>hull points-epic fail GW!

[mercury14]

I like the changes for the most part. But WOW is it easy to kill vehicles in an assault. A Wave Serpent moving 24 inches flat out shouldn't be hit in the back armor on a 3+. There's just no way it should be as easy to hit as a rhino moving one inch.

Wave Serpents cost over 100 points and have to drop off troops in dangerous places, not stay 36" back and shoot. As it is now they're ridiculously flimsy suicide tanks with no more survivability than the little fire dragon squad they're dropping off. It just isn't logical at all that fast skimmers moving flat out that cost a ton of points don't get some kind of bonus...

[MajorWesJanson]

And let's not forget wound allocation shenanigans in vehicle squadrons. Russ takes 2 hits, move another one up front and make those two hard-earned glances completely meaningless.

I would consider the ability to move another vehicle up to draw fire from a damaged member to be tactics and not shenanigans. This example requires both more though, and movement, which reduces the fire a tank can put out. I wouldn't call it shenanigans, like wound allocation tricks from 5th that are done in the list building stage. Movement to protect wounded vehicles is tactics, not shenanigans.

As for Eldar vehicles and Tau wargear, both those problems are things that should be fixed at the codex level. Maybe Eldar vehicles will get the assault vehicle ability. Maybe Holofields will make them harder to hit in CC and improve jink saves. Maybe Tau target Locks will change from split fire to something like giving Precision shot ability. Maybe the Tau Command and Control node will allow for reserves bonus or maybe a reroll on the warlord chart.

[Rick Blaine]

You can also buy almost 30" of 4+ cover fortifications that can be placed up to halfway up the table for 50 pts. Maybe try to look at the wider context of the new rules before writing them off.

[blameless]

I would consider the ability to move another vehicle up to draw fire from a damaged member to be tactics and not shenanigans. This example requires both more though, and movement, which reduces the fire a tank can put out. I wouldn't call it shenanigans, like wound allocation tricks from 5th that are done in the list building stage. Movement to protect wounded vehicles is tactics, not shenanigans.

This^ it is not OP by any stretch of the imagination.

Have thrown a few dice around and it looks pretty well balanced overall I think.

[Gonefishing]

You can also buy almost 30" of 4+ cover fortifications that can be placed up to halfway up the table for 50 pts. Maybe try to look at the wider context of the new rules before writing them off.

Not if your a Skimmer as your helpful flying base puts you above the 25% - Still a nice boost for all the non xenos army vehicles.....

Of xourse the problem for you guys is you cannot then drive through your own ageis line, so you get the cover but block your own movement....swings and roundabouts

[MajorWesJanson]

Not if your a Skimmer as your helpful flying base puts you above the 25% - Still a nice boost for all the non xenos army vehicles.....

Of xourse the problem for you guys is you cannot then drive through your own ageis line, so you get the cover but block your own movement....swings and roundabouts

Orks are quite pleased as well, as are Nids who can use the walls for their MCs.

[Athlan na Dyr]

So your telling people what kind of armies they are allowed to field. some of us like tanks or in my case walkers which are key to the background fluff of my chapter.
Tsuruki i think you played that wrong unless your leaving out his skimmers making their jink saves. round 2- one of those speeders should have been dead to a glance, also your using orks....5s to hit 6s to glance is not even close compared to the number of MEQ armies that will be shooting at them hitting on 3+. my storm went down to like 3 glancing hits from BA assault marines in one round of shooting. didn't make the 5+ saves

Some of us like infantry or actual armies to field. Fifth screwed us in terms of competitiveness against mech, now Sixth is reversing this somewhat. That is rather the way that it works.
There is nothing stopping you from fielding your fluffy force, other than a bad experience and a lack of perceived competitiveness.

And you appear to have had some really crappy luck/ a lucky opponent. This is hardly indicative of the normal state of affairs. Play a couple more games before you come out and declare that GW "epically failed". Also, your land speeder has a 36" gun. That assault squad has a 12" one unless something has majorly changed with bolt pistols. Perhaps it is time to start regarding infantry as a little more dangerous than you did in fifth and compensate for that on a tactical level.

Finally, with mech becoming weaker for many armies, the amount of anti-tank weapons in an all comers list should also decrease meaning that over time your list could quite easily have a renaissance. Wait until the list upheaval from sixth has quieted down before making judgements.

edit: If your opponent was using a half-way competitive 5th list, it would have been designed to cram in as many AT weapons as possible. If that didn't destroy a mech list, then that would have been a failure of rules

[bad dice]

Also I don't knew about you guys but I was getting sick and tiered of fighting carparks.
I mean it was fun and all at the start all those tank nice and dynamic but after 5 years I welcome the change.

[Pyriel]

we ALL knew vehicles would be getting a serious nerf this edition. stop complaining for something that was already assured to happen. just because 5th was the "go mech or go home" edition doesnt mean 40k, as a whole, is. in 4th, transports were DEATHTRAPS and nobody used them, with the exception of "a couple of rhinos" for some space marine players-and even then, not for the most competitive ones. 6th seems, like 4th, to nerf vehicles-but not so much. who knows, maybe this leads to "some armies using vehicles, other armies not using vehicles" which will bring a great, fun environment to play and compete in.

just... stop bringing 5th-ed armylists for 6th-ed games. please. i KNOW most ppl started competing in tournaments in 5th ed, but that doesnt mean 40k was always about the mech game. editions change. ADAPT. and that, coming from a BT player, who has adapted all they way from 4th to 5th, and now from 5th to 6th with the SAME superold codex.

[Commandojimbob]

we ALL knew vehicles would be getting a serious nerf this edition. stop complaining for something that was already assured to happen. just because 5th was the "go mech or go home" edition doesnt mean 40k, as a whole, is. in 4th, transports were DEATHTRAPS and nobody used them, with the exception of "a couple of rhinos" for some space marine players-and even then, not for the most competitive ones. 6th seems, like 4th, to nerf vehicles-but not so much. who knows, maybe this leads to "some armies using vehicles, other armies not using vehicles" which will bring a great, fun environment to play and compete in.

just... stop bringing 5th-ed armylists for 6th-ed games. please. i KNOW most ppl started competing in tournaments in 5th ed, but that doesnt mean 40k was always about the mech game. editions change. ADAPT. and that, coming from a BT player, who has adapted all they way from 4th to 5th, and now from 5th to 6th with the SAME superold codex.

THIS ^

It is hilarious listening to some people whine that there uber 5th edition list is no longer uber...... well that is odd, because we are no longer 5th edition. 6th Edition seems to have balanced vehicles now, which is great - so all those Mech heavy lists of 5th edition need to now look at the rules of 6th, consider how this affects your lists and adapt to start playing in 6th edition - stop crying that your boring copy paste uber net list is know longer uber and think !

It is going to take a while i think before we really start to understand the shift that 6th brings but so far, going through the book, im loving what it brings.

[TrangleC]

7th edition will pretty surely go back to Mech Meta. I don't really see how my Mech Eldar list could stay halfway competitive (even in 5th it only was able to win games because of turn 5 shenanigans and last minute mission objective grabs), but I won't make the mistake again of selling it now. I'll store it and perhaps it might have a big come back in 4 to 5 years. (Unless there will be a new Eldar model line that will make the current ones look ****** in comparison and thus still force me to buy new ones, as I would have done if I still had had my old Dark Eldar army when the new codex and models came out.)

[xxRavenxx]

Infantry could harm walkers before but at least walkers had a fighting chance, now they just die. thats not even a reasonable trade off.

This is my hi-light of the OP's rant against hullpoints.

10 marines charge a dread. 5 hit with grenades. Statistically they aren't even likely to get a 6, but lets assume they do. Wooo! They've done it a single "wound". Only two more turns of losing guys to its powerfists to go and its down. DAMN YOU FOR MAKING IT SO WEAK HULLPOINTS!!!

I'm not even sure how mughi got to the idea that bolters can take down transports so fast. Point the front at the enemy and you'll be on top of them before they can shoot your side or rear armor (and why bother, when combat will let you attempt to penetrate instead?)

The idea that missiles can reliably get a landraider down in a turn is laughable too. Lets say you have 12 of them (Three dev squads worth?) Thats 8 hits. So not too unreasonable to expect a single 6, and a glance. Only three more turns of that and you've cracked the tank. Its like its made of paper...

[MiyamatoMusashi]

I think Hull Points aren't a great idea (an AV10 vehicle is effectively T6, W3 with no armour save and vulnerable to ID (penetrating hits)) which doesn't exactly make vehicles very realistically resilient.

...but... it's hard to disagree with the previous two posters. GW change their games every four years (insert "to force you to buy something new" or "to mix up the meta and keep people thinking" depending on your level of cynicism) and with 5th Ed being a game of mech, 6th Ed was always going to change that. The hull point rules are silly (IMO), in fact the whole vehicle armour/damage system has been silly since 3rd Ed and it's only now got a bit sillier... but it's what we've got, we're stuck with it, and it's no surprise.

(I'm not sure why I'm so forgiving about 6th Ed 40K when I can't stand 8th Ed Warhammer. Maybe because there's very little new in 8th Ed WH that I like, whereas I like and dislike stuff in 6th Ed 40K in equal measure. So maybe I can understand people getting upset about Hull Points after all, because I got upset about random charges and magic. But still... it should not be a surprise).

[MajorWesJanson]

I wonder how things would balance out if everything has 1 additional hullpoint than it does now, but it is far too soon to even guess. It will be a few months before the new rules settle in, and another month or two before the new meta sets up. Plus CSM and DA probably within the next 6 months, so more scrambling of the meta.

Lets give it more than 2 days before screaming about the sky getting awfully close to the ground.

[Azalthor]

I for one am very happy with this change playing Tyranid and often facing IG and all
Also my friend of mine was criticizing my way of playing tyranid we switched around and I took his SM
I threw a speeder and he went BOOM all charge and then he realised the pain of hitting on 6's the speeder survived with a shaken if I recall
Also there is that time when a monolith took all my army for 2 turns I'm not sure if it's still the same with their new FAQ

Long live hull points!

[Pendragon]

I like the new hull point system, and I play armoured Imperial Guard (9 Leman Russ tanks if i can get away with it). Sure, they're going to die a lot easier, but they're no longer going to be stunlocked by glancing hits or killed by being immobilized. Also, I can shoot with almost everything, all the time, even if its at BS1. Is my army less competitive? Probably (not that it was great in the first place), but the new rules are probably going to make it more fun to play, both for me AND my opponent.

[Pawn of Decay]

So this weekend I played my first game of 6th edition. It also happened to be my 2nd game using Eldar. I tried Eldar out with 5th Edition rules last week and thought that they were ok. They did some things fine, but I found that a lot of the movement and options with the Eldar were strangled a bit with the rule set. I did however have a fun and enjoyable game loosing to Necrons 7 Kill points to 6 Kill points. It took far too long to take out his Doom Scythes etc.

With the new rules, I changed my list slightly to use more of the Psychic Powers. Now Eldars powers are still very good, so I bought in Eldrad and a small 4 man unit of Warlocks keeping them, with a Farseer and small 4 man unit of Warlocks for some of the new powers (I settled on using Divination Powers for game 1). The army I played against was my friends Daemon Army. Now whilst his Daemons don't have a lot of shooting (and we wanted to try out a lot of the new rules) I bought along allied Orks... (This hurt a bit....) With Shoota Boys, Big Mek with KFF and Dakka Jets with Lootas appearing behind an Aegis Defence line... He suddenly had some fire power...

The game was brilliant fun with a lot of very cool things happening. When a Dakka Jet appears on turn two to mow down and destroy a unit of 3 Eldar War Walkers... it can change the game a little Flyers are a bit more resiliant than other tanks, but once you hit them, the hull point rules etc. Balance it quite nicely.

Hull points are a nice addition to the rules. Whilst I am new with Eldar, and taking 4 Wave Serpents seems to be a brilliant idea, the Hull points didn't hamper the game. I lost 2 of the Tanks during the game and all of the War Walkers... But the game was great fun, and seeing the Eldar running around the field on foot with Seer Councils actually being used for more than Protecting a Seer.

The game was great fun. Yes I will be changing my list a bit. Perhaps a couple of Wraith Lords instead of War Walkers. But I don't think I will be changing my list too much.

Ironically my current Chaos Space Marine army seems to be much much better...

[theshoveller]

I guess i have been spoiled by better game designers, i still play classic battletech and it still has solid rules that have needed little change in 25 years and are not affected by what era you play.

Just because it hasn't had a significant rules update in 25 years doesn't mean it hasn't sorely needed one.

...and the very vocal 3025 crowd believes that the game is very much affected by what era you play in.

[Narf]

Having not played with 6th yet (still waiting for my book!) i'm looking forward to it, and will play the first few games with my 5th ed army.

The only changes i can see happening to my army, if the transports rules are that much of a hinderance will be as follows

Instead of 5 man Gh, with power armoured WG, i'll take 10 GH, with TDA WG, alongside a possible IC

I'll still take the razorbacks but they will be my anti tank support units (las and twin plasma), as i will not need to get as close to the enemy now, i can fire my bolt guns at 24 even when moving, and teh TDA will allow me to absorb some heavy firepower, and the look out sir will allow my TDA to survive a little better.

All in all i'll prob just drop some WG and maybe dreads depending.

if i fidn tehre is no problem with HP my army prob wont change much at all due to them, but again may change as above jsut to flow better overall.

[xerxeshavelock]

I like Hull Points - they mean you have to treat your force with care. It is worth commenting that the Hull Point system is another similarity to the tried and tested system in Epic Armageddon where War Engines will lose a Structure Point and have a chance of taking more serious damage. In that system its on a 6, in this one its based on how powerful the weapon is (ie whether it scores a penetrating), but either way the HP system is based on something that GW has years of experience with.