News: No news is good news...

Login  |  Register

Author Topic: Is 6th edition broken?  (Read 5745 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Wyddr

  • Author Eminence: Hereticus Liber Daemonica | Fio'shas Shi
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5254
  • Country: us
    • My blog about SF/F stuff
  • Armies: Daemons, Imperial Fists, Tau, Ksons, Vostroyans
Re: Is 6th edition broken?
« Reply #20 on: March 27, 2014, 09:03:03 AM »
Every single edition of this game, dating all the way back to 2nd Edition (or possibly Rogue Trader, though I never played that one), has favored one type of play over another. The whole reason this game *has* editions is to change the way the game works so people will buy more things. GW is in the business of selling models, and the only way they can get people to buy more models is if they nerf the ones that *used* to be awesome and buff the ones that *used* to be terrible. It's the nature of the beast.

This, though, is different than saying the game is 'unbalanced'. I, personally, am unaware of any game that lets you play any damned way you please and expect to win. For any ruleset of any game anywhere, there are wise and unwise strategies based upon the rule set given. If the rule set changes, the wisdom also changes.

As many of us have pointed out, you *can* still play armies that are fun and win. I have (I play Thousand Sons for God's sake!), Killing Time has, Irisado has. GML plays Deathwing, of all things. You are not currently engaged in a conversation with WAAC tourney munchkins. When I play Imperial Fists, I bring a bunch of tactical squads, I stick them in Rhinos and Drop Pods, and sometimes I take a techmarine just for the hell of it. In friendly games, I do just fine. Do I win all the time? No, but I have a good shot at it much of the time.

If the game isn't fun for you because you dislike the idea of adapting your playstyle or army to suit how the rules currently work, then that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. That, though, doesn't mean the game can't and doesn't work or that it's irrevocably broken. It just isn't. 

Offline Killing Time

  • Infinity Circuit | I put out on the first date | Tarrin's Sullied Cunning Stunt Double
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3691
  • Country: wales
  • Brevior saltare cum deformibus mulieribus est vita
Re: Is 6th edition broken?
« Reply #21 on: March 27, 2014, 09:36:55 AM »
If you're only playing tournaments, and you're only fielding a bunch of fun units that you like, rather than WAAC lists, then you should be glad of ever win you can claim, every draw you can scrape, and every honourable loss against a true WAAC list that you can muster. Every tournament place you can knock the netlists down a peg is a victory in itself.
This is the way I've always played.
When 6th Ed came out I suddenly started winning with my Eldar on a grand scale. When the 6th Ed Eldar codex came out it got even better.
So I started playing with a totally gimped Chaos list in tournaments to give myself a challenge. Mixed weapons, no Heldrakes, assault focused... really silly. Totally anti-meta.
It's some of the most fun I've had playing 40k. I got a huge amount of respect from my opponents for turning up with the list, and even more when I played it hard enough to claim a few precious tournament points.

The game isn't about winning, it's about having fun. If you can only have fun by winning then that's a problem.


So basically 40K doesn't work for me, which as a consumer means I'll stop buying.

#ragequit

Offline Irisado

  • A Light in The Grim-Darkness ~ Guns Don't Kill People, Copyright Stats Do | Farseer | Reporting Live! from the Crime Scene | Somewhat behind the times
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11480
  • Country: gb
  • Soñando debajo del arco iris
  • Armies: Administrators must not play 40K
Re: Is 6th edition broken?
« Reply #22 on: March 27, 2014, 09:49:31 AM »
I'd agree that they went overboard with random tables in this edition.  That said:

Thinking constructively, another way to promote fair and balanced lists building is tweaking the rulesfor oobjectives. Domination based, getting a VP for every turn you spend on an objective. Though I'm sure Eldar and Tau players will reject the idea...

Regardless of the army which you play, how would this make any sense?  Objectives count for being held at game's end (although determining how the game ends could be altered - see the rules for Epic if you want some ideas on this), not during the game.  That's kind of the whole point of taking an objective, unless you're playing some kind of time based scenario with different victory conditions.

Furthermore, to pick up on Wyddr's point, I've played all sorts of less fashionable Eldar lists over the years, and had a lot of fun doing so.  I lost a number of games as a result of taking such forces, but I did also manage to win, or at least give opponents a good run for their money.  One of the best afternoons I ever had was against Killersquid's very nasty Blood Angel jump pack/infantry list, and even though I was up against it, I managed to pull of a draw in the second of the two games.  It was great fun too.

How you approach the game will determine how much you get out of it.  I understand your point that prefer to play at tournaments, owing to issues of time, but that environment is where you're always more likely to meet a minority of people who will push the game to its limits, because they only take pleasure in winning by massive margins.  As I said before, tournament play is not a good indicator of whether the game is broken.
You haunt my in-box like an ex-girl friend could only dream of.

The Forum Rules - Please Read and Remember Them.

Soñando con una playa donde brilla el sol, un arco iris ilumina el cielo, y el mar espejea iridescentemente

Offline Idaho

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 667
  • Country: 00
Re: Is 6th edition broken?
« Reply #23 on: March 27, 2014, 10:56:40 AM »
I don't play just any old combination of units, but by the same token I shouldn't be forced to take specific lists and combinations just to stand a chance of competing.

Offline Killing Time

  • Infinity Circuit | I put out on the first date | Tarrin's Sullied Cunning Stunt Double
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3691
  • Country: wales
  • Brevior saltare cum deformibus mulieribus est vita
Re: Is 6th edition broken?
« Reply #24 on: March 27, 2014, 11:55:44 AM »
....but by the same token I shouldn't be forced to take specific lists and combinations just to stand a chance of competing.

This has always been the case. The specifics change as editions change and new codexes are released, but in essence 40k is not a balanced game (certainly not for tournament play) and never has been.
Competitive tournament players will analyse each new edition and codex for its strengths and weaknesses and quickly redefine the competitive meta. Your problem is that through a combination of edition creep and codex creep you've found yourself on the wrong side of the meta.

This doesn't mean that 6th edition is broken. I actually find them to be the most balanced and enjoyable rules I've ever played. I can totally appreciate that it's possible to field overpowered lists in this edition, just as it has been in every other edition. I shelved my Eldar for a time simply because I felt they were too good and winning so easily detracted from my enjoyment of the game. I hadn't even changed my list, it's just that my list was suddenly very very good overnight. I now play them again competitively because the meta has caught up. People have learned how to play against them.

Offline Idaho

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 667
  • Country: 00
Re: Is 6th edition broken?
« Reply #25 on: March 27, 2014, 12:34:20 PM »
I think a game that is inherently imbalanced is broken. I don't just accept it as "oh well that's 40K".

Perfection is hard/impossible to achieve but an attempt can be made.

I've always been the "wrong side of the meta" but no edition have I been steam rollered so comphrensively as this edition. I still come in high in tournaments but just don't stand a chance against some opponents.

Having said that I've added 3 Drop Pod units and ditched my transports which is more competitive. Sadly Rhinos haven't a place in the game anymore if you want to be competitive in the slightest. That's broken. It's a fundamental flaw in the rules that Chaos, Loyalist and the like can't play with one of their iconic methods of play and can't assault anymore.

Unless you really think Wave Serpent spam and Tau etc are genuinely fair? If so then there's no point discussing anything as I'm not going to change your mind.

As for the change in the objectives I suggested; it's a perfect way of balancing 40K. People will amend their lists to take objectives and try and hold them, rather than hide at the back of the table and shoot your opponent to death until last turn. Yawn.


Offline Irisado

  • A Light in The Grim-Darkness ~ Guns Don't Kill People, Copyright Stats Do | Farseer | Reporting Live! from the Crime Scene | Somewhat behind the times
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11480
  • Country: gb
  • Soñando debajo del arco iris
  • Armies: Administrators must not play 40K
Re: Is 6th edition broken?
« Reply #26 on: March 27, 2014, 01:02:49 PM »
I don't understand your comment about Rhinos.  I'd still use them in my Chaos army were I to get the chance to ever finish it properly.  Use them to get ranged units into position, and unload mass fire power.  What's the problem with doing that?

There's no such thing as a perfect way to balance 40K.  If you're looking to balance the game as much as possible, then you'd have to cut out all vehicles and non-infantry units, and turn it into an infantry based skirmish game, or convert it to a vehicle based game without infantry.  Mixing the two together at the scale 40K uses is inherently imbalanced, it's just to what extent and in which ways that varies from one edition to the next.

Camping on objectives for x number of turns is also horribly open to abuse.  This favours highly durable armies and hordes as opposed to fragile elite fast moving armies, so you just end up changing which armies are easier to use in a given edition.
You haunt my in-box like an ex-girl friend could only dream of.

The Forum Rules - Please Read and Remember Them.

Soñando con una playa donde brilla el sol, un arco iris ilumina el cielo, y el mar espejea iridescentemente

Offline Grand Master Lomandalis

  • Grand Master of the Deathwing | Oh the lolmanity! | 40kOnline's Care Bear of LOL!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11372
  • Country: ca
  • We were murderers first, last, and always!
  • Armies: Dark Angels, Custodes, Knights, Night Lords
Re: Is 6th edition broken?
« Reply #27 on: March 27, 2014, 01:07:31 PM »
Again, you've said you enjoy 6th edition but then you play a shooting list that doesn't want to assault.

No, I said I primarily play a shooting force.  As in the list I take out most often is my Ravenwing.  I also play my Deathwing, which due to being vastly outnumbered, often find sanctuary in assault.  What's a more effective way to kill the enemy?  10 shots from storm bolters or 15 power fist attacks?

The primary reason why I play my Ravenwing over my Deathwing is not because my Ravenwing are excellent at shooting, but because they have the speed to be where ever I want them to be on the battlefield at a moments notice.  Hence why I am building up a Saim-Hann list.  Nothing is faster.

And there are other aspects of 6th that needs to be changed, not least game set up and mysterious objectives. It's such a chore setting up a game, stopping and rolling in tables, rolling on more tables, putting some models down, rolling on another table, recording the results...

Thinking constructively, another way to promote fair and balanced lists building is tweaking the rulesfor oobjectives. Domination based, getting a VP for every turn you spend on an objective. Though I'm sure Eldar and Tau players will reject the idea...
I'll be honest, more often than not we don't use Mysterious Objectives because we just forget.  The only time I will make a point in remembering is in a tournament when that roll can drastically change a game.

As for your idea of a Domination scenario, that is all well and good for an army like Guard that can afford to sit on an objective for 5 turns, but what about elite armies?  What about armies that have 28 models at 1850 and rely on those end of the game grabs with 2 models left alive for victory?  They come across that scenario and there is no point in playing.  Reach across the table, shake their hand, and say GG because they already know they have lost.

I don't play just any old combination of units, but by the same token I shouldn't be forced to take specific lists and combinations just to stand a chance of competing.

No one is forcing you to take specific lists to compete.  Is it easier to win if you do so?  Absolutely.  But if you don't enjoy those lists then don't play them.  Some of the best games I have had are ones were I get absolutely slaughtered, but I enjoy it because of the heroic last stand my guys put up.  Often when running my Deathwing, we get into the third turn and I am telling my opponent I will not concede, they have to kill me to the last man.  And that last man puts up one hell of a fight!

But as Killing Time has said, it has always been the case of there being some lists that are just easier to win with and a lot of WAAC players will take.  If you only go to tournaments, you will see those a lot more than if you played with a regular gaming group due to the fact that people going to tournaments want to win at all costs.  Hence the acronym.

Looking at previous editions it is really easy to see.

3rd edition the biggest and baddest lists were Blood Angels for being able to pull off a first turn charge, as well as Chaos Space Marines for having disgustingly good Daemon Princes.

4th edition was the era of Assault Cannon spam in marines and Tyranid Godzilla lists.

5th edition belonged to Grey Knights Purifier spam and Orks Green Tide.

6th edition currently belongs to Tau and Eldar.

Does that mean in any of those editions, those lists were unbeatable?  No, just you have to work harder for it.

Nothing has changed in 6th ed.  Tau and Eldar are currently at the top of the field, but they still can be beaten, you just have to find a way for it to work.  For me, it is trying to spice things up by including a pair of Imperial Knights in my list.  Do I think they are super effective?  beslubber no.  Do I think they will give me a better chance against the local Eldar and Tau players?  Probably, but taking them seriously hinders the rest of my army.

I think a game that is inherently imbalanced is broken. I don't just accept it as "oh well that's 40K".

Perfection is hard/impossible to achieve but an attempt can be made.
A perfectly balanced game is impossible, but the game isn't so unbalanced right now that it is broken.  Yes, it leans towards shooting, but when I say leans, I mean the scale is at 55/45.  That isn't broken.

I've always been the "wrong side of the meta" but no edition have I been steam rollered so comphrensively as this edition. I still come in high in tournaments but just don't stand a chance against some opponents.

Having said that I've added 3 Drop Pod units and ditched my transports which is more competitive. Sadly Rhinos haven't a place in the game anymore if you want to be competitive in the slightest. That's broken. It's a fundamental flaw in the rules that Chaos, Loyalist and the like can't play with one of their iconic methods of play and can't assault anymore.
So it is a fundamental flaw in the rules that Loyalists can't play with one of their iconic methods, and instead have to rely on their other iconic method of play?  Rhinos do have a place in the game on a competitive scale, but how they are used has changed and you have to adapt with that.  They cannot be used any more to race forward, jump out and assault.  Very few transports are still able to do that. 

Frankly, unless you were playing Assault Marines or Terminators, Marines were never that great in Assault anyways.  It isn't the game rules that are "flawed" in the way you view them, it is the codex the army is bought from.  It is true that Chaos used to be heavily geared towards assault, and they still have some great assault units.  But with the recent codex, if I am not mistaken their basic marine lost the Bolter/Pistol/CCW combination.  So what made them really good at combat has been tossed aside.

If you want to play in assault, play an army that is geared for assault.  Don't try and fit an army that is moderate at assault but good at shooting into the assault role.

Unless you really think Wave Serpent spam and Tau etc are genuinely fair?
I actually do believe that the changes with the Tau codex have made their army more fair.  Fair for them.  Unless Tau players ran nothing but suits before, they would get rolled.  Even the best players around my area, guys I have mentioned in the past are some of the best in North America, put their Tau on the shelf in the previous edition because they weren't able to compete with the list and only took them out for a fun game to have with a rare force.

The changes to the Tau, primarily the defensive fire they get, actually gives them a chance.  In the previous codex, they got maybe two turns of shooting before every single enemy force would charge their lines and they would be done within two turns because Tau are terrible in combat.  Now, they can get three or four turns of shooting because having that supporting fire is actually making people reconsider charging.  It is forcing people to adapt their well worn tactics into something that gives the Tau a fighting chance.

The only issue I have with Wave Serpent Spam is that damned shield.  They made that a bit too powerful.  Taking everything else into consideration though, the Wave Serpent is no less difficult to kill than it was before their updated codex.  Actually they are easier to kill now because high strength weapons aren't brought down to St8 like they used to be.

As for the change in the objectives I suggested; it's a perfect way of balancing 40K. People will amend their lists to take objectives and try and hold them, rather than hide at the back of the table and shoot your opponent to death until last turn. Yawn.
It isn't going to force people to change their tactics and hold objectives, it is going to encourage more gun line lists.  Say you run the scenario with 3 5 objectives.  The person that wins the roll off to place first will put three objectives in his deployment zone and camp his gunline on them, racking up points while the other person has to run into his guns to dislodge him while holding his two.

If you put in a rule that they can't be within the deployment zone, then the three are placed just outside of it and first turn they are probably being held anyways.

But do me a favour and play one game with that idea for objectives.  But don't play your regular force, play a Deathwing list against Imperial Guard.  Tell me if that is perfectly balanced.  I dare you.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2014, 01:11:53 PM by Grand Master Lomandalis »
If there is anything that recent politics has taught us, it is that quotes taken out of context can mean what ever you want them to.
Well I always liked the globals...
I knew I had fans!!!

Quote
"Dark Angels are Traitors" is the 40k equivalent of Flat Earthers.  You can provide all of the proof you want that says otherwise, but people just can't let it go...

Offline Killing Time

  • Infinity Circuit | I put out on the first date | Tarrin's Sullied Cunning Stunt Double
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3691
  • Country: wales
  • Brevior saltare cum deformibus mulieribus est vita
Re: Is 6th edition broken?
« Reply #28 on: March 27, 2014, 01:08:03 PM »
But the point is that it isn't 6th Edition that's broken. It's certain elements of certain lists that are overpowered.
If you don't think that Tau are fair then it's Tau that are broken, not the 6th Edition rules.
If you don't think Serpent spam is fair then it's the Eldar codex, not the 6th Edition rules.

Necron flyer spam and IG leaf blowers were "broken" in 5th.
The flying circus was "broken" in 4th.
Blood Angel rhino rush was "broken" in 3rd.
Every edition has power builds, and the next edition and new codexes come along and make them obsolete, and bring new ones to the fore.
If you're having a particularly tough time in this edition then it's because your list or style of play is particularly unsuited to this edition, not because this edition is intrinsically less fair than any that have gone before.

EDIT: What GML said.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2014, 01:11:57 PM by Killing Time »

Offline Grand Master Lomandalis

  • Grand Master of the Deathwing | Oh the lolmanity! | 40kOnline's Care Bear of LOL!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11372
  • Country: ca
  • We were murderers first, last, and always!
  • Armies: Dark Angels, Custodes, Knights, Night Lords
Re: Is 6th edition broken?
« Reply #29 on: March 27, 2014, 01:22:39 PM »
Every edition has power builds, and the next edition and new codexes come along and make them obsolete, and bring new ones to the fore.

To touch on this, pull the example I had in that massive wall of text (which I had to hit post to three times because someone kept responding and I kept replying to them...)

Quote
3rd edition the biggest and baddest lists were Blood Angels for being able to pull off a first turn charge, as well as Chaos Space Marines for having disgustingly good Daemon Princes.

4th edition was the era of Assault Cannon spam in marines and Tyranid Godzilla lists.

5th edition belonged to Grey Knights Purifier spam and Orks Green Tide.

How did the changes to the edition make those power lists obsolete?

When changing to 4th edition, the Rhino Rush was declared dead because you were no longer able to assault out of a moving transport.  That was done to stop the Blood Angels.  Pure and simple.  They changed the combat system to having a kill radius, which prevented one Daemon Prince from annihilating a full squad of marines.

The change from 4th to 5th put an end to Assault Cannon spam because of the changes to rending, going from rending on the hit roll to the wound roll made a huge difference.  What stopped the Godzilla list was a redone codex that made it less points effective to run all those monsters.

The change from 5th to 6th put an end to Grey Knights and Orks being top dog.  For the Grey Knights it was the addition of AP values in combat, so their dominance in combat could be stopped by a single squad of Terminators.  And for the Orks it was a change to wound allocation and the addition of over watch.

But the one big thing for all of those changes is that when something big and nasty is brought to the fore front, the next changes deal with that and make the game more balanced for everyone.  In all of those examples, those codexes were over powered.  A certain change is made in the rules and they are brought into alignment with the rest of the game.

Simple.
If there is anything that recent politics has taught us, it is that quotes taken out of context can mean what ever you want them to.
Well I always liked the globals...
I knew I had fans!!!

Quote
"Dark Angels are Traitors" is the 40k equivalent of Flat Earthers.  You can provide all of the proof you want that says otherwise, but people just can't let it go...

Offline Idaho

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 667
  • Country: 00
Re: Is 6th edition broken?
« Reply #30 on: March 27, 2014, 01:47:26 PM »
I concede - we'll only go round in circles otherwise since neither side agree.

Kind regards friends.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2014, 01:48:51 PM by Idaho »

Offline EpeeBill

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 342
Re: Is 6th edition broken?
« Reply #31 on: March 27, 2014, 03:20:38 PM »
I started as a Blood Angel player in 4th edition, playing the White Dwarf codex. In those games, they were frequently decided by how fast I could get into hand to hand combat. If it happened in the 2nd or 3rd turn, I won. In the 4th, it was 50/50, after that, I lost pretty badly. But melee was so powerful in 4th ed and early 5th, and my army was so good at it, that the game was pretty easy for me.  I didn't care about getting shot for a couple turns, I'd do way more damage than my opponent in combat and silence their guns in the process.

 Then the 5th ed codex came out for Blood Angels and it got to the point that my friends didn't like playing me because now I had new toys that made my army even tougher. All my melee specialist units got better, and oh look I can get new melee specialists and deliver them even faster! My friends were not amuse.

Then 6th ed comes out and nerfs melee a lot. Guys with futuristic laser guns now have a better chance to win a war than the guys waving chainsaws. The main special rules of my codex got nerfed too. All of a sudden, I can't win using the same tactics I had relied on before. And before I can really make many adjustments, new codices come out with points costs balanced out for the new environment, so my melee-centric army costs more points per model than regular marine player's all-rounders.

I haven't changed to another army.  This happens. Between codex creep, local metas and new editions, the hot flavor of the month becomes next year's underdog. It just happens. Eldar and Dark Eldar (especially) players had to get clobbered for literally YEARS on old rules that were balanced under obsolete editions, now they have newer books and rules have changed to favor them a bit more. Those of us who loved the rough and tumble CC game have to figure out  how to play a game that makes shooting more attractive.  My friends are getting revenge for the days I spent mopping the floor with them. And, I'm ok with that. Facing a challenge is part of the fun of this game. I'll be the knock-around guy for now.

And when my next BA codex comes out (whenever that will be), things will change again for me. By then maybe 7th ed will roll back some of the melee nerfs. I'll be the new hotness again and people will be crying "Overpowered" at me again. It's just the cycle that comes with a game that has lots of variables and company with a commercial need to keep selling new products.

One can argue how well a given edition of 40k simulates the 'reality' of a scifi battle field, but one way it's always accurate is that change is a constant and those who don't adapt don't win.

Offline nawari

  • Ork Boy
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 374
  • Country: au
  • There is a bit of wulfen in all of us.
  • Armies: Space Wolves, Orks, White Scars
Re: Is 6th edition broken?
« Reply #32 on: March 28, 2014, 01:54:27 AM »
Man it's been a while since i wrote anything on this site.

This edition of 40k has made me stop playing it. I used to think because it was broken. But after thinking about it for a while and reading this topic, i realise that's not the case. I feel for Idaho, i was getting blown away by tau and elder armies first turn aswell. The worst army i played against was a tau allied with elder! I favour combat armies, to me there is more honour in fighting hand to hand then shooting a guy in the face 24 inches away :p. But thats me, i've come to accept that this edition favours shooting armies and that either i adapt or stop playing. So i now play fantasy more, because of the combat heavy side of the game.

So in the end, because of my personal views and playstyle. I choose to not play, because i dont have fun doing it. I used to blame the edition and scream "broken!". But its not the case, like stated before every edition brings something new to the table. And to be honest i was getting sick of the old rhino rush anyway :p

Also what the hell is with the super heavies in the game?! and now a new codex with just them! LOL as cool as they look, the damage output is insane. I watched a game yesterday with those new knights, those poor orks never stood a chance. That's GW for you, sell the cool things and make money!
Wish i had my own pet thunderwolf! Then i could ride into work and people will be like "Dayymm he so awsome right now!"

Offline DND

  • Newest
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • I *LOVE* 40k Online!
Re: Is 6th edition broken?
« Reply #33 on: March 28, 2014, 02:20:37 PM »
I play Tyranids and since the new codex has been reelased, I have played 7/8 games. In every game but one, I have been wiped out before getting near close combat (and in that game, I won the combat and was subsequently gutted in the following turn by my opponents firepower) as I cannot run the gauntlet of the volume of shots I receive.

I have tried different lists, different tactics all to no avail. I field what I consider to be a balanced force containing Termagants, Gargoyles, Genestealers, Hormagaunts, a Tervigon, Shrikes, Tyranid Warriors, a zoanthrope and a Hive Tyrant.

It seems that no matter what I do, I am doomed to be shot to pieces because as I see it, I can no longer use terrain to get close to an enemy for the final assault. If I run in the shooting phase in order to close the distance I am not able to charge as per the rules and have to wait until my next turn to declare the charge that fails as my opponent then takes great pleasure in shooting the daylights out of my waiting unit.

I have tried deep striking only to find that my shooting is relatively ineffective and the return fire guts the gargoyles before they can charge.

I have tried the outflank with my Genestealers and they have to try and survive for the rest of the turn and my opponents turn while my opponent has a free rein at shooting them, again before they can get into combat. My termagants are armed with fleshborers or devourers with a maximum range of 18" for the devourer and once again I am outgunned at range and rarely survive to get into range to shoot.

Is this edition broken. From my persepctive yes it is. My battle plans are sound. My tactics correct but I cannot compete with the volume of fire that comes in. I appreciate that in ruins etc, I get a cover save but in reality, the volume of fire negates the advantage of that and of the games I have played, they have all been an exercise in rolling dice and packing away my miniatures.

It's no good just telling me I need to change the way I play and use more firepower, I am on a tight budget and cannot afford to indulge the manufacturer in buying more models just to change the weapon fit.

Offline GreaterGoodIreland

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 419
  • Country: ie
  • When in doubt, railguns.
  • Armies: Tau, Grey Knights
Re: Is 6th edition broken?
« Reply #34 on: March 28, 2014, 03:44:49 PM »
Nids got shafted in this edition as they did in the last edition, if we're being honest. Their codex is horrendous. That's a codex problem, not a game problem. The codex should have evolved to fit the new circumstances of the game (like pretty much every one to be released so far), and it spectacularly failed to do so, to the point where we can actually say that they went the wrong way entirely.

Offline GaleRazorwind

  • Hormagaunt
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1419
  • Country: 00
  • Ziltoid Lives!
  • Armies: Nids, BA, CSM
Re: Is 6th edition broken?
« Reply #35 on: March 28, 2014, 08:01:38 PM »
Nids didn't quite get as shafted as we'd like to think, their codex just got changed to the point that CC is no longer its primary focus. They are a shooting army now that happens to be decent in CC. If you focus on only CC units, you will die. Badly. That pissed me off horribly. Basically, this was a blantant, "buy lots of our new $80 models or you suck". But they actually are pretty good when you build the list around the standard 2xflying hive tyrant, 2xcrone, 2xexocrine core.

If you want the horde/MC close combat army, Daemons are the answer. As far as I can tell, that is how GW decided to differentiate the two armies. CD get to be crazy close combat guys and Nids got relegated to being a shooty army.
Ziltoid is so omniscient, if there were to be two omnisciences, he would be both!

Offline GreaterGoodIreland

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 419
  • Country: ie
  • When in doubt, railguns.
  • Armies: Tau, Grey Knights
Re: Is 6th edition broken?
« Reply #36 on: March 29, 2014, 01:45:26 PM »
Either way, that remains a codex problem.

One does wonder what possessed the design team to attempt to get the Tyranids to compete with the Tau and Eldar on shooting, but no matter...

Offline DND

  • Newest
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • I *LOVE* 40k Online!
Re: Is 6th edition broken?
« Reply #37 on: March 30, 2014, 03:07:23 PM »
But they actually are pretty good when you build the list around the standard 2xflying hive tyrant, 2xcrone, 2xexocrine core.

If you want the horde/MC close combat army, Daemons are the answer. As far as I can tell, that is how GW decided to differentiate the two armies. CD get to be crazy close combat guys and Nids got relegated to being a shooty army.

Unfortunately as I stated previously, I'm on a budget and don't have the £200+ I need to get the flying hive tyrant 2x crone and 2 x exocrine as you suggest. Neither do I have the resources to buy a complete new army of Chaos Daemons.

I had hoped that perhaps I was missing something but it seems apparent that GW is trying to force me into buying models I don't want and can't afford.

Offline Grand Master Lomandalis

  • Grand Master of the Deathwing | Oh the lolmanity! | 40kOnline's Care Bear of LOL!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11372
  • Country: ca
  • We were murderers first, last, and always!
  • Armies: Dark Angels, Custodes, Knights, Night Lords
Re: Is 6th edition broken?
« Reply #38 on: March 30, 2014, 03:49:52 PM »
You don't need to drop all the money on the stuff at once.  I too am on a budget, and I have plans for armies that I want to do.  For me to build the Eldar list I want, with how I want the models, I have to spend around $800 on the bikers alone (combining Reavers and Guardians).  Add the stuff over time, save up for it if you want to improve your list.  But claiming that the game is broken because your codex was redone and GW wants you to buy new stuff...

???

They're not in business for people to buy one army and use that for 20 years.
If there is anything that recent politics has taught us, it is that quotes taken out of context can mean what ever you want them to.
Well I always liked the globals...
I knew I had fans!!!

Quote
"Dark Angels are Traitors" is the 40k equivalent of Flat Earthers.  You can provide all of the proof you want that says otherwise, but people just can't let it go...

Offline Draggo Blacksun

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 357
  • Country: au
  • The never ending crusade will, umm.... Never End!
  • Armies: Black Templar 6000+ pts, Soon SOB 1500 pts
Re: Is 6th edition broken?
« Reply #39 on: March 31, 2014, 08:43:35 AM »
6th Edition is not broken, just seriously bent out of shape.... A little panel beating and some buffing should make it good as new.

Jokes aside, so far people have been in two camps here. Either its Broken or its the best Ed ever released. I'd like to think its a bit of both. I play Black Templars. (So I know how you Nid players feel. But at least you still have a codex) This edition seriously favors shooty type armies, which face it wasnt the BT's Ace card. Yes we could put a lot of fire down range with our crusader sqd. But that was with a maxed out sqd and it was still short range. Unless you were determined to field a foot slogging army there was no way you was going to sink that many points into a single unit.

I fully agree with Idaho..... the new edition has turned rhinos into free kps for you opponent. With the glancing rules and the no assault from a stationary rhino. (A building is stationary, and you can assualt from it. But a rhino that stayed still in its last movement phase, you cant???). As for glancing, A little rule ammendment would return some of the toughness of vehicals... were the Ap of weapons would actually mean something

      "After a glancing hit is confirmed, the attacking player rolls a d6 to get a result higher than the ap of the weapon. If they do so then a hull point is removed, otherwise it just scratched the paint. So that a roll of 1 never takes a hull point and a roll of 6 always takes a hull point."

Also theres overwatch, which I think is a good inclusion to the game. Yes I said that and I play an assaulty based army. My reasoning is that it makes sence. What doesnt make sence to me is wound allocation in 6th ed.... the first guy in the unit takes all the wounds until he dies, great that means my firing line is shooting at just one guy.... Bull! Once again a little modification to the rules would go a long way to repairing that....

      "Wounds are allocated per model from the closest to the farthest from the firing sqd, then if there are any wounds left over the process is repeated until all the wounds are allocated. So that when the saves for the wounds are rolled any model that failed to save its allocated wound is wounded/removed."

Yes this might make the game a little slower but Im sure some one will think of a way to speed it up.

And I also agree the inclusion of super heavies and flyers has turned this game into a buy this and win game instead of a game of luck and tactics.

Oh and one other thing the rules for outflank is now rediculous. The whole idea of outflank was to suprise and attack your oponents from an unexpected quarter. Oh it surprise alright .... "Surprise, Shoot me."  They should be allowed to assault maybe with out overwatch (nah, that would be too powerful) Keep overwatch, but only that unit thats getting assaulted (I'm looking at you Tau)

P.S. I only play my BT's in friendlies were I can still use the BLACK TEMPLAR codex, Ive taking up with playing my fledging SOB army. But I heared that they have a new dex out too, to replace the WD one. HMmmm!!! I have a bad feeling about this!
For Sigismund, Dorn and..... FOR THE EMPEROR!
8th ed record
                                W / D / L
Black Templars         1 / 1  / 3
Sisters of Battle          2 / 0 / 1

 


Powered by EzPortal