Rumor: 6th ed wound Allocation from BoW

[Denied]

Hey Guys Beast of War did a little video segment on rumored wound allocation in 6th ed based on one of their "credible" sources. Take it as you will here is the link:

[url]http://www.beastsofwar.com/warhammer-40k/wound-allocation-works-6th-edition-40k/[/url]

[Shadoq]

Interesting but here is my question.
Say you take 6 wounds on a unit. All bolter wounds for the sake of argument. Lets say you measure to the target and find that while 3 man dudes in the target unit are in range of your guns, 7 other man dudes are found to be out of range. What happens then? Do the wounds wrap around to only the guys who are in range or do they get spread even if the 7 man dudes are out of range?

I know how it would work in 5th, just curious to see what the thinking will be for 6th.

[Chuck777]

Interesting but here is my question.
Say you take 6 wounds on a unit. All bolter wounds for the sake of argument. Lets say you measure to the target and find that while 3 man dudes in the target unit are in range of your guns, 7 other man dudes are found to be out of range. What happens then? Do the wounds wrap around to only the guys who are in range or do they get spread even if the 7 man dudes are out of range?

I know how it would work in 5th, just curious to see what the thinking will be for 6th.

The pay off for all the measuring you'll be doing, for the defender, would most likely be that woulds do not wrap around. You can only hit models that are within range.

Of course, then the debate becomes - All of your bugs are within range of the first six of my 10 marines. Another 3 are within range of 2 of your bugs, while the last is not within range. How would allocation work for this very common scenario?

[DrLove42]

Given i've disliked most the other 6th ed rumours, unsuprisingly i dislike this one

I guess the idea is that if your heavy weapons aren't in the front, they lose a little bit of range, for some safety. Except is loosing 2" of range worth the guy with the lascannon in a squad being the last to die?

It also encourages the idea of flanking I guess. Move round to the sides and back to get the models being protected faster.

So its a flanking maneuvre,....yet another thing from Fantasy to 40k

[eldargal]

This is sodding awful. People say 40k is supposed to be getting more like 8th ed WFB, but this is straight out of 7th ed, having to micromanage units to an 8th of an inch in movement to maximise your advantages.

I still don't actually believe in any of this, but if the yare true then 6th is looking like it is going to be a disaster.

[Deadlift]

If half the 6th rumours are true (which I doubt) then myself and our small group will just keep playing 5th.

[Aetaosrau]

Can't say I'm overly keen on this as it seems to make this round overly converluted and will slow things down and cause more arguements.
I can see this being a sticking point in the game and coursing more rules imperfections and holes, like blast weapons were does the allocations go then.

[eldargal]

Well that is it isn't it, ALL the rumours for 6th so far point to a ridiculously convoluted ruleset which will result in slow, boring games. You can get away with a bit more sedentary pace in WFB because of the style of warfare it represents, but not in a fast paced scifi setting. GW deliberately made 40k a more streamlined, fast paced ruleset with 3rd and we are supposed to believe they are going to turn their back on fourteen years in which 40k became the dominant tabletop wargame in the world.

[MC Tic Tac]

I remember when the rumours for 5th where floating around.....

Every rumored rule on it's own was thought to be the end of the game.

But as we all know now the combination is the game we know and love today.

Perspective is a power thing.


Personally I will wait till the book is in my hands rather than panic over a single rule in isolation away from the rest of the book.

[lobster-overlord]

You hit me with a laz and 2 bolters. I allocate teh las to the closest model, and the bolters to 2... ook, only 1 more is in range of teh bolters, even though their were two models in range, but because i allocated the laz first, to a closer model, then I get to skip allocating that second bolter since no other neww marine is in range.... there's a flaw already if they don't carry over into the rest of the unit... or they have to specify allocating in range order first since the two marines in range of the bolters have to get those shots and the laz goes to someone in a further group in the same unit.