W40K - 6th edition - is it a shooting only game?

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.

**ALEXisAWESOME**

I wouldn't say a shooting only edition, but it does favour gunline armies. Which in turn favours the assault armies that can weather the barrage and slaughter the gunline. So while assault in general has been nerfed, if you have a good gimmick (Some combo of speed, resilience and power) to get you there then a single multi assault can change the game.

Take a Seer council for example, they have amazing speed and good resilience (AMAZING if they get fortune or protect) but are rather lacking in the power department. But they still have more then enough to slaughter a gunline tau, and the gunline tau have very little that can defeat them effectively (2+ armour with protect, 2+ cover with turbo boast, 4+ invul, usually re-rollable) and they can reliably tear them a new one. 6th ed didn't kill assault, it just changed the criteria for being good at it.

**Vaktathi**

6E is by no means a shooting only game, however footslogging or mechanized assault units are heavily punished in favor of units with inherent speed such as SM Bikes (especially bikes this edition), Wraiths, etc. Mechanized assaults have been killed pretty thoroughly by 6E's vehicle and transport rules (either the transport won't make it in one piece or you have to eat a turn in the open), while footslogging infantry are just too slow.

That said, average and maximum assault distances are longer than they've ever been, tanks are absurdly vulnerable to assaults, to the point where it's easier to kill heavy battle tanks and screaming flat-out moving armored hovertanks for a Tac squad (or equivalent) than it is to kill even a couple basic MEQ's, and an increasingly large number of units are getting access to things like Fleet or ignoring difficult/dangerous terrain entirely.

The problem moreso is, besides the aforementioned mechanization issues, that many units even in some 6E books are still designed to a 4E CC paradigm (e.g. Mutilators, CSM termi's, Howlong Banshees, etc) and GW just hasn't seen fit to do anything about it, and of course we have things like Orks that still *are* 4E armies.

**davethepak**

This topic has come up many many times on dakka (and other boards) and and usually is never decisive.

Players who primarily used assualt in 5th feel this is a shooty edition, and players who may have been primarily shooty feel its balanced.

Well, as a person who played both an assault based and a shooty based armies in 5th (actually, more than one of each, and very successfully competitively as well) I feel it is now balanced.

I felt assault was too powerful in 5th (yes, I know, many would disagree) for a variety of reasons, and now it is balanced.

If you relied primarily on the advantages of assault to carry you through in 5th (whether you knew it or not...most are not) then of course, 6th feels VERY shooty.

One very important thing in this - perception is most people's reality - regardless of what actually happened.

I have seen many players say "you get slaughtered" or "shot to pieces" with overwatch....I have actually kept track of models lost in overwatch at some recent events (I am a numbers guy...I like data) and have to say, that for the most part - the actual numbers of models lost to overwatch is very very small.
But its the fear of losing models, or not making it - or that one time you don't make it - that gives a person that perspective.

I strongly encourage many players to play multiple style armies (not not all power armor, and no, not all xenos) as it gives a lot of perspective, and really helps you become a better player.

**DrunkPhilisoph**

Lemme postulate a bit:

1.The advantage of assaulting is, that it singles out two units.
--> you want your assault unit to be stronger than the enemies since it won't receive backup
-----> assault units are often either hordes or elite units

2. Specialist weapons (melter, plasma, anything with high AP) are more readily available and cheaper
--> armor saves aren't worth as much

Conclusion: Glasscannon assault is dead because of changes to DS, transport (e.g. lictor, to a much lesser degree calidus assassins)

Older Elite assault units suffer because they pay high point costs for a save which isn't as usefull anymore (the new C;SM codex actually adresses this by making SS cheaper and more readily available to assault units)

Hordes are nerfed (e.g. cover ignoring, no more hidden PK) but not as badly as the other two, since losses had always been calculated into their price

Conclusion of the conclusion: CSM and DA suffer from a case of bad balancing. I think that other 6ed codexes will actually balance assault and shooting farely well, but atm old assault based armies have to face a change in design-philosophy which they can't really cope with yet...

**Ailaros**

aapch45 wrote:What exactly made it such a shooting game? The only new thing with shooting is overwatch.... and the only downside to assault is you have to dice for it.. that's it.

Here ya go:

Ailaros wrote:

It's actually worse than that. To take your list and expand...

RELATIVE BUFFS FOR SHOOTING

- Your charge distance is at the mercy of the dice. I have seen several assaults that would have been in range in 5th fail in 6th.

- You can no longer run and assault with Fleet.

- Grenades got nerfed for assaulting through terrain.

- Assault grenades no longer hurt vehicles.

- Overwatch

- And, because it really needs to be mentioned twice given the scope of the rule, transported units can overwatch if their transport gets charged, walkers can overwatch, and flamers are overwatch BEASTS. There is now literally no point in attempting to assault a unit of burnaz.

- A unit type that IS IMMUNE TO CLOSE COMBAT was born and became a staple in many lists (fliers)

- You can't assault out of a non-assault vehicle ever and that includes when it is destroyed on you

- Multi-charges were nerfed

- Challenges killed a lot of the potential of combat beast characters

- You can't assault on the turn you come on from reserves

- You can't assault if you Infiltrate or Scout and go first

- The distance from which an assault vehicle brings you closer to the enemy is reduced

- Some random objectives half your assault range

- Furious Charge got nerfed

- Wound allocation forces you to take the models from the front as casualties, this makes an assault unit take an extra turn(s) of being exposed to gunfire before they can get stuck in.

- Wound allocation means that hidden weapons upgrades are no longer hidden. You only need to kill a squad to the point where the upgrade model is the closest to something. This is very easy to achieve with deepstriking.

- Loss of by-unit cover in favor of by-model cover destroys the ability for foot hordes to advance upfield.

- Addition of focus fire

- Addition of Precise Shot.

- Worsening of cover. Intervening units only give 4+, hills no longer area terrain, etc.

- Power weapons got screwed up. Either Ap3, or I1, take your choice...

- You can no longer disembark after moving more than 6" in a transport (killing mech assault units).

- grenades can now be thrown.

- walkers can no longer tie up squads in close combat.

- grenades now work against monstrous creatures in close combat. This hurts dedicated assault units relative to basic infantry that have no desire to be in close combat.

- pre-measuring makes it much easier to make sure shooting weapons are in range, while not helping assault units make it into assault more reliably.

- rapid fire now puts more shots out on the move.

- you can now move and fire heavy weapons. This and the above change to rapid fire mean that you can now back up away from assault units while still shooting.

- parts of a squad can now move without affecting the accuracy of heavy weapons.

- old wound wrapping gotten rid of. I'm glad, but for the purposes of this discussion, it is a boost to shooting more than assaulting.

- pile-in moves reduced to 3" from 6".

- unengaged models in a unit that is locked in close combat must now move closer to the enemy units. Used to capture objectives far away while in close combat with this one in 5th.

- barrage weapons may now fire within their minimum ranges.

- barrage weapons no longer lose strength against vehicles from off-center scatters.

- artillery units got MUCH more survivable.

- models with two pistol weapons can now fire them both.

- vehicles can shoot all weapons at cruising speed.

- in order to charge a vehicle, you must have some way of damaging it.

RELATIVE BUFFS FOR ASSAULT

- hypothetical increase of maximum charge range from 6" to 12". Given that assault range is no longer reliable, I still consider this more of a nerf than a buff. I mean, if you're 12" away, are you really going to attempt to charge? The most likely result is that your opponent will get some free overwatch, and you're still not making it into close combat.

- hammer of wrath.

- assaulting vehicles now gives you much better chance to hit.

- rage rule change

- gets hot now affects those rare vehicles that have it

So, some of these changes are more important than others, and you can uselessly nit-pick them all you like, but the fact is that there were 39 rule changes to make shooting better, and arguably up to 5 rule changes that make assault better.

Put another way, for every rule that made assault better, there were EIGHT rules that make shooting better.

6th ed is a shooting edition. End of.

**gausus**

Ailaros wrote:
Yes, 6th ed is a shooting game. Do a google search of dakka, and you'll find several threads to this effect.

Is it shooting ONLY? No. You can do shooty armies with a bit of close combat sprinkled in (how I've run my guard army). You can also deliberately decide to play the game on hard mode and just run a bunch of khorne berzerkers anyways.

There's nothing preventing you from using close combat, or even focusing on it. Nothing but your desire to win every game with minimal effort, that is.

I can't agree with the last sentence. The problem with shooting and shooting armies like Tau is that no matter the efforr, you still loose.
After years of playing , the 6th suddenly shifted the game.

The problem is not a desire to win with minimal erffort.
The problem is that, no matter the efforr, skill and tactics you still loose with a stand&shoot tau gunline.

Here is an example - All powerfull Space Wolves shooting are vehicle.

Tau Riptide is a Jumpack MC with wounds and inv save.
That is the difference that makes people so frustrated.
Tha game isnt about skill. It is about how many shooting models You can buy

**Kain**

gausus wrote:
Ailaros wrote:
Yes, 6th ed is a shooting game. Do a google search of dakka, and you'll find several threads to this effect.

Is it shooting ONLY? No. You can do shooty armies with a bit of close combat sprinkled in (how I've run my guard army). You can also deliberately decide to play the game on hard mode and just run a bunch of khorne berzerkers anyways.

There's nothing preventing you from using close combat, or even focusing on it. Nothing but your desire to win every game with minimal effort, that is.

I can't agree with the last sentence. The problem with shooting and shooting armies like Tau is that no matter the efforr, you still loose.
After years of playing , the 6th suddenly shifted the game.

The problem is not a desire to win with minimal erffort.
The problem is that, no matter the efforr, skill and tactics you still loose with a stand&shoot tau gunline.

Here is an example - All powerfull Space Wolves shooting are vehicle.

Tau Riptide is a Jumpack MC with wounds and inv save.
That is the difference that makes people so frustrated.
Tha game isnt about skill. It is about how many shooting models You can buy

And here I thought Space Wolf shooting primarily came from Grey Hunters and Long Fangs.

**Likan Wolfsheim**

PrinceRaven wrote:
6th edition is most often won not in the assault or shooting phase, but in the movement phase.

This is very, very true.

I still run my Wytch-heavy DE army led by the Baron(ess) in a blob of Hellions. Since 6th ed it's performed even better, go figure (I think it's probably Fleet mitigating the downside to the random charge). Shooting is stronger than assault, yes, but a well-built, well-played assault army is still viable.

**Mywik**

Space Wolves still have competitive CC builds (thunderwolf spam) when allied with IG for anti-air (and an aegis).

**Tigramans**

Nobody_Holme wrote:
Precision shots can still snipe out your special melee weaponry - -

...Which are nullified with successful Look Out Sir! -rolls. The Precision shots should be unavoidable, or they end up being semi-useless.

**Wilytank**

Tigramans wrote:
Nobody_Holme wrote:
Precision shots can still snipe out your special melee weaponry - -

...Which are nullified with successful Look Out Sir! -rolls.

Not every model that can take special melee weaponry is a character.

**Tigramans**

Wilytank wrote:

Not every model that can take special melee weaponry is a character.

I am aware of that.

**PrinceRaven**

Wilytank wrote:
Tigramans wrote:
Nobody_Holme wrote:
Precision shots can still snipe out your special melee weaponry - -

...Which are nullified with successful Look Out Sir! -rolls.

Not every model that can take special melee weaponry is a character.

And the one's that are characters get challenged and die.

**Art_of_war**

davethepak wrote:
This topic has come up many many times on dakka (and other boards) and and usually is never decisive.

Players who primarily used assualt in 5th feel this is a shooty edition, and players who may have been primarily shooty feel its balanced.

Well, as a person who played both an assault based and a shooty based armies in 5th (actually, more than one of each, and very successfully competitively as well) I feel it is now balanced.

I felt assault was too powerful in 5th (yes, I know, many would disagree) for a variety of reasons, and now it is balanced.

If you relied primarily on the advantages of assault to carry you through in 5th (whether you knew it or not...most are not) then of course, 6th feels VERY shooty.

One very important thing in this - perception is most people's reality - regardless of what actually happened.

I have seen many players say "you get slaughtered" or "shot to pieces" with overwatch....I have actually kept track of models lost in overwatch at some recent events (I am a numbers guy...I like data) and have to say, that for the most part - the actual numbers of models lost to overwatch is very very small.
But its the fear of losing models, or not making it - or that one time you don't make it - that gives a person that perspective.

I strongly encourage many players to play multiple style armies (not not all power armor, and no, not all xenos) as it gives a lot of perspective, and really helps you become a better player.

well said, i agree +1

However that being said there are still quite a few issues that crop up mostly Tau and the Riptide. Now in my humble expereince, the markerlight shenanigins is accepted but it still gets branded as 'bent' (my club vernacular

), throw in a riptide or two and quite a few army builds/lists fall over at the mere sight of them... and it gets branded as

Now i'll confess they are dam good for what they are. however i am perplexed at the mindset some players have, the 2 times my tau have been well and truly buggered was by good players who were not phased by the riptide and took action to mitigate it. One was a SW army that drop podded in/ rhino rush and the second was raven wing. They boxed them in etc and took them apart with quite disgusting ease, in one way it was a joy to watch.

This was highlighted the other day in a 2v2 game i had 1500pts per player(we rolled the KP mission), I was with orks facing 2 marine players. One of the marines was based around jump packs and the other was mostly infantry, a dread and a few bikes/attack bikes. The game went as follows...

They siezed the first turn, 2 pods came down a dread jumped out and a comamnd squad containing tigris and a chapter master also jumped out, the squad was armed with 4 grav guns (this could hurt..) they appeared next to one of my riptides. They shot it with grave guns all in all 8 shots, i saved 6 on 5+

On our go the orks rushed forward, as they do, and i 'obliterated' the command squad a mere 3 kill points in one go...

Next they charged the orks, que more jammy rolling on my side and they got 'stuck' in CC with the orks, i just lobbed supporting fire while trying to kill the dreadnought, he refused to die

then as the combats went our way my wounded riptide went toe to toe with the dread and killed it in kung fu style to much embarresment

he then died next turn after a stormraven nuked him, oh well he had caused enought trouble...

the result we won 14 Kps to 7 ...ouch

They made several key errors- they failed to kill the nob bikers and, they could have rushed one side of the board and swept up that way and the riptides would have been useless.... and i got branded a cheese lord

just my humble opinion

**Tigramans**

PrinceRaven wrote:

And the one's that are characters get challenged and die.

Well, once again, it depends on the challenger, and the challengee. The challenge can also always be denied or taken with another character instead.

"Powerfist sergeant, I challenge you to a-oh hello Lysander!"

**PrinceRaven**

Tigramans wrote:
PrinceRaven wrote:

And the one's that are characters get challenged and die.

Well, once again, it depends on the challenger, and the challengee. The challenge can also always be denied or taken with another character instead.

"Powerfist sergeant, I challenge you to a-oh hello Lysander!"

Point taken, but not every character is going to have helpful Lysander to take the challenge for him, and sometimes the challenger is the Swarmlord.

**Tigramans**

PrinceRaven wrote:
Tigramans wrote:
PrinceRaven wrote:

And the one's that are characters get challenged and die.

Well, once again, it depends on the challenger, and the challengee. The challenge can also always be denied or taken with another character instead.

"Powerfist sergeant, I challenge you to a-oh hello Lysander!"

Point taken, but not every character is going to have helpful Lysander to take the challenge for him, and sometimes the challenger is the Swarmlord.

...But there can be other less important characters to take his/her place as a necessary sacrifice.

**SisterSydney**

Disposable sergeants are the key: they take challenges while your melee monster character rips up the enemy force -- at least for one assault phase, after which the sergeant is dead...

**Makumba**

I still run my Wytch-heavy DE army led by the Baron(ess) in a blob of Hellions. Since 6th ed it's performed even better, go figure (I think it's probably Fleet mitigating the downside to the random charge). Shooting is stronger than assault, yes, but a well-built, well-played assault army is still viable.

Aren't you worried that any army runing 2-3 drakes or ally drakes can wipe your helion star realy fast ?

**juraigamer**

It's both equal parts shooting and melee. You can focus on either one and win. Melee got better this edition (no fearless saves, longer charge ranges) and shooting got better (cover tends to be 5+, overwatch)

Your playstyle is important too. Would you enjoy playing infantry guard with 200+ guys on the field, or a CSM force with 15 spawn and armored support?

I've won more games with my melee CSM this edition then I ever have before, same with my melee daemons.

**ZebioLizard2**

Makumba wrote:
I still run my Wytch-heavy DE army led by the Baron(ess) in a blob of Hellions. Since 6th ed it's performed even better, go figure (I think it's probably Fleet mitigating the downside to the random charge). Shooting is stronger than assault, yes, but a well-built, well-played assault army is still viable.

Aren't you worried that any army runing 2-3 drakes or ally drakes can wipe your helion star realy fast ?

Actually I'd be more worried about anyone with decent anti-cover shooting in general, let alone just heldrakes.

**Tamwulf**

davethepak wrote:

I have seen many players say "you get slaughtered" or "shot to pieces" with overwatch....I have actually kept track of models lost in overwatch at some recent events (I am a numbers guy...I like data) and have to say, that for the most part - the actual numbers of models lost to overwatch is very very small.
But its the fear of losing models, or not making it - or that one time you don't make it - that gives a person that perspective.

I strongly encourage many players to play multiple style armies (not not all power armor, and no, not all xenos) as it gives a lot of perspective, and really helps you become a better player.

From my perspective, trying to assault any unit of Tau is a suicide maneuver. If it's a long charge (7+ inches), losing 1-2 models could make it a failed charge. Even if I make it and kill everything I'm in CC with, there is that other Fire Warrior unit well within rapid fire range, or a Riptide, or Hammerhead, or Crisis Suits, or... the problem with assaults is... what happens after the assault? Do you have enough left to do another effective assault? Or is the unit about to get shot to Kingdom Come? What was the point of the assault? Trade one unit for another? If you play that game, you will never win. There is just no upside to the assault. You lose and your opponent loses, but you try to not lose less?

Why not stand back and just shoot them, lose nothing and gain everything?

In a game with Kill Points, all I have to do is have more than you. If you assault a unit on an objective and wipe them out, well, I'll just shoot you off the objective, and now neither one of us will have it. The player that score the "First Blood" is usually the winner- from my perspective.

I strongly encourage many players to play multiple style armies (not not all power armor, and no, not all xenos) as it gives a lot of perspective, and really helps you become a better player.

GW appreciates this marketing ploy, and readily encourages all players to take this approach and buy more stuff. As a corollary, if I played multiple armies (and I do), and the assault one (my Blood Angels) consistently loses despite everything I try, but my Tau army wrecks all face... why should I continue playing the army that always loses?

**gausus**

Kain wrote:
gausus wrote:
Ailaros wrote:
Yes, 6th ed is a shooting game. Do a google search of dakka, and you'll find several threads to this effect.

Is it shooting ONLY? No. You can do shooty armies with a bit of close combat sprinkled in (how I've run my guard army). You can also deliberately decide to play the game on hard mode and just run a bunch of khorne berzerkers anyways.

There's nothing preventing you from using close combat, or even focusing on it. Nothing but your desire to win every game with minimal effort, that is.

I can't agree with the last sentence. The problem with shooting and shooting armies like Tau is that no matter the efforr, you still loose.
After years of playing , the 6th suddenly shifted the game.

The problem is not a desire to win with minimal erffort.
The problem is that, no matter the efforr, skill and tactics you still loose with a stand&shoot tau gunline.

Here is an example - All powerfull Space Wolves shooting are vehicle.

Tau Riptide is a Jumpack MC with wounds and inv save.
That is the difference that makes people so frustrated.
Tha game isnt about skill. It is about how many shooting models You can buy

And here I thought Space Wolf shooting primarily came from Grey Hunters and Long Fangs.

Compare Grey Hunters with Tau/Eldar troops in terms of shooting.
As for Long Fangs - compare them with Noise Marines or Obliterators

Both Fangs and Hunters are 1W, 3+

Hunters range is 24 top.Fangs don't have anything againts flyers, and can't ignore cover without a Rune Priest.

**Likan Wolfsheim**

Makumba wrote:
I still run my Wytch-heavy DE army led by the Baron(ess) in a blob of Hellions. Since 6th ed it's performed even better, go figure (I think it's probably Fleet mitigating the downside to the random charge). Shooting is stronger than assault, yes, but a well-built, well-played assault army is still viable.

Aren't you worried that any army runing 2-3 drakes or ally drakes can wipe your helion star realy fast ?

My primary opponent is CSM and his drakes have never won the day against DE for some reason (I am aware that my constant success shouldn't happen on paper). I've had games where most/all my Hellions have died--but the unit is hardly a deathstar. It's a sorta 'oh well...' moment if I lose them. I tend to be safely in combat with something by 2nd turn, too, which helps. It's a regular occurrence for almost all my transports (and shootier units, typically Kabalites) to get decimated by the end of the game, but my Wyches/Hellions have an astounding tendency to grind through enemy armies. Nurgle Lords, grounded Greater Daemons, and squads of angry CSM all routinely go down.

It's all about winning the game in the Movement Phase.

On the other hand I proxied a marine list a few days ago and a single Heldrake melted my sternguard, devastators, a fair number of tactical marines, a few rhinos, and almost Vector-struck my Hunter into oblivion. That was supremely unpleasant.

**bosky**

I guess you shouldn't bring a knife to a gun fight? Honestly, what do people expect? To be able to run into a barrage of fire and survive? That hasn't worked since WW1, and it's always just been a holdover in 40k due to the game being a retheme of WFB.

Now all they need is a bit more focus on maneuverability so the game doesn't come down to two gunlines facing each other and both players rolling dice until they fall asleep.

**Kain**

bosky wrote:
I guess you shouldn't bring a knife to a gun fight? Honestly, what do people expect? To be able to run into a barrage of fire and survive? That hasn't worked since WW1, and it's always just been a holdover in 40k due to the game being a retheme of WFB.

Now all they need is a bit more focus on maneuverability so the game doesn't come down to two gunlines facing each other and both players rolling dice until they fall asleep.

Charging and screaming like bloody murder works for Daemons.

**Luke_Prowler**

Kain wrote:
bosky wrote:
I guess you shouldn't bring a knife to a gun fight? Honestly, what do people expect? To be able to run into a barrage of fire and survive? That hasn't worked since WW1, and it's always just been a holdover in 40k due to the game being a retheme of WFB.

Now all they need is a bit more focus on maneuverability so the game doesn't come down to two gunlines facing each other and both players rolling dice until they fall asleep.

Charging and screaming like bloody murder works for Daemons.

And Orks, and Tyranids, and Space Marines, and....

I think that the first thing we need to reavaluate about our suspension of disbelief is that we need to stop basing how others wage war based on how we wage war, 'cause humans are weenies who're deathly afraid/allergic to sharp objects were these guys aren't.

**Oaka**

Another vote here for assault not being dead, but definitely more difficult. But that makes it even more of an accomplishment if you win a game, in my experience. Heck, I walk away from a game with a huge smile on my face if it's a draw.

I had to get rid of my Wyches and add a lot more Beasts and MCs, since those are the only things that can actually reach assault now, but it wasn't too big of a change. The worst part was when the FAQ was written to disallow assaulting out of a Webway Portal. I was absolutely convinced that would be allowed as a unique alternative to assault-oriented Dark Eldar armies. The reason Kheradruakh is so bad is his special rule that prevents him from assaulting the turn he comes into play. Now that rule is given to any assault-based unit in the game, and it's just brutal.

**juraigamer**

Assault is no longer the way to win games by driving up in metal boxes, taking no skill whatsoever. Assault isn't harder now, it's fair.

**Likan Wolfsheim**

juraigamer wrote:
Assault is no longer the way to win games by driving up in metal boxes, taking no skill whatsoever. Assault isn't harder now, it's fair.

But flying up in paper boats still works for me!

Terrain must be hugged like a dear friend (long-ranged cover ignoring shooting other than ML spam seems fairly sparse in my experience...but that's local meta I guess) and the assault(s) should come from somewhere other than straight across the board--this is just as tactically unimpressive as the 'I sit here and shoot you all game' approach with the added hindrance that while the latter may very well do the job (especially against the former), the former is prone to very tragic results. I don't think any army should be able to win the game by bunkering down in their deployment zone and forcing the other guy to take models off the table until turn 5...but at the same time I don't think any army--not CSM, nor BA, nor Orks, nor Tyranids, nor DE--should be able to win by simply throwing their army straight across the board regardless of what shooting the enemy has. Neither tactic makes for a very interesting game (granted in my experience fighting the Unstoppable Wave of Bodies tends to be more fun than fighting a gunline).