What are peoples HONEST views of 6th ed as a whole?

[Lord Inquisitor]

I have to say I quite like the random terrain rules and I like them a lot more in 40k than WFB.

Partially because I'm less inclined to take particularly this edition seriously but it makes a lot more sense in the context of the game. It doesn't make a lot of sense that there should be more than one kind of magical forest on the battlefield or that you couldn't tell a river of blood or that the soldiers wouldn't know about the terrain in WFB. But in 40k in all likelihood both sides are on an alien planet, each dark area, brooding alien fauna or water rippling with xenos creatures represents an unknown threat.

The risk and exploration of the mysterious terrain works a lot better in 40k's sci-do format. I'm much happier dealing with vicious indigenous alien beasties lurking in the forests rather than magical forests that run around.

[Azulthar]

Gamers DESPISE change more than moaning politicians.

The ruleset just came out. People will pick up their game play speed as the new rules soak in and less trips to the book are required.

All my objections are based on actual play, not some default 'anti-change' whining you assume it must be.

All my games have been slower so far, and the main culprits seem to be pre-measuring and wound-allocation. It's not a big deal, it mostly irks me because I don't feel I get anything from it in return.

Moving and shooting is great though, to end on a more positive note.

[RandomThoughts]

My honest opinion: Significant improvement, but still pretty flawed (cluncky game mechanics and counter-intuitive rules)

[Nurgling Chieftain]

But do you think the ally system has not increased the potential min-max combos between lists?

I guess we're just arguing over degrees. (Side story: My parents knew a couple who argued endlessly over whether to have a small family or a large family. This went on for a long time, until they finally started talking actual numbers, and it turned out that she, an only child, wanted a "large family" with three children, and he, with a dozen siblings, wanted a "small family", also with three children.)

Of course it has increased the potential min-max combos to some degree. But I don't think it's throwing off balance as much as, say, the latest Grey Knights codex managed single-handedly! And in fact I think the lower tier codexes have more to gain than the higher tier codexes; the fallout could easily be a more balanced game, albeit a somewhat sillier one (if TH/SS terminators in Tau armies become standard fare!).

Again, I've been having a lot of fun with the ally possibilities, but it seems quite imperfect from a balance perspective and oddly restricting from a fluff perspective.

Well, it's a new rule. I like to think of it as a "first draft". Maybe it'll be refined at some point (probably in four years ).

[murgel2006]

I really like it.
there is still much room to improve the game, *looks longingly at the leaked...* but the rules are clear and fun.

I have bought some additional turrets for my long time unused Razorbacks and Rhinos and dusted of my Falcons all of them almost unused in 4th and 5th ed.
I have begun painting quite a number of ICs and named Cs due to challenges being fun etc.
And I have unshelfed some quite nice and fluffy allied contingents.

All in all I am having the best of times in 40k since the change to 3rd destroyed much of my fun.

[Vaktathi]

I really like it.
there is still much room to improve the game, *looks longingly at the leaked...* but the rules are clear and fun.

I have bought some additional turrets for my long time unused Razorbacks and Rhinos and dusted of my Falcons all of them almost unused in 4th and 5th ed.

Just out of curiosity, why would you not have used those in the last edition but find them so attractive in this edition? I can't think of a single way in which they would be more capable now than they were previously.

[Scribe of Khorne]

I've played close to 10 games?

Short: Its better then 5th, and 5th was fun. Therefore, I enjoy it.

Longer

Good Stuff
Flyers
Shooting Allocation
Wound Allocation

Neutral
Hull Points - Feels too soft, but most people hated vehicles, so whatever

Bad
Loss of Wound Allocation for things like Wraiths and Blood Crushers.

[Seismic]

Well, its hard to judge game balance from the perspective of a single book; Even if that book is the core rule book. That said , it certainly seem as if GW went into this with a specific direction in mind; Which is saying a lot considering how uncoordinated GW is normally , changing design philosophy at a whim . A few exceptions not withstanding , previous releases seems quite at ease within the confine of the 6th edition.

On the subject of Armoured vehicles , i agree they took the nerfbat swing a little too hard. If they're planning to update the game via WD , i would hope that they could balance it out with something simple; Say, limit the none-flyer/skimmer vehicle status to either Functional , Disabled or Destroyed : Where a "0" hull point , disabled , vehicle could still be repaired (by adequate units ) in subsequent phases , so long as it doesn't become destroyed.

Overall ,its more random than ever & "setting up /deployment" is , again , too cumbersome ; Random set ups , random psy powers, random warlord traits , random charge, random turns et cetera et cetera... At the end of the day the game is a gigantic question mark , and with the recent games i've played i can't help but laugh at anyone bringing up "strategy" as an argument for or against anything.

I may sound negative , in reality i'm not, its an "Okay" book ... with inappropriate cover art though. I much prefer the previous , more "symbolic" , cover than the flat out "Space marine" highlighting thing it has going...

[PANZERBUNNY]

Well, we gain a more believable and enjoyable playing experience?

I always felt GW made ranges etc so random to mask their lackluster mechanics and attention to a balanced system.

"oooohhh everything is mysterious! Will you hit? Will miss that charge! That's Warhammer! Amazing!"

The random elements added regarding terrain, make more sense than seasoned, experience, hatched killers that know their weapons and ranges unable to determine which enemies are in the kill zone or not.

That....and goblin machines. Anything goblins is allowed to be terribly random. Space goblins or fantasy goblins alike.

[akahdrin]

My views, I don't post often, but I play a lot. So you know my stance, I play Orks, Space Wolves, and Eldar and our standard games here are always 'ard boyz 2500 lists, so that's what I'm basing it off. I have no idea how the game plays at lower point values.

Good points

Pre-measuring. This really makes things much better as a whole.

Wound allocation. I don't care what anyone says, shooting a model 24 inches away with a bolter and having them remove a model 40 inches away because it was conga lined behind cover is a horrible concept, and those of you complaining about wound allocation want this? If there is high invul save model taking hits, he's being heroic / stupid (take your pick) and will die simply due to attrition firing. Don't use big shots on it, just pepper it with bolters, stubbers, lasguns, shurikens...whatever. Making the closest models get removed in shooting and cc changes how assaults pan out, create space on the table, and really adds tactics to how you set up your formation.

Focus fire. Love it. You got 1/2 your squad in cover? That's cool, I'll blow up these other guys and hope you fail your moral.

Power weapon changes. This change really makes 2+ saves feel like they are truly wearing tactical dreadknought armor and not just something that a little 'oomie with a power sword can cut through like butter. And anyone complaining about power mauls, seriously how many models does this effect. And now that same model can penetrate the rear of a ton of vehicles.

Grenades...I don't have to say much about them, they are simply great and really makes you not want to deal with a mob of things with them.

Overwatch. For those of you who say, but it's not as good as stand and shoot blah blah. This is more than we could do previously and we can still fight normally in combat.

Ambushing tactics. Watching models come on the table and instantly destroy stuff without a change to respond was quite lame, I know...I did it to people all the time and they were frustrated. It required 0 skill and was just an overall win button for that squad.

Hull points. Love it. Even as the one fielding the vehicles. Previously vehicles could be stopped in their tracks by a single glance, now that same vehicle on a glance still shoots you in the face the following turn.

Allies, self explanatory. Remember you don't have to paint them as allies, use them as a new unit, rename them, paint them cool. I painted some IG for a Tau player because they were converted over to the greater good.

Gunslingers, hilariously fun. Wolf guard x9 with 2 plasma pistols each, a rune priest with a plasma and divination in a drop pod. 19 twin linked plasma shots in a drop pod...ok. And if that rune priest is a master of runes and actually roles up foreboding it's even funnier.

Flanking now works! Love how you can actually limit or prevent their attacks back if you assault properly (as long as you are faster than they are!)

Loving artillery changes as well.

Snapshotting heavy weapons and allowing weapons teams to move, but if the heavy stays stationary to still fire normally.

Way too many other things I enjoy.


Dislikes

Poor wording of what is a character and the appendix obviously has flaws. 10 nob bikers and a warboss are 11 characters in a squad. They rattle off 33 shots, average of like 17 hit, since they're BS2, 50% of their hits are actually allocated by the Ork player because they're 6s. Nob bikers are the best snipers in the game...with BS2, riddle me that.

Challenges when a lone model assaults a large squad. As it stands, a single model can walk over to a squad of say 10 guys. He can issue a challenge and if that model has a decent invul save and doesn't kill the guy he's against, nothing happens. It's just a huge tie up with a complete loss of the squad, sure they'll get a couple rerolls, but still it's a cheesy thing. I charged a squad of 30 boyz with a single lone wolf armed with only a storm shield. I went toe to toe with their nob for 2 full turns (4 combats) and his squad of 30 boyz just stood around watching.

The new fortifications in general. They encourage turtling and come at me bro tactics. Sadly, these structures have false hopes and is basically an autoloss if you're in one.

Poor addition of flying units. If you're going to change the rules about hitting them and offer nothing other than structures or other flyers to deal with it because you simply didn't get around to adding flak missiles...maybe it should have waited.

Overall, the goods beat the bads by a long shot. The game is stream lined, quicker to play (once you're use to it), and because it is rules heavy, not much has to be rolled on or interpreted.

[Grimbad]

I may sound negative , in reality i'm not, its an "Okay" book ... with inappropriate cover art though. I much prefer the previous , more "symbolic" , cover than the flat out "Space marine" highlighting thing it has going...

It would have been okay to have a marine on the cover, as has been done a few times before, if it looked remotely like something that was able to move or fight. Screaming baby with stubby arms isn't that cool looking.

[Grocklock]

Got to say played 23 games of 6th now and love it, there are some really nice thought out rules such as snap fire, or the new wound allocation system, which allows for more tactics as where you fire from has an effect. which means a unit deepstriking form behind can suprise their prey. The random terrain is optional and allows for some peaces to be put on the table if you so require.
the change to fearless is so welcome as it made bno sense before. Got too say GW has done a grand job.

[murgel2006]

Just out of curiosity, why would you not have used those in the last edition but find them so attractive in this edition? I can't think of a single way in which they would be more capable now than they were previously.

really? how about a tank that actually fires it's guns (more than once) for a change?
Well, I have stopped using Falcons (all together) and razorbacks (mostly) in 4th and 5th due to the glancing table.
I simply was not willing to pay that much points for a "tank" which just was "terrain" on the table due to being at least shaken or stunned from the start of the game to the end of the game.

And I have also never seen the "greatness" of the holofield, it just makes sure you have the less annoying results turned to the annoying ones (stunned and shaken).
I have used serpents as the wave field at least had some use in protecting the vehicle.

So I think the removal of the glancing table is one of the best things in 6th.

[Omniassiah]

I'm in the "Meh" to Dislike category more on the dislike side (hate is too strong of a word and 40k/GW doesn't rate the energy expenditure to hate it). Most of the stuff that was a problem really didn't get fixed because they weren't an issue with the core rules but the codexes. Like 8th edition fantasy once a majority of army books get released (assuming they can find a power lvl and stick with it) it will be pretty solid edition and that should take about 4-6 years. Now the problem with that statement is 7th will be out in 4 years so we will more an likely never see what this edition could be.

For individual mechanics

Wound allocation- not a bad idea but like most other wargames it should have been you allocate all hits front to back by the firer and then LoS/wound/saves. This allows the cinematic of the front ranks being wittled down first with out the retarded situation of a single 2+ save model soaking a Battlecannon hit for 7 guys.
Hull points- Again not a bad idea but really not needed, The problem was always in the pricing of vehicles not there rules in 5th. A chimera is still 30pts under-pointed (this coming from a Mech IG player from the Armageddon book) hull points doesn't really change that its still 30 points under-pointed.
Overwatch- not a bad idea but seriously it should have been done with modifiers or left out. Honestly it ends up being okay the did it this way for the fact that it would have royally screwed of the pointing of models and GW does not have the desire to update existing books or release schedule to make the changes quickly enough.
Random charge range- Completely unnecessary. I play multiple other systems that have pre-measuring and fixed move distances and never had an issue with assault moves. Now part of it comes down to the next issue.
Rapid Fire- The changes to this was the only thing I might consider hating. Giving you basic trooper a threat range of 30" meaning that on a 4x6 board he can cover almost 80% of the board from the center was down right stupid. I think game play would have significantly improved if they went back to the old 3rd edition rapid fire rules (if you moved 1 shot at half range for the newer guys). It would actually allow you to out maneuver people again as opposed to the current game where gimmicks replace real maneuvering. It would have also killed the issue of Kiting units by staying 19" away so they could never charge (not like that is a valid option for more then a turn or 2 anyway with the number of models on the table now.)

[GodlessM]

Maybe I'm biased because I enjoy the new edition a lot, but it seems to me that people that play both of GW's main game systems enjoy both much more. When 8th edition Fantasy came out there were many new editions which people didn't like that had been in 40k before, and so if you had played 40k it wasn't a new concept to swallow. Same thing applies for the new edition of 40k taking some Fantasy concepts.

[IcedCrow]

I agree. The number of people in my own anecdotal world far more like the new edition over the number of people who rage quit.

[Daedalus81]

Dislikes

Poor wording of what is a character and the appendix obviously has flaws. 10 nob bikers and a warboss are 11 characters in a squad. They rattle off 33 shots, average of like 17 hit, since they're BS2, 50% of their hits are actually allocated by the Ork player because they're 6s. Nob bikers are the best snipers in the game...with BS2, riddle me that.

Hopefully this gets FAQ'd

Challenges when a lone model assaults a large squad. As it stands, a single model can walk over to a squad of say 10 guys. He can issue a challenge and if that model has a decent invul save and doesn't kill the guy he's against, nothing happens. It's just a huge tie up with a complete loss of the squad, sure they'll get a couple rerolls, but still it's a cheesy thing. I charged a squad of 30 boyz with a single lone wolf armed with only a storm shield. I went toe to toe with their nob for 2 full turns (4 combats) and his squad of 30 boyz just stood around watching.

Decline the challenge or shoot him before he gets there.

Poor addition of flying units. If you're going to change the rules about hitting them and offer nothing other than structures or other flyers to deal with it because you simply didn't get around to adding flak missiles...maybe it should have waited.

Well, at least it gives us an opportunity to learn flyers before we lean on a flak missile crutch.

Overall, the goods beat the bads by a long shot. The game is stream lined, quicker to play (once you're use to it), and because it is rules heavy, not much has to be rolled on or interpreted.

Totally agree.

[Ventus]

I've only played a few games so far so it is just an initial impression and I intend to keep playing to learn more about how the rules interact with different dexes.

Likes:
I like the idea of overwatch and snap fire. One of my armies is nids and it always seemed odd that I could assault a unit from outflanking (genestealers) without them allowed a response of any kind. Of course GW also took out assaulting from reserves which I'm unsure of yet.

I like that you can move some models in a unit, say tac marines, without moving the heavy weapon and it can fire.

I like that vehicles are easier to kill in CC and the concept of hull points for vehicles. Time will tell if this was good or was not handled well and went to far as some argue.

I am fine with rapid fire weapons getting a boost. Makes tac marines a little more useful.

I think focus fire is a good idea. Makes movement more important and gives players options.

I like the idea that the closest models are casualties first but as someone earlier mentioned it is clumsy the way it was done with 'look out sir' because we will see many examples of the super cheese with the great save (and maybe FNP) at the front to absorb most everything and the battlecannon example immediately demonstrates the 'uncinematic' way this will occur. Good idea but needed refining.

Dislikes
I dislike challenges. I understand the 'cinematic' idea but I don't see how this will be the case in most situations. Also, it seems ridiculous that, for example, a tyranid prime with warriors could get assaulted and challenged by a character and now the prime either doesn't fight or the tyranid warriors stand around cheering on the prime. Not cinematic to me - just stupid. I think the idea is fine but it is handled in a clunky manor. You cannot assume that all characters are honour bound in some medieval setting. It doesn't work for some races.

I dislike excessive random elements that seem to be just because GW does not want to/cannot balance their game. So lets add more random stuff to make things less serious or competitive. Mysterious terrain, objective, psychic powers all fit in this. I wonder why mysterious terrain doesn't include ruins because what I see happening is a player with a shooty army always placing ruins in their zone for 4+ and no chance of something wacky happening whereas the assaulty army probably has to pass through a few forests or a pool or an ancient artefact and suffer the consequences (which might be okay, or not).

Flyers are fine but GWs handling of it is crap. Some armies have no flyers/FMC and/or little effective way to deal with flying units as GW decided that while they made a complete weapons list in the rulebook it wasn't necessary to give hardly anyone skyfire. It is decisions like this that demonstrate GWs total lack of care whether they make a good product - they just want to make a product that enough people will buy. That is sad and ties in with the next point.

The biggest disappointment was the dex FAQs/errata released at the same time. This was a perfect opportunity to adjust many poorly worded rules or rules that did not work, overcosted units/ poor stats lines etc. As someone said earlier, if the dexes are balanced this might be a great edition but at the rate this will happen many armies won't see it and then another core rulebook change happens. The best while waiting the many years for dexes to hopefully get redone is to fix many of the problems (not everything). A lot of a dexes problems could be quickly dealt with in a decent fashion to make most units playable and most dexes relatively balanced. The pyrovore is a classic example. GW wants to sell models - this units rules and FOC location were not good - doubtful many models sold - minor fixes with errata the unit is playable/works - GW sells models and is happy - player has more options, buys models and is happy. I don't see the problem.

So overall it is a wait and see for now. I hope GW comes to their senses and releases some decent errata to give the game a semblance of balance.

[Capamaru]

Much more mainstreamed but still unfinished...

[Vaktathi]

really? how about a tank that actually fires it's guns (more than once) for a change?
Well, I have stopped using Falcons (all together) and razorbacks (mostly) in 4th and 5th due to the glancing table.

The same thing didn't happen in 3rd also? If all your tanks were getting glanced constantly, then there was probably another problem, and they probably have a very short lifespan in 6th.

If you're relying on Falcons for firepower they are unfortunately some of the least cost effective firepower available. Their firepower, while nice, is supplemental to their role as hard-to-kill transport which is now no longer something they can do. They really aren't great buys for their firepower at all (115pts base for a pulse laser and a shuriken catapult before mandator 3rd weapon IIRC?)

Razorbacks didn't exactly seem to have an issue in 5th ed given how they became almost ubiquitous amongst marine armies

I simply was not willing to pay that much points for a "tank" which just was "terrain" on the table due to being at least shaken or stunned from the start of the game to the end of the game.

Again, if they were being stunlocked the entire time, there was probably another issue, and if they're taking that kind of fire in 6th, they probably aren't hanging around long enough to do a whole lot of shooting.

And I have also never seen the "greatness" of the holofield, it just makes sure you have the less annoying results turned to the annoying ones (stunned and shaken).

It meant it was very hard to kill, even with meltaguns, and made it nigh invincible in 4th. There's a lot of utility in a tank that can transport dudes and be very hard to kill. Holofields made Falcons almost unkillable in 4th, and in 5th were roughly on par with Land Raiders in terms of survivability (vulnerable to lighter weapons than the Land Raider is, harder to kill with stuff like Melta Weaponry than Land Raiders were).

I have used serpents as the wave field at least had some use in protecting the vehicle.

The wave field is very useful yes, but only against heavier weapons, the Holofields were very useful against everything. S6/7/8 weapons, often the most typical weapons brought to bear against skimmers, are completely unaffected by the Wave Serpent energy field. The energy field gave the Wave Serpent a higher chance to avoid hits from S9/10/melta guns, but the Holofield meant equal or greater survivability against everything (be it autocannon or railgun) but melta-guns in double-pen range. Now it's rather pointless given that you just need X number of "meets or beats AV12", so now the Wave Serpent is clearly superior, cheaper, doesn't take an HS slot and isn't much behind in terms of firepower.

Not to mention the hideous vulnerability of anything that isn't a Land Raider, Flyer or Walker to CC, a squad of tac marines is putting more (twice as many or more) glancing/pen'ing hits on a vehicle (enough on average to kill anything with 3 HP's), be it Falcon that jetted 36" or crawling Leman Russ tank or stationary Trukk, than they are wounds on another marine unit.