Official WarSeer Warhammer 40,000 6th Edition discussion thread

[Rhana Dandra]

@Aluinn

^^^

This is what I'm afraid of tbh.

Not only will we now see the same units being spammed from every codex (long fangs, chimera vets, etc.), but now if there aren't too many restrictions, the same list brought by everyone, with the choice units from each codex.

We might have to get used to everyone fielding forces led by Mephiston, backed up with long fangs, dakka dreads, vendettas TH/SS termies, IG vets purifiers etc. etc.

I've no problem with power gaming, but it might just become just a bit too mundane now instead of moving into the variety that I had hoped it would be. Less spamming, more balance.

EDIT: Damn browser making me double-post, sorry...

[Scribe of Khorne]

As of this moment we all know just enough information to make really ignorant decisions about what armies and units are trashed in 6th.

Quote for emphasis!

I would much rather wait till a few minutes after the book is released before seeing 'the sky is falling' '40k is dead just like fantasy (someone forgot to tell fantasy players...)' and assorted kneejerk head up...somewhere, statements.

Will there be a shakeup? Without a doubt. Have a vocal minority decried 5th for YEARS as being little more then 3.2? Sure would seem like it to me. So this is all bad why?

Because that vocal minority just wants to bitch, simple fact of the internet...

I mean how many pages now commenting (to be generous) on allies when we dont have a CLUE of the full rules around it?

[Krayd]

That's an awesome painting!
It's has a Hemi, some Wracks, Grotesque, a raider in the distance, I'm assuming a pain engine above, but what are the female snipers looking figures in the back?

My best guess is that it is a female haemi/acothyst with a hexrifle, hanging out with some female (or feminine, at least) wracks.

[Spell_of_Destruction]

Quote for emphasis!

I would much rather wait till a few minutes after the book is released before seeing 'the sky is falling' '40k is dead just like fantasy (someone forgot to tell fantasy players...)' and assorted kneejerk head up...somewhere, statements.

Will there be a shakeup? Without a doubt. Have a vocal minority decried 5th for YEARS as being little more then 3.2? Sure would seem like it to me. So this is all bad why?

Because that vocal minority just wants to bitch, simple fact of the internet... :evilgrin:

I mean how many pages now commenting (to be generous) on allies when we dont have a CLUE of the full rules around it?

Fine, but clearly people want to speculate on the snippets that we have received which is the whole purpose of the Rumours discussion forum. The odd person may go into rage mode but most of us are just having fun trying to predict how things will turn out.

[Athlan na Dyr]

I swear that some rumours were stating that power weapons were AP 2 still...

As an Eldar player, I'm looking rather forward to the new changes.
+ Hull points seem to be making vehicles a little more destructable
+ Flying transports seem to be good, but it wouldn't suprise me if the transported unit died if they blew up. This would make fighters and AA mounts a hard counter and reduce the "no brainer"-ness of the flying metal box
+ Snipers snipe. Be afraid heavy weapon troopers. Be very afraid
+ Movement based shooting modifiers. Jetbikes are looking very nice at the moment.
+ AP having an effect on penetrating vehicles. Suddenly the Bright Lance might make a return as a decent anti-armour weapon! I'm hoping that AP1 doesn't suddenly blow up a tank 2/3rds of the time. We shall have to wait and see.
+ Psychic powers. Oh my Fing God. Great to see a bit more psychic blastiness making its presence felt. However, due to the numbers of psyker-less armies I would very much doubt that these are game changing, and current rumours seem to support this. Nice to add some variety to the game.
+ Overwatch. I have a sneaking suspicion that this will be in lieu of the previous shooting phase though.
+ No blasted wound allocation crap! Oh, how glad I will be to give this a send off!

The ones I'm not looking as forward to are
- Allies. Though this will very much depend on how it is implemented, it seems that it will favour some armies far more than other (for example, the forever alone nids). Still, nice if you are mid way through collecting another army and helps for Imperial buddies to fight with each other. I remain skeptical as to how well implemented these will be, but if done well, these should be in the 'good' section of changes.
- Rapid Fire. Gets another buff whilst Assault Weapons stay as they are? Of course, assault weapons might have as well, we will have to wait and see.
- More emphasis on shooting. Lower cover, more shots for rapid fire and so on seems to buff the shooting phase making combined assault and shooty armies weaker... That said, there are rumoured changes to BS, so we will have to wait and see how these two interact.

And the ambivalent section.
> Random charge distance. It will still give a reasonable spread and adds a bit of randomness. Hardly impossible to plan for and mitigate randomness.

Here is hoping that the edition favours all builds, be they transport heavy, infantry heavy, flyer heavy, shooty, hitty or a mix of all. I am quitely optimistic.

[Spell_of_Destruction]

Maybe we'll get some wacky back door buffs...

Whatever floats your boat mate!

[Scribe of Khorne]

Fine, but clearly people want to speculate on the snippets that we have received which is the whole purpose of the Rumours discussion forum. The odd person may go into rage mode but most of us are just having fun trying to predict how things will turn out.

Yeah I'm on board with that, but the number of area's that I have already had to 'defend' against nerd rage rants about 6th is growing by the minute. I just feel the need to shout into the incoming storm before it arrives completely.

[Aluinn]

@Aluinn

^^^

This is what I'm afraid of tbh.

Not only will we now see the same units being spammed from every codex (long fangs, chimera vets, etc.), but now if there aren't too many restrictions, the same list brought by everyone, with the choice units from each codex.

We might have to get used to everyone fielding forces led by Mephiston, backed up with long fangs, dakka dreads, vendettas TH/SS termies, IG vets purifiers etc. etc.

I've no problem with power gaming, but it might just become just a bit too mundane now instead of moving into the variety that I had hoped it would be. Less spamming, more balance.

EDIT: Damn browser making me double-post, sorry...

As I said in an earlier post, though, it seems like a lot of those things you mentioned (i.e. the things that are currently spammed), from what we kind of know (i.e. based on printed GW material and conjecture from there, plus the most solid rumor sources), will no longer be spammed or even be good. IG Vets I went into: Transport gets worse; melta not necessary to deal with vehicles anymore since the damage result rolled is only one way to destroy them vs. just taking off their structure points; drive-bys with melta severely nerfed; probably can't score objectives from within the Chimera anymore; squad itself, as a base unit entry, good but nothing to write home about and likely to be less powerful than large blobs of infantry with Commissars and longer-ranged specials (I'd go grenade launchers based on what we know, unless the way that plasma overheat works changes to be equalized for models with various armor saves, in which case I'd go with plasma).

Of course old "choice" units will be replaced by new ones. However, it seems like the new rules set at least promotes more of a balance between standard infantry, jump infantry/cav/bikes/whatever, and vehicles, and should lead to less min-maxing. For example, if vehicles can be destroyed reliably (albeit over multiple turns in many cases) by sustained anti-tank shooting from range, and objectives can no longer be scored from within them, then: A) Getting close to them with melta is no longer a must, which makes for changes far beyond just choice of weaponry, e.g. less mobile shooty units such as infantry without transports become better; and B) spamming them and going "hurr durr u cant kill all deez even wit all ur gunz" is no longer viable because, for one thing, they probably can all be dealt with in a reasonable number of turns by someone who spams anti-tank, and for another you're going to have to expose your infantry to assaults and anti-infantry shooting at some point to win games (by claiming objectives) anyway. However, vehicles are by no means trash now, because as far as we know losing SP does nothing to impair them beyond bringing them closer to destruction eventually, and transports are probably still going to be a useful way to get a squad onto a mid-field objective--it's just that taking larger infantry squads and running or advancing while firing is also now viable (or, as a rough equivalent, using very tough infantry on foot e.g. Wraithguard, Plague Marines, Immortals, etc.). What I'm getting at is that if these changes are done right, neither type of army comp (light infantry or mech), nor the hybrid between them, will be the no-brainer choice, and this has implications on which units are chosen. IG Vets are a wonderful example because it was the particular combination of melta and Chimera being too good/necessary that made them spammed to the exclusion of other Troops options in the IG 'dex, and yet they did not suddenly become bad either: They're just infantry with a focus on shooting, as opposed to the blob w/ Commissar which is generally focused on close combat, in the sense of being stupidly survivable in it whilst chipping away. (In Fantasy that type of unit is common and is called a "tarpit"; they are considered highly useful.)

Now if everyone who can take Eldar allies can take Eldrad (or Mephiston, Vulkan, etc.--take your pick of powerful SCs), then I can see everyone who can do so doing so, but this may lead to more TOs banning special characters, which again to compare to Fantasy is something common amongst square-baser TOs. Beyond that, though, you seem to be under the impression that more than two armies can be combined, and it is almost certain, based on common sense, precedent, and all the material we have seen so far, that this is not the case. Also, if choices are limited by percentage (e.g. HQ limited to 25% of total points) then you're going to need a 2k game to take, say, Eldrad and Mephy, and this may lead to more 1,500 or 1,750 tourneys which IMO are better anyway .

So, TL;DR version:

1. The power units you cited are probably no longer going to be the game's most powerful units; rules changes look to cut down on spam in general, though obviously it will still exist--the question is whether it is obviously optimal.

2. I would imagine only 2 armies can be combined, thus, no, no Mephiston backed up by Psyflemen Dreads and Vendettas (and again Psyflemen Dreads and Vendettas are plainly being nerfed by structure points amongst other things) .

3. It looks to me like there will indeed be what you hoped for: Less spamming and more balance. Taking lots of powerful things is not a problem for a game; that's what powergamers do by definition. People taking dang near the same list as everyone else (okay, choosing from one of ~4), and that list consisting of spam, was always the problem in 5th because it made for boring lists and boring games, and negated one of 40K's major strengths in itself and in competition with other games systems: A huge amount of variety and customizability, potentially.

[althathir]

I think you're right in the sense that terminators haven't always been the most popular unit since the release of 3rd ed and befroe the nerf to the starcannon we certainly didn't worry too much about them.

I do sympathise with the other Eldar players when it comes to Banshees though. Maybe non Eldar players don't understand how tough it is to get the most out of them. Someone else pointed out - they are specialists who are crap at most things. I don't think it's expecting too much that they should be strong against Termies.

Banshees have indeed remained almost identical since the release of the 3rd ed codex. Since then the rules have become increasingly less friendly to their effective use. Banshees were tearing up the battlefield in the days when you could assault out of moving transports and sweeping advance 2D6". Changes since then have seemingly been balanced for MEQs armies and not fragile T3 4+ armour save units which require to stay at close to full strength to remain effective.

But like I said - this change to power weapons won't effect Banshees much. They are a sub par unit now and they will remain a sub par unit. We just have to wait and see what the new codex brings.

I've played eldar for a long time, and to be honest I'm actually starting to look at it from the opposite perspective. Banshees are fine at taking out most generalist well armoured units, without support they aren't very dependable but thats part of playing eldar. Otherwise if you have the right units then the game is just point & click. Thats not to say banshees don't need a boost just that people need to take a step back.

That said, when this batch of rumours first came out, one of the first ones I saw was power weapons were ap 2, and now because the spainish white drawf says you need a powerfist or an energy axe to hurt termies in description that becomes false? Cause if thats all that can hurt them what ap are chainfists & thunder hammers and is it no longer possible tofail a 2+ save anymore? ..... Please calm down a bit people (that isn't aimed at you spell_of_destruction) just a general point. Cause honestly that small description (thats trying to sell termies), is all I can find that suggests otherwise.

@Aluinn

^^^

This is what I'm afraid of tbh.

Not only will we now see the same units being spammed from every codex (long fangs, chimera vets, etc.), but now if there aren't too many restrictions, the same list brought by everyone, with the choice units from each codex.

We might have to get used to everyone fielding forces led by Mephiston, backed up with long fangs, dakka dreads, vendettas TH/SS termies, IG vets purifiers etc. etc.

I've no problem with power gaming, but it might just become just a bit too mundane now instead of moving into the variety that I had hoped it would be. Less spamming, more balance.

We have nothing to base this on yet, I can understand being wary of it, but I'm not sure throwing out examples like this helps. I really can't stress that enough, just look at the tangent that blurb about termies lead too. Aliunn's examples are possible, but without knowing the rules its easy to see it as overpowered, whereas you might have to jump through a enough hoops where its worse then running the current CWE dex.

[JWhex]

. . . will no longer be spammed or even be good. IG Vets I went into: Transport gets worse; melta not necessary to deal with vehicles anymore since the damage result rolled is only one way to destroy them vs. just taking off their structure points; drive-bys with melta severely nerfed;

Insert wall of text here!!!

Actually, melta vets in metal boxes will still be an excellent choice to spam in 6th. The idea that 6th will seriously nerf them is just wishfull thinking. Spam enough chimeras and you will still gain the mid-field advantage. Chimeras were vulnerable to sustained fire in 5th and the new hull points rule is not going to result in any more blown up chimeras than what one usually experiences from a talented opponent.

If the rumour about tiered kill points is true that is a significant boost to mech based armies since our chimeras/rhinos no longer give away the same kill points as a land raider.

[Spell_of_Destruction]

I've played eldar for a long time, and to be honest I'm actually starting to look at it from the opposite perspective. Banshees are fine at taking out most generalist well armoured units, without support they aren't very dependable but thats part of playing eldar. Otherwise if you have the right units then the game is just point & click. Thats not to say banshees don't need a boost just that people need to take a step back.

Yeah, my point was really that Banshees have a lot more to worry about than whether or not they can kill Termies when they get to combat. Not having access to assault transports is a major hindrance for them because you need to set up the charge a turn in advance or use them defensively. Disembarking from the Transport a turn in advance is suicide and the unit's effectiveness decreases with each casualty (unlike some units which rely on the sergeant or a few guys equipped with particular special weapons). Then you also need to anticipate once they're going to do AFTER they kill their target unit as they don't enjoy running around on foot unless they are in combat. That isn't to say they're useless but I start to leave units in my carrying case when the number of situations in which they are the best tool for the job is very small.

I could use a fork to eat ice cream but I'm not going to because I have a spoon.

[Scribe of Khorne]

While we have seen stuff around Wound Allocation, have there been any details about multi-wound model wound allocation in particular? Nobz, Paladins, Thunder Wolf Cav, Crushers, and Wraiths would love to know.

[drbored]

I see a lot of people freaking out about allies.

1. You won't be able to add more to your basic FOC chart than you already have. In other words, if you're taking 2 Heavies and you have an ally, you're down to one Heavy. If you're taking three Elites in your main army, you won't be able to take Elites via allies.
2. You must take an HQ and a Troop in order to take anything else with your allies. With the standard 2 HQ limit, this means that you will only be allowed one ally. If you're using allies in order to get that super cheesy Heavy Support option, well, you've gotta pay the price of an HQ and Troop to go along with that.
3. Many allies will be restricted based on 'cooperation level', which will limit how much of your army can be devoted to 'allies'. This may allow for 'allies of circumstance' (like Tyranids actually having allies) but with limits, whereas Imperium Codices will have more open ally slots.

So, that should quell any worries about 'cherry picking' the best units out of multiple codices to create T3H MOSTEST |3R0KENZ NETL1ST EVARZ!!!1!!

I'm looking forward to ally detachments. I think it's going to sell more models for GW, it's going to bring some diversity to a lot of armies, and it's going to allow Chaos Marines to spread into Daemon and Traitor Guard territory.

[Formerly Wu]

Actually, melta vets in metal boxes will still be an excellent choice to spam in 6th. The idea that 6th will seriously nerf them is just wishfull thinking.

If making the chimeras less resilient and easier to hit in assaults, the fire points less accurate on the move and meltas less necessary for tankbusting, expanding the mission objectives and making the troops unable to score from inside the vehicle don't count as "seriously nerfed," well. I'd hate to see what counts as a real nerf.

For clarity, I'm in favor of all of these.

[ForgottenLore]

1. You won't be able to add more to your basic FOC chart than you already have. In other words, if you're taking 2 Heavies and you have an ally, you're down to one Heavy. If you're taking three Elites in your main army, you won't be able to take Elites via allies.
2. You must take an HQ and a Troop in order to take anything else with your allies. With the standard 2 HQ limit, this means that you will only be allowed one ally. If you're using allies in order to get that super cheesy Heavy Support option, well, you've gotta pay the price of an HQ and Troop to go along with that.

I haven't seen the White Dwarf that all these rumors are coming from, but my understanding from what has been said by the people who have is that the ally HQ and Troop choice was in addition to the primary detachment's allocation.

Anyone with sources that have actual access to the information want to clarify this point? Cause this is a pretty major one.

[Seville]

^^^

This is what I'm afraid of tbh.

Not only will we now see the same units being spammed from every codex (long fangs, chimera vets, etc.), but now if there aren't too many restrictions, the same list brought by everyone, with the choice units from each codex.

We might have to get used to everyone fielding forces led by Mephiston, backed up with long fangs, dakka dreads, vendettas TH/SS termies, IG vets purifiers etc. etc.

I've no problem with power gaming, but it might just become just a bit too mundane now instead of moving into the variety that I had hoped it would be. Less spamming, more balance.

I understand your concern, and I say this with all due respect.

Why is it GW's job to police how people play the game? I am thrilled with the new allies rules, and not because I plan on fielding the uber cheese army of doom, but because I can now make really awesome, fluffy armies with the armies that I currently own. Wow! How fun is that going to be?

Sorry, but if people need to worry about others abusing this system, then you need to find new people to play with. It's not GW's fault that you're playing with jerks.

[DJ3]

I see a lot of people freaking out about allies.

1. You won't be able to add more to your basic FOC chart than you already have. In other words, if you're taking 2 Heavies and you have an ally, you're down to one Heavy. If you're taking three Elites in your main army, you won't be able to take Elites via allies.

I can't imagine why you would say this so matter-of-factly, as if you've already seen the rulebook, when it is directly opposed to what's in the White Dwarf.

Both lists include 3 HQs (2 standard, 1 Ally) and the CSM list has 4 Heavy Support (3 standard, 1 Ally).

[Cheexsta]

I can't imagine why you would say this so matter-of-factly, as if you've already seen the rulebook, when it is directly opposed to what's in the White Dwarf.

Both lists include 3 HQs (2 standard, 1 Ally) and the CSM list has 4 Heavy Support (3 standard, 1 Ally).

There have also been rumours that say games above 2000pts can take additional/expanded FOCs.

[Charistoph]

I can't imagine why you would say this so matter-of-factly, as if you've already seen the rulebook, when it is directly opposed to what's in the White Dwarf.

Both lists include 3 HQs (2 standard, 1 Ally) and the CSM list has 4 Heavy Support (3 standard, 1 Ally).

And of course, White Dwarf has NEVER been wrong about the rules, EVER. (I agree with your point, I just think that WD battle reports is a poor source for the proper example).

[Dwane Diblie]

I see a lot of people freaking out about allies.

1. You won't be able to add more to your basic FOC chart than you already have. In other words, if you're taking 2 Heavies and you have an ally, you're down to one Heavy. If you're taking three Elites in your main army, you won't be able to take Elites via allies.
2. You must take an HQ and a Troop in order to take anything else with your allies. With the standard 2 HQ limit, this means that you will only be allowed one ally. If you're using allies in order to get that super cheesy Heavy Support option, well, you've gotta pay the price of an HQ and Troop to go along with that.
3. Many allies will be restricted based on 'cooperation level', which will limit how much of your army can be devoted to 'allies'. This may allow for 'allies of circumstance' (like Tyranids actually having allies) but with limits, whereas Imperium Codices will have more open ally slots.

So, that should quell any worries about 'cherry picking' the best units out of multiple codices to create T3H MOSTEST |3R0KENZ NETL1ST EVARZ!!!1!!

I'm looking forward to ally detachments. I think it's going to sell more models for GW, it's going to bring some diversity to a lot of armies, and it's going to allow Chaos Marines to spread into Daemon and Traitor Guard territory.

Where did you get all that from? I think the WD states otherwise. The armies in there have extra HQs and one has an extra Heavy Support or somthing like that from their allies. Yet we haven't seen anythig liek what you said come through this forum. (Well not that I can remember.) So a source would be nice.