February 18 2020 13:10:31
Navigation
Forum Threads
Newest Threads
· Reclaim The Stones!!...
· Alternative GUO model
· Lost options from RH
· Pitched Battle - Dwa...
· So I finally did it...
Hottest Threads
· Lost options from RH [7]
· Pitched Battle - ... [2]
· Reclaim The Stone... [0]
· Alternative GUO m... [0]
Latest Articles
· THE GODS OF CHAOS HA...
· Posting Content on t...
· A word on Attachments
· Final Testing and Bu...
Users Online
· Guests Online: 4

· Members Online: 0

· Total Members: 251
· Newest Member: Sherpa1016
Welcome
Welcome to Classic Hammer
View Thread
Classic Hammer » Warhammer Fantasy » 6th Edition
 Print Thread
The bad side of 6th Ed.
Just Tony
So I got switched to a different shift at work where I am doing a mind-numbingly easy job which has given me tons of time to think about army lists, especially with my Beast of Chaos list since it's the one I want most to get a game in with. I found that I was having the worst time coming up with a decent list, and one thing was to blame: the Beast Herd. You know, the one that has a mix of Gors and Ungors with excessively complicated rules for both shooting wound allocation and combat formation/charging restrictions. I wound up simply slotting a 5/5 mix for two units simply so I could get 2 Bestigor units since I wanted ranks to pad out my mostly Minotaur army. This isn't the way I like to run list building, and it didn't sit well with me. So it got me thinking about stuff.

Now if you've seen me on here or that place I used to be allowed to post on, I'm a huge fan of 6th. I consider it to be the benchmark for the best WFB has ever been. That being said, I'm well aware it wasn't perfect. I started to think about what I didn't like, mostly so I could talk to my brother about what should be house ruled in or out to make up for the shortcomings.

Which brings me to my question for the board: what parts of 6th Ed. did you NOT like? Core rules, army books, whatever. Just name your grief so we can see if we as a community stand on even ground.

Merged on September 11 2015 01:48:09:


SERIOUSLY?!?!!?!? Apparently you can't post a post after a post you've made, it auto merges.




So now that it's been viewed plenty of times, time to throw my $0.02 US in.

WFB main rules: Lapping around was an unnecessary mechanic that simply bogged down the combat phase, luckily nobody in my group uses it. Autobreak from Fear is a huge one, and we use Insane Courage from 7th to fix it. Power Dice. We use the 7th Ed. Power Dice rules to keep people from focusing all their dice through one badass LVL 4 mage. Also, I think a great misstep would be that they should have included a rule stating you couldn't have more magic user characters than non-magic user characters. Would fix alot of the Magichammer that people said was about.

The Empire: Whoa, what DON'T I dislike about that book? Cheaper and better all cav army than the premier all cav army (Brets), better black powder than any other army including Dwarfs, who invented black powder, and a detachment system that breaks so many fundamentals of the game that they should just let the Empire player have two turns in a row vs. everyone else's one turn.

High Elves: The step from Ravening Hordes to army book saw a few things that I highly disagreed with. Intrigue at Court. Why? Just... why??!?!?!?! Archers stayed the same points cost and got worse, losing their Citizen Levy rules. Spearmen lost the heavy armor option, and cost what the heavy armor Spearmen cost in Hordes.

Chaos: Oh, the combining book nonsense. How I'd kill that first if I were able to. Also because of that mechanic, you have all mortal units counting as Core in a mortal army, and same with each book except Beasts, which still had stuff stay Special. There was literally no drawback for running what would be considered as an all-Special army to every other list. Oh, and the horrible Beast Herd rules. The more I look at this, the more annoyed I get. To the point that I'm thinking about running the Ravening Hordes list and not touching the 6th book version.
Edited by Just Tony on 11-09-2015 01:49
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
Galadrin
Didn't lapping around allow you to remove the enemy rank bonus? It sure did in 5e and that was a huge deal. Also, zombies (and sneaky gits) automatically lapping around both looked great and made them very effective.

As far as I understand, Insane Courage is "a roll of 2 always passes a leadership test." How did this fix Fear? A 1 in 36 chance roll will only happen once every four or five games (assuming you take a lot of fear tests in each of those games). It doesn't seem to change much, statistically.

Why not just reduce the consequence of breaking from combat and bring back the freehack?

The things I didn't like about 6th Edition were the art (not much can be done about that, though) and the fact that the overpowered trophy went from characters (which were easy to deal with) to units (which were very difficult to deal with). I also didn't like the dice-based magic system, but that is very easy to mod or remove entirely.
 
TinyLegions
Just Tony wrote:

So I got switched to a different shift at work where I am doing a mind-numbingly easy job which has given me tons of time to think about army lists, especially with my Beast of Chaos list since it's the one I want most to get a game in with. I found that I was having the worst time coming up with a decent list, and one thing was to blame: the Beast Herd. You know, the one that has a mix of Gors and Ungors with excessively complicated rules for both shooting wound allocation and combat formation/charging restrictions. I wound up simply slotting a 5/5 mix for two units simply so I could get 2 Bestigor units since I wanted ranks to pad out my mostly Minotaur army. This isn't the way I like to run list building, and it didn't sit well with me. So it got me thinking about stuff.

Now if you've seen me on here or that place I used to be allowed to post on, I'm a huge fan of 6th. I consider it to be the benchmark for the best WFB has ever been. That being said, I'm well aware it wasn't perfect. I started to think about what I didn't like, mostly so I could talk to my brother about what should be house ruled in or out to make up for the shortcomings.

Which brings me to my question for the board: what parts of 6th Ed. did you NOT like? Core rules, army books, whatever. Just name your grief so we can see if we as a community stand on even ground.

Merged on September 11 2015 01:48:09:


SERIOUSLY?!?!!?!? Apparently you can't post a post after a post you've made, it auto merges.




So now that it's been viewed plenty of times, time to throw my $0.02 US in.

WFB main rules: Lapping around was an unnecessary mechanic that simply bogged down the combat phase, luckily nobody in my group uses it. Autobreak from Fear is a huge one, and we use Insane Courage from 7th to fix it. Power Dice. We use the 7th Ed. Power Dice rules to keep people from focusing all their dice through one badass LVL 4 mage. Also, I think a great misstep would be that they should have included a rule stating you couldn't have more magic user characters than non-magic user characters. Would fix alot of the Magichammer that people said was about.

The Empire: Whoa, what DON'T I dislike about that book? Cheaper and better all cav army than the premier all cav army (Brets), better black powder than any other army including Dwarfs, who invented black powder, and a detachment system that breaks so many fundamentals of the game that they should just let the Empire player have two turns in a row vs. everyone else's one turn.

High Elves: The step from Ravening Hordes to army book saw a few things that I highly disagreed with. Intrigue at Court. Why? Just... why??!?!?!?! Archers stayed the same points cost and got worse, losing their Citizen Levy rules. Spearmen lost the heavy armor option, and cost what the heavy armor Spearmen cost in Hordes.

Chaos: Oh, the combining book nonsense. How I'd kill that first if I were able to. Also because of that mechanic, you have all mortal units counting as Core in a mortal army, and same with each book except Beasts, which still had stuff stay Special. There was literally no drawback for running what would be considered as an all-Special army to every other list. Oh, and the horrible Beast Herd rules. The more I look at this, the more annoyed I get. To the point that I'm thinking about running the Ravening Hordes list and not touching the 6th book version.


Ok, I fixed the auto-merge for this board. It is something that I will need to do for the rest of them eventually.

I liked the core rule changes enough to make a poll on them to add to our recommended house rules once I get a 2/3rds majority of our members to approve of that change, with the exception of the combat/magic users ratio. I tend to think that having all of our characters as magic users should be the prerogative of the player. There are some armies that just wont be able to do that, most specifically VC and certain Chaos armies. Concerning the core rules, I know that there are issues out there, and I do want to have a discussion as to how to fix them, and I am more apt to propose small tweaks like the rule changes that I have already proposed. I am not into re-writing books just yet, and if I am re-writing books, why don't I just create my own game system like Armies of Arcana or War and Conquest and call it a day.

As far as the different issues with the armies. I really do want to review those more before I make my own decisions on them. I do know that there are issues, and you are hitting on a few of these that I agree on, but I am of the same mind as with the changes with the core rules. Small incremental fixes are what I recommend rather than sweeping changes. Using alternative army lists that were published in one of the Chronicles as well as Ravening Hordes is another option that I highly recommend. With that in mind, I am only the dictator of this website, not a dictator of how you play Warhammer. How you play a game is your business. If you play-test the game and like a new rule, feel free to mention it in the rules development forum, as that is what it is there for.
Edited by TinyLegions on 13-09-2015 15:12
 
Just Tony
Now I'm not for a head to toe rewrite of some of these books, some it's a case of a rule needing to be ignored, or implemented. Others, it's simply a case of where the unit is slotted in the FOC.

Also, I LOVE appendix lists from that timeframe. Almost all of my armies were built with one of them in mind.
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
snyggejygge
Personally Iīm not a big fan of how the Chaos list worked either, I mean I liked that you could mix from all the Chaos races, I really enjoyed that, but I didnīt Think it was balanced in any way to have Chaos Knights, chariots etc etc in core.

I wouldīve liked a re-write of the book with the Chaos gods being the core of the army, you want a Khorne army, here you go, you get access to the following stuff (all undivided, Khorne daemons & access to Khorne marks), you want Tzeentch then you have this etc etc, then they couldīve fixed the core special & rare slots dependant on how rare it actually was instead of the nonsense they threw together.

For example a khorne set-up could be:
Lords: Chaos Lord, Beastlord, Daemon prince, Blood Thirster

Heroes:
Exalted Hero, Marauder Hero, Beast Hero, Exalted Daemon, Blood Shaman
Core:
Ungors, Gors, Marauders, Marauder horsemen, Warriors, Chaos Hounds, Bloodletters.
Special: Chariots, Knights, Flesh hounds, Khorngors, Furies, Trolls, Ogres, Minotaurs
Rare:
Juggernauts with riders, Dragon Ogres, Giant, Chimera

Maybe include chosen but make them Count one step above, for example chosen warriors being special while chosen Knights would be rare

Iīd also change the marks a bit, Tzeentch had an easy time getting loads of Powerdice, while Khorne could shut down a magicphase without any problems, make them more like now, with maybe an added dispeldice for Khorne characters, while all Tzeentch combat characters could get level 1 free & the spellcasters +1 to cast (in addition to the +1 wardsave, which I would cap at 4+)

As for pure rules, I never enjoyed lap around, I also think Spears need an upgrade vs cavalry
 
Just Tony
Galadrin wrote:

Didn't lapping around allow you to remove the enemy rank bonus? It sure did in 5e and that was a huge deal. Also, zombies (and sneaky gits) automatically lapping around both looked great and made them very effective.

As far as I understand, Insane Courage is "a roll of 2 always passes a leadership test." How did this fix Fear? A 1 in 36 chance roll will only happen once every four or five games (assuming you take a lot of fear tests in each of those games). It doesn't seem to change much, statistically.

Why not just reduce the consequence of breaking from combat and bring back the freehack?

The things I didn't like about 6th Edition were the art (not much can be done about that, though) and the fact that the overpowered trophy went from characters (which were easy to deal with) to units (which were very difficult to deal with). I also didn't like the dice-based magic system, but that is very easy to mod or remove entirely.


Like I said in another post, I don't want fear nerfed, that just feels wrong to make it damn near inconsequential. Not to mention the fact that the only time Fear becomes game breaking in 6th is when you're outnumbered and lose combat. A 5 man knight unit won't make you autobreak. A 15 man Knight unit would. Insane Courage gives you what amounts to a speed bump against what would be a devastating mechanic. Not a response, but at least a speed bump. Remember how infuriating it was when they turned the Anvil of Doom's spells into shooting attacks that couldn't be dispelled? It's on that same level with me and autobreak.
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
foggynight81
I personally enjoy the rules for fear and terror, the auto breaking seems justified in my mind. I believe scary things being scary, I would break if I was outnumbered and losing from zombies, etc..

For 6th edition my biggest issue is the Calvary charge is so powerful. I have toyed around with changing the spear rules, possible +1 str/ +1 rank attack against charging Calvary. Seems to me that riding full gallop into spear would hit harder and involve more ranks as you drive into the unit. My group is going to play this for a while and see what it does. It may make spearmen more desirable and force Calvary to make harder choices.

Another rule we put into place with my group is ranks with different bases sizes, 20/25mm bases must be at least 5 to a rank to get the bonus and 40/50mm bases need at least 3 to get the rank. This rule seemed to be there just as a bleed over from 8th, we just like the way it looks, and like dealing in 5's. The 4 to a rank never sit well with us.

We also do not use lapping around, mostly because we keep forgetting about it.

Just my 2 cents
 
Just Tony
But if you do the math on a cav charge, it winds up like this:

6 Knight attacks, 5 horse attacks.

Knights hit 3-4 times, Horses we'll round up to 3.

Knights wound 2-3 times, Horses 1 1/2, so either 1-2.

Saves maybe one Knight attack depending on armor, assume not, and assume save against horse attacks

So total of 3-5 unsaved wounds. We assume the champion wasn't targeted, so he gets his attacks back, plus the back rank possibly minus one in a spear unit, +5 for HE spears. Standing res of +5, and the Knight charge suddenly isn't so scary unless it's in a flank, and you got charge blockers specifically to stop that.
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
Jump to Forum:
Login
Username

Password



Not a member yet?
Click here to register.

Forgotten your password?
Request a new one here.
Member Poll
There are no polls defined.
Shoutbox
You must login to post a message.

No messages have been posted.
1,287,523 unique visits
Table 'cmvogan_phpf1.phpf_new_users' doesn't exist