you'll pay for it in pain.

I'd say MEq got buffed, to be honest, that one round of BS1 overwatch probably ain't gonna scratch them, what with their good armour save, but even those MEq who didn't previously have the 5th ed fleet distance can now do the fleet distance that 5th ed fleet assault units had. As well as what you said about terminators and their 2+ save.

I think it's time to update the adage to "shoot the xenos, chop the xenos, play the marines"?

Baronyu wrote:

Sephyr wrote:It's a mild nerf if you are a Marine-equivalent. MeQs can eat the incoming overwatch, have power fists choices on almost all squads, access to TH/SS if they want to get serious.

For rest? Colossal nerf.

Fragile CC specialists not making it to combat, getting nuked via overwatch. Rare AP 2 weapons and often none that you can sing before the enemy has decimated your squad. Heck, you only need 1 2+ save in a unit to mess you a qhole unit of AP3 banshees/incubi.

The old adage of "shoot the choppy, chop the shooty" doesn't hold anymore. For khorne's sake, do NOT try to chop the shooty! you'll pay for it in pain.

I'd say MEq got buffed, to be honest, that one round of BS1 overwatch probably ain't gonna scratch them, what with their good armour save, but even those MEq who didn't previously have the 5th ed fleet distance can now do the fleet distance that 5th ed fleet assault units had. As well as what you said about terminators and their 2+ save.

I think it's time to update the adage to "shoot the xenos, chop the xenos, play the marines"?

Huh, I think I heard someone say that exact thing when it came to 4th, and 5th edition..Deja vu.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Baronyu wrote:

Sephyr wrote:It's a mild nerf if you are a Marine-equivalent. MeQs can eat the incoming overwatch, have power fists choices on almost all squads, access to TH/SS if they want to get serious.

For rest? Colossal nerf.

Fragile CC specialists not making it to combat, getting nuked via overwatch. Rare AP 2 weapons and often none that you can sing before the enemy has decimated your squad. Heck, you only need 1 2+ save in a unit to mess you a qhole unit of AP3 banshees/incubi.

The old adage of "shoot the choppy, chop the shooty" doesn't hold anymore. For khorne's sake, do NOT try to chop the shooty! you'll pay for it in pain.

I'd say MEq got buffed, to be honest, that one round of BS1 overwatch probably ain't gonna scratch them, what with their good armour save, but even those MEq who didn't previously have the 5th ed fleet distance can now do the fleet distance that 5th ed fleet assault units had. As well as what you said about terminators and their 2+ save.

I think it's time to update the adage to "shoot the xenos, chop the xenos, play the marines"?

Huh, I think I heard someone say that exact thing when it came to 4th, and 5th edition..Deja vu.

I'm guessing you're referring to the 2nd half, because I don't think when going 4th to 5th, they used the 5th ed rules and then changed them to the 5th ed rules... But I was largely being sarcastic... Though, I don't think the whole conspiracy theory that GW hates xenos only happens during edition shift.

Gotta be honest, I used to laugh at people saying GW changes its rules and books to make people dumb the old stuff as conspiracy theories...

...but now I'm getting fitted for my tinfoil hat.

Guess people bought all the DE and nids they were going to, so why not dangle awesomely strong necrons where you can smap flyers and overwatch assaulters all day long in front of them?

Put down those agonizers and boneswords, friends, they'll help you none against articer armor, terminators and sempiternal weaves! Just form up neat lines and trade shots like Napoleonic armies should.

Another note on why assault is nerfed, is overwatch is applied before you roll how far you assault, and models come off the front... so every death puts you further back.

Not to mention normal transports need about 3 turns to pull off a proper assault, with 2 of those turns standing outside the tank.

So...

Ravenous D wrote:Nerfed.

-Multi charging is extremely difficult to do, and it nerfs furious charge and rage.
-5+ cover average means more effective shooting
-5+ fnp is a nerf that will effect some things
-Wound allocation is from the front
-Overwatch (not huge but still there, losing a marine or 2 can be a big deal)

Long story short, I kill you easier, and you lose inches when I shoot you.

... it gets even worse than this. You also have to include...

Focus Fire - This makes it much more likely that you will arrive with a lot fewer models. Unless you airtight bubble wrap you assaulters, your opponent is always just going to declare that they're shooting at the guys who don't have cover.

Precise Shot - anyone armed with a sniper rifle or plasma pistol has a chance to pick out hidden weapon upgrades in the shooting phase. That powerfist sergeant isn't going to even make it into close combat if your opponent really doesn't want them there. Without the ability to reliably hide close combat upgrades in a squad, armies that were only good in close combat because of hidden weapons (guard, ork, CSM, eldar, etc.) are now much, much worse.

Wound Allocation - I know this was in the list, but I had to repeat it. If you put your good assaulting models in the front of the squad, they're going to be picked off by shooting before they arrive, end of. If you put them in the back, then it's going to take them longer to actually get to swing (with large squads, they may not get to swing at all before its too late).

Then, of course, add all of the buffs to shooting, and 6th ed is not going to be a choppy edition...

Your squad with a thunderhammer sergeant goes bounding forward toward the wraithlord....

Then wham, a squad of Eldar Pathfinders opens up.

Guess who takes the AP1, Rending shot to the face????

If I were a Marine player, I'd pack on the sternguard, command squads, and vanguard vets with plasma to take out MC/Daemon Princes with shooting, and leave the thunder hammers and power fists to the Terminators.

Not to mention that orks got a massive nerf, waaaagh just giving a reroll to charge is pretty lame but its the loss of +1 initiative from furious charge that means charging a 50man blob squad is basically a death sentence, especially if they are rocking a few flamers.

And did anyone else notice that "marine tax" (the tax you pay for not playing marines) just got a lot higher?

Sephyr wrote:Gotta be honest, I used to laugh at people saying GW changes its rules and books to make people dumb the old stuff as conspiracy theories...

...but now I'm getting fitted for my tinfoil hat.

Guess people bought all the DE and nids they were going to, so why not dangle awesomely strong necrons where you can smap flyers and overwatch assaulters all day long in front of them?

Put down those agonizers and boneswords, friends, they'll help you none against articer armor, terminators and sempiternal weaves! Just form up neat lines and trade shots like Napoleonic armies should.

Take off the tinfoil.

Here's how this works...

1. GW releases book A for edition X.

2. The internet lets the mathhammer masters pound out the most abusive lists for book A in edition X. The vast majority of the time these lists are NOT the intended use of the rules and instead abuse a gimmick of some sort to an extreme that was intended to be used in moderation. The rest are usually the result of GW penning a codex with the next edition in mind to give players of that codex as much time in the sweet spot as possible once the new edition comes out because they won't be getting a new codex for a while.

3. GW releases edition Y and fixes the abuses that caused the broken lists because...wait for it...they weren't intended to work that way.They were abuses to begin with. Effective tactics that came about due to unintended or unfortunate interpretations of the rules. This new edition also clears up the issues brought about by bridged-edition codicies which can now be played in the edition for which they were written.

4. People who built armies that focused on the abuses from the previous edition suddenly find that their armies don't function.

Which brings us to the majority of the current forums QQ that paints GW as conspiring to steal their money by destroying their army on purpose.

Well, I got news for you. If you're a WAAC player and you build armies that abuse rules to your advantage you're going to universally hate new editions because GW is going to dismantle your abusive armies as a matter of course. It's just how it works. You close loopholes and fix abuses for the overall health of the game in the long run because you want to keep your playerbase.

Want to love new editions? Try to play to the spirit of the rules rather than to always win. Unless you play for tournaments. Then you should just strap yourself in for a bad time and stop whining about it every. single. time. they release a new codex or edition.

As for Napoleonic gunline armies... If you can't figure out a way to get something into melee that's not the game's fault. If there's not enough cover on the board to cover-hop in relative safety across a board you're playing with too much open space. This hasn't changed from 4th edition, much less 5th. Also, blowing up a transport doesn't auto-entangle anymore. You just take a pinning test which isn't automatically the end of the world. Properly utilized transports are still going to be worth their weight in gold to melee troops. Even with HPs.

Arandmoor wrote:
If you're a WAAC player and you build armies that abuse rules to your advantage you're going to universally hate new editions because GW is going to dismantle your abusive armies as a matter of course. It's just how it works.

Yeah, abusive armies! Like the entire Tyranid codex!

Fafnir wrote:

Arandmoor wrote:
If you're a WAAC player and you build armies that abuse rules to your advantage you're going to universally hate new editions because GW is going to dismantle your abusive armies as a matter of course. It's just how it works.

Yeah, abusive armies! Like the entire Tyranid codex!

To be fair, they weren't dismantled by a Rulebook, but by their own codex. Nothing could save them from being Cruddaced.

Arandmoor wrote:
So long as you know the D3 S3 AP2 wounds to all psykers terrain is a possibility in a finite list of possibilities, none of which are unknown, it's effects come down to statistics. Not luck. Simply because you can opt to NOT trigger the possible death-trap in the first place. If there were no way to avoid it, then you would be right, and it would be luck.

The difference is that you get a choice to trigger it on purpose, and to try to prevent your opponent from triggering it in turn.

The key is 'choice'.

Sorry this particular event is down to luck. This happens on a roll of a 9 with a certain mysterious type of terrain. The even cause these hits to ALL PSYKERS ON THE BOARD, not just in the terrain itself. SO essentially there is no choice for me if my opponent decides that he is going to use that mysetrious terrain piece.

DarthOvious wrote:

Arandmoor wrote:
So long as you know the D3 S3 AP2 wounds to all psykers terrain is a possibility in a finite list of possibilities, none of which are unknown, it's effects come down to statistics. Not luck. Simply because you can opt to NOT trigger the possible death-trap in the first place. If there were no way to avoid it, then you would be right, and it would be luck.

The difference is that you get a choice to trigger it on purpose, and to try to prevent your opponent from triggering it in turn.

The key is 'choice'.

Sorry this particular event is down to luck. This happens on a roll of a 9 with a certain mysterious type of terrain. The even cause these hits to ALL PSYKERS ON THE BOARD, not just in the terrain itself. SO essentially there is no choice for me if my opponent decides that he is going to use that mysetrious terrain piece.

Than he took the risk and was rewarded for it if it worked on you, also that piece of terrain is pretty much the least common compared to forests, lakes, and hills. I doubt people will use the Archeotechnical terrain except every few boards.

Depends on what you're engaging really. Against non-vehicle units, generally nerfed as it's more difficult to pull of multiple successful assaults and it's easier to shoot units down. Against vehicles though? Absurdly enough charging at tanks is probably one of the best ways to kill them.

From my experience so far combat requires a bit more patience and tactical thinking. Its not just simply "move 6", run d6" until I am close enough to an enemy to charge."

With 5/6 missions being objectives, armies are going to get close to each other and you are going to want some things that can fight in cc.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Than he took the risk and was rewarded for it if it worked on you, also that piece of terrain is pretty much the least common compared to forests, lakes, and hills. I doubt people will use the Archeotechnical terrain except every few boards.

The point is, this is something that is outside my control. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against a random game or games based on luck. I don't mind the 2D6 random charge rule, but that doesn't change the fact that this event is purely based on luck, odds or however you want to see it. That is what I was getting at. This is NOT something I can PLAN for. The fact that you state that HE TOOK the risk and was rewarded for it and not me just clarrifies my point even further. Thank You.

That is what is being argued over in the first place. How do I plan for my opponent rolling a dice roll for a piece of Archeotechnical terrain and comes up with something that does damage to most of my Grey Knights? Let me guess, your answer is for me to not play using Grey Knights.

DarthOvious wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Than he took the risk and was rewarded for it if it worked on you, also that piece of terrain is pretty much the least common compared to forests, lakes, and hills. I doubt people will use the Archeotechnical terrain except every few boards.

The point is, this is something that is outside my control. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against a random game or games based on luck. I don't mind the 2D6 random charge rule, but that doesn't change the fact that this event is purely based on luck, odds or however you want to see it. That is what I was getting at. This is NOT something I can PLAN for. The fact that you state that HE TOOK the risk and was rewarded for it and not me just clarrifies my point even further. Thank You.

That is what is being argued over in the first place. How do I plan for my opponent rolling a dice roll for a piece of Archeotechnical terrain and comes up with something that does damage to most of my Grey Knights? Let me guess, your answer is for me to not play using Grey Knights.

Aww you didn't even let me get the snarky answer in.

Due to your Brotherhood of Psykers rule, you only take it against one model regardless per unit. due to the second part of the rule.

"If the unit suffers perils or any other attack that specifically targets psykers, it is resolved against the character, or a random, non character model in the unit if there is none"

You have powerful psykers regardless, what with being able to take a power with each unit with hammerhand. I play thousand sons, so I feel this pain too, so don't think I am just ignoring your army because I can't feel the same thing.

I originally voted for "Close combat being nerfed" (although it really seems too early to say anything. But thinking about the whole thing again, I think melee got stronger; at least if your army has specialized close combat units. Before, when Terminators charged my guardsmen, my sergeants could safely whack at them with power weapons, while the grunts took the hits. Now, specialized melee units make your opponent chose between risking his best fighters to stop the assaulting squad, who will often wipe the floor with them, or have them cowering in the back while his regular troops are getting slaughtered.
The increase in night fighting also helps of course.

In conclusion, it seems like the 6th edition has not really nerfed close combat, it simply added the tactical element that it so desperately needed. Where before, throwing your squads at each other sufficed, now positioning, equipment and target evaluation are key.
Those who truly understand the mechanics will still make it work. And to all those who quit their assaulty armies just because it suddenly became too challenging to do (basically requiring more thought than "herp derp assault"), to you I say: shame on you!

It's different, not really nerfed or buffed...

Power weapons got a boost IMO, FOUR TYPES? You mean my guard can take an AP 2 weapon for 10 stinking points? And it is +1 S? OR I can take a skull bashing +2 maul? Or equip a bunch of them with lances and get a bonus on the charge?

AWESOME SAUCE.

Fafnir wrote:

Arandmoor wrote:
If you're a WAAC player and you build armies that abuse rules to your advantage you're going to universally hate new editions because GW is going to dismantle your abusive armies as a matter of course. It's just how it works.

Yeah, abusive armies! Like the entire Tyranid codex!

Lol, no. No, no. GW just hates 'nids.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DarthOvious wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Than he took the risk and was rewarded for it if it worked on you, also that piece of terrain is pretty much the least common compared to forests, lakes, and hills. I doubt people will use the Archeotechnical terrain except every few boards.

The point is, this is something that is outside my control. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against a random game or games based on luck. I don't mind the 2D6 random charge rule, but that doesn't change the fact that this event is purely based on luck, odds or however you want to see it. That is what I was getting at. This is NOT something I can PLAN for. The fact that you state that HE TOOK the risk and was rewarded for it and not me just clarrifies my point even further. Thank You.

That is what is being argued over in the first place. How do I plan for my opponent rolling a dice roll for a piece of Archeotechnical terrain and comes up with something that does damage to most of my Grey Knights? Let me guess, your answer is for me to not play using Grey Knights.

No, the answer is for you to keep him from triggering the terrain which is, again, a choice.

Arandmoor wrote:

2. The internet lets the mathhammer masters pound out the most abusive lists for book A in edition X. The vast majority of the time these lists are NOT the intended use of the rules and instead abuse a gimmick of some sort to an extreme that was intended to be used in moderation. The rest are usually the result of GW penning a codex with the next edition in mind to give players of that codex as much time in the sweet spot as possible once the new edition comes out because they won't be getting a new codex for a while. .

Most "abuses" are discovered almost instantly tho

Just shows that the testers are bad

Lol, no. No, no. GW just hates 'nids.

Being the only Xenos to update every single edition is really hateful isn't it?

If they didn't hate them, they would never have given them to Crud-face.

To me, the new throws especialy the mysterious everything seem more like adventurous gimmicks than some tactical balance. 2d6 charge is bad, can't get my head around the decision - d6 run was already too much disparity between results imo. Should not end up overly tragic with fleet but is sure to create some needless wtf moments anyway.

On topic, following GW recommendations of d3 terrain pieces for each 2'x2' part of a board, the melee might actualy work.

Btw tyranids from Cruddace codex (which I like btw) is nothing compared to 6th + tyranids codex as far as genestealers are concerned. One could argue they were better in 5th vs 4th but now are worse than in both.

Talamare wrote:

Arandmoor wrote:

2. The internet lets the mathhammer masters pound out the most abusive lists for book A in edition X. The vast majority of the time these lists are NOT the intended use of the rules and instead abuse a gimmick of some sort to an extreme that was intended to be used in moderation. The rest are usually the result of GW penning a codex with the next edition in mind to give players of that codex as much time in the sweet spot as possible once the new edition comes out because they won't be getting a new codex for a while. .

Most "abuses" are discovered almost instantly tho

Just shows that the testers are bad

Either that or they're just not listened to. Having worked in QA, it happens more than one might think. (QA: hey, these reports don't work, and we're getting rounding errors DEV: yeah, we're not gonna fix it, it'd take too much work or we want to look like that).

KGatch113 wrote:

Your squad with a thunderhammer sergeant goes bounding forward toward the wraithlord....

Then wham, a squad of Eldar Pathfinders opens up.

Guess who takes the AP1, Rending shot to the face????

The guy with the 4+ Look Out Sir?

Vaktathi wrote:

Talamare wrote:

Arandmoor wrote:

2. The internet lets the mathhammer masters pound out the most abusive lists for book A in edition X. The vast majority of the time these lists are NOT the intended use of the rules and instead abuse a gimmick of some sort to an extreme that was intended to be used in moderation. The rest are usually the result of GW penning a codex with the next edition in mind to give players of that codex as much time in the sweet spot as possible once the new edition comes out because they won't be getting a new codex for a while. .

Most "abuses" are discovered almost instantly tho

Just shows that the testers are bad

Either that or they're just not listened to. Having worked in QA, it happens more than one might think. (QA: hey, these reports don't work, and we're getting rounding errors DEV: yeah, we're not gonna fix it, it'd take too much work or we want to look like that).

Sorry, youre very right. I shouldnt insult the testers who could have been doing an excellent job

It also could be that they may not exist too GW has cut wayyyyyy back on their playtesting and it may just be the same guys writing it that do all the playtesting. They don't have anyone internally dedicated to that position as far as has ever been revealed, and IIRC they no longer do external testing.

Kaldor wrote:

KGatch113 wrote:

Your squad with a thunderhammer sergeant goes bounding forward toward the wraithlord....

Then wham, a squad of Eldar Pathfinders opens up.

Guess who takes the AP1, Rending shot to the face????

The guy with the 4+ Look Out Sir?

Hidden models went from a 0% chance of being picked out to a 50% chance of being picked out when precise shots come their way. This is a very serious blow to stuff relying on hidden weapons and upgrades.

Take the pathfinder example. 10 guys are likely to put down two precise shots. Filter that through look out, sir, and your sergeant or icon bearer or commissar is still very likely very dead.

Sephyr wrote:It's a mild nerf if you are a Marine-equivalent. MeQs can eat the incoming overwatch, have power fists choices on almost all squads, access to TH/SS if they want to get serious.

For rest? Colossal nerf.

Fragile CC specialists not making it to combat, getting nuked via overwatch. Rare AP 2 weapons and often none that you can sing before the enemy has decimated your squad. Heck, you only need 1 2+ save in a unit to mess you a qhole unit of AP3 banshees/incubi.

The old adage of "shoot the choppy, chop the shooty" doesn't hold anymore. For khorne's sake, do NOT try to chop the shooty! you'll pay for it in pain.

yes, Eldar and DE assault took a massive nerf to the point that they can probably still take a shooty army but if they face a meq assault army they have no chance.
DE shooty is a little overcosted but atleast it is not autolose.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Arandmoor wrote:

Sephyr wrote:Gotta be honest, I used to laugh at people saying GW changes its rules and books to make people dumb the old stuff as conspiracy theories...

...but now I'm getting fitted for my tinfoil hat.

Guess people bought all the DE and nids they were going to, so why not dangle awesomely strong necrons where you can smap flyers and overwatch assaulters all day long in front of them?

Put down those agonizers and boneswords, friends, they'll help you none against articer armor, terminators and sempiternal weaves! Just form up neat lines and trade shots like Napoleonic armies should.

Take off the tinfoil.

Here's how this works...

1. GW releases book A for edition X.

2. The internet lets the mathhammer masters pound out the most abusive lists for book A in edition X. The vast majority of the time these lists are NOT the intended use of the rules and instead abuse a gimmick of some sort to an extreme that was intended to be used in moderation. The rest are usually the result of GW penning a codex with the next edition in mind to give players of that codex as much time in the sweet spot as possible once the new edition comes out because they won't be getting a new codex for a while.

3. GW releases edition Y and fixes the abuses that caused the broken lists because...wait for it...they weren't intended to work that way.They were abuses to begin with. Effective tactics that came about due to unintended or unfortunate interpretations of the rules. This new edition also clears up the issues brought about by bridged-edition codicies which can now be played in the edition for which they were written.

4. People who built armies that focused on the abuses from the previous edition suddenly find that their armies don't function.

Which brings us to the majority of the current forums QQ that paints GW as conspiring to steal their money by destroying their army on purpose.

Well, I got news for you. If you're a WAAC player and you build armies that abuse rules to your advantage you're going to universally hate new editions because GW is going to dismantle your abusive armies as a matter of course. It's just how it works. You close loopholes and fix abuses for the overall health of the game in the long run because you want to keep your playerbase.

Want to love new editions? Try to play to the spirit of the rules rather than to always win. Unless you play for tournaments. Then you should just strap yourself in for a bad time and stop whining about it every. single. time. they release a new codex or edition.

As for Napoleonic gunline armies... If you can't figure out a way to get something into melee that's not the game's fault. If there's not enough cover on the board to cover-hop in relative safety across a board you're playing with too much open space. This hasn't changed from 4th edition, much less 5th. Also, blowing up a transport doesn't auto-entangle anymore. You just take a pinning test which isn't automatically the end of the world. Properly utilized transports are still going to be worth their weight in gold to melee troops. Even with HPs.

DE weren't supposed to be good in assault. They were just abusing the rules? Incubi first came out in 3rd edition when they were 25points. In 5th they were lowered to 22 points but they lost their shooting attack. You were supposed to run or fleet into every assault so who needs to shoot right. Even in 5th they werent that good, they were only really useful against things with 2+ saves or very expensive 3+ saves with max toughness 4. Now they are basically completely useless with ap3. Now they charge in, pretty difficult with the assault range nerf. Now they arew going to charge in to an expensive squad and find either they all have 2+ saves or the sergent has a 2+ save and they bounce off. Clearly they use to be abused as they might do their job of heavy assault.