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.

Experiment 626 wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
So any leaks yet by people who have (or claim to have) the rulebook early? Usually we get those by now right?

It's only Monday, and a holiday Monday at that here in Canada and the UK. (now please excuse me while I go light some fireworks!)

Nope, not a Holiday in the UK, that's next week.

UK gets a holiday next monday too?

no its not a holiday today, next monday instead

 optometris wrote:
no its not a holiday today, next monday instead

We have to do better job co-ordinating this Victoria Day/"May two-four weekend" thing...

Otherwise we will demand a second weekend of consuming said two-four.

It simple in the UK, the first and last Mondays in May are always public holidays, you Canucks need to keep up!

I just finished reading the painful new WD. Are they listening at GW design studio? Yes. Vehicles dying easily is a problem, however, I'm afraid that and Allies are all they heard. The addition of the psychic phase, the addition of the tactical objective cards and the addition of Unbounded tells me they are listening more to the marketing team. There's no talk of fixing the deep strike no-assault craziness, First Blood will remain ridiculous, and seeing Coteaz surrounded by daemons makes me insane.

I will not buy this edition until it's had 3 months in the wild. I hate Look Out, Sir as a mechanic so much...I also hate precision strikes as it just takes momentum out of them game. I will paint my 30k stuff and dream of DZC armies.

I am confused, surely the psychic phase and tactical objectives are there to help fix the 6th ed problems?

Well I'm participating in a 6th Ed anything goes tourney on the 25th. I'm buying it... and hanging on until the Ork Codex. Then, hopefully it'll be so good I'll be super stoked or so bad I can quit this silly game.... but I love it.... dang it.

bodazoka wrote:
I am confused, surely the psychic phase and tactical objectives are there to help fix the 6th ed problems?

I'm not sure what problem the tactical objectives are supposed to fix.

The changes to psychic powers do fix the problem of non-psychic armies being unable to counter blessings, but I can't help thinking that there should have been a more elegant solution than adding a whole extra phase back in.

Basimpo wrote:
Dude instead of spending points on psykers that can explode into bloodthirsters I think that I will spend points on bloodthirsters that can explode into bloodthirsters.

Also, I like the space balls ref in the post above

Here's another: just like at the end of the movie the BT will breakout of the BTs chest with a top hat and cane and start singing a ditty.

Hello my darlin!!

Papa Nurgle's got you covered

 insaniak wrote:

bodazoka wrote:
I am confused, surely the psychic phase and tactical objectives are there to help fix the 6th ed problems?

I'm not sure what problem the tactical objectives are supposed to fix.

Being able to play a game easily with only the codex and rulebook but no other purchases?

Exactly. Adding a phase and a card set?!? Just so much added without addressing the many, many big problems. Allies getting fixed is great. Flying monstrous creatures? Thank you, GW. But fix assault. Fix deep strike. Fix instant death. Fix flyers so they act like planes. Fix Look Out Sir and First Blood!

 warboss wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

bodazoka wrote:
I am confused, surely the psychic phase and tactical objectives are there to help fix the 6th ed problems?

I'm not sure what problem the tactical objectives are supposed to fix.

Being able to play a game easily with only the codex and rulebook but no other purchases?

You do know that all of the rules for the cards are in the rulebook right? Its the same as the psychic cards, a convenience if you want it.

Also the psychic phase is there to consolidate all the powers into one phase instead of dealing with them all over the place. Simplifies it instead of remember start of turn, or start of psykers movement, or start of shooting, or during shooting, or start of assault phase, or after charging etc. Its all done at once.

Also we are incomplete on rules. We know next to nothing about assault, or anything else so to say it is or isnt fixed is premature.

 insaniak wrote:

bodazoka wrote:
I am confused, surely the psychic phase and tactical objectives are there to help fix the 6th ed problems?

I'm not sure what problem the tactical objectives are supposed to fix.

The changes to psychic powers do fix the problem of non-psychic armies being unable to counter blessings, but I can't help thinking that there should have been a more elegant solution than adding a whole extra phase back in.

The 4 main problems I have currently are

1. People late game contesting my objectives with nothing I can do about it
2. People getting first blood and then hiding all game or castling on one objective meaning I loose turn 1/2 effectively
3. People getting all the high number objectives on there table edge and me loosing the game basically in deployment
4. Relic.. in general, hate it always re-roll it.

I believe that accumulative VP's and an ever changing mission structure goes some way to fixing some of the issues above. It is hard to sing the praises of this though as I don't have all the information, it could end up not being a fix but I do believe it is at least an attempt at a fix from GW. When 50 odd games are played and the people more knowledgeable than me on here figure it out I am sure we will have an answer.

 Leth wrote:

 warboss wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

bodazoka wrote:
I am confused, surely the psychic phase and tactical objectives are there to help fix the 6th ed problems?

I'm not sure what problem the tactical objectives are supposed to fix.

Being able to play a game easily with only the codex and rulebook but no other purchases?

You do know that all of the rules for the cards are in the rulebook right? Its the same as the psychic cards, a convenience if you want it.

Also the psychic phase is there to consolidate all the powers into one phase instead of dealing with them all over the place. Simplifies it instead of remember start of turn, or start of psykers movement, or start of shooting, or during shooting, or start of assault phase, or after charging etc. Its all done at once.

Also we are incomplete on rules. We know next to nothing about assault, or anything else so to say it is or isnt fixed is premature.

We don't know, but man the WD just makes me depressed.

 Leth wrote:
Also the psychic phase is there to consolidate all the powers into one phase instead of dealing with them all over the place. Simplifies it instead of remember start of turn, or start of psykers movement, or start of shooting, or during shooting, or start of assault phase, or after charging etc. Its all done at once.

By that logic, we should also have a 'special abilities' phase. And possibly a 'Rapid Fire' phase, a 'Heavy' phase and a 'Move Your Vehicles' phase.

Having the different types of psychic powers function at different times during the turn was never a problem, because they all affect different things. Dropping them all out into a separate phase was uneccessary, and breaks the flow of the game even further than the current IGYG system does already.

And the silliness of allowing a psyker to cast multiple wychfires and then still also get to shoot his ranged weapon?

 insaniak wrote:

 Leth wrote:
Also the psychic phase is there to consolidate all the powers into one phase instead of dealing with them all over the place. Simplifies it instead of remember start of turn, or start of psykers movement, or start of shooting, or during shooting, or start of assault phase, or after charging etc. Its all done at once.

By that logic, we should also have a 'special abilities' phase. And possibly a 'Rapid Fire' phase, a 'Heavy' phase and a 'Move Your Vehicles' phase.

Having the different types of psychic powers function at different times during the turn was never a problem, because they all affect different things. Dropping them all out into a separate phase was uneccessary, and breaks the flow of the game even further than the current IGYG system does already.

And the silliness of allowing a psyker to cast multiple wychfires and then still also get to shoot his ranged weapon?

Psykers casting multiple witchfires is a good thing, not a bad thing. Compared to other powers and other weapons, witchfires were less effective- you had to get the power off, then get through deny the witch, then roll to hit, roll to wound, and get through saves. Other powers only had to do the first two, and shooting weapons had to do the latter three. And being able to split fire makes putting a psyker in a unit with witchfire powers less of a handicap, like often a heavy or special weapon in a squad can be as well. Changes to splitfire also seems to address the problem of "wasted" shots somewhat as well.

Putting all the psychic powers in one phase does streamline things. While many of the powers affect different things, they all tended to last until the start of the next turn anyways, so doing them at the same time is not going to make any major difference. Having them go off after movement and before shooting also opens up a lot of flexability compared to the current mix where some were start of the turn, some were in the shooting phase, some were done other times. But I also would rather see Flat Out and Run be lumped back into the movement phase to streamline that as well.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Psykers casting multiple witchfires is a good thing, not a bad thing. Compared to other powers and other weapons, witchfires were less effective- you had to get the power off, then get through deny the witch, then roll to hit, roll to wound, and get through saves. Other powers only had to do the first two, and shooting weapons had to do the latter three. And being able to split fire makes putting a psyker in a unit with witchfire powers less of a handicap, like often a heavy or special weapon in a squad can be as well. Changes to splitfire also seems to address the problem of "wasted" shots somewhat as well.

Putting all the psychic powers in one phase does streamline things. While many of the powers affect different things, they all tended to last until the start of the next turn anyways, so doing them at the same time is not going to make any major difference. Having them go off after movement and before shooting also opens up a lot of flexability compared to the current mix where some were start of the turn, some were in the shooting phase, some were done other times. But I also would rather see Flat Out and Run be lumped back into the movement phase to streamline that as well.

Agree with all of that!

Now that you mention it.. run and flat out really should be in the movement! to that effect I generally always do it in the movement phase anyway (just ask my opponent first).

 insaniak wrote:

 Leth wrote:
Also the psychic phase is there to consolidate all the powers into one phase instead of dealing with them all over the place. Simplifies it instead of remember start of turn, or start of psykers movement, or start of shooting, or during shooting, or start of assault phase, or after charging etc. Its all done at once.

By that logic, we should also have a 'special abilities' phase. And possibly a 'Rapid Fire' phase, a 'Heavy' phase and a 'Move Your Vehicles' phase.

Having the different types of psychic powers function at different times during the turn was never a problem, because they all affect different things. Dropping them all out into a separate phase was uneccessary, and breaks the flow of the game even further than the current IGYG system does already.

And the silliness of allowing a psyker to cast multiple wychfires and then still also get to shoot his ranged weapon?

Except all of those happen in one phase with no required order.

Psykers have fixed time in multiple phases that they can cast. Not quite comparable.

bodazoka wrote:
Now that you mention it.. run and flat out really should be in the movement! to that effect I generally always do it in the movement phase anyway (just ask my opponent first).

They were specifically moved out of the movement phase to make it easier for players to remember them. Previous editions saw the common mistake of players running or moving flat out and then forgetting about it and trying to shoot in the shooting phase.

 insaniak wrote:

bodazoka wrote:
Now that you mention it.. run and flat out really should be in the movement! to that effect I generally always do it in the movement phase anyway (just ask my opponent first).

They were specifically moved out of the movement phase to make it easier for players to remember them. Previous editions saw the common mistake of players running or moving flat out and then forgetting about it and trying to shoot in the shooting phase.

Funny, for me and most people i know, it's easier to keep straight in the movement phase.

 Lobukia wrote:
Funny, for me and most people i know, it's easier to keep straight in the movement phase.

It's easier to remember in a shooting phase that you already ran that unit in the previous phase than it is to just run the unit in the shooting phase?


To each his own, I guess.

Some of you need to remember that the rulebook is not out YET. So we still may see the much needed fix to assault (and deep striking assault)

there might still be plenty of stuff left for us to discover

My big thing that I would like to see is a slight change to Heavy vehicles, specifically how snapfire works.

I'd like to be able to snap fire a flamer or heavy flamer from an ordnance firing tank such as a Demolisher. I'd happily pay the points to be able to mount a pair of heavy flamer sponsons on my demolisher provided I could then fire the demolisher cannon at a target while still being able to drop flamer templates on the same nearby squad. Even if it's only D3 hits per flamer a-la the overwatch rule for flamers, so long as you can reach the squad in question with the flamer template, they should be able to fling promethium at them.

Or, even better, I wish that the Heavy Vehicle rule allowed you to fire an ordnance weapon and one other weapon at full BS while moving 6" or less (at the same target of course, not trying to horn in on PotMS here). Any other weapons firing would be snap shots, but at least it gives you the option to mount a lascannon to the hull of you LRBT and use it to it's full effectiveness versus paying the points for it and hoping for a 6 every turn while you fling battlecannon shells around. Heavy Vehicle would also allow you to move up to 6" and, provided you didn't fire an ordnance weapon, fire all weapons on the vehicle at full BS.

Those are what I'm hoping for. I doubt either of these will come in to play, but as they say, a man can dream.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

I would like to see the "you go, I go" mechanic removed.

Make it more action/response type.

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
I would like to see the "you go, I go" mechanic removed.

Make it more action/response type.

I feel that removing IGYG would slow the game down even more. With the game expanding to 100+ models(generally speaking), I don't think it would really be feasible. And the difference in numbers of units on the field could just ruin the experience for one or both players- either someone gets extra turns, or one player gets a bunch of models that sit there for the entire game. The unit by unit works fine for smaller scale games, but I feel 40k has gotten a little too big for that. Not to mention the upkeep involved to remember who activated or not.

 Sinful Hero wrote:

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
I would like to see the "you go, I go" mechanic removed.

Make it more action/response type.

I feel that removing IGYG would slow the game down even more. With the game expanding to 100+ models(generally speaking), I don't think it would really be feasible. And the difference in numbers of units on the field could just ruin the experience for one or both players- either someone gets extra turns, or one player gets a bunch of models that sit there for the entire game. The unit by unit works fine for smaller scale games, but I feel 40k has gotten a little too big for that. Not to mention the upkeep involved to remember who activated or not.

You could organize your army into "detachments" of several units which activate together.

 Eldarain wrote:

 Sinful Hero wrote:

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
I would like to see the "you go, I go" mechanic removed.

Make it more action/response type.

I feel that removing IGYG would slow the game down even more. With the game expanding to 100+ models(generally speaking), I don't think it would really be feasible. And the difference in numbers of units on the field could just ruin the experience for one or both players- either someone gets extra turns, or one player gets a bunch of models that sit there for the entire game. The unit by unit works fine for smaller scale games, but I feel 40k has gotten a little too big for that. Not to mention the upkeep involved to remember who activated or not.

You could organize your army into "detachments" of several units which activate together.

There are several ways one could go about it, but I still feel the larger size of 40k games work against it. After a certain point there is too much upkeep- and the game right now is overburdened with memorizing who did what or what tokens it has. A change from IGYG would exacerbate this problem.

I'm most looking forward to the flyer and challenge changes myself. Although honestly, I think GW should give up the ghost and make the game into a modular RPG system. It seems they're headed that way- forging a narrative, requiring opponent's permission, and the extra rules bloat(warlord traits and challenges spring foremost in my mind). A build your own rules system for playing 40k. Have a streamlined set, with optional extra content to add to your game.

 Sinful Hero wrote:
Although honestly, I think GW should give up the ghost and make the game into a modular RPG system. It seems they're headed that way- forging a narrative, requiring opponent's permission, and the extra rules bloat(warlord traits and challenges spring foremost in my mind). A build your own rules system for playing 40k. Have a streamlined set, with optional extra content to add to your game.

So back to Rogue Trader then?

bodazoka wrote:



I believe that accumulative VP's and an ever changing mission structure goes some way to fixing some of the issues above. It is hard to sing the praises of this though as I don't have all the information, it could end up not being a fix but I do believe it is at least an attempt at a fix from GW. When 50 odd games are played and the people more knowledgeable than me on here figure it out I am sure we will have an answer.

Based on the cards we have seen it's just kinda arbitrary. Think of the scouring, you, just like me have likely experienced pretty bad luck in the distribution of vp's to objectives. The problem is that cards do a similar thing, of the 4 cards shown, 2 of them can potentially give the owning player vp's just for picking them up. That doesn't sound very fair to me.