March 28 2020 20:21:45
Navigation
Forum Threads
Newest Threads
· Marianna Chevaux
· New 3rd Ed. 40K oppo...
· 6th ed rules for 7th...
· Reclaim The Stones!!...
· Destroy The Chaos He...
Hottest Threads
· Marianna Chevaux [4]
· New 3rd Ed. 40K o... [2]
Latest Articles
· THE GODS OF CHAOS HA...
· Posting Content on t...
· A word on Attachments
· Final Testing and Bu...
Users Online
· Guests Online: 2

· Members Online: 0

· Total Members: 252
· Newest Member: Sherpa1016
Welcome
Welcome to Classic Hammer
View Thread
Classic Hammer » Warhammer Fantasy » 6th Edition
 Print Thread
6th edition thoughts
HidaSeku
So, on Saturday, I was able to get a game of 6th edition again with someone I used to play with back when it was "current".

2000 points of my Empire vs 2000 points of his Dwarfs. The Dwarfs won a solid victory, and my Empire lost (and will be back to fight another day!)

We had a lot of fun! After the game, we talked about how it went and it was very interesting to contrast and compare. We had been playing 9th age recently after playing 8th for a bit, so we had forgotten a lot about 6th and it was fun to play it again once more.

Some thoughts we had comparing the game of 6th vs 8th edition/9th Age:
- The game felt much more tactical (where to move, where to deploy, what to target, etc)
- The game felt much more in the player's control (no random charges, less attacks = less random fluctations, etc)
- Magic felt much more sane and more balanced (note I was the only one casting, as he had no anvil)
- Complexity was the same, but the complexity was in the movement and tactics in 6th, where in 8th/9th the complexity is in special rules
- We both felt that the game could use some "elements" to improve it from later editions, but definitely felt that 6th was actually a much better "base" for rules than either 8th/9th
 
Just Tony
Have to agree on all points here. Though I don't think there's a single thing from 8th that needs salvaged.



Well, some of the new units, but they'd have to be dialed back a touch.
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
Geep
8th brought more clarity that had been very much lacking in past editions. Giving everything a clear unit type was great, as that honestly came up as an argument in my old gaming group- and trying to find clear evidence wasn't always easy.
The entire 'always strikes first' and 'always strikes last' being clearly defined also helped. I'm pretty sure it was in 6th where 'always strikes last' was a relatively clear special rule, but 'always strikes first' was a paragraph of explanatory text, reprinted everywhere that needed it (and sometimes varying slightly, just to be extra confusing).
'Clipping' had also been a problem pre-8th: There was nothing about maximising unit contact, so it was perfectly valid to charge in, clip a unit's edge, kill the one or two models in position to attack back, then win by massive combat resolution and run down a whole unit. I think a note about 'the evils of clipping' was in the back of the 7th ed rulebook, but no solid rules prevented it.

In all of the more general aspects, I agree 6th is a superior edition.
 
Just Tony
At the risk of coming off far too condescending, which is not my intent, I'll refer to the PDF of the book I have.

Page 52 of the main 6th Ed. rulebook is pretty straightforward:

"1. When a unit charges an enemy the play must endeavor to bring as many models from the charging unit into combat as possible. This can sometimes be achieved by moving the chargers straight forward, but often it will be necessary to wheel slightly to face the enemy. This is a very important rule, so be sure to get it right from the start!

2. During a charge a unit can wheel once. It can, and indeed must, wheel in order to maximize the number of charging models being able to fight. Note that the unit does not have to wheel if this would mean that it cannot reach its enemy.

If chargers need to wheel towards their target, execute the wheel as already described, measuring the distance wheeled as you normally would. This distance counts as part of the total distance charged. For example, if a unit can charge 12" it might wheel 4" to bring models to face the enemy and then move up to 8" towards them.

Once a unit has completed any required wheel it is moved straight forward towards the enemy and stops as soon as the two units touch."

It then continues on page 53:

ALIGNING COMBATANTS

"Once the charging unit is in contact it is automatically aligned against its enemy as shown in the diagram below to form a battle line. This extra alignment move is free.

If it is impractical to align a unit properly because of interposing terrain, other models, or whatever, then it is acceptable to re-align the charged unit as well (or instead) so the battlelines remain neat. A confusing situation may arise when interposing terrain or models make it impossible to align the whole unit, for example. Rather than clutter the rules with endless clarifications, we have included further examples in the back of this book."

And here is where my PDF lets me down, as the last few pages aren't there. If clipping is addressed, it's in the back of the book. The main rules make it clear that getting the most models in is the goal. Any body gaming the rules to allow for a single charger in base is the problem, not the rule set.

Also I'm really curious how many 6th Ed. units could do enough damage on the charge AND have that much static res as to force a break. I mean, a fear causing unit could do that, but it'd have to be quite sizeable.
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
Geep
The instructions of 'don't clip!' were there, but 1) it was only made very clear in the back of the book, which is an often ignored area and 2) the detail of 'you don't have to wheel to maximise contact if movement distance doesn't allow it' is a big one.
I found that it didn't take long before I and almost all of my friends could estimate distances extremely well, and in the usual micro-movement to see who could get the charge there often wasn't much spare movement distance beyond what was required to reach the opponent- and so clipping happened.
8th ed's solution of extra movement was a little odd, but I think was a decent way to go to end this problem.

The issue with clipping is more in the static combat res than the damage output- for example, I could charge 30 goblins with full command into 15 Swordmasters with full command, and have the only unit contact be between a Goblin character (cheap and plentiful, these guys were everywhere) face on with one Swordmaster. Damage wise, that engagement is likely to be pretty even, but the Goblins win the combat based on static res. If the Swordmasters break that's great, but if not the Goblins are in control of the movement in that engagement- so things are unlikely to get better for the Swordmasters, and often that kind of delay of an elite unit is all that's needed to swing a game.
It's also just plain frustrating for the elf player that most of his elite warriors are scratching their backsides, when if the engagement were lined up properly there'd be dead goblins everywhere.

You're right that clipping is usually gaming the rules, but that's a very common thing among gamers and so should be addressed by firm rules (more than is given in 6th ed). It's obviously a problem they suffered- if not it wouldn't have had such details for the last 3 editions (6th, 7th and 8th).
 
Just Tony
Fair enough. I guess I didn't see that sort of thing in my clubs. I saw one dude do the whole fraction of an inch move thing, and I peppered him with as much shooting and magic as I could muster. He got the hint.


If there's anything in 6th that needs absolutely killed, it'd be lapping around. Most useless part of the rules, and most exploitable.
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
Geep
I agree, lapping around was very odd- especially as, when charged, the lapping unit had to go back to its normal formation, which could often make the charge impossible- I was never sure what to do then!

I think I'd also want to adjust 6th ed's terrain rules- though 8th ed is not the right way to go there Pfft I remember my Wood Elves had access to an 'acorn', that was fired like a rock lobber and created a forest where it landed- it was quite possibly the most broken thing in the game at the time, as you could usually catch a unit or two and they'd be pretty well out of the game completely, and the item had no counter (since it didn't actually do damage).
 
Just Tony
Simple solution: When entering/moving through/exiting difficult terrain, a regiment can assume a skirmish formation. It costs a quarter of your move, and you cannot change formations twice in the same turn.
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
Geep
That's too simple, and too good. Who wouldn't want to be able to make their shooting units into skirmishers? Or most fast cav? I'd save 5pts per model using Glade Guard over Scouts, and would keep the special longbow- great deal!
I like the Lustria campaign pseudo-skirmish option, though if it's too reliable then terrain ends up doing nothing at all (which is no doubt why they added the random tables to terrain in 8th, because otherwise the terrain did nothing). I'm pretty sure I've already given my reasoning for these things in the thread I made relatively recently.
 
Just Tony
If you do that, you take their shooting out for a turn or two, in which case, what's the point?

Or would it be better to have it be D6 move?
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
Geep
How would it take their shooting out for a turn or two?
If you specifically played that changing into skirmish formation stopped shooting for a turn, then sure- but I find it's not too uncommon to be out of range first turn anyway. Skirmishing Glade Guard would make Wood Elf opponents cry- able to move 5" back or sideways each turn, shooting without penalty (it'd still be good for most other races, but Wood Elves were my usual army of choice, so I'm seeing this from their view).

I'm not a fan of the D6 move either- random values with no relation to the statline just end up weird. For example- What if Dwarfs roll a 4+, Humans roll a 5+ or Elves a 6?
You can set a cap- like Dwarfs that roll a 4+ still only move 3"- but then why is it that Dwarfs are often relatively unimpeded (3+ roll required for full movement) while the Elves rarely get their full movement (5+ roll required for full movement)?
are you saying D6" and they can march to double it, or does it still block marching?

I like the idea of it halving movement but allowing marching, so a unit can be march blocked and in a forest- and it'll really suffer for that. That would need some playtesting though- would players make units actually interact with a forest (or any difficult ground) under those rules?
 
Just Tony
I can live with half move AND marching.
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
Just Tony
My brother recommended marching not allowed, and half charge speed. I think that may work out the best.
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
TinyLegions
Just Tony wrote:

Simple solution: When entering/moving through/exiting difficult terrain, a regiment can assume a skirmish formation. It costs a quarter of your move, and you cannot change formations twice in the same turn.


In WAB there is a certain type of units that are called 'Light Infantry." An example is Auxiliary units in the Roman army. They can adopt a skirmish formation and reform to a ranked formation. I don't remember but I believe that there is either a reform that needs to be done, or a leadership test. The Ranked formation acts like a Heavy Infantry,(Legionnaires) but with less perks and power. While I think that this rule should not be used by everyone, I tend to think that a rule like this could be useful to implement in WFB. I can't understand why GW did not use play tested rules like what they had in WAB but instead went the way that they did for the 8th.
Edited by TinyLegions on 31-08-2016 20:50
Your Benevolent dictator

My Miniatures Blog http://www.tinyle...gspot.com/
 
TinyLegions
HidaSeku wrote:

So, on Saturday, I was able to get a game of 6th edition again with someone I used to play with back when it was "current".

2000 points of my Empire vs 2000 points of his Dwarfs. The Dwarfs won a solid victory, and my Empire lost (and will be back to fight another day!)

We had a lot of fun! After the game, we talked about how it went and it was very interesting to contrast and compare. We had been playing 9th age recently after playing 8th for a bit, so we had forgotten a lot about 6th and it was fun to play it again once more.

Some thoughts we had comparing the game of 6th vs 8th edition/9th Age:
- The game felt much more tactical (where to move, where to deploy, what to target, etc)
- The game felt much more in the player's control (no random charges, less attacks = less random fluctations, etc)
- Magic felt much more sane and more balanced (note I was the only one casting, as he had no anvil)
- Complexity was the same, but the complexity was in the movement and tactics in 6th, where in 8th/9th the complexity is in special rules
- We both felt that the game could use some "elements" to improve it from later editions, but definitely felt that 6th was actually a much better "base" for rules than either 8th/9th


I am glad that you got a game in. The "elements" that I liked from the 8th was very far and few between for me.
Your Benevolent dictator

My Miniatures Blog http://www.tinyle...gspot.com/
 
TinyLegions
Just Tony wrote:

At the risk of coming off far too condescending, which is not my intent, I'll refer to the PDF of the book I have.

Page 52 of the main 6th Ed. rulebook is pretty straightforward:

"1. When a unit charges an enemy the play must endeavor to bring as many models from the charging unit into combat as possible. This can sometimes be achieved by moving the chargers straight forward, but often it will be necessary to wheel slightly to face the enemy. This is a very important rule, so be sure to get it right from the start!

2. During a charge a unit can wheel once. It can, and indeed must, wheel in order to maximize the number of charging models being able to fight. Note that the unit does not have to wheel if this would mean that it cannot reach its enemy.

If chargers need to wheel towards their target, execute the wheel as already described, measuring the distance wheeled as you normally would. This distance counts as part of the total distance charged. For example, if a unit can charge 12" it might wheel 4" to bring models to face the enemy and then move up to 8" towards them.

Once a unit has completed any required wheel it is moved straight forward towards the enemy and stops as soon as the two units touch."

It then continues on page 53:

ALIGNING COMBATANTS

"Once the charging unit is in contact it is automatically aligned against its enemy as shown in the diagram below to form a battle line. This extra alignment move is free.

If it is impractical to align a unit properly because of interposing terrain, other models, or whatever, then it is acceptable to re-align the charged unit as well (or instead) so the battlelines remain neat. A confusing situation may arise when interposing terrain or models make it impossible to align the whole unit, for example. Rather than clutter the rules with endless clarifications, we have included further examples in the back of this book."

And here is where my PDF lets me down, as the last few pages aren't there. If clipping is addressed, it's in the back of the book. The main rules make it clear that getting the most models in is the goal. Any body gaming the rules to allow for a single charger in base is the problem, not the rule set.

Also I'm really curious how many 6th Ed. units could do enough damage on the charge AND have that much static res as to force a break. I mean, a fear causing unit could do that, but it'd have to be quite sizeable.


I never had much issues with clipping in my games in any of the editions that I played in. I know that this never takes place in a vacuum like you see at the back of the BRB, and it is a good idea to have a contingency just in case. Maximizing the wheel movement and knowing the flanking rules will do a lot to fix this. The old house rule that I used with friends is to charge as is with maximizing the wheel to make the charge work. After the first combat, we can then do a shuffle during the movement phase if necessary.
Your Benevolent dictator

My Miniatures Blog http://www.tinyle...gspot.com/
 
Just Tony
The last Bat Rep I posted had a Minotaur unit slam into a Dwarf unit. Not many models made it into combat, and honestly I'm sure my brother would have been happy to let it be a redirect. I think that's the rub, knowing when a redirect is possible. I mean, I couldn't have charged the Dwarves while the Knights were there, but at the same time it can be a bit vague as the unit wasn't hidden, just obstructed by the Knight unit.

Discussion for later?
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
TinyLegions
Just Tony wrote:

If you do that, you take their shooting out for a turn or two, in which case, what's the point?

Or would it be better to have it be D6 move?


Taking a page from 40K 2D6 and pick the lowest instead? In general I don't know how to fix difficult terrain for WFB.
Your Benevolent dictator

My Miniatures Blog http://www.tinyle...gspot.com/
 
Geep
Basing movement on a D6 only works in 40k where all relevant units have a 6" move. It won't work in Warhammer for the reasons I gave earlier- in short, because it may boost the speed of some units or the effect will be unequal in application (without intention).
 
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.
1,322,053 unique visits
Table 'cmvogan_phpf1.phpf_new_users' doesn't exist