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.

An before ya say yea of course it would, some units got nerfed an others buffed its more than that.

In 5th I used to worry more about who I was facing an what the mission would be, it was hard for me to build an all comers list. With the introduction of allies an flyers I don't care about who I am facing, I feel like I can build a good list capable of taking anyone on. I would like to face off against one of the Necrons air force lists, but there aren't to many Cron players in my area.

How bout you guys?

If anything I find myself wanting to play 10 different lists just because they are strong an will be fun to play. 6th edition has completely changed the way I look at an play 40k

This
If anything I find myself wanting to play 10 different lists just because they are strong an will be fun to play

I hope to come across different lists and not the same 3 units over and over.

Easy answer to that, MrWhoop - just don't play in tournaments. Those things are awful for over-stratification.

For me as a Necron player, I would say the biggest change is I basically don't ever need to bring dedicated anti-tank anymore as my basic Necron Warriors can kill a Land Raider with enough shots. So, list building got a lot simplier.

Actually, I've found the opposite to be true. You could be successful in 5th ed regardless of what you took so long as you took a strong troops section. 5th didn't have as many objectives in its objective games, so it was very possible to win with just a few hardcore troops, whether it be big wraithguard units, or power blobs or slugga mobz, etc.

The fight between support units always felt rather ancillary.

In 6th edition, though, they have made everything more fragile, especially "weaker" units like troops. This engourages you to bring lists that put out absolutely as much up-front killing power as possible with as little possible damage received. This has caused lists to become much more polarized than they were before, especially combined with rules that boosted the maxim that a spam list is a strong list.

There are gunlines, and there are flier lists, and there are drop pod lists, etc, but builds that tend to be good against one of them tend not to be good against the others. This wasn't so much of a deal when everybody was spending 60% of their points on troops and HQ, but now that people are making sacrifices to include as many toys in their list as possible, things are becoming more difficult to counter.

Now, it seems to be less of a "how do I handle all comers, with the extra ability to handle certain lists?" and now it's more "How do I make a good anti-flier list? How do I make a good anti-gunline list? How many lists can I fit in my army case?"

I have seen 6th ed being played in a much more narrative way around here. We haven't just been having "annihilate everything and play until that happens." games, we've had stuff with battlefield traits and random powers, and it has led to a cinematic and fun experience

^ This is great! Narrative battles add more depth to battles, and before anyone tells me to avoid tournaments, I've never been to one.

Rakeeb wrote:
Easy answer to that, MrWhoop - just don't play in tournaments. Those things are awful for over-stratification.

Maybe in your area but tournies at my FLGS are one of the few ways to encounter other lists. Any day pickup game I can count on SM, Orks or IG. With tournies I have seen DE/E. Tau and SoB. With 6th I actually walked in and 3 people were playing NIds (genestealer cult, horde and MC!) So I'm hoping gamers keep trying new things and not settle on what 'worked' before.

I don't go to tournaments because people there will be spamming lists like its there job. Its like fighting three or four lists ten times. The good part about that is I can carry enough cases to have something for anything, but its not worth the money or effort

 TheAngrySquig wrote:
I don't go to tournaments because people there will be spamming lists like its there job. Its like fighting three or four lists ten times. The good part about that is I can carry enough cases to have something for anything, but its not worth the money or effort

Huh? You only enter one list into a tourney. You can't tailor for each match up...

And thats my evidence that I've never been to a real tourney. We have multiple lists for each match in the games we play in my group

^ Nothing wrong with that!

It makes more sense IMO, why would a commander be fighting against Tyranids and use more Darklight than Splinter weaponry?

This wasn't so much of a deal when everybody was spending 60% of their points on troops and HQ, but now that people are making sacrifices to include as many toys in their list as possible, things are becoming more difficult to counter.

Troops and HQ? Most people generally took 80% Elites and Heavy Support unless it was an army where you could make elites troops by some means. Along with most armies not really taking much HQ unless it was an army that either desperately needed what it could offer (Daemons, Nids) or was cheap and really good (Space wolves)

 Ailaros wrote:
This wasn't so much of a deal when everybody was spending 60% of their points on troops and HQ,

Our experiences are wildly divergent.

As for the topic, I'm experiencing more diversity than in past days as well. At least in my own lists. I'm building many armies and coming to the conclusion that they're all basically the same in function (which stands to reason as everyone has a playstyle they prefer) without being even close in makeup.

 Ailaros wrote:
Actually, I've found the opposite to be true. You could be successful in 5th ed regardless of what you took so long as you took a strong troops section. 5th didn't have as many objectives in its objective games, so it was very possible to win with just a few hardcore troops, whether it be big wraithguard units, or power blobs or slugga mobz, etc.

The fight between support units always felt rather ancillary.

In 6th edition, though, they have made everything more fragile, especially "weaker" units like troops. This engourages you to bring lists that put out absolutely as much up-front killing power as possible with as little possible damage received. This has caused lists to become much more polarized than they were before, especially combined with rules that boosted the maxim that a spam list is a strong list.

There are gunlines, and there are flier lists, and there are drop pod lists, etc, but builds that tend to be good against one of them tend not to be good against the others. This wasn't so much of a deal when everybody was spending 60% of their points on troops and HQ, but now that people are making sacrifices to include as many toys in their list as possible, things are becoming more difficult to counter.

Now, it seems to be less of a "how do I handle all comers, with the extra ability to handle certain lists?" and now it's more "How do I make a good anti-flier list? How do I make a good anti-gunline list? How many lists can I fit in my army case?"

What would you call this list?

Wolf Lord w/ Thunderwolf Mount, TH/SS, Runic Armour, 2 Fenrisian Wolves, and Saga of the Bear 280pts

Rune Priest w/ divination power 100pts
Rune Priest w/ divination power 100pts

5x Grey Hunter 75pts
5x Grey Hunters w/ melta gun 80pts

3x Thunderwolf Cavalry w/ TH/SS 210pts

6x Long Fangs w/ 3x Missile Launchers an 2x Lasannon 170pts
6x Long Fangs w/ 3x Missile Launchers 140pts
6x Long Fangs w/ 3x Missile Launchers 140pts

Sky Shield Landing Pad 75pts

Belial w/ TH/SS 130pts

5x Deathwing w/4x TH-SS, Cyclone, Apothecary 265pts
5x Deathwing w/4x TH-SS, an Cyclone 235pts

It is so well rounded, at least IMO. You would never take TH/SS terminator Wolf Guard because they are extremely expensive compared to most chapters 400pts for a 10 ,man squad thats why in a Space Wolf list you saw dozens of Hunters, Light vehicles and Long Fangs. DA allow you to take cheap scoring Terminators something you have to pay 275pts for in a Space Wolf List using Logan Grimnar. The Cavalry give me speed and with the Lord make them tough as nails. The Long Fangs combined with the Rune Priests on the pad are good at killing anything an reasonably good at hitting flyers. I will take the Landing Pad over the A Line any day. I don't think you could lump this list in with the three you mentioned. Ran a version of this list subbing Tau for Space Wolves an used Broadsides for the Long Fangs and Crisis suits for the Cavalry it worked amazing. The synergy between the assault terminators and the suits was great. Kept them close to each other and they were great fun to play.

I like the fact that 6th seems to have added a lot of emphasis on the narrative of the game. I'm a huge nut for the background of this game, so it's nice to see the fluff-lovers getting some love. The ally system, while some combinations are kind of odd (I'm looking at you Tau and Space Marine armies), it opens up all new possibilities for army building and fluffy gameplay.


Big thumbs up for 6th edition from me!

6th edition made me realize how much I like building army lists, and that I needed to deviate from old set course that was dominant in 5th. I also have found myself loving 6th for the kinda feel it gives the games of 40k I play.

I can not stand how more and more people are throwing around the terms "narrative" and "cinematic". The GW "hobbyist" machine is going strong.

Table wrote:
I can not stand how more and more people are throwing around the terms "narrative" and "cinematic". The GW "hobbyist" machine is going strong.

Maybe because some people enjoy the background of the game and like to roleplay? A lot of people like the emphasis this edition of the game has put on trying to actually create a little story line for each game of 40k that you play. It helps to keep the game refreshing and dynamic, instead of the bland, boring, "my tank list vs your tank list" / Melta-spam game it became in 5th. The biggest thing 40k has going for it is the background; without it, it's just another expensive miniature war game. I'm not quite sure what your purpose behind this comment was, but maybe an explanation could make your comment seem a little less inflammatory and a little more constructive.

Table wrote:
I can not stand how more and more people are throwing around the terms "narrative" and "cinematic". The GW "hobbyist" machine is going strong.

Lose a few games in 6th have ya?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Darth Bob wrote:

Table wrote:
I can not stand how more and more people are throwing around the terms "narrative" and "cinematic". The GW "hobbyist" machine is going strong.

Maybe because some people enjoy the background of the game and like to roleplay? A lot of people like the emphasis this edition of the game has put on trying to actually create a little story line for each game of 40k that you play. It helps to keep the game refreshing and dynamic, instead of the bland, boring, "my tank list vs your tank list" / Melta-spam game it became in 5th. The biggest thing 40k has going for it is the background; without it, it's just another expensive miniature war game. I'm not quite sure what your purpose behind this comment was, but maybe an explanation could make your comment seem a little less inflammatory and a little more constructive.

Agreed.

When I ally my Grey Knights with Dark Angels I like to think that it's because the Dark Angels have found some of the Fallen an the Inquisition is there to make sure the Angels get the job done.

It has changed the way I look at army building, because now I see that potentially glancing something to death is actually worth it. Before glancing a vehicle was crap. Now its actually a viable strategy and it makes weight of low S shots actually worth it. For instance before I would maybe consider Psybolt Ammo only on larger squads. Now I think its worth it to have it on many GK squads because S5 stormbolters could potentially wreck a Rhino.

Furthermore I feel like we all need to be able to deal with Flyers appropriately and it seems like most lists aren't actually setting out to do that. They are just tweaking the lists a bit and expecting them to still work and I feel a lot of MSU lists simply don't work anymore. It seems list building works better as hybrids or footslogging now. List-building is just as difficult now in my opinion as it was in 5th, but now we have to make different choices for different situations that may crop up that we didn't have to deal with before in 5th.