Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner

Xenos too insignificant in the new BRB?

  • Totally. Xenos races are completely underrepresented.

    Votes: 26 55.3%
  • Nope. Just the right balance of humans and xenos.

    Votes: 21 44.7%
41 - 59 of 59 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,523 Posts
Now how many games is this based on, or is this just based on hersay and the 5th Edition rules?

currently, rules and a few play tests.

I think people forget that when an edition changes the way the game plays changes. 6th is not the same 40K game people played in 5th, and with it brings a restructuring on how you view an army.

that is how games workshop does new editions and it is pretty much a dick move and money grab.

I think there is a lot more balance in this edition that people think, they're just too busy looking at only what they see as negatives.

it is very balanced for certain armies. it has potentially crushed a few and will require large investments of money to correct for the changes in many.
personally, i was on the fence with a new edition because of the problems with 5th and 6th has not helped with that. warhammer remains the monopoly of wargames.

my thoughts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,271 Posts
Discussion Starter #42
I find it absolutely wonderful when people say "gunlines are back, hide yo wyches, hide yo nobz, and hide yo pallies cause they overwatchin' errybody out here" because on overwatch you hit on 6 and that's way too powerful, and then at the same time talk about how hitting flyers on 6 is completely underpowered and impossible. Which is it? Is hitting on 6 good, or bad? From my experience, overwatch doesn't do a whole lot unless A: You have several high-powered guns that only need one wound to go through to do lots of damage and have a high enough Strength to reliably wound if you get a hit through, which is rare, B: You have a colossal mob that can torrent like no other and put out a quantity of shots in the several dozens, once again, not especially common, or C: You can re-roll all your failed to-hit rolls. Overwatch is a nice add-on but its not a game-breaker for assault armies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,523 Posts
overwatch did not wreak CC. it is overwatch combined with fleet being wreaked, combined with random charge distances, combined with removed from the front. that, when taken together, have severely hurt CC armies.

edit: and add to that no bonus for assaulting multiple units.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,385 Posts
overwatch did not wreak CC. it is overwatch combined with fleet being wreaked, combined with random charge distances, combined with removed from the front. that, when taken together, have severely hurt CC armies.

edit: and add to that no bonus for assaulting multiple units.
Fleet actually makes your random charges better, but I guess you consider it a nerf when everyone gets the same threat range instead of specific armies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
491 Posts
Fleet actually makes your random charges better, but I guess you consider it a nerf when everyone gets the same threat range instead of specific armies.
And also when you have odds of not making it into CC in the first place through no fault of your own, when before you could plan charges that were sure to arrive.

You certainly can roll good averages with fleet, but there is still the fact that some 20% of your charges are going to stall even if you need a very low number, leaving you on the board to be shot to hell.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,209 Posts
Fleet actually makes your random charges better, but I guess you consider it a nerf when everyone gets the same threat range instead of specific armies.
The fleet is a nerf

12+d6 is higher on average than 6+rerollable2d6

It's also a relative nerf. The average threat range of fleet units went down while their maximum remained the same. For non fleet units, their average range increased slightly while their maximum range increased massively.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,385 Posts
And also when you have odds of not making it into CC in the first place through no fault of your own, when before you could plan charges that were sure to arrive.

You certainly can roll good averages with fleet, but there is still the fact that some 20% of your charges are going to stall even if you need a very low number, leaving you on the board to be shot to hell.
The fleet is a nerf

12+d6 is higher on average than 6+rerollable2d6

It's also a relative nerf. The average threat range of fleet units went down while their maximum remained the same. For non fleet units, their average range increased slightly while their maximum range increased massively.
I'm going to point something out though: it's no worse than a Fleeting unit that was charging a unit in cover in the same turn they ran (and seeing as this is where I usually saw objectives, or units that were now huddling in a crater where a vehicle used to be, this was a common thing I've seen before). You fix this by being close, the same way you fixed charging into terrain before. Can you fail? Sure, but with how DANGEROUS some assault units are to your average unit (5 Incubi and an Archon removing whole squads of Marines a turn anyone?) this makes the assault phase less likely to complete nuke portions of someone army effortlessly.

While I'm at it I'm going to make a comment about some of these other "nerfs".

Not able to get bonuses for charging multiple units: Honestly this just means you concentrate your charges instead of stringing out and hitting two separate units to pull both off objectives. This is still a tactic you can do, you just don't get bonuses for doing it anymore.

No charging the second you hit the board: Having been hit by Snikrot in a multi charge on turn two, I can understand why this is annoying and can understand why GW did this, but if you were outflanking Genestealers it wasn't common that you got them into combat the second they hit the board just because people knew they where coming (since you have to announce Outflankers and Deep Strikers when you deploy). I think the only armies that REALLY got hurt by this are White Scars. They had the speed to make that outflank manuever very useful, now they'll likely outflank melta to just mess up your tanks instead.

No charging first turn from Infiltration
: Anyone who tries to tell me the Warboss sling shot WASN'T an incredibly dumb tactic probably used it ("Let me throw my expensive HQ choice into the enemy line first turn so he'll die in the next turn!" Yeah, that was a feasible tactic the first time someone did it, but with the number of vehicles out there he'll likely just hit a vehicle and then be shot to death.). I've never seen Infiltrated Genestealers but that was because if they didn't get turn one they would be killed pretty quickly. Really all this does is keep you from over extending your army early and getting killed early on.

No assaulting the turn you step out of a non-Open Topped Transport/Assault Vehicle: Doesn't affect Dark Eldar, or Tyranids or Orks in Open-Topped vehicles (everything but Orks in Battle Wagons with 'ard Case upgrades). The armies that got hurt by this tend to wear power armor, or play regular Eldar (who are two editions old and have a LOT of other issues anyways) so I don't know why the majority of the Xeno players are complaining about something that didn't nerf them (seriously, the ones who complain about this usually play an army that either doesn't use vehicles, or has open topped vehicles.

Overwatch: Armies that benefit from this are all over the board (Orks, Tyranid Termagaunts/Gargoyles/Tyrannofex (Heavy 20 anyone?), Dark Eldar with Splinter weapons, Eldar with Shuriken Catapults, Firewarriors, Blob Guard, Marines....you get the idea). Basically if you can get more than one shot when you shoot, this is something that helps you. It doesn't benefit shooty armies, but any unit that gets to shoot. The ones who can't tend to be blenders in and of themselves so they don't need the extra killing power. I'm sure there is a lot of Marine players out there who wish they could have shot a unit of Death Cult Assassins before their entire squad vanished in a single assault phase.

Anything Else I'm Forgetting
: 6th Edition didn't nerf the assault based unit, it readjusted how much damage an assault unit could do in a turn. The amount of killing assault units could do in a turn was borderline insane towards the end of 5th Edition, and one of the most frustrating things you can end up doing is having to pick up an entire unit of models before you can even swing. It's even worse when you get multi-charged, a unit gets wiped out, the other unit breaks from the massive penalties and then was wiped all without even an armor save being allowed because you were hit with Power Weapons.

Pure assault armies are probably not as viable anymore but that's not a bad thing. You just can't base your army on being a big "fuck you hammer" that tears whole units off the board every turn and instead have to balance between firepower and close combat power to make an army more effective.

Here's the general place where I sit on this: the game is more balanced from the elite power weapon-wielding assault units who were becoming more common towards the latter half of 5th Edition. 6th Edition asks you to take risks, be more balanced in how you design a list and not just rely on breaking your opponent's head in during the assault phase. Is there a level of randomness? Sure, but most pure assault units have a way to mitigate this anyways.

Really I'm not seeing the reason for the complaints beyond maybe the Flyers (something that I've seen come up as something people wanted brought in from Apoc on occasion), and I don't really see those as money grabbing schemes as most of the 5th Edition books already had a Flyer in the books (many of which where being actively played as skimmers when they were basically WORSE), and even then I can't agree that the complaints because we have cool models that are finally good.

TL;DR: This isn't 5th Edition. Stop using 5th Edition metrics on 6th Edition. And PLAY the game a LOT before you say something is nerfed. Seriously, just because you THINK it looks bad on paper doesn't make it look bad on the Table. That's a common truth for a lot of armies too (like the Sisters who got a LOT of flakk when they came out but prove to be more solid than forseen).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,385 Posts
your right TL:DR

jist seems to be, if you don't play power armor, non-assault armies, buy new models.
Thanks for not reading and missing the points I made in the FAVOR of the non-power armored close combat armies (like them not being affected by disembarking thanks to either not having vehicles or having open-topped vehicles) and the fact that many of them has bonuses like Fleet that make their charges more effective.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
10,978 Posts
During fifth, I played firepower based armies. Even my nids and orks were built around long ranged warfare.

So now, I see people crying nerf over the new rules and I laugh. :taunt:


Now, on topic, I have always believed xenos to be underrepresented. But that is the way I have come to expect gw to do business. The previous necron codex was a huge letdown for instance, being mostly from the Inquisition or Mechanicus' perspective. The current one was better, but still seems to be less than it could have been.

The BRB is and has always been a rulebook first and an Imperial Propaganda tome second. I didn't expect any different and as such I wasn't disappointed. :whistle:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,209 Posts
your right TL:DR

jist seems to be, if you don't play power armor, non-assault armies, buy new models.
I can simplify this for you even further. If you are playing tyranids, lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,209 Posts
TL;DR: This isn't 5th Edition. Stop using 5th Edition metrics on 6th Edition. And PLAY the game a LOT before you say something is nerfed. Seriously, just because you THINK it looks bad on paper doesn't make it look bad on the Table. That's a common truth for a lot of armies too (like the Sisters who got a LOT of flakk when they came out but prove to be more solid than forseen).
This is said alot (and often by people that know what they are talking about), but it also gets taken out of context like in the above.

Fleet is different in the 6th edition and is not to be compared to 5th you're right....except when it is in a 5th edition codex.

In the 5th edition codices, you are paying a premium of points for an ability that is supposed to make you greatly faster than your opponents. In fifth, fleet meant that unless something went wrong, you would be the one charging against non fleet opponents. However, in 6th, it is easily plausible to have your fleet units out ranged by none fleet units (something that was simply impossible in 5th), and yet you are still paying the points for a unit that is no longer effective.

Luckily, I don't utilize anything that has fleet (except for eldar, but i'm shooty), so it doesn't hurt me. But all of the armies with lots of fleet units are no paying inflated prices for a unit that is only marginally faster than any generic unit.

That's why they are complaining. In the new 6th edition codices, I'm sure we will see the price of fleet units adjusted because fleet isn't very good anymore. Well, we can hope but alot of times GWS doesn't seem to understand the balance of their own game.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,195 Posts
Fleet allows you to alter your 2d6 assault roll, I doubt they will change the points costs of those units for this reason alone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
The fleet is a nerf

12+d6 is higher on average than 6+rerollable2d6

It's also a relative nerf. The average threat range of fleet units went down while their maximum remained the same. For non fleet units, their average range increased slightly while their maximum range increased massively.
Math time
12 +d6 = 15.5 average.

6 +2d6 reroll one or both:
6 + 4.75x2
6 + 9.5 = 15.5 average.

If charging 9- 13 inches or less, you are now less likely to make your mark than the 100% chance you had before. However, you'll only go 8 inches 1/1296 times. a statistical non factor.

10 inches will happen 1/648.
11 inches 1/324.
12 inches 1/167
13 inches 1/83.5

31 in 1296 times, you will fail to go 13 inches.
or in more comprehensible numbers, about 1/41 times.
this part is a nerf.

HOWEVER!!! it's a little one. roll double ones on twin linked, and that's about your odds.

now for the real meat of it. lets look at that magical 15.5 number that is the average for both charge distances.

the old way: you will achieve that distance 1/2 of the time.

the new way: you will achieve it 3/4 times.


Don't try to make a 17" charge. ever. Other than that, you should be fine.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,385 Posts
Math time
12 +d6 = 15.5 average.

6 +2d6 reroll one or both:
6 + 4.75x2
6 + 9.5 = 15.5 average.

If charging 9- 13 inches or less, you are now less likely to make your mark than the 100% chance you had before. However, you'll only go 8 inches 1/1296 times. a statistical non factor.

10 inches will happen 1/648.
11 inches 1/324.
12 inches 1/167
13 inches 1/83.5

31 in 1296 times, you will fail to go 13 inches.
or in more comprehensible numbers, about 1/41 times.
this part is a nerf.

HOWEVER!!! it's a little one. roll double ones on twin linked, and that's about your odds.

now for the real meat of it. lets look at that magical 15.5 number that is the average for both charge distances.

the old way: you will achieve that distance 1/2 of the time.

the new way: you will achieve it 3/4 times.


Don't try to make a 17" charge. ever. Other than that, you should be fine.
I knew the new method couldn't be that bad!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,182 Posts
I have found the news rules on the whole, a refreshing approach by GW. The emphasis is now on a more cinematic approach to the game. Charging has been nerfed, but the challeneg rules are great and make for much more interesting close combat phase. I dont expect my power claw nob to survive against a tooled up cahos lord, but he could. And if he does it would look awesome on the battlefield!

Some things need getting used too, but play a dozen games before you call the game good or bad. Also adjust your army to take advantage fo the new rule set. I know this is going to be hard for nids, but everybody else will have something to bring to the party.

Mysterious objective also means you get some fun things happening. Like a unit could use the skyfire rule. Random i know but could still be useful.

Back on topic though. Yes 40k is human centric and always has been. I would be surprised if it was not. Its much easier to get people to relate to the human perspective and also its much easier to write form this point of view. Maybe it would have been good to look from the Eldar of the Ork point of view, but they have no central structure making it more difficult to describe thier organisational structure except from a very high level which they have more or less done in the BYB.

Codexes always flesh this out, and with the prospect of much weightier dexes there is hope this will be the case.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
328 Posts
The game has always been human focused.

We're humans. Makes the Imperium easy to identify with for the majority of players. That's why Spess Mahreens sell more models than every other army.

Let's just be realistic here. Dating back to Rogue Trader, the Space Marines, with the Imperium second, has been the focus of the game. Everything else exists for Space Marines to blow up. I mean, it's certainly a fact you don't have to like, but I don't see any trend in 6th that makes it any more human-focused than the previous editions. The Xenos are the antagonists of the setting. Even though the Imperium's forces and agencies aren't really "good guys" in the traditional white hat, saves the day sort of way, they're still the humans. The "us" of the future, and thus they're going to be the protagonists.
 
41 - 59 of 59 Posts
Top