6th ed rumors

[PlasticRat]

I'm really hoping this stuff isn't a hoax.

If you're complaining that a couple of tables make it too complex, you really should go and play snakes and ladders.

Having a 'normal' and 'advanced' game is the only way forward for 40k. Half the players want something with all the strategy of snakes and ladders and the complexity of rock, paper, scissors. The other half want something where you have to think a bit and actually get to make meaningful decisions in the game.

You can't keep both camps happy, so have two different rulesets for them. This is about the only intelligent thing I can think of GW doing in recent memory. In fact... it's just too smart for them, thus unfortunately probably a hoax.

Pre-measuring is great. It takes the game from being gimmicky and luck based toward actually having meaningful strategy. It's no longer about "guess which unit I'm in range to charge" and rather "which unit is more tactically advantageous to charge." Yes, strategy people, it's not a dirty word.

The only thing I really wish they'd change is to add some meaning to positioning in melee combat. There is no strategy during melee currently. It still runs on autopilot. Using something like Epic's assault rules where positioning actually means something would be good. The forced pile-in move basically negates any form of control or tactics on the player's part.

Although right now, any improvement is good. For those of us with even half a brain, the game is currently a tedious dice-fest that runs entirely on autopilot with almost no meaningful decisions for the player during the game.

[Lancel]

Is that really a rule about using pistols with the pistol's stats in close combat instead of the users? If true it would probably be the end of weapons like Laspistols and Bolt Pistols on ICs though, they'll all have Plasma Pistols. Except Sisters who would probably all have Inferno Pistols, which would be the best close combat pistols ever if this is true.

[GrenAcid]

Having a 'normal' and 'advanced' game is the only way forward for 40k. Half the players want something with all the strategy of snakes and ladders and the complexity of rock, paper, scissors. The other half want something where you have to think a bit and actually get to make meaningful decisions in the game.

You can't keep both camps happy, so have two different rulesets for them. This is about the only intelligent thing I can think of GW doing in recent memory. In fact... it's just too smart for them, thus unfortunately probably a hoax.

Fully agree.

The only thing I really wish they'd change is to add some meaning to positioning in melee combat.

Mate please no..I dont want to play chees....I wanc CC to be wild, bloody and quick.

[DrLove42]

Is that really a rule about using pistols with the pistol's stats in close combat instead of the users? If true it would probably be the end of weapons like Laspistols and Bolt Pistols on ICs though, they'll all have Plasma Pistols. Except Sisters who would probably all have Inferno Pistols, which would be the best close combat pistols ever if this is true.

If this is the case of types of pistols playing a role in CC either DE are all going to be lethal, or it wont work for them, and they will all be in uproar.

frankly one of the big things I DON'T like about these rumours is the seeming lack of wound allocation. With wounds being allocated after saves, we go back to 4th ed where there is no chance of killing that power fist, or missile launcher till last. But if they can be sniped out of the unit (like IC can apparantly) then there will be no point taking them as they'll be the first to die, just making vehicles stronger, in addition to all the other rules that seem to work vehciles way

Some of the other stuff is coming round on me more I think about it, but I don't like this strategem point and asset thing. The idea of having to buy the ability to steal the Init doens't sound nice. A lot of the abilites dont seem balenced.

I'm still in the camp of hoping this is false. I happen to rathe rlike 5th ed. I think it works really well

[Lockark]

Pre-measuring is great. It takes the game from being gimmicky and luck based toward actually having meaningful strategy. It's no longer about "guess which unit I'm in range to charge" and rather "which unit is more tactically advantageous to charge." Yes, strategy people, it's not a dirty word.

They do that by taking away all random movement. If I know exactly how far away everything is, but then I ALSO know exactly how far I move every turn? Then for me the game just feels like I'm playing it on auto-pioliet. I have no tough calls to make any more. I just have to logically move up units. Their is no longer that element of being on the edge of your seat because of a hard decision.

I'm just playing the motions of my army at that point.

I only tolerate it in 8th ed Fantasy because pre-measuring and random charge distance balance each other out.

I'm also pointing out they only said it's in normal. In Advance rules measureing works almost exactly the way it dose now.
(Can only measure up to a unit's max movement, and when shooting weapons you can only measure to the target unit.)

If this is the case of types of pistols playing a role in CC either DE are all going to be lethal, or it wont work for them, and they will all be in uproar.

frankly one of the big things I DON'T like about these rumours is the seeming lack of wound allocation. With wounds being allocated after saves, we go back to 4th ed where there is no chance of killing that power fist, or missile launcher till last. But if they can be sniped out of the unit (like IC can apparantly) then there will be no point taking them as they'll be the first to die, just making vehicles stronger, in addition to all the other rules that seem to work vehciles way

Some of the other stuff is coming round on me more I think about it, but I don't like this strategem point and asset thing. The idea of having to buy the ability to steal the Init doens't sound nice. A lot of the abilites dont seem balenced.

I'm still in the camp of hoping this is false. I happen to rathe rlike 5th ed. I think it works really well

You didn't read the new wound allocation correctly. You applie wounds to armour save groups like in 4th. BUT the big difference is that for every 5th unsaved wound, the enemy player gets to allocate it.

For Sniper Rifles, it's every 2nd wound.

So for example. If I was to cause 5 Plasma cannon wounds on your tac squad. you choose the 1st four guys taken off, but I get to choose for the 5th guy is. But if I caused 4 unsaved bolt gun wounds, and 1 unsaved plasma you get to allocate all the wounds your self. (The thing being that it needs to be 5 unsaved wounds from the same weapon type.)


For Orks, since we can upgrade the squad's Nob to have evy' Armour and leave the rest with tshirt saves, This will be our saving grace. Thow that also means that the Rokkits and bigshootahs are going to be gone pretty quickly.

Space marines in general will not have to worry about it too much due to thier 3+ sv. It's hard to cause 5 unsaved wounds on a tac squad only with basic small arms fire.


You will also notice their is a special rule relating to this called "shielded". If one model in the squad has this USR, the whole squad get's it. If this rule is in play on the squad, the controlling player gets to allocate all wounds delt to the squad.


This is at least how I have pieaced together how the new wound allocation will work. Hope this clears up the rumored new rules for wound allocation. Well I liked the current allocation rules, these one are alot easier to learn and teach people. o.o

[eldargal]

I'm hearing some strong indications from 'my sources' () that these are legitimate, but they aren't the full story. And ghost21 on Warseer says much the same thing, there will be a lot of optional rules, a semi-seperate competitive list, oh and a chaos legions codex.

[Lockark]

I'm hearing some strong indications from 'my sources' () that these are legitimate, but they aren't the full story. And ghost21 on Warseer says much the same thing, there will be a lot of optional rules, a semi-seperate competitive list, oh and a chaos legions codex.

SSSSQQQQQQQQUUUUUUUEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

It's so hard for me not to get giddy every time I read that. I'm usely one to warn to never get excited over rumors, but I'm having a hard time taking my own advice.
@w@

[GrenAcid]

@up
Everytime I see that my mind is racing: "do we get traitors?/mutants?/all nasty stuff chaos should have??" and then is my other thought "Damn...I dont have money for 3 armies!!!"

@Eldargal
"a semi-seperate competitive list" wtf??

[Kawauso]

I'm hearing some strong indications from 'my sources' () that these are legitimate, but they aren't the full story. And ghost21 on Warseer says much the same thing, there will be a lot of optional rules, a semi-seperate competitive list, oh and a chaos legions codex.

God, YES.

I knew there was a reason I was sitting on heaps of conversion bitz for Thousand Sons.

[deadshane]

Why do people fear change?

This is like the 6th time I've heard..."These rumours suck! I'm going to quit! They're ruining the game!"

Shut up and play!