PDA

View Full Version : playing a friendly game at home 4th or 5th?



MrBo114
20-07-2008, 02:55
Now that 5th is out and ppl have had a chance to play with it what do you think?

qwertywraith
20-07-2008, 03:05
I really like the objective system in 5th. I have thus far found the games very fun.

Vaktathi
20-07-2008, 03:08
Personally, with the exception of the skimmer rules and CC rules and a couple other small things, I like 4th ed better, mainly because the missions in 5th ed tend to drastically favor one army or the other unless both sides are playing similar armies, whereas I personally feel that they were a bit better in 4th, and I really don't think VP's were all that bad, but KP's are just dumb.

EDIT: Oh, and S4 defensive weapons killed the primary reason to take anti-infantry tanks over heavy weapon infantry alternatives. I really don't see why the change was needed so badly. It basically put me off tanks, which are my favorite units in 40k :P

EldarBishop
20-07-2008, 04:47
Only played one game of 5th thus far. Rules-wise there were a few things that seemed "odd", though we will get used to them as we play more games.

I agree that the defensive weapon changes were probably not needed. The only Troops can hold objectives is quite silly, and will require some army list/comp changes for some of my armies (probably part of GWs plan all along, to make us buy more stuff). VPs were fine, I haven't played a KP game yet...

scarvet
20-07-2008, 05:13
For me, 5th is obviously not make for competitive play by the amount of house rule they suggest you to use. The game itself is way more forgiving for Space marines or any defensive/static build, as well as for shooting. The game is also less predictable due to all the additional rolling.

You can even play 5th ed in skirmish style (i.e 200pts of models, all operate independently) and it will be fun

Seth the Dark
20-07-2008, 05:44
I really do not like the objective system in 5th ed. There really wasn't much thought put into them.

Takitron
20-07-2008, 06:51
Only played one game of 5th thus far. Rules-wise there were a few things that seemed "odd", though we will get used to them as we play more games.

I agree that the defensive weapon changes were probably not needed. The only Troops can hold objectives is quite silly, and will require some army list/comp changes for some of my armies (probably part of GWs plan all along, to make us buy more stuff). VPs were fine, I haven't played a KP game yet...

Yes, it is their plan to snatch the game from all the HARDCORE tournament players and return it to a "just for fun" game.

==Me==
20-07-2008, 06:54
5th all the way. It eliminates a lot of the imbalances from 4th and rewards balanced and fluffy armies over gimmicky stuff like nidzilla and falcon spam.

The rules are tighter, objectives are actually significant, and the game just plays better.

There a few gripes I have, S4 defensives and kill points being the main ones, but overall it is a vast improvement.

blackspring
20-07-2008, 06:58
5th all the way. It eliminates a lot of the imbalances from 4th and rewards balanced and fluffy armies over gimmicky stuff like nidzilla and falcon spam.

The rules are tighter, objectives are actually significant, and the game just plays better.

There a few gripes I have, S4 defensives and kill points being the main ones, but overall it is a vast improvement.

Fully agree except for S4 defensives and kill points, granted I haven't actually played kill points yet, but theory-hammer tells me that I have no problem with them.

I have played six games now and found the game to be much more balanced and the missions are fun. The clarity of the rules has definitely been improved as has the organization by which to find them.

Reaver83
20-07-2008, 07:09
I really like it, i think the kill points is an excellent balance so while some people will take lots and lots of troops to secure objectives, by the same note it puts you at a disadvantage in Kill points, so you need to balance your list... good thing imho

Vaktathi
20-07-2008, 07:16
I really like it, i think the kill points is an excellent balance so while some people will take lots and lots of troops to secure objectives, by the same note it puts you at a disadvantage in Kill points, so you need to balance your list... good thing imho

Just because an army has lots of KP's doesn't mean it has an advantage in objective games, especially if it's very immobile (IG) or has stupid things like tau Gundrones (making mounted Firewarriors 3 KP's)


It eliminates a lot of the imbalances from 4th and rewards balanced and fluffy armies over gimmicky stuff like nidzilla and falcon spam. Personally I've found that Nidzilla only got a minor slap (especially in 2000pt as opposed to 1500pt games, which matters depending on where you play) and Falcons are still hard as hell to kill. I think its the fluffy armies that have suffered the worst. Just because an army has a ton of troops doesn't mean its balanced, nor does it mean its fluffy. 180 ork boyz in any game isn't exactly balanced for most opponents, while armies with only like 3 troops can still be relatively mediocre on power and extremely fluffy.

RazielZian
20-07-2008, 11:35
Its still far too early for me to decide which I like better, but from what i've seen 5th is going to be pretty good, so I'd play that one until I can decide one way or another.

exsulis
22-07-2008, 00:55
4th ed all the way.

6 1/2 games into 5th, and I'm done with this crappy edition.

Bad points
TLOS, whenever you need a laser pointer to check something, it has lost its fun.
Tanks: it is pretty much either shoot, or move
Too many cover saves
Poor rules writting(see the ramming rules)
defensive weapons
Fearless nerf
Kill points sorry it doesn't work in a flexable system like 40K
Certain skimmers are still too hard to kill

iffy changes
Scoring change, it would have been better to label just troop choices
the new wound system, it just seems counter productive half the time
new unified vehicle chart even though it is too high on the high end.
Run rule, it closes the gap too quickly for some armies that shouldn't move that fast. This dates back to each army having a different movement value
The ramming rule, while I like this rule on paper.
the PF nerf, only if it gets readjusted with the newer dexes will it work
The higher BS has meaning, even though it just replaces MCing on ranged

Good points
the change to rending
scout actually means something
blast templates changes
The book is laid out better than it has been in a while

Loki73
22-07-2008, 01:51
5th E is fun. I have played 3 games now. Even guard in a KP mission. Still I like it. TLOS is gonna have some getting used to. With fair opponents its not so bad.

Coragus
22-07-2008, 04:12
You don't have to have had a 5th ed. game yet. GW changed the rules. You're doing yourself, and your friend, a disservice by clinging to 4th. Like 'um or hate 'um, it's too late to complain. GW won't change them again for 4 to 6 years.

Corporal Chaos
22-07-2008, 04:19
I baught the book, I am going to use it.:cool:

Eryx_UK
22-07-2008, 13:04
5th ed all the way. Best version of the game IMO.

Azulthar
22-07-2008, 15:18
It's weird...I was going to type a post about how I preferred 5th edition with a few exceptions...and then noticed how my exception list was growing and growing.

They claim the game is once again designed to be more fun, and rules such as TLoS and blast marker scattering seem to back this up...but a lot of the other rule changes actually once again make everything more streamlined/boring.

I hope the more streamlined core rules allow for more special rules in the codices...

Triggerdog
22-07-2008, 15:30
I'll be using 5th. I paid for the gamer's edition for the snazzy ammo box transport and I'll be using the book that came along with it. My armies are Mechanized Guard and an Armored Company and I have no issue with the new vehicle rules. So what that they cut down defensive weapons? I can ram you now and when a Leman Russ opt's to ram you it's going to hurt. That and it isnt like heavy bolter sponsons are short on range or anything, a Russ can still just sit back and blaze away with them if its battle cannon gets blown off and be fine.

Royal Tiger
22-07-2008, 16:29
gimme 4.5, elements of both

Templar-Sun
22-07-2008, 21:21
5th is great imho. My only problem is not being able to zeal into my opponents. I'll get over it...


Templar-Sun

LeeJerrum
22-07-2008, 22:17
I'll take 4th over 5th any day.

Norsehawk
22-07-2008, 22:19
New rules, might as well start learning them, they aren't going away, just like the CSM codex that people love complaining about.