40K 6th ed: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

 

Hey everyone, Reecius here to talk about what we see as the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of 40K 6th edition in these early days.

So, first off: caveats. I know the haters gonna hate despite me saying this, but that is OK.

We have played about 12 practice games now, gone over the rules thoroughly but I AM SURE WE WILL GET SOME OF THE RULES WRONG. It is inevitable with this much information and this little amount of time to process it. This also isn’t comprehensive (although it is pretty damn long!); a lot of the more subtle things will reveal themselves to us over time. Feel free to correct me where I have missed something, but please stow the hate if at all possible. Also, these are my opinions, and you are free to disagree, I am not trying to force my points of view on anyone (and I am sure mine will change with time and more exposure to this rule set).

With that done: let’s do this.

We here at our store Frontline Gaming have a really eclectic mix of gamers, from the super casual to the super competitive and have gotten feedback from everyone. I think it is important to get a diversity of opinions in order to get a complete picture. All of that feedback has gone into this.

The Good.

Flyers: Everyone at our store really likes the flyer rules. They add a new dynamic to the game, and I think are well done. Flying MC’s too, as they essentially follow the same rules. Fliers are pretty easy to get around now, too, apart from those with Vector Dancer due to their movement rules, so the inevitable flying circus lists we will see will have some pretty serious limitations built in. By giving every army access to anti-flyer firepower through terrain it keeps things fair (and make sure to note, many things like Hyrdas that have Skyfire aren’t as good at shooting ground units). Well done GW on implementing this.

Movement. I like the new movement rules quite a bit, particularly allowing you to move a squad but leave a heavy weapon stationary to shoot at normal BS. Very cool, very fun change. Beasts finally being able to go up stairs? Win. Slow and Purposeful now being able to move 6” is another big win. Snap fire I like as well, as it means you can almost always do something and stay engaged in the game, even if at reduced efficiency. Nicely done.

Streamlining of the USRs is also a nice rule and I can see the forethought that went into this. A lot of rules will be made clear with new books. They had USRs, but this is obviously a bigger push towards a streamlining of play.

Allies. I really like allies for what it is now and what it could be. Allies break the game, but in the way Warmachine is “broken.” Every army can pretty much get everything (sorry Nids) which means that every army when built well will have the ability to fight on a level playing field with anyone else. It isn’t a perfect system of course (we’ve already found some incredibly OP combos), and some of the alliances seem weird, but I believe that with the new books coming out, the crazy combos will most likely be toned down. I could of course be wrong, but I still have faith. Also, with the incredible potential to bring the GW fluff to life with “mini-armies” as we discussed last time, this could be awesome. If you missed that article, think Mercenary forces for 40K that give us awesome new models like Demiurge/Squats, Genestealer Cults, etc. that could be used for a variety of armies. This was a bold move and I applaud it.

Vehicle Hull Points. I really like the new system. Vehicles die faster, but also got better in some ways. Glancing only removes a hull point, but you don’t roll on the damage table. The pen table is slightly more forgiving than it was to any weapon that isn’t AP2 or 1, for whom it is the same (essentially). On the whole, I was ready for the age of metal boxes to come to an end and I think this was a good way to handle it. Perhaps the pendulum has swung a bit too far against vehicles, but for now I like this rule.

Cover. Decreasing the average cover save, particularly for vehicles, was a good move. It is now incumbent upon the players to make sure terrain is fair on a table (not too much 4+ on one side) but most players are fair minded in that regard and I don’t see it being an issue. Now, things die easier which speeds the game up a bit. It also makes heavy weapons better, which needed to happen. Volume of Fire is still king due to the increased amounts of Infantry we’ll be seeing and because of Hull Points, but it isn’t such a big disparity any more. I like the rules for models being out of cover being able to be singled out. It will get a big weird and clunky given the physical reality of some tables and terrain pieces, but in concept I like it for the tactical choices it provides players. The downside though of course, is that movement will be even more important now than it was which will slow things down.

Weapons changes. Making Rapid Fire weapons able to fire on the move as if they were holding still is pure win. Throwing grenades and being able to use them against tanks and MC’s in combat? Great call there and I am stoked to see it in the rules as I have always missed that since 2nd ed. I actually like the distinction now between HtH weapons with AP values, AP 1 and 2, etc. I think it really stratifies the game a lot and makes things like 2+sv armor a real game changer. I think this was a good decision and will make the game more enjoyable and tactically diverse.

Morale. They gave non-fearless units a big boost, and the game is better for it. Being able to rally even if near the enemy, if above 25% (down to a single model if you have an Independent Character) or even below that with Snake Eyes, makes the gap between Fearless and Non-Fearless models not so huge and I think it is a great addition to the game.

Snapfire. I like it. Being able to shoot when charged, stunned, gone to ground, etc. but at a reduced effect means that units can always participate in the game in some fashion. This rule does make the game feel more cinematic and interactive to me, and I like it.

The Bad.

Reserves. I am hoping that in time this will make sense to me but right now it seems truly awful. Only being able to reserve half of your army with decreased cover saves means going second against a shooty army is going to be terrible. Night Fight MIGHT help, but again, it’s a crap shot. Combine this with every book mission having First Blood as a secondary objective, and you have an innate and potentially HUGE disadvantage built into the game. The ability to go full reserves was one of the best changes of 5th ed, IMO, and provided a ton of unique army builds and tactical choices. Now if you go second against a powerful shooty army such as IG with insufficient cover on your side of the board, you are likely going to get smashed with no recourse other than to drop your shorts and take it. Further, you can no longer assault out of reserves, scout moves, infiltrating, etc. I struggle to see the wisdom in this choice as well. Units like Snikrot, Genesteelers of both varieties, out flanking units, etc. all got hosed. I never felt that these units were OP at all, but in fact added a lot of fun to the game. Now these units are greatly reduced in power. Units that come onto the table and shoot well will be fine (I see Drop Pod Armies, particularly Wolves being very good), but assault based units come on, sit there, get shot, then get shot again with Overwatch before finally assaulting. Many of them lack the durability to do this and survive with any hitting power. Bummer.

Random Warlord power and Psychic Powers. I just flat out do not understand the appeal of rolling for an ability that may very well be useless. If they were all good, then OK, I can live with it. But some of the powers and abilities you can roll on the table are just plain worthless in certain situations. If we could just choose, it would allow people to plan and build lists and tactics that they can actually use, or react to new situations. Rolling  a crap ability or power that does nothing against your opponent while they get one that is great against you is another one of those situations where you are at a disadvantage before the game has even begun and that just isn’t fun, IMO.

Wound Allocation. This rule is unfortunately terrible, IMO and really drags the game down.  It causes a domino effect that adversely affects a lot of the game, most of it actually. The previous wound allocation system upset people because you could diversify a unit with wargear and then spread wounds around, giving a crazy advantage to multi-wound units. This new rule’s stated purpose is to create a more cinematic experience where the guys in front die to incoming fire before the guys in the back. What this means in application is that you have to put your best stuff in the middle or rear of the unit to avoid dying by being the closest model to the enemy. That means your heroic Sargents and Special Weapon toting models will have to be protected through model placement. The game is very fluid now, especially with fliers and such, and players will have to be very, very careful in how they place their models as threats can come from any angle.

This is going to really slow the game down, particularly when combined with the fact that you can pre-measure, and the changed terrain rules (not wanting to leave certain models out in the open, worse cover saves, etc.). In order to not have a squad neutered, you will have to be meticulous in model placement. Range and Tank sniping are back as well, two of the WORST parts of 4th ed. What these mean is positioning yourself through using the maximum range of weapons (easy as hell now with pre-measuring) and/or other units (such as Tanks) so that your models can ONLY see/hit certain models in the other unit so that you can only kill those models. This is mitigated by Look Out, Sir!, but it will still drive people crazy, and again, will slow the game down as people try and set these types of attacks up.

The other reason I really, really dislike the new wound allocation system is how much it will slow down the act of removing casualties. With homogenous units it isn’t so bad during the shooting phase. You roll all saves, pull the closest models. Sounds simple, but the issue is going to come when people can’t tell which model is closest and one of the models is important. This will cause animosity, and conflict in many cases.

The other issue is when you have mixed save units. The way the rule is written, you have to start rolling on the different armor type by itself, one at a time, until the model dies or there are no more wounds to allocate. This is bad. It will slow the game down incredibly, and it pretty much forces people to game the system. Armies that have access to resilient, good save (particularly when you can give said model a reroll on armor and/or FnP) characters can place that model out front, and just take saves on him and him alone until he fails one, and then use Look Out, Sir! to soak the wound on a chump on a 2+. Trust me, this is going to be infuriating, and it will become extremely prevalent. Just as people used wound diversification in 5th because it really increases a unit’s durability, they will use these rules and Look Out, Sir to abuse the daylights out of this system.

Units like Nob Bikers (who are going to be unbelievably powerful now) and Paladins are going to piss people off to high heaven. Each is a character which means each can Look Out, Sir for the others on a 4+, 2+ on any attached IC’s.  They are now arguably HARDER to kill than they were before and they can do it without diversifying wargear which saves points. You can use maneuver to get around this to a certain extent, but it will be super annoying. Also, think about how long this will take. Roll save 1 on lead character, fail, roll save 2 (if they have it, and almost everyone can get FnP now), fail, roll Look Out, Sir. That was 1 wound, no on to the next one, repeat over and over.

In combat it gets worse. Since it is really hard to determine who the closest model is in combat, the defending player has the choice to roll the saves one at a time on models that are “closest” in combat. If a unit is largely homogenous, such as a big unit of Gants, this won’t come up. However, if say you have 4 Tac Marines in BtB with an enemy unit: 2 chumps, 1 Sarge and 1 Flamer, you are going to want roll your saves one at a time starting with the chumps in the hopes that they soak the wounds before they get to your more important models. Again, the game is slowing down in a very big way and, again, add in Look Out, Sir and additional saves and this process can take ages. Yes you have the option to fast roll the dice, but it is not mandatory and it will often be detrimental to do so with a complex unit.

Assaulting is also one of the aspects of the game I do not like. Random charges are really awful, IMO (you will see a trend of me disliking random things). I understand why they put it in sense they added pre-measuring and they don’t want units dancing around one another’s max charge range, but the mechanic stinks. Units with the ability to reroll one or both of the dice (such as Fleet) is going to be critical to making an assault army that is reliable.

What you get with this is a situation where you can plan for the average, but the long and short of it is that getting the charge is just a crap toss. In our first game, a Black Templar unit failed its charge from 4.5” away and the unit was subsequently destroyed and that decided the game…on turn 1. Now of course, anecdotes do not make statistical evidence and the majority of the time you will roll a 6, 7, or 8 on the roll, but no amount of skill mitigates this. It really does just come down to getting as close as you can and hoping you roll a high enough number….skill is diminished greatly in this system. I think a superior system would have been choosing to either take 6” OR roll if you wanted to.

The other bummer is that units that only assault will almost always try and get that lucky long assault because why not? They have nothing else to do. Yes, Snapfire may deny them of that charge and result in a wasted effort, but in our experience Snapfire has not been something to rely on or factor into decisions unless it is a weird situation such as a unit with Foreboding cast on it, or with a huge amount of flak fire. So what you will see happen is the long bomb assaults being icing on the cake more often than game winning moves (as the defender with pre-measuring can just make sure he is out of charge range if he needs to), and the short range failed charges being devastating blows. In other words, it will be a disappointment and game loser more often than a game winner, IMO.

Not being able to charge units you can’t see is another big change. It makes sense to a certain extent, but it hurts assault armies a great deal.

The loss of fearless saves is a trip back to 4th ed where we will see combats that never end. I like it on the one hand as it means silly things like monstrous creatures won’t die of fright when a bunch of little guys get splattered, but it also means that as in 4th, we will have these protracted, grinding combats where not much of anything happens. Scarabs, large units of Nids, etc. will just suck units in and sit on them all game. They mitigated this to an extent by limiting multi-assaults, but I like games with lots of action and that was one aspect of 4th I didn’t care for. When you factor in the ability to kill characters out of a unit with Wound Allocation, you can REALLY turn these combats into slap fights when Sarges are killed early.

The pile-in mechanic, while definitely cool and cinematic, slows the game down a ton. Combat now means you will be moving each model in a squad between 2-3 times. Think about what that means for large units: moving every Boy in a 30 strong mob 4 times in a turn (move, assault, pile-in 1, pile-in 2) will take ages, and that is just one squad. Taking casualties from the back of a unit was unrealistic, but I will sacrifice realism for speed and smoothness of play any day.

Challenges are also a cool idea but not so cool in application. They are meant to allow people to fight epic combats between heroic characters, but in reality the mechanics of the game do not support that. Instant Death and Eternal Warrior make combats totally lop-sided. That big, brave Space Marine Captain fighting the iconic Ork Warboss with his Power Klaw is going to get smashed in almost every confrontation. What will happen, again, is that most people will game the system and come up with ways to turn the rules to their advantage, or to at least mitigate damage. For example, I can see people running naked Sarges just to make or accept challenges and take a key enemy fighter out of a combat. Or, characters like Draigo who will beat damn near anyone in a Challenge and have pretty much nothing to fear from it. One of the funny/dumb situations we had was when a Daemon Prince charged a Black Templars Assault Terminator unit and Challenged the EC, who had to accept. His buddies sat around watching him get cut to ribbons, unable to help. That isn’t really very cool or fun. In the end, this will be a system that sounds neat but will be meta-gamed.

The Ugly

Night fight. With the chance to have Night Fight in EVERY game, and for multiple turns, it will become a very real issue to address, but again, it is totally random. You could have 3 turns of it, you could have none, but you will probably have at least a turn of Night Fight in every game. And now that it really changes the way the game plays, long ranged shooting armies that do not have the ability to get around it will struggle. I see why it was put into the game—to mitigate shooty armies and give a small boost to assaulters—it still is too random and potentially game winning/loosing in some match-ups for my liking. Again, I believe a game is most fun when it is determined as much as possible by player actions and not random occurrences. This makes the players feel like they are in control of what is happening instead of just observers of random events.

Transports. I am on the fence on this one. Transports changed so much, keeping in line with reserves so that unless you are in an Open Topped or Assault vehicle, you are going to get shot before you get to do much. Not being able to charge out of a vehicle that isn’t assault, even if it held still or was blown up, is pretty crazy. That means best case scenario, you are getting a turn 3 charge from a non-assault vehicle. You will actually have situations where you will NOT want to destroy a transport as it means the cargo inside won’t be able to assault. Let them drive around in their box, they have to get out to score objectives, and the vehicle can only go 6” for that to occur. The limited range on them means crazy things like Orks on a WAAAGH!! won’t have a charge range that is greater than the range of most weapons, but it is also yet another blow to assault armies. I think it will take some more play testing to really see how we feel about this one.

Mysterious Objectives and Terrain. Again, random effects are not fun, IMO. I don’t want all of my Psykers to randomly die because someone walked next to something. I simply do not enjoy this kind of game mechanic, although I can see how some people would. Mysterious Objectives are annoying as well as it just isn’t enjoyable to deploy in a certain way only to find out that all of the objectives worth high points are on your opponent’s side of the table or you roll detrimental objectives while your opponent rolls beneficial (and some are REALLY beneficial). Through just happenstance, you are fighting an uphill battle. Again, a reduction of player skill and an increase in random chance determining the results of a game is just not enjoyable for me as I value fairness and skill.

Book missions. Some of them are good, and I like some of the concepts put forth, but some of the missions are just bad. I love the secondary objectives, but First Blood is really slanted towards the player that goes first, giving them yet another big advantage.

Crusade is one we’re used to and quite good, I like it. Purge the Alien is essentially modified Kill Points which is a bit of a letdown. The rumor that units would be worth 1 KP per 50pts they cost was awesome, still simple and helped to get rid of the ridiculous situations where a unit of Paladins is worth as much as a unit of Grots. To further compound this, First Blood is worth more in this mission (as it is in the Scouring and Big Guns Never Tire) as it just further pushes first turn into the lime light, particularly when units can’t reserve.

Big Guns Never Tire and Scouring both have some flaws IMO as well. Both can present situations where one player can score more points than the other, which is somewhat offset by those units being scoring, but when you add in the bonus from First Blood as well, they are more of a detriment in most situations than a benefit. Good lists have their scoring needs covered in most cases, anyway. The Scouring suffers from similar issues, further compounded by the fact that the objectives are worth a random amount of points after deployment. It should be revealed before deployment, IMO, so you can plan for it and not get hosed if your army isn’t very mobile.

The Emperor’s Will is Capture and Control but with tie breaker points, I like it. The Relic is a weird one, and really great for some armies, and poor for others. If you have a fast, tough scoring unit and you go first, this is almost an auto-win (Nob Bikers for example).

The deployments are great apart from Hammer and Anvil, which is cool IMO apart from the wonky reserves…they come on from the short table edge, meaning that they will often contribute nothing to the game which further puts you at the mercy of shooty armies. This is also a tough deployment to play in a tight space such as at a tournament, but otherwise I like it.

Terrain.  The new Battlefield Terrain rules are fun, but with so much randomness, really not suited for even mildly competitive play, IMO. I think that these can be funny if you appreciate randomness, but frustrating otherwise. Some of them are incredibly powerful, too and can win or lose you a game based on their effects. Purchasable terrain is cool, and I like what it brings to the game in terms of allowing armies to fight back against flyers and manipulate reserve rolls where they otherwise would not have been able to, not to mention awesome modeling possibilities, but unless you are playing in a pre-arranged game, they are pretty impractical. If two people show up with a Fortress of Redemption to a tournament or pick-up game, that would certainly be interesting to say the least.

I think in general assault armies got a nerf, and that short ranged, mobile shooty armies will become ascendant, followed closely by long range shooty armies that can reliably get around Night Fight. With the ability to shoot nearly everything before getting charged, less multi-assaults, and unending fearless assaults, assault armies will really struggle in the face of shooty armies. I could of course be wrong, and I hope I am, but I believe 6th will be the shooty edition more so than any other we have seen. Either way, I look forward to seeing how it develops.

Oh the whole, I like 6th ed, but the things I don’t like I REALLY don’t like and they unfortunately are core mechanics of the game. I think this was obviously a rule set written with the casual gamer in mind and that to fit it into the tournament scene, like Fantasy, it will require a lot of modification. I do think though, that we can mould it into something that satisfies gamers of all persuasions.

Tags:

About Reecius

The fearless leader of the intrepid group of gamers gone retailers at Frontline Gaming!

30 Responses to “40K 6th ed: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly”

  1. eriochrome July 4, 2012 3:10 am
    #

    I do not have the rules but have been reading up on them to see if I want to invest ~60 dollars in a rulebook for a game I have not played recently since this amount is twice what I paid for my hardbound 4ed rulebook and 25% more than what I paid for the 5th ed starter set.

    On the wound allocation from shooting in heterogeneous units and characters does not work exactly like you say from what I have read. Look Out Sir is triggered by wound allocation which in heterogeneous units is before the save is rolled so you do not take the 2+ and FNP and then if failed pass of the wound with Look Out Sir. If you want the Look Out Sir you have to take it first so the use is more for passing off the AP2 or Instant death attacks while trying to have him save the weak shots where 1 wound is not going to kill him.

    I think the Nob bikers are still going to be annoying but I think the rules say that you must put the wounds on a wounded model over the closest. Now that model can take the Look Out Sir to try to dump it on another model giving you two wounded models (if passed) etc. It is going to be a pain but with only 4+ transfer success they will die a little quicker at the expense of some really painful additional rolling and rules arguments.

    • Gargh July 4, 2012 10:40 pm
      #

      Just weighing in here to say yup, this is how wound allocation works. It’s annoying that it’s not very clear, but if you read it carefully it can only be
      1. allocate wound
      2. choose whether or not to Look Out
      3. roll save
      4. take wound (or not)

      • Reecius
        Reecius July 5, 2012 9:44 am
        #

        Yeah, you may be right, it is unclear (typical GW, haha) but I think you may have it. The shitty thing is that it really doesn’t change how the unit plays that much, unfortunately. You can still spread wounds around to keep resilient units, super resilient.

  2. kombat July 4, 2012 4:41 am
    #

    About reserves, i actualyl really hated playing against an all reserve army since it basically 2 rounds where i as the 1st player did nothing and it was very hard to counter something that really sin´t there. Sure it can be harsh against a really shooty list liek IG or tau but with random night fight reserve half the army and get really good cover with the rest that ahs to be on the field i still dont see any army completly obliterating everything you put on the battlefield.

    Also about first blood I fell like they put it there to counter the pros of going 2nd beeing able to score or denying victory points in the last round i feel is way too powerful.

    I generally like the new missions it is a good mix between need lots of units or few units and especially there are more missions.

    And lastly even though too much randomness is not very nice from a tournament player view i still think some random elements gives for a funnier game and I rather have fun games than I win every game tournament or not.

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 5, 2012 10:09 am
      #

      I agree random is definitely funny, and if you like that, or are approaching the game as a diversion, then that is great. If you look at the game as a contest of skill, then it really is a bummer, as you pointed out.

      You can’t really on Night Fight though, it only happens 50% of the time, if you don’t get it, bye bye, baby.

      Going second isn’t that great though, as every mission still has random game length. You don’t know, unless it’s turn 7, that you will truly get the last move. Going first now is better than it’s been since 4th, IMO.

      I agree that the new missions aren’t terrible, but they have a lot of loop-holes that could produce near auto-loss situations which is really crappy.

  3. Alarum July 4, 2012 5:24 am
    #

    When I get my first game in, I think I will try a Dark Footdar list. I have some ideas for getting into assault unmolested (relatively) with my wyches out of a portal. If these ideas dont work out, do I make a shooty DE army (Likely a very tough army but “Yawn” to play) or is it time to dust off the 1K Sons and Fateweaver for an edition. I have always liked to make lists that people say are unplayable and find a way to be competitive with them but I just dont see it with an assault based WWP army.

    I agree with the points you make just from reading the rules. (no games experience yet) I dont ike the random elements that punish units that are not wearing 3+ or better. Failing a charge is much more bearable if you get a save from shooting next turn, but look at all the Xenos that dont get better than a 5+. Orks, Dark Eldar, Nids all have dedicated assault units that will be blown off the board if they fail a charge. Being able to save dangerous terrain helps meq be more survivable but those poor orks are just as likely to die as they were before.

    I would like to metion that I am looking forward to having a few games and getting the feel for for it. There is nothing I have read so far (or will ever read) that will stop me playing 40k, It may force me to change armies, think of new stratagies, use units I would not normaly use and find ways to adapt and overcome the obstacles my opponent provides. If this is what I get from 6th then it is a win in my book.

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 5, 2012 10:10 am
      #

      I am with you. I will still play and enjoy it, but some of the rules are such a bummer.

      Please let us know how the WWP list you are working on goes, as that was my next project but I now feel like it is just dead in the water.

  4. Lord Victor July 4, 2012 5:50 am
    #

    Yo,

    Decent review, but do really need to point out what must be the most common rule misreading of 6th (really tons of people are getting it wrong, so no disrespect).

    Wound allocation with look out sir:
    In your example you talk about a super tough character taking shots and rolling saves, and then if he fails them just LOSing them to some chump. This is incorrect. Look out Sir takes place when the wound is ALLOCATED. Read the first sentence of the rule again and take out the (or unsaved wound) part. Look out sir can only happen immediatly upon allocation of a wound. Now flip back a page and look at the wound allocation rules. You’ll notice that wounds are allocated 2 different ways. 1: if all armor values are the same in the unit, roll saves first, then allocate. 2: if armor saves are different, allocate wounds and then roll saves based on that models individual save.

    So in your above example, if the super character is in line to have a wound allocated to him, and his armor save is different from his squad, you must choose to LOS or not before you roll his save. Once he rolls a save it is to late to LOS.

    Now of course everyone then replies, “But what about the “unsaved wound” part of the rule!!” Well remember how I mentioned there are 2 ways to allocate wounds? So now example two: you have a Marine Sgt with his bros. They all have the same armor save, so at the wound allocation process you must roll saves first, and then allocate wounds. So you take your wound pile and roll all your 3+s. What remains are “Unsaved wounds” you then allocate them closest to furthest yadda yadda. So when it gets to the Sgt, he is now allocated a “unsaved wound”, but now has the chance to LOS it away. If he fails the LOS he immediatly is removed as a casualty because the wound has already failed its armor save.

    I apologize for the wall-o-txt comment, but this mistake has been popping up on a lot of very important blogs, and the rule is being spread incorrectly and starting to filter down in to gaming groups. We need to nip it in the bud now! Thanks for reading!

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 5, 2012 10:13 am
      #

      No disrespect at all man, I appreciate a thoughtful comment which yours clearly is.

      I think you may be right in this argument, and that we may have miss-read it. It isn’t very clear at all.

      But, even with the way you are looking at it the squad still stays super resilient. You can take super dude in the front, and let him take the wounds you can’t allocate, and LOS those the squad can take to chumps. It isn’t as good, but dang near it.

      Thanks for the clarification though, it’s appreciated.

  5. Hulksmash July 4, 2012 6:37 am
    #

    Hey Reece,

    You have the lookout sir rule incorrect. You roll for lookout before rolling the save. So you can’t take a 2+ on the character, fail, and then shuffle it off. You roll for Lookout Sir if you choose to take it and then that model that takes the hit makes it’s save.

    I disagree about the random charges. This is an instance, to me, of you reading the rules and appying them in a vacuum and not in comparison to how it played in 5th. I think that 75% of my charges in 5th were random anyway since a good opponent was using terrain to their advantage against assault units.

    As for fearless let’s face it. That needed to happen. It was ridiculous that TMC’s were taking massive overkill wounds from small bugs or that ork boyz were pretty boned against things like grey hunters. I think it’s a solid change and while there will be some tarpitting (a good thing) I feel this was done partially because it majorly boosts Xenos races.

    As for night fight, since it’s rolled before deployment, you know going in whether or not it’s going to matter on turn one. And even more so since it’s rolled before deployment and since the rules say you roll for sides during deployment that means you know before anything else, right there with warlord traits. It’s still gonna suck for Nids on this against Dark Eldar but I think it really does help with mitigating major first turn advantages. As a sidenote it opens up tons of tactical options as far as what reserves you place, when you choose to go due to flyers (if you take them) and other such crazy things.

    On transports I think your missing the opportunity. Can units just assault out of them anymore if they don’t move? Nope. But can a vehicle move up, have troops pile out the side, have the troops fire, and then have the vehicle move in the shooting phase to block the troops from enemy LoS? Yes. This is more of an imperial, chaos, & ork boost but it’s a pretty solid one.

    I do agree that until we get the hang of it that wound allocation is going to be a pita. So is Lookout Sir and pile in moves. But I do feel it’ll be a very tactical game, more so than 5th. There is more control out there on a lot of things than there was before so some of the other random elements had to be added.

    Hope you make it to Nova broski. Otherwise I’ll see ya at Adepticon 🙂

    I think this edition is a mobility players dream. Everything moves and participates and it’s very fluid. I also think you’ll find that, other than daemons, no army really relies on assault to carry the win. Especially as we see more and more people shift to a combined arms approach instead of the MSU that will cripple them competitively this edition. Even armies most people think of as assault heavy (orks & nids) have insane amounts of firepower to support their CC element and honestly those got so much better it’s sick.

    Overall a pretty good read but I do feel in certain areas that you’re getting worked up on a few things and reading rules in isolation, instead of as a whole.

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 5, 2012 10:20 am
      #

      Hey buddy, always appreciate your input and as usual, you bring some very good points to the table.

      I didn’t even consider using flat out to cover units after they shoot, that is genius and will be a staple tactic.

      I agree that mobility and firepower are really going to be where it’s at (as I stated in the article) and that the game is more tactical if you reduce some of the random stuff. Every model’s movement is important, and that is one of my gripes with it, it will take bloody ages! haha.

      The game has become a game of micro-management in a big way.

      I still disagree on the reserves issue, not being able to put everything in reserves is a step backwards, IMO. Night Fight isn’t reliable, and if you are playing that SAFH and you don’t get it, what do you do? Sit there and get splattered.

      Mixed arms armies will be better now, I wouldn’t go so far as to say they are mandatory, but they going to be really flexible.

      Thanks for the good input my friend, as always.

    • artfox13 January 3, 2013 2:35 pm
      #

      yeah because xenos races are way OPed.

  6. Fable July 4, 2012 6:40 am
    #

    As usual I find your articles to be well written ones, however I disagree with you on a few points.

    The Warlord Chart in particular I’ve found fairly useful. One of the things to remember is that these abilities are free. But you roll on the chart after rolling up the mission, so you can choose which of the three charts best suits the mission and your commanders.

    I’ve heard a lot of negative comments about randomness not being fun overall and I think this has a lot to do with the common persistence of the tournament mindset online. As far as that goes I think one of the challenges of the game is for a good general to mitigate the effect of random things.

    For instance, you need to calculate the advantages and disadvantages of taking objectives on turn 5. Do you chance there will be a turn 6 and your opponent can drive your forces off the objective or do you take the chance that the game might end and you don’t have the objective?

    While there may be a rare occurrence of a 4″ charge not working, those times are few and far between. In the case of fleet units especially the new charge mechanic is very powerful.

    Among my gaming group the mysterious terrain has been fun because it shifts your idea of what the battleground you’re fighting over is, sort of re-defining the game as you play it.

    The Random Psychic Powers are a fun throwback to 2nd edition because they change how your psyker is used from game to game which is both a challenge for the general to get the best use out of them and for the opposing general to know exactly what to expect out of the opposing forces.

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 5, 2012 10:25 am
      #

      Hey Fable, I think you really said it well. How you like random or non-random effects really just depends on your perspective as a gamer. If you like the unpredictability of random events, then this will be great! If you like the immersion that interactive terrain brings, then I am stoked for you. I just personally do not! haha.

      We failed a 4.5″ charge in our FIRST game of 6th which cost the player the game, haha, so that sort of colored our look on it right off the bat. I know that won’t happen often, but when it does, it is going to suck hard. Fleet will be critical for assault armies, I agree.

      The Warlord abilities are free true, but they can be grossly imbalanced which is my gripe with them. One guy can get a powerful ability, the other a bad ability which to me coming from the perspective of a TO, is bad.

      I just can’t get into random Psyker abilities for the same reason. I play Pathfinder every Monday night with the guys for that kind of fun, I want my table top games to be tactically challenging and precise, but that is just me.

  7. mercutioh July 4, 2012 7:02 am
    #

    Played my first full game last night with my son. I’m on the casual side of things so I have to say a good portion of the changes really appeal to me. Even wound allocation(although a PITA) it allows for directed fire(which in turn allows for sniping I know.) The fact that Cover is strictly on a model by model basis now is BRILLIANT. I honestly can say that had they done nothing else with the game this single change would have won me over entirely. I see the speed of hull points now as Typhus took out a Predator in a single charge by himself. (Dude is a BOSS). I think that there’s a lot of we need to get used to the rules out there that will dim some of the anti-6th feelings. As always though a great read, Good to see someone who may not be happy with some of the elements really give full credit to GW where they got things absolutely right.

    Looking forward to getting in a game with my Main Rival soon, and I may play 5 or 6 more games with my son until then. I may even have to finagle a way to come down for the 1k tourney. If not this month then next.

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 5, 2012 10:47 am
      #

      I am really glad you guys are enjoying the game, that is great! We want people to like the game not just because it is good for business, but because we love it!

      Let us know how that game goes.

  8. saffring July 4, 2012 7:09 am
    #

    agree with most of this. I think list building will revolve around how many fliers per troop choices you can afford. When you can’t afford a flyer, buy an Aegis w/quad gun for AA and self made cover for your troops.

    the randomness just sends competitive play to the dump. no other way to say it. you won’t be able to count on nearly as many stable variables as you’ve been used to in the past. Luck will overtake Skill as you stated. You said it very well, it won’t be what your army can and can’t do, it will be the random advantages for your opponents or disadvantages for your army that having equal pointed armies to start the game, won’t be able to mitigate.

    you have the wound allocation due to Look Out Sir a bit wrong. You don’t fail your saves then pass it on. you try to pass the allocated wound to someone else first, if you fail, it’s all yours. I think that takes alot of the bite of your complaint away and leaves wound shaninigans fair. (unless you have loads of IC’s.)

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 5, 2012 11:09 am
      #

      Yeah, you said it.

      I was wrong on the LOS rule, but in multi-wound units, it’s still really annoying! haha. You can still spread wounds around the unit.

      I am sure that with time and familiarity we won’t be so taken aback by a lot of this, but some of the stuff just seems poorly conceived, IMO.

      Flyers are damn good, but I don’t think that they are gong to be game breaking. You can get out of their firing lanes pretty easily.

  9. Zid July 4, 2012 9:03 am
    #

    While not having played a game of 6th yet, I’m with Hulk; I can see a lot of benefits in this new edition. While some armies got punished (DE Wyches for example), some got greatly needed buffs, and allies isn’t nearly as OP as everyone makes it out to be. Think of it this way: you need to spend ~200ish points on allies before you get to the other slots. So if you want that unit of TWC, your spending a good chunk of points to get the ability to use a SINGLE unit. Allies are also hard to fit in and make “work” with other codices; each codex was balanced and made to work with itself. Trying to fit, say, a unit of AM’s with a libby into your Necron list, you need to make 225 points worth of room, which for a Necron player that could be a unit of wraiths.

    Honestly, I feel this edition will work really well, and look forward to getting my games in. My Immotekh Shooty List can finally come to fruition! (I’ve had him sitting in a case since I won a tourney back in december…. lol)

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 5, 2012 11:10 am
      #

      I appreciate your optimism, and I too like Allies, but they are pretty OP right now. Luckily though, they are OP for everyone! Haha, apart from poor Nids though, of course.

  10. Sean Ireland July 4, 2012 11:20 am
    #

    Nice use of the pictures. Freakin’ love that movie. Would allocation does suck, that should of made it to the ugly.

    The big solution to the problems of sixth, granted I haven’t played, only read the rules a few times, is smaller point games. Makes no sense for GW since they will now sell less models.

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 5, 2012 11:11 am
      #

      I agree at this point, that it really does seem like lower point games are going to be where it’s at. Maybe they think with allies and lower points, it will be easier to start a new army than it was before?

  11. edwin July 4, 2012 12:59 pm
    #

    I personally love the idea if random effects. Make me work for my victory when everything turns against me. Makes things more fun.

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 5, 2012 11:12 am
      #

      That’s cool that you see it that way. For me, I think the challenge of a game should be in out-smarting the other player, and when they are good, even a slight disadvantage could mean that you don’t have much of a chance of winning.

  12. Aervyper July 4, 2012 2:53 pm
    #

    A bit of help. I was reading thru the article and came across FIRST BLOOD, since you guys are major movers and shakers in the tournament scene why not change the First blood rule to apply to both opponents first turn. If either opponent kills an enemy in the first turn they score a point. It makes it ‘fair’. As always,my two cents.
    TTFN

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 5, 2012 11:12 am
      #

      That’s a really good solution, actually. Both players can get it, but it is equal.

  13. Hulksmash July 5, 2012 7:17 am
    #

    Hey Reece,

    Just figured since they felt the wound allocation will slow things down so much that I’d link a guide for how to speed it up that I wrote up on my blog.

    http://hulksmash-homeplace.blogspot.com/2012/07/speeding-up-lookout-sir-wound.html

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 5, 2012 11:12 am
      #

      Cool, thanks Hulk, I will check that out.

  14. Red Corsair July 5, 2012 4:18 pm
    #

    Honestly you had to roll 9 times to check and see if the melta gun died in 5th any way. It really just seems slow now because it’s early and drastically different.

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 5, 2012 4:34 pm
      #

      That is somewhat true if you had a really diverse unit, but there are some objectively slower mechanics such as in combat with rolling a million LoS rolls, and such. The main thing is how this influences movement, and multiple pile-ins and such.