GW Botched the 6th release?

[daboarder]

Hi guys,

let me start by saying this is not a grip about the core rules.

I was wondering if anyone else though GW really screwed up their handling of the transition into 6th? What I mean is when fantasy 8th came out they had sweeping errata's that changed unit, point, rules to being everything into line with the new edition, this breathed new life into old armies and gave everyone a similar footing even if their codex was ancient.

This is what I was expecting for 6th, however what we got was a jumbled half hearted attempt by multiple authors that reads more as a "screw it you already bought the rulebook" than a clear concise attempt to make sure everything works. The 6th rulebook is littered with loads of special rules that could or should have probably been applied to a plethora of units in proper errata. There was plenty of opportunity to fix units that don't work, clarify weapon profiles, unit types, and so on.

Personally the whole thing has gone a considerable way to tarnishing my initial enjoyment of 6th, I really thought GW had learnt from the past with 8th but this is the same old edition change BS we always get.

[Uncle Nutsy]

what got me laughing about 6th is the USR that points to other USR's.

[Soups]

The appendix in back is funny enough. especially the part that says codex trumps BRB. A few stat lines got changed.

It's disappointing that GW decided not to take a 8th Fantasy approach to FAQs, but over 5th, they always took a back seat. Waiting months after a release for FAQs to come out, and only halfheartedly fixing questions that most forums said they emailed/snail mailed GW.

Basically it's up to your local store to do your own work around. Or badger those adepticon guys to make the FAQ that is considered the bible to some.

[Tynskel]

hah! This made me chuckle.

This rulebook is 10x better than 2nd Edition, and 2nd Edition was the best, up 'till now.

[daboarder]

Easy there Tynskel, I like the rules think they are pretty solid, and reasonably well written and refreshing. I think GW's attitude and handling of the transition however still stinks.

[magickbk]

I think there are as many people who think that Fantasy 8th has army books that are outdated and non-competitive as who think 40K 6th has that issue. You need only to scan this forum to see that. What we can hope is that GW manages a release schedule on par with what we saw after the release of Fantasy 8th. If they can crank out six major releases in the next 2 years for 40K, I think they will have done a good job, if they can hit the oldest books.

Where I think GW 'botched' the 6th release was not revealing it earlier. I know they have their reasons for all the secrecy, but giving a month-ahead teaser in White Dwarf with some details would build some excitement. I feel like this release was anti-climatic. By the time everyone knew about it, their books were in the store or in the mail.

[antennafarm]

can't please everyone especially in gamer ragenerd culture. always finding something to complain about instead of just learning the new ruleset and playing.

[Black Hydra]

can't please everyone especially in gamer ragenerd culture. always finding something to complain about instead of just learning the new ruleset and playing.

He said he liked the rules which most likely means he played them. At least OP isn't ragequitting or anything.

I guess people who complain about complainers are just as bad.

[DarkLink]

40k isn't as messed up as Fantasy ever was, though. There wasn't as drastic a need for sweeping change, and so GW reverted to their usual attitude for FAQs. At least they released FAQs on the first day of 6th. That's something, even if most of them were... mediocre.

[daboarder]

It just seems sloppy that where there was any instance of an upgrade changing

ie: Swarmlord conferring acute senses. Instead of say changing it to "night vision" they just said well bugger off now you can't even get acute senses.

just an example of what I'm talking about off the top of my head.

[triplare]

It just seems sloppy that where there was any instance of an upgrade changing

ie: Swarmlord conferring acute senses. Instead of say changing it to "night vision" they just said well bugger off now you can't even get acute senses.

That 'acute deletion' was a big letdown for me too and left a bad taste in my mouth. Just a little FU nestled in middle of a very 'meh' update.

[eldargal]

7th edition WFB was almost dead, it was simply an abomination in so many ways. 5th ed 40k was nowhere near as bad, and frankly anyone who suggests otherwise is delusional. In many ways I think 5th was the best edition yet, prior to 6th. Now I think 6th has that possibility if they can balance the codices as well as they have done with the 8th ed WFB books.

2nd edition 40k wasn't that great. It was a bizarre RPG/tabletop hybrid that made for long, convoluted games with relatively few figures. It had its charm, but it certainly wasn't the best way of depicting battles.

Has the 6th edition release been botched? No. Certainly the FAQs could have done more and god knows some of the older books are struggling, but the core ruleset is solid and the mech/foot assault/shooting dichotomies are all nicely balanced.

[Psychosplodge]

hah! This made me chuckle.

This rulebook is 10x better than 2nd Edition, and 2nd Edition was the best, up 'till now.

Does it have displacer fields, vortex grenades, and virus orbital bombardment?




2nd edition 40k wasn't that great. It was a bizarre RPG/tabletop hybrid that made for long, convoluted games with relatively few figures. It had its charm, but it certainly wasn't the best way of depicting battles.



2nd was fun <==== Most important thing
and you could easily fit all your army on the table?

[eldargal]

2nd was fun, but it had the balance of a drunken, drugged up Howling Banshee and took many hours ti play a 1500pt game.:) People whine about 5th/6th ed balance and it is 1000 times better than 2nd. 5th 6th editions are also fun.

[Psychosplodge]

I couldn't possibly comment, but my beautiful rose tinted specs are still telling me 2nd, 2nd, 2nd

[Captainparty]

2nd was fun, but it had the balance of a drunken, drugged up Howling Banshee and took many hours ti play a 1500pt game.:) People whine about 5th/6th ed balance and it is 1000 times better than 2nd. 5th 6th editions are also fun.

Balance is 2nd was very different because there wasn't reall a competitive scene and the internet wasn't there to distill all the choices down to the best army, we all played for fun a lot more back then. Which made it more feasible to use what ever you wanted, you would only really face an expertly min/maxed army.

People look back fondly on 2nd mostly because they were children then and it was all new and exciting.

[eldargal]

Exactly, you place 2nd under the same scrutiny 5th and 6th were/are placed under and peoples opinion of it would have been very different. Different times, different game.:)

[maverick935]

Am I the only person concerned of how the flyers were handled? I mean releasing them right before the rule change as fast skimmers has caused no end of problem in my FLGS. (this may be a reflection of the intelligence of the people who play there).

On the point of FAQs I think that i am starting to see people leave the game because of the FAQ being incomplete or older codexs being so difficult to work now (Tau and Eldar mostly), they promise to return when there are updated rules but in the meantime alll there is to play is Draigowing. tbh thats not an improvement on 5th.

[eldargal]

I think flyers have been handled fairly well, though most armies either need a flyer or more skyfire to deal with them. There is another flyer wave coming sooonish though.

Tau seem to be a bit better off in 6th than they were in 5th, certainly Eldar struggle. But both are rumoured to be getting new books within 12-18 months so it isn't the end of the world.

[Lexington]

Agreed, it was a really weird move. I've been getting the feeling for the past few years that 40K is considered an ugly necessity at GW, and that the real talent and effort in the company has been put towards Fantasy. This is just one more piece of that.

[eldargal]

I find that a frankly bizarre statement. WFB got little attention, the technical sophistication of its kits lagged behind 40k and the 7th edition army books were thrown together with an almost wilful abandon when it came to balance both internetal and external. As WFB player it was quite clear that GW had almost given up on 7th edition, thankfully they made up for it with 8th.

[Autarch]

Though I am a disappointed Eldar player, I have to say I really like 6th edition. It just feels more fun to me, with "Look Out Sir" rules, mysterious terrain, the fortification FOC slot, and allies. I feel like they've finally let the game breathe and relax for the first time since 2nd edition.

[Wildeybeast]

I think there are as many people who think that Fantasy 8th has army books that are outdated and non-competitive as who think 40K 6th has that issue. You need only to scan this forum to see that. What we can hope is that GW manages a release schedule on par with what we saw after the release of Fantasy 8th. If they can crank out six major releases in the next 2 years for 40K, I think they will have done a good job, if they can hit the oldest books.

Where I think GW 'botched' the 6th release was not revealing it earlier. I know they have their reasons for all the secrecy, but giving a month-ahead teaser in White Dwarf with some details would build some excitement. I feel like this release was anti-climatic. By the time everyone knew about it, their books were in the store or in the mail.


7th edition WFB was almost dead, it was simply an abomination in so many ways. 5th ed 40k was nowhere near as bad, and frankly anyone who suggests otherwise is delusional. In many ways I think 5th was the best edition yet, prior to 6th. Now I think 6th has that possibility if they can balance the codices as well as they have done with the 8th ed WFB books.

2nd edition 40k wasn't that great. It was a bizarre RPG/tabletop hybrid that made for long, convoluted games with relatively few figures. It had its charm, but it certainly wasn't the best way of depicting battles.

Has the 6th edition release been botched? No. Certainly the FAQs could have done more and god knows some of the older books are struggling, but the core ruleset is solid and the mech/foot assault/shooting dichotomies are all nicely balanced.

Agree entirely with both of these views. Fantasy needed sweeping changes because there was all kinds of broken nonsense in 7th and they have kept a high turnaround rate of some of the worst army books. However it's not to say everything was handled perfectly in the transition to 8th - WE are all kinds of broken to the extent that I honestly think they will not get a new army book in this edition as GW have no idea how to make them viable in the game without completely altering their character and play style. It is the same with any change of the core rules, some of the armies get a boost while others get screwed. All you can hope for is that they fix the worst things quickly with new army books/codexes, which to their credit they have been trying to do with Warhammer. I think the OP suggestion that they could have used the main rules to fix all the little niggles is flawed as that would make to main ruleset overly complicated. What the core rules should do is provide a clear framework from which the updated codexes can address the niggles as they arise.