Hoax or not, I don't really care. All I know is that it looks like a lot of fun and I hope to try playing it. A lot of pricing especially for dark eldar and necron vehicles are starting to make sense. Everything about the broken mechanic appeals to me. Scouts are worth taking.
Overall I am happy with the entire book. Everything I am not happy with I could chalk up to editing and all the page flipping I have to do. Still that is no different than the current 8th edition book where you are constantly referencing different rules that are later in the book.
Honestly all this complaining about it being complicated I know that within a month we would all be playing it as fluently as we do for 5th now. It would just become blocks of information, also with a large selection of special rules it would be easy to see how a new unit operated. "This unit has x" instead of "this unit has this special rule that works like this".
Also just getting as many rules in the main rulebook as possible seems to be the trend seen in 8th. Also the inclusion of the apocalypse rules in the main book means that everyone has access to them and they might be able to make an appearance in regular games. Finally I can justify buying from forgeworld.
I hope it is mostly real, i have not been this excited about 40k in nearly a year.
Having read through everyone's thoughts (pro and con), I am more excited about 6th Ed than I have been about 40K for a long, long time. Talk of Overwatch, Covering Fire, ability to assault of a deep-strike...it all bodes very, very well.
That sort of degree of change is exactly the shot in the arm 40K needs after the failboat that is 5th Ed.
Reckon I'll check out the doc and maybe dust off my 40K minis when I get home tonight.
So if this is a early play testing draft has anyone actually tried playing a game of 40k using this mysterious document ?
If any one does play a game using these rules any chance they could give us their experiences ?
The problem is that if you get an immobilized result on an *already* immobilized vehicle. Ergo, you need to immobilize it with one unit damaging it, and THEN do it again with another unit. Being able to spread the damage around 3 Leman Russ tanks mitigates that. And immobilized squadron vehicles no longer are wrecked automatically.
To destroy the Leman Russ squadron that way, you would have to immobilize a tank, hope they fail there 2+ squadron save, and then repeat that 3 more times. It would be easier and more likely to go for 6 needed to kill the tank initially.
Again this is all conjecture, these rules might very well be fake, and without play testing and studying the rules further than a skim read we wont know how it will all wrap up.
I like it. With the exception of a few bits, it all seems good
Parking lots are dead. A combination of shorter ranged shooting from embarked units, scoring in every turn and embarked units not being eligable to hold objectives means holing up in your tank is no longer a realistic strategy.
Also Orks...they get hurt most out of all the armies in this I think. CCW's are AP6, so no armour saves, basically ever. Nob bikers suffer from changes to wound allocation and multiwound squads. Their shooting will improve against a stationairy army but thats not going to save them
Also PEOPLE THERES NO SUCH THING AS WEAPON DESTROYED ANYMORE. It reduces the number of shots a vehicle can make, it doesn't destroy the gun itself.
Eldar vectored engines are going to make a comeback...from a basically useless upgrade, to downgrading the first immobilised result to shaken instead
Last edited by DrLove42; 01-12-2012 at 05:30 AM.
Autarch, Shas'o, Chaos Lord and Decadant Lord of the Webway. And a Doctor!
http://drlove42.blogspot.com/
This is awesome. But awesome.
Seriously, a lot of my 6th ed wishlist boxes are ticked. Wound allocation stupidity? Boom, baby. More dynamic game allowing you to do more than sit and watch (and roll saves) during you opponents move and shoot? Hoo-hah-hwuh-hah, done.
Can anyone who's read any of this leaked document offer any clarification on:
-Covering fire. What is it and how does it work?
-Fearless / no retreat!: Is it still godawful and utterly immersion breaking (speaking as a tyranid player who can lose MCs because termagants got multi-charged)?
Many thanks.
Yep, if these are an early draft and not indicative of final formatting these rules do appear to be quite decent now I've gone over them more. Though I still have a hard time believing they would make such considerable changes to the ruleset.
Ask not the EldarGal a question, for she will give you three answers, all of which are puns and terrifying to know. Back off man, I'm a feminist. Ia! Ia! Gloppal Snode!
Covering fire, from memory, is that if a squad that can do it shoots at a target (even if they can't hurt it), if you roll 3 or more 6's on the to hit rolls then one shot from the squad can be directed.
For instance if a squad of DE Warriors fire at a squad of marines with a captain in the squad, if you score 3 or more 6's from the splinter rifles then the dark lance shot can be directed onto the captain.
Least thats my understnading of it
Some new evidence for it being a "fake" taken from Imperiatus Dominatui. [url]http://www.imperiusdominatus.com/2012/01/proof-that-leaked-6th-rules-are-fake.html[/url]
Would need a bit more evidence than that, but this would be the most elaborate fake in history, and proff that people RELLY need to get out moreIt was done on a home edition of the program that GW use the professional version of, this version was 1.5 vs the 1.6 that GW use for all their other (older) published files. The files origin is Glasgow not Lenton unlike all their published files and the file author is named Robert Smithe, not GWPLC like all their other published files.
And if it is a fake, it'd be a shame...this is really exactly what i'd want
Last edited by DrLove42; 01-12-2012 at 06:00 AM.
Autarch, Shas'o, Chaos Lord and Decadant Lord of the Webway. And a Doctor!
http://drlove42.blogspot.com/