PDA

View Full Version : 6th edition ruleset. Worth coming back to game?



Glocknal
02-08-2012, 01:02
I've been out of the game for a couple years now and getting the itch to come back to 40k. I see GW has dropped the 6th edition ruleset and was wondering how the new ruleset compares to 5th ed. Are codexes backward compatible? How is the overall quality of the rules? I enjoyed 5th edition and wonder what people think of the new ruleset.

Thanks,

Glock

IcedCrow
02-08-2012, 01:53
http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?347704-What-are-peoples-HONEST-views-of-6th-ed-as-a-whole

Scribe of Khorne
02-08-2012, 02:30
If you enjoyed 5th, odds are good you'll enjoy 6th as most (i would say) see it as a minor improvement at worst. I'm enjoying it.

Nymie_the_Pooh
02-08-2012, 04:10
I see sixth as a lateral move rather than being any better or worse than fifth which is saying something as fifth has been my favourite edition from third on up. I'm still waiting to see where the dust settles before I can really decide which I like better, but that is a positive sign in my opnion.

duffybear1988
02-08-2012, 14:22
I have been playing 40k since the dawn of time (Rogue Trader) and while I had some problems with 5th edition, I am finding 6th to be worse than ever.

Here me out before you shoot me down -

1) Vehicles are mostly terrible now. Hit points is a nice idea, but when they are so easy to hit in combat and cover has been nerfed then they really are as fragile as wet loo roll.

2) Random assault. It works in fantasy but just doesn't feel designed for 40k... it's just too random.

3) Transport vehicles. So there have been major changes here, and none of them are good. Transports like Rhinos get to move 12" in the movement phase, but then the troops can't get out. Or the Rhino can move 6" and the troops can get out (and in fact move 6") and shoot. However if the Rhino doesn't move then your troops can get out but can't assault... yeah that really sucks for most armies.

4) Overwatch. A nice idea but terribly written and frankly when your assaulting units have already weathered a turn of shooting after they have disembarked it's not needed at all.

5) Power weapon nerf. I know it was needed but now terminators with stormshields are even harder than in 5th edition WTF? Did they really need a boost? If they were going to do that then stormshields should have taken a hit somewhere.

6) Assault and infiltration/outflank. Why oh why can we no longer assault after infiltrating/outflanking? OK maybe infiltrating and then assaulting is a bit much, but outflanking really?

7) Rapid fire weapons. Too powerful now when compared to assault weapons. Simple as that.

8) Look out sir. God this is a terrible rule and slows the game down so much. People complained about wound allocation in 5th edition but this is worse!!!

9) Challenges. Nice idea but poorly executed. Again something that works in fantasy but doesn't in 40k. I always imagine Indiana Jones fighting the guy with the sword - he just pulls out his pistol and shoots him. We have guns for a reason you know!

10) Lack of support from GW. The FAQs we have been given are useless and bring up more questions than they do provide answers.

Now what I like -

1) Allies. This has been far too long coming and is a nice touch, even if it does pose some serious problems with rules. But then if GW ever managed to write a proper FAQ then these problems may be solved.

2) Missions. More mission scan only be a good thing.

3) Fortifications. Another nice addition that lets you play defensive. Hopefully GW should be making more kits.


Basically my advice is give it a go and see if you like it. I don't, but then we haven't had any decent FAQ's yet. Maybe when they arrive I will actually enjoy a game, but until then there are too many questions that don't have answers.

Also 6th edition really doesn't play well for competitive games I have found.

To be honest I was hoping 6th would be more like 5th edition with a few more missions and a slight vehicle nerf. Instead we got a whole new ruleset simply so GW could sell fliers, fortifications and troops because everyone already has a case full of tanks from 5th edition.

lordbeefy
02-08-2012, 14:28
I love 6th......

overwatch....love it
fliers....great
psychic powers changes....magic
vehicle hull points...excellent
snap shooting...brilliant
allies...the best

there is never any perfect iteration of a ruleset, however this is a very good attempt.

Just for info, I play mainly guard and orks, so i benefit and am punished equally by the changes.

Vaktathi
02-08-2012, 16:12
I've been out of the game for a couple years now and getting the itch to come back to 40k. I see GW has dropped the 6th edition ruleset and was wondering how the new ruleset compares to 5th ed. Are codexes backward compatible? How is the overall quality of the rules? I enjoyed 5th edition and wonder what people think of the new ruleset.

Thanks,

Glock
It all depends on what you are looking for. All the codex books are backwards compatible. However, in terms of the 6E ruleset, it's a very different game than 5th was. If you are looking for a tight tactical ruleset, or like to use tanks, look elsewhere. If you're looking for something where you can just throw down everything from GW that you own and have a crazy scenario play itself out with all sorts of unexpected twists and turns, with lots of cool looking abilities and a lot of visually impressive elements, 6E is for you.

IcedCrow
02-08-2012, 17:24
I have been playing 40k since the dawn of time (Rogue Trader) and while I had some problems with 5th edition, I am finding 6th to be worse than ever.

Here me out before you shoot me down -

1) Vehicles are mostly terrible now. Hit points is a nice idea, but when they are so easy to hit in combat and cover has been nerfed then they really are as fragile as wet loo roll.

2) Random assault. It works in fantasy but just doesn't feel designed for 40k... it's just too random.

3) Transport vehicles. So there have been major changes here, and none of them are good. Transports like Rhinos get to move 12" in the movement phase, but then the troops can't get out. Or the Rhino can move 6" and the troops can get out (and in fact move 6") and shoot. However if the Rhino doesn't move then your troops can get out but can't assault... yeah that really sucks for most armies.

4) Overwatch. A nice idea but terribly written and frankly when your assaulting units have already weathered a turn of shooting after they have disembarked it's not needed at all.

5) Power weapon nerf. I know it was needed but now terminators with stormshields are even harder than in 5th edition WTF? Did they really need a boost? If they were going to do that then stormshields should have taken a hit somewhere.

6) Assault and infiltration/outflank. Why oh why can we no longer assault after infiltrating/outflanking? OK maybe infiltrating and then assaulting is a bit much, but outflanking really?

7) Rapid fire weapons. Too powerful now when compared to assault weapons. Simple as that.

8) Look out sir. God this is a terrible rule and slows the game down so much. People complained about wound allocation in 5th edition but this is worse!!!

9) Challenges. Nice idea but poorly executed. Again something that works in fantasy but doesn't in 40k. I always imagine Indiana Jones fighting the guy with the sword - he just pulls out his pistol and shoots him. We have guns for a reason you know!

10) Lack of support from GW. The FAQs we have been given are useless and bring up more questions than they do provide answers.

..... {snip}

To be honest I was hoping 6th would be more like 5th edition with a few more missions and a slight vehicle nerf. Instead we got a whole new ruleset simply so GW could sell fliers, fortifications and troops because everyone already has a case full of tanks from 5th edition.

Take all of this and reverse it and you have most of my opinion.

Ragnar123
02-08-2012, 18:24
I have been playing since 2nd edition and i must say that i am loving this ruleset. Vehicles are very balanced now and i truly believe that people that say that they are nerfed to "unusability" are people that have not really played many a game and if they do play they are not very good at the "startegy" part. Anyways, why not just give it a try with what you have and see if you like it.

althathir
02-08-2012, 18:40
I have been playing since 2nd edition and i must say that i am loving this ruleset. Vehicles are very balanced now and i truly believe that people that say that they are nerfed to "unusability" are people that have not really played many a game and if they do play they are not very good at the "startegy" part. Anyways, why not just give it a try with what you have and see if you like it.

Have to agree, vehicles are still pretty solid, its just a 35pt transports aren't moble bunkers anymore... which is pretty great.

Vaktathi
02-08-2012, 18:47
The problem is that vehicles seem to have been hammered thinking everything is a 35pt rhino, when very few things are 35pt rhinos except...rhinos. ;)

IcedCrow
02-08-2012, 19:02
You also have to realize a lot of guys that say they are useless are the type of people that are looking for units that are good at almost everything and/or have weaknesses that are not glaring. If a unit is only good at a certain thing or has a counter to it that is obvious, they will call it useless.

BooTMGSG
02-08-2012, 19:07
Vehicles are now more effective, but less durable.
HUll points mean that most vehicles are going to drop by the end of the fight (depending on number and type)
However, now that glancing does not give a roll on the table, you are less likely to be Stunned/Shaken/weapon loss.
So while your tank is going to die, it is more likely to get some shots off first.
Added bonus, owner gets to choose which weapon is destoyed. Fireprism main gun or Twin linked Shuriken cattapult, Demolisher cannon or Storm bolter?
This is a significant boost to all these one gun (+ defensive gun) tanks.

Open top vehicles also receive a slight boost as glancing hits are not as dangerous, (although pens will still wreak them)
This is good because for assault units, open top or assault ramps are the only way to go.

Finally cover, bad news its usually going to be 5+, the good news it is usually going to be 5+, getting cover is easier.

Overal I'm happy with 6th, its added a fair bit of flexibility that could make for some interesting senario games.

althathir
02-08-2012, 19:09
The problem is that vehicles seem to have been hammered thinking everything is a 35pt rhino, when very few things are 35pt rhinos except...rhinos. ;)

I don't know about that.

Chimeras were in the same boat as rhinos
DE vehicles got tougher (open topped glances used to be brutal)
Crons were built for this edition
Ork vehicles are bit hit & miss but aren't bad (battle wagons got worse but are still solid, trucks weren't effected too much)
Daemons vehicles are too new for me to have a handle on tbh.

Eldar & tau are the big losers, but thats what happens when your codex was designed for 2 editions ago.

The battle tank options are still fairly tough IMO.

Goshawk
02-08-2012, 19:15
You also have to realize a lot of guys that say they are useless are the type of people that are looking for units that are good at almost everything and/or have weaknesses that are not glaring. If a unit is only good at a certain thing or has a counter to it that is obvious, they will call it useless.

Case in point: Rough Riders

I've been playing since 2nd edition and I am really liking this edition so far. It's a lot of fun to play, and doesn't promote winning over fun. Vehicles are really well balanced and the assault phase got a little more depth to it. One of the best things about it though is the direction GW is moving in. Realism, that makes sense in this kind of game. Just the little things; like throwing grenades, wounds taken from the front, snipers actually sniping, and quite a bit more.

I like the direction. They aren't quite there yet, but they are closer than ever before to having a balanced and well thought out game. Once they get this down, then they can move onto incorporating rules for tournaments and competitive play.

Vaktathi
02-08-2012, 19:18
Vehicles are now more effective, but less durable.
HUll points mean that most vehicles are going to drop by the end of the fight (depending on number and type)
However, now that glancing does not give a roll on the table, you are less likely to be Stunned/Shaken/weapon loss. Glancing hits only, and quite often when you're taking glancing hits, you're taking multiples, meaning you may end up dead where before you'd just be silenced. Or you end up in a situation where you can shoot, but you're down to 1 HP and the next thing that merely meets the AC will kill you. People are making way too much of the "but you can still shoot after glancing". Glances don't typically happen in isolation (meaning you may be taking 2 or 3, which means dead), or in the case of big guns are a minority result (e.g. Lascannon vs AV12 is going to have 3 pens to each glance) and thus the impact of glancing hits not rolling on a chart is lessened.



So while your tank is going to die, it is more likely to get some shots off first. Most vehicles on average require half or less the firepower to destroy. A Rhino for instance will take ~9 Autocannon hits to kill between HP's and pen chance to destroy, before it averaged 18. Drastically reduced lifespan, and you only get to keep shooting on glances.



Added bonus, owner gets to choose which weapon is destoyed. Fireprism main gun or Twin linked Shuriken cattapult, Demolisher cannon or Storm bolter? This part *is* nice, but situational.



This is a significant boost to all these one gun (+ defensive gun) tanks. It's more of an off-set. They'll likely die much faster, making weapon destruction sort of moot in many cases, and have a much more restricted mobility given that half the troops in the game will almost assuredly destroy any vehicle they get into combat with in one round thanks to the CC to-hit nerf as well.




Open top vehicles also receive a slight boost as glancing hits are not as dangerous, (although pens will still wreak them)
This is good because for assault units, open top or assault ramps are the only way to go. These types of vehicles are often the quickest to do down now since they are highly susceptible to suffering large numbers of glancing hits. A Raider for instance has only a slightly less than average chance of a round of rapid firing bolters not bringing it down.

Vehicles also cannot score even with embarked troops nor can they contest at all, greatly de-valuing vehicles that don't have meaningful shooting when the time comes.



Finally cover, bad news its usually going to be 5+, the good news it is usually going to be 5+, getting cover is easier. In effect, a wash once you average it out with the previous edition. Not a nerf or a buff either way, just a change.

The only clear buff was that vehicles can still shoot after taking a glancing hit. Aside from that, they have signficantly shorter lifespans, are hideously vulnerable in assaults (a charging tac squad will find it easier to kill a moving Leman Russ than they will 2 other marines), and significantly less utility in terms of objective control.



I don't know about that.

Chimeras were in the same boat as rhinosSort of, but I'll concede it for now, however there are large numbers of vehicles that are not chimeras either. Hellhounds, Basilisks, Griffons, Manticores, Leman Russ tanks, etc. These are significatly more expensive vehicles, often by several multiples, that don't offer triple the value when they die just as easily. They hammered what would have been a code costing issue with a core rules nerf.



DE vehicles got tougher (open topped glances used to be brutal)hrm, dunno about that, often they'll take enough glances to put them down either way.



Crons were built for this edition And suspiciously have more hull points on their transport than a Leman Russ does...



Ork vehicles are bit hit & miss but aren't bad (battle wagons got worse but are still solid, trucks weren't effected too much) trukks die either way, I've yet to see a Battlewagon make it across the board however, they die much too quickly in the 3 games I've seen them in so far.


Eldar & tau are the big losers, but thats what happens when your codex was designed for 2 editions ago. True, but I don't see their vehicles becoming significantly cheaper either.



The battle tank options are still fairly tough IMO.As long as nothing can get into base contact, but still much easier to kill than they were previously.





Effectively what has happened is that vehicles have been turned into T6-10 W3 models with no save that are WS0 or WS1 at best, that have a chance to suffer Instant Death or some sort of crippling on any to-wound roll that exceeds the minimum required to hurt them, and about 90% are reduced to T6 in CC despite what they would otherwise be.

Inevitable
02-08-2012, 19:22
I don't know about that.

Chimeras were in the same boat as rhinos
DE vehicles got tougher (open topped glances used to be brutal)
Crons were built for this edition
Ork vehicles are bit hit & miss but aren't bad (battle wagons got worse but are still solid, trucks weren't effected too much)
Daemons vehicles are too new for me to have a handle on tbh.

Eldar & tau are the big losers, but thats what happens when your codex was designed for 2 editions ago.

The battle tank options are still fairly tough IMO.

What models die first by shooting (Wound allocation) is better for gameplay imo. Although it is sometimes hard to beleive the 1 Term Sergant in Spacewolves taking 25 Devourer shots for his entire squad and not dying :) Gameplay wise it provides a Risk -v- Reward scenario. When it works the sergeant effectively tanks/protects his squad. When it does, the pricey defense vaporizes.

Hull point wise, they have the right idea. It may need a bit of tweaking and/or Hull-point increases on same expensive vehicles, but it works very well now.

Where I'm from a lot of us didn't play 5th edition. 6th Edition has created alot more options which increases complexity. Allies, Fortification, Flyers, increase of availability of cover although decreasing effectiveness, and enhanced Psyker system has created a heavy layer of complexity, army building, and tactics moreso than 5th.

It's just my personal opinion, but in 5th the game wasn't very fun. In 6th the game is fun. Time will tell if that changes, but I've enjoyed the changes.

duffybear1988
02-08-2012, 19:26
I have been playing since 2nd edition and i must say that i am loving this ruleset. Vehicles are very balanced now and i truly believe that people that say that they are nerfed to "unusability" are people that have not really played many a game and if they do play they are not very good at the "startegy" part. Anyways, why not just give it a try with what you have and see if you like it.

What a load of rubbish.

The only vehicles that are now balanced are main line battle tanks. GW have weakened transports far to much to make them worthwhile.

Of course SOME transports could have been helped out by the FAQs. The Devilfish and Wave Serpent could really have done with getting a bonus or a points drop. As it stands Eldar basically have no combat ability because of the nerf to transports.

Most of the problems boil down to the fact that GW fail whenever it comes to updating a codex or writing an FAQ. They could have taken the time to rework units and adjust points costs, but they didn't... all they did was give us the "Please ignore this line" cut and paste job.

I mean they take the time to put special rules like split fire and crusader into the rulebook, but then fail to apply them to armies that could really do with a boost. GW even managed to remove target locks from the Tau but didn't give them split fire! How did that happen?

If and when they finally get around to updating the army lists or put out decent FAQs then 6th edition may be enjoyable. Until then it is a bad ruleset.

Oh and Ragnar123 - I have always been good at the "strategy" part. Sadly 6th edition took all of the strategy away and replaced it with random tables and pointless rules!

Goshawk
02-08-2012, 20:28
What a load of rubbish.

The only vehicles that are now balanced are main line battle tanks. GW have weakened transports far to much to make them worthwhile.

Of course SOME transports could have been helped out by the FAQs. The Devilfish and Wave Serpent could really have done with getting a bonus or a points drop. As it stands Eldar basically have no combat ability because of the nerf to transports.

Most of the problems boil down to the fact that GW fail whenever it comes to updating a codex or writing an FAQ. They could have taken the time to rework units and adjust points costs, but they didn't... all they did was give us the "Please ignore this line" cut and paste job.

I mean they take the time to put special rules like split fire and crusader into the rulebook, but then fail to apply them to armies that could really do with a boost. GW even managed to remove target locks from the Tau but didn't give them split fire! How did that happen?

If and when they finally get around to updating the army lists or put out decent FAQs then 6th edition may be enjoyable. Until then it is a bad ruleset.

Oh and Ragnar123 - I have always been good at the "strategy" part. Sadly 6th edition took all of the strategy away and replaced it with random tables and pointless rules!


I'll have to agree with you on the fact that GW is notorius for terribly unhelpful and useless FAQ's and Erratas. They are a chance for horrendously broken and worthless units and rules to be fixed. Instead GW consistantly drops the ball and does nothing but complicate things further than they had been before while adressing nothing that needed to be adressed.

However, they did not take "all" strategy away. Not by a long shot. Some random things were added for better or for worse (and sometimes it seems as though they change things simply for the sake of change) but there is still a strong emphasis on purely strategical aspects of the game like list building, deployment, movement, and target prioritization.

BooTMGSG
02-08-2012, 22:16
Most vehicles on average require half or less the firepower to destroy. A Rhino for instance will take ~9 Autocannon hits to kill between HP's and pen chance to destroy, before it averaged 18. Drastically reduced lifespan, and you only get to keep shooting on glances.

I do not deny they are less durable, I'm just not sure you should solely be concerned with firepower to destory. How do the systems compare when considering firepower to neutralise? Single weapon vehicles and transport can be neutralised without destoying either for the turn with shaken and stunned, or weapon destoyed and immobilised.
In 6th stuned and shaken arn't complete lock downs, weapon destoyed isn't either (although looking over its actually random, and not owner chooses as I stated before.)
The way I see it, vehicles need more to neutralise less to destroy.
Are they going to be the dominant force in 6th, no.
Do they still have a role to play yes.
I suspect as vehicles lose their prominance so will the amount of anti vehicle weapons being fielded will reduced now the parking lots are gone. And so the mighty Rhino can once again frolick across the battle field.

As for the Faqs, I'm reserving my judgement, GW could be waiting to see how things fall. The first Faqs were to get the lingo into 6th edition, expect codex tweeking to happen once the dust settles.

onidemon
02-08-2012, 23:49
From a personal perspective, I played Orks in 5th edition. Orks are, of course, a close combat oriented army, so I ran thirty ork mobs, with a nob who had a power klaw, and would plow them at you as fast as I could. Actually, I still do this, but look at how it goes:

5th edition:
I am generally in close combat by turn two, thanks to running rules and the Waaagh abilty to run and then assault on turn two. In close combat, my boys handle lightly armored targets, my nob kills heavily armored targets with a power klaw. You will never kill my nob until you kill the twenty nine ablative wounds I brought with him, as casualties are taken from the rear in assault. Consequently, fights against Terminators or Defilers are completely one sided affairs, as their attacks are wasted on filler orks, while the nob hits back without fear of being in danger. Your only option is to shoot all the orks before I get there, but good luck on that, as shooting casualties are taken from the rear too, so it's not going to slow me down any.

6th edition:
I may never get to you, if you concentrate your fire on my orks. As casualties come from the front now, I am pressed back by shooting. I cannot run and then assault, so my waaagh no longer gets me there sooner, it just lets me re-roll my charge dice, which may still cause a charge to fail. Further, my nob can't march around in the front showing off anymore, because he'd be the first one on the dead pile if he did. If I do make it, you unload your guns on me as I rush in, possibly elimating more of my front line. The terminators who stood no chance before now have a character model in the form of the Sarge who can call my nob out into a duel; I can accept, or tell the boyz to deal with this skumgrot and go lurk in the back like a coward. Now, that will never happen, so depending on the luck of the dice, the Sarg may lop a nobz head off with a power sword before he can even swing that klaw. Suddenly, close combat isn't so sure a thing; the enemy has a zillion ways of dealing with me, and just running right at them will now only work some of the time.

Now, here's the question: how should I respond?

If the answer is: "I hate this! They ruined my orks! How am I supposed to get to do anything when you can shoot me off the board before I can even get close? This is so unbalanced I can't stand it! I had practically no way of dealing with armor before, and now GW took away the only good one I had!" you will not enjoy 6th edition.

If the answer is: "My nob isn't invulnerable anymore! Wow, my whole army is built around power klaw nobs in big mobs of boyz, and that doesn't work now. Maybe I'd better field an extra warboss and have him go with the largest mob to handle challengers, and then have a squad of expendable grotz charge in first to absorb the overwatch fire - hey, that would really fit with the established Ork background! If that doesn't work though, I have some other ideas I'd like to try." then you will enjoy 6th edition.

Neither answer is right, it's just a guide to how much fun you'll have in 6th edition. :)

Glocknal
03-08-2012, 00:26
Thanks for the feedback guys. I get the feeling that GW is moving away from heavily mech/CC oriented gameplay and allowing a more open force selection. I think I will like that, just got to get out there and play some games. Thanks for the feedback warseers! You guys still rock :)

The_Klobb_Maniac
03-08-2012, 06:29
6th is my favorite so far. 5th was a step in the right direction, 6th fixed the goofy problems of 5th (or at least a good lot of them.)

The game just became a lot more intuitive, interesting, encouraging more fluffy builds, more variety in lists (potentially) and allowing codices with abhorrently designed force org charts (Orks, Nids, CSM, sort of Eldar) to get around the problem. What's more? It's done well. GW tightened up the rules while making the game more fun IMO, and making the rules just.. make more sense. Things like "you can only shoot at models you can see, but models way out of range, being that building over there can be taken as casualties. Ur welcs" is out. While it was neat to do that strategically you always nagged in the back of your head "this makes no sense."

Now when the blast hits.. you kill models near the blast! How.. normal! When you shoot a unit, you shoot the guy near you! Units only half in cover? You can just shoot the ones out of cover!

The game cleaned up, dropped a lot of it's gaminess, and IMO became a more balanced game in the process. You can still expect a lot of vehicles, but you can actually deal with them at a reasonable pace now; which just about any army. Oh, and everyone can deal with Psykers now too; which is nice.

mattschuur
03-08-2012, 12:33
6th is not balanced. Now, I want to clarify before people start saying things of which they know nothing about. 1.) I've been playing since 3rd. 2.) I've played over 30 games in 6th. 3.) I own 7 armies. {not bias} and 4.) I'm not simply a competitive nor fun player as I enjoy both.

Now, Besides the randomness, which is either really beneficial or really pointless, this edition has major flaws.
1.) vehicles are now greatly reduced in abilities. Sure, I can shoot my guns more often, but they can't contest, cover's worse, models inside can't score, they're easier to hit in CC, they're easier to kill at range, and can die simply to glancing hits. They are not better or more versatile. Some still have some capabilities, but only a few.

2.) Flyers right now are just to good, and against some armies overpowered. 6's to hit, jink save, can't be assaulted and worst of all the fact they basically ignore rolls of 2, 3 and 5 on the damage chart. Why isn't an immobolized flyer crashing? Why does it basically ignore the basic definition of Immobolized. What about Stunned? Sure it can't shoot, but it ignores the other half. 6's to hit fine, jink save fine, no assault fine, but ignoring or being only slightly inconvenienced on the damage chart is way way to much.
3.) The death of assault armies. This is kind of connected to flyers. My world eater army has nothing at all to deal with flyers. Which forces me to break theme and take a havoc squad or emplacements, which is just stupid. Jump blood angels are the same way. Orks have less cover, less movement, random assault and their enemies can kill them earlier and faster. People complained they were to cheap at 6 points, now they aren't worth 6 points. Now they get shot an extra turn, shot when they charge, have weaker cover and the cover kills them. And while fearless was changed to a benefit, it's less likely to be useful. Nids are the same as orks, except they don't have loota's. And lets not forget Daemons. What this does is limit army building. If I'm facing a flyer I "have" to take certain things in order to have a chance to destroy them. An aegis defense line with an auto-cannon combined with an at unit and I could have lost 1/4th of my points to deal with 1/14 of my opponents. You could still build lists the way you want, but while losing can still be fun, losing when you don't have a way to handle a part of your opponents army isn't.

Sure, flakk missiles will help, but it won't help Orks, Daemons, Nids, Tau or Dark eldar? They either have nothing or 1 thing. And if you think any opponent isn't going to kill that one thing as fast as possible, your naive. Any games system that forces it's players to take specific things to deal with one aspect of their opponents army is a bad game system.

FYI, there are some things I like about this edition, but they pale in comparison to it's flaws. Necrons got such a huge boost it's stupid. They have the only flyers who when they do die their models inside don't die. They're basic guns mow down tanks. They're guns , tesla, mows down light infantry. They have better feel no pain, they are now cheap and capable of taking the most flyers. I have yet to have a good fun game against them. People screamed bloody murder about Grey knights, well Necrons are worse. It takes me back to 3rd with the daemon bombs, iron warriors and blood angel rhino rush.

Matt Schuur

A.T.
03-08-2012, 12:43
Now when the blast hits.. you kill models near the blast! How.. normal!Mortar sniping is perhaps not the best thing to bring up when calling 6th ed less goofy...

malisteen
03-08-2012, 12:57
Yeah, 6th ed's at best a lateral shift towards goofiness. For a beer and pretzels game it can be fun, for a more competitive or tactical game, not so much, at least not right now (new codeces may fix it with time).

Right now, though, assault units and ground vehicles have taken a bit too much of a nerf, flying vehicles are a bit too strong, and the targeting & allocation rules, while different, are just as prone to wonkiness & abuse as ever.

On the other hand, allies, fortifications, & new scenarios are fun. Not balanced, but fun, at least for casual games. I'm enjoying 6th so far, but then again I'm decidedly a casual player, and am not above asking whether my opponent is willing to refrain from spamming flyers or abusing allocation rules before agreeing to a game.

Megad00mer
03-08-2012, 13:03
I can't remember the last time I enjoyed the game this much. I feel 6th edition is a huge improvement over 5th. The rules feel like they make a lot more sense and the game feels very cinematic because of it.

Random Charges: While some hate this change with teeth gnashing fury I personally think it makes every assault much more exciting. Most people only point out the potential down sides. "I was only 5" away and rolled a 4 on 2D6! I hate random charges!" What you don't hear very often (this being the internets and all) is units being 8-9" away and making a successful charge which can happen just as often. It's risk vs reward and I love how it plays.

Overwatch: Even though I play Tyranids and am normally on the receiving end of Overwatch, I think it's another factor that makes Assault more exciting. It also gives the player being assaulted something to do other than just stand there drooling.

Snap-Fire: Yes, Snap-Fire is resolved at BS1, but would you rather not be able to fire at all?

Wound Allocation: Abusable to a point but also makes movement a lot more tactical. Flanking an enemy unit is a thing in 40k now. I think that's awesome.

Flyers: They're tons of fun to use and not nearly as powerful and game breaking as some would have you believe. They're fast and very hard to hit but also severely lack maneuverability. At best a Flyer will get 2-3 turns of shooting per game if not shot down.

Vehicles and Hull Points: I feel this change has balanced vehicles out very well. Vehicles are more fragile but also much more effective while they are still "alive". 6th has also made transports into well....transports. Vehicles you use to get you where you need to go, then you get the hell out of it, not mobile homes you sit in for 6 turns.

The best part of the 6th edition vehicle rules is that game tables will stop looking like damn parking lots. You'll actually see boots on the ground again. Not to say Vehicles "suck" now. Far from it. They are balanced. Still worth taking but no longer must have.

If you're a hardcore, math-hammerin, unit spammin, fluff be damned, WAAC type player, then you probably won't enjoy 6th edition very much. Otherwise, I think it's far and away the best 40k I've played and I started at the beginning of 3rd.

IcedCrow
03-08-2012, 13:43
You have to realize that for people who say vehicles are useless, they are often the same people who only take units that are good at everything and whose weaknesses either don't exist or are hard to exploit (cost effective)

Vehicles now have weaknesses that are not difficult to exploit, and as such those style of players have called them "useless" because there is much more risk in taking them now (not guaranteed to be cost effective).

malisteen
03-08-2012, 14:23
Of course, if you're worried about that kind of thing, fliers now are extremely cost effective, with far fewer weaknesses that are much harder to exploit than those of any vehicles in 5th edition. That may change as new codeces are released, but it's certainly an issue now.

IcedCrow
03-08-2012, 14:39
Exactly which is why those same people are fielding as many flyers as possible. 9 night scythe necron armies...

Vaktathi
03-08-2012, 15:44
You have to realize that for people who say vehicles are useless, they are often the same people who only take units that are good at everything and whose weaknesses either don't exist or are hard to exploit (cost effective) Hooray generalizations...:shifty:



Vehicles now have weaknesses that are not difficult to exploit, and as such those style of players have called them "useless" because there is much more risk in taking them now (not guaranteed to be cost effective).The problem with vehicles is that they simply die too quickly and are far too vulnerable to CC, and this game has no effective infantry support mechanics (you have the options of A: Bodyblock or B: try and kill anything that gets close), unlike say, Flames of War, where infantry can fire with full effect at attackers attempting to assault nearby tanks and force failure of the assault through volume of fire and pinning the attackers down.

Tanks in 40k die roughly twice as fast as they did in the previous edition, and are almost guaranteed to die in assaults against anything with krak/emp/haywire grenades (available on a majority of the armies in the game as standard or purchaseable equipment on basic troops) no matter possible defensive measures the vehicle can take if an opponent makes it in.

malisteen
03-08-2012, 16:07
Exactly which is why those same people are fielding as many flyers as possible. 9 night scythe necron armies...

Point is, it's a lateral shift at best. If you didn't like unbalanced units dominating the game, 6e's still got that. They're just different units. In fact, it arguably has it even worse, since few of the vehicles spammed in 5e were anything like as difficult to deal with as a pile of scythes.

darthslowe
03-08-2012, 16:15
I like 6th. It makes the game seem more like a narrative. My friends and I generally play tons of campaigns and this rule set has made it so our idea of what our awesome characters are doing is similar to what is happening on tabletop. I've been playing since 3rd and this is my favorite edition yet.

IcedCrow
03-08-2012, 16:40
No doubt. There will always be unbalance in 40k. Optimizers will continue to break the game no matter what edition you are in. If you don't like unbalanced units dominating the game, you have to play against people that aren't looking to break the game.

Ragnar123
03-08-2012, 17:49
What a load of rubbish.

The only vehicles that are now balanced are main line battle tanks. GW have weakened transports far to much to make them worthwhile.

Of course SOME transports could have been helped out by the FAQs. The Devilfish and Wave Serpent could really have done with getting a bonus or a points drop. As it stands Eldar basically have no combat ability because of the nerf to transports.

Most of the problems boil down to the fact that GW fail whenever it comes to updating a codex or writing an FAQ. They could have taken the time to rework units and adjust points costs, but they didn't... all they did was give us the "Please ignore this line" cut and paste job.

I mean they take the time to put special rules like split fire and crusader into the rulebook, but then fail to apply them to armies that could really do with a boost. GW even managed to remove target locks from the Tau but didn't give them split fire! How did that happen?

If and when they finally get around to updating the army lists or put out decent FAQs then 6th edition may be enjoyable. Until then it is a bad ruleset.

Oh and Ragnar123 - I have always been good at the "strategy" part. Sadly 6th edition took all of the strategy away and replaced it with random tables and pointless rules!

So you are arguing that mainline battle tanks are balanced (which is a good thing) and that transports are far too weak to be used (especially tau devilfish and eldar wave serpents)? So by your logic then you will have your troops run around the battlefield and walk to the objectives? I'm pretty sure that would not go over very well for you against a well designed list.

Also, i'm not claiming the devilfish and waveserpents are balanced, being that they come from 2 very very old codecies but i also find the internet tends to exaggerate how good/bad things are.

The Devilfish is AV 12 in the front, and the only transport option available to the tau. If those firewarriors are going to get to a point (besides their home point) they will probably need to be loaded into 1 of these things. Now last i checked small arms fire is, generally speaking, going to do absolutely nothing to this vehicle meaning that the opponent is going to have to bust out their "bigger guns" and if someone is trying to knock off 3 hullpoints from my 1 of however many devil fish i have that means they are not shooting my broadsides and xv8 suits (i.e. the stuff that actually causes damage in my army) so all the power to them, my turns will hurt alot more than theirs.

The same logic goes for the waveserpent. It is armour 12 with a 5+/4+ coversave depending on how far it moves. Also, nothing will be more than strength 8 against it so its not so easy a nut to crack (or glance). In terms of it being nerfed for the eldar, i can't see where this nerf really is because banshees (who have always been a pretty sucky unit) and scorpians could never charge out of a wave serpent before and dire avengers could always just get out and shoot stuff so their "power" remains undiminished. With that in mind, eldar have never had combat ability because of anything to do with their transports. Their combat ability has always come from jetbike seer council with farseer and eldrad casting fortune on an avatar and himself.

In terms of the faq, GW could have done more but i'm guessing that is what they are going to do when they release their new codicies.

Now, at the end there you mentioned 6th is a bad ruleset. While i am not overly fond of certian random events in the game, i would hardly say it is a bad ruleset. In fact i would say it is a very clear, concise and well written rule set that makes for enjoyable games (and i do enjoy playing fluffy and hard tournament armies). There is still plenty of opportunity to implement and use a strategy and i think that good players will definitely score top positions in tournaments cosistently (meaning that skill > luck so that the randomness is not actually detracting as much as people like to say it is on the internet).

I guess, to wrap it up, all i am trying to say is that i diagree with your points duffy and, in fact, almost anyones point that is along the lines of "6th sucks because vehicles suck and randomness and blah blah blah" especially since they are never backed by anything.

duffybear1988
03-08-2012, 17:53
I don't even think that we will end up seeing lots of infantry, at least not basic infantry. With the reduced value of cover these days you have to be a complete fool not to spam vindicators/demolishers.

The most powerful armies are just going to spam units that have 2+ saves/decent invulnerable saves, high strength/low AP weapons, and fast units.

So basically terminators, vindicators and bikes.

Vaktathi
03-08-2012, 17:56
The Devilfish is AV 12 in the front, and the only transport option available to the tau. If those firewarriors are going to get to a point (besides their home point) they will probably need to be loaded into 1 of these things. Now last i checked small arms fire is, generally speaking, going to do absolutely nothing to this vehicle meaning that the opponent is going to have to bust out their "bigger guns" and if someone is trying to knock off 3 hullpoints from my 1 of however many devil fish i have that means they are not shooting my broadsides and xv8 suits (i.e. the stuff that actually causes damage in my army) so all the power to them, my turns will hurt alot more than theirs. This assumes they'd use the same weapons against the same targets, or that they have a lack of such weapons, neither is necessarily true. I'm not dumping autocannons into W2 2+sv models when an AV12 vehicle I just need to ping 3 times is an available target. Likewise I'm not wasting pieplates on an AV12 vehicle when there's a crisis suit unit to shoot at.



The same logic goes for the waveserpent. It is armour 12 with a 5+/4+ coversave depending on how far it moves. Also, nothing will be more than strength 8 against it so its not so easy a nut to crack (or glance). Aside from large volumes of S6/7/8 fire which many armies can pack huge amounts of in. The classical anti-skimmer weapons fit into these categories.


In terms of it being nerfed for the eldar, i can't see where this nerf really is because banshees (who have always been a pretty sucky unit) and scorpians could never charge out of a wave serpent before and dire avengers could always just get out and shoot stuff so their "power" remains undiminished. They couldn't charge if the vehicle moved, they could if the vehicle was stationary. They could move to their destination turn 1, disembark and assault turn 2, now they must wait until turn 3 to charge.


With that in mind, eldar have never had combat ability because of anything to do with their transports. Their combat ability has always come from jetbike seer council with farseer and eldrad casting fortune on an avatar and himself. O_o Methinks we are forgetting some things here...you'll find that Transports have often played a rather large role in Eldar capabilities.

duffybear1988
03-08-2012, 18:04
The Devilfish is AV 12 in the front, and the only transport option available to the tau. If those firewarriors are going to get to a point (besides their home point) they will probably need to be loaded into 1 of these things. Now last i checked small arms fire is, generally speaking, going to do absolutely nothing to this vehicle meaning that the opponent is going to have to bust out their "bigger guns" and if someone is trying to knock off 3 hullpoints from my 1 of however many devil fish i have that means they are not shooting my broadsides and xv8 suits (i.e. the stuff that actually causes damage in my army) so all the power to them, my turns will hurt alot more than theirs.
Tau don't actually put out that much firepower because all of their units are so overpriced. Most armies these days will be able to shoot down 3 or 4 transports in a turn, so your argument doesn't really work.

The same logic goes for the waveserpent. It is armour 12 with a 5+/4+ coversave depending on how far it moves. Also, nothing will be more than strength 8 against it so its not so easy a nut to crack (or glance). In terms of it being nerfed for the eldar, i can't see where this nerf really is because banshees (who have always been a pretty sucky unit) and scorpians could never charge out of a wave serpent before and dire avengers could always just get out and shoot stuff so their "power" remains undiminished. With that in mind, eldar have never had combat ability because of anything to do with their transports. Their combat ability has always come from jetbike seer council with farseer and eldrad casting fortune on an avatar and himself.

Hmmm well just watch as I charge a squad of space marine bikes into that wave serpent and wreck it in combat on turn 2. What's that you moved flat out this turn? Well that pretty much does nothing to help you now.

Regarding banshees and scorpions charging out of vehicles. Check your rules - in the last edition if the transport hadn't moved yet then the unit inside could jump out and assault. This was great as it meant you could zoom up in one turn, and then jump out and assault in the next. These days you have to zoom up. Jump out. Charge. It takes 3 turns instead of 2 and in that time your transport is much easier to destroy and you get pasted by extra turns of shooting and overwatch. This is made even worse when you consider that rapid fire weapons can now shoot 24" even after moving which means there could be lots more guns in range of your assault units.

In terms of the faq, GW could have done more but i'm guessing that is what they are going to do when they release their new codicies.

That doesn't solve any of the problems we have now though does it?

Now, at the end there you mentioned 6th is a bad ruleset. While i am not overly fond of certian random events in the game, i would hardly say it is a bad ruleset. In fact i would say it is a very clear, concise and well written rule set that makes for enjoyable games (and i do enjoy playing fluffy and hard tournament armies). There is still plenty of opportunity to implement and use a strategy and i think that good players will definitely score top positions in tournaments cosistently (meaning that skill > luck so that the randomness is not actually detracting as much as people like to say it is on the internet).

I guess, to wrap it up, all i am trying to say is that i diagree with your points duffy and, in fact, almost anyones point that is along the lines of "6th sucks because vehicles suck and randomness and blah blah blah" especially since they are never backed by anything.

Well I guess I am going to have to completely disagree with you on everything.

Ragnar123
03-08-2012, 19:01
Well I guess I am going to have to completely disagree with you on everything.

In terms of tau not putting out much fire power, i don't know what Tau you are playing against but 3 units of broadsides and 3 units of xv8 battle suits in 1850 points sounds like a lot of firepower to me. In terms of most armies shooting down 3-4 transports per turn, i would like to see this army that does that and doesn't get utterly crushed in the next turn ... what i am getting at is that if you prioritze my devilfish then i will blow up your important stuff and you will be a very unhappy opponent.

With regards to your argument of "watch my bikes charge and kill your X", i can argue that watch my "Y target and kill your bikes before they charge on turn 1" ... this argument doesn't work because everyone will have something that counters something else.

Now, with regards to the tactic of having an Eldar transport that in 5th edition would drive up to my army, (and for some reason i choose not to kill it) and have the banshees/scorpians inside (that somehow survive because i choose not to shoot their transport down and i choose not to assualt or shoot them there-after) charge me on their turn, that was never a feasible startegy to begin with and if that was your strategy then it is a flawed one so you can't assume because this tactic was nerfed then the mighty eldar wave serpent rush filled with banshees was nerfed because it was never existent to begin with.

Looks like we are going to have to agree to disagree then.

Vaktathi
03-08-2012, 19:10
In terms of tau not putting out much fire power, i don't know what Tau you are playing against but 3 units of broadsides and 3 units of xv8 battle suits in 1850 points sounds like a lot of firepower to me. For the points? It's a good amount of AT, but is going to have a much more difficult time hordes, heavy infantry, and MC's. There are other armies able to pack in equal or greater firepower for the same points.


In terms of most armies shooting down 3-4 transports per turn, i would like to see this army that does that and doesn't get utterly crushed in the next turn ... 420pts of Space wolves Long fangs will do that. Any IG gunline will be fully capable of engaging 3 or 4 transports every turn with firepower to spare on other threats.


what i am getting at is that if you prioritze my devilfish then i will blow up your important stuff and you will be a very unhappy opponent. And you are very much underestimating the amount of firepower many armies can bring to the table.
e.



Now, with regards to the tactic of having an Eldar transport that in 5th edition would drive up to my army, (and for some reason i choose not to kill it) and have the banshees/scorpians inside (that somehow survive because i choose not to shoot their transport down and i choose not to assualt or shoot them there-after) Their transports were very difficult to down in 4E and 5E to a lesser extent, especially Falcons, far more often than not they'd live through that turn of fire, unlike now.


charge me on their turn, that was never a feasible startegy to begin with Not all the time, but it was an option they could deploy with some effectiveness sometimes. It was pretty much the only way anyone used Banshees when they were used.

duffybear1988
03-08-2012, 20:30
Ragnar123 no offence intended but how long have you been playing? How many tournaments have you taken part in? What is your local gaming club like? Because frankly if you think that downing 3 or 4 transports is hard then my guess is not many! As Vaktathi said above pretty much every army has a way of shooting up transports early on.

Falcons and Serpents were pretty hard to take apart in combat because if they moved flat out then they only got hit on 6s, and then holofields and the powerfield on the Serpent helped protect them from shooting.

Oh and also the Eldar assault was only an example and could be applied to any other assault army that doesn't have open topped transports... how else do you propose that assault armies get into combat?

You sound way too inexperienced. I have faced the best and the worst lists in heaps of tournaments and friendlies, at one point I was undefeated for 35 straight games of 5th edition with Space Wolves before their new codex (that's right I was winning with the old book... it wasn't as weak as everyone thought). Now I know you probably won't believe me but hey that's the internet for you...

hashrat
03-08-2012, 23:52
Humm.. Sounds like some people in here don't realise that if you play Football with a bouncing bomb, it won't be very enjoyable.
The same people cannot wrap their heads around that fact that Games Workshop do not sell Tournament games.

Shame they think that everyone who plays Football with a actual Football is doing it wrong.

Ragnar123
07-08-2012, 15:33
Ragnar123 no offence intended but how long have you been playing? How many tournaments have you taken part in? What is your local gaming club like? Because frankly if you think that downing 3 or 4 transports is hard then my guess is not many! As Vaktathi said above pretty much every army has a way of shooting up transports early on.

Falcons and Serpents were pretty hard to take apart in combat because if they moved flat out then they only got hit on 6s, and then holofields and the powerfield on the Serpent helped protect them from shooting.

Oh and also the Eldar assault was only an example and could be applied to any other assault army that doesn't have open topped transports... how else do you propose that assault armies get into combat?

You sound way too inexperienced. I have faced the best and the worst lists in heaps of tournaments and friendlies, at one point I was undefeated for 35 straight games of 5th edition with Space Wolves before their new codex (that's right I was winning with the old book... it wasn't as weak as everyone thought). Now I know you probably won't believe me but hey that's the internet for you...

I would hardly say i'm inexperienced. I have been playing since 2nd edition and in 5th i was that guy running 3 missile launcher squads of longfangs with wolflord + thunderwolves death star. For the most part, i am a tournament player and have seen all these armies that people call useless in action which leads me to believe that people theorize things, don't play them and just assume whatever the internet states is true ... which many times, it's not.

Downing 3-4 transports is indeed not so challenging if you focus fire them, but if you focus transports the xv8 battles suits (just as an example i am using the tau) will lay waste to the long fangs and the broadsides will put the hurt on tanks. To truly see what would happen one would have to play out the game, but all i was initially trying to get at is that vehicles of all sorts are not nearly as bad as people make them out to be and that armies like the tau and eldar can still compete (even though their codex is really old and some units are pretty unusable).

Vaktathi
07-08-2012, 16:36
Downing 3-4 transports is indeed not so challenging if you focus fire them, but if you focus transports the xv8 battles suits (just as an example i am using the tau) will lay waste to the long fangs and the broadsides will put the hurt on tanks. Against Tau specifically you probably wouldn't need to worry about the transports at first and could take them out quickly when you needed to later in the game, or in the case of many armies you'd have enough firepower to engage everything, or certain weapons will be better against certain targets than others. Autocannons for instance are going to put to best use against the transports than against the suits, given that it'll take fewer than half the shots to bring down the transports than to try and kill a 3 man crisis suit squad much less a broadside unit.

Against an army like say...Blood Angels or Chaos Marines or Eldar, the transports are going to be your first priority, and vital to your opponents strategy, and bringing them down is significantly easier than they were designed in mind with, and as such you can shut them down *very* quickly now.

Either way, it's significantly easier to shut them down with a lower investment in firepower than it was previously, so if you weren't having a problem over-concentrating on the transports last edition, they certainly won't be an issue this edition.

The_Klobb_Maniac
07-08-2012, 17:13
Against Tau specifically you probably wouldn't need to worry about the transports at first and could take them out quickly when you needed to later in the game, or in the case of many armies you'd have enough firepower to engage everything, or certain weapons will be better against certain targets than others. Autocannons for instance are going to put to best use against the transports than against the suits, given that it'll take fewer than half the shots to bring down the transports than to try and kill a 3 man crisis suit squad much less a broadside unit.

Against an army like say...Blood Angels or Chaos Marines or Eldar, the transports are going to be your first priority, and vital to your opponents strategy, and bringing them down is significantly easier than they were designed in mind with, and as such you can shut them down *very* quickly now.

Either way, it's significantly easier to shut them down with a lower investment in firepower than it was previously, so if you weren't having a problem over-concentrating on the transports last edition, they certainly won't be an issue this edition.


I don't know. The thing about codices *leading up to* 5th was they realized in 4th that vehicles might be dying to easily. They got rid of almost all of the ork AT options (kannons as ordnance, zzaps being any good, no krak nades, loss of TB bombs except on TBs, etc etc etc) Eldar options became exceedingly expensive, Chaos options (tankhunter Havocs for example) were nerfed. Assault cannon prices were going up, pred lascannon prices were going up, etc...

In 5th they realized they had let all hell break loose and these codices suffered for it; but the new ones came out with reasonable firepower. Before the nerfing, these codices had *awesome* AT firepower in 4th and suffered elsewhere (except for Chaos, don't remember Eldar.) In 6th we've gone back to efficient firepower towards the end of 5th, but it wasn't enough for half the armies; Transports were nerfed and we're very much in this awkward time where things haven't adjusted yet.

Vehicles will be fine. The fact is that some armies were null and void because AT was so specialized to them in a meta where it was the only component that mattered.



Now, I have remark on your 4th compared to 6th comments. I want you to note that in 4th:
-Ordnance did more damage
-Glances could kill
-Pens were 5th ed pens
-Rather than modifying the chart, weapons would upgrade to pens (meltas, open-topped, etc.)
-There were no coversaves. They had a *chance* to modify you down to a glance.

In 6th you can nullify results, and indeed with hull points, ignore glances unless they actually kill the vehicle. Yes, now it takes "3" glances to kill a vehicle instead of "on average 6", but it's different, because back then you always had a destroy chance. Now you'll save a full 33% of those glances meaning it takes 4-5 to kill the average vehicle; which isn't crazy different from back then; except that you can save *pens* now too.

To put it another way: Our penetrating hit table is 4th eds *glancing hit* table; plus we have coversaves. I think your entire argument about 4th having stronger vehicles is bunk. It's a wash at best. Some weapons will do it more reliably, but that's to be expected since meltas were nigh useless in 4th (an edition where the Lascannon, Brightlance, Tankhunting Autocannons, Assault cannons, and similar ruled the day.)