Talk:Warhammer 40,000 6th edition
This should be moved or have a disambiguation, since it presupposes 6th edition must be about warhammer. --Petro 23:17, 25 June 2012 (BST)
From the first paragraph, "Wards Ultra cross Tau isn't fluff (yet)." What? Can someone please translate that to legible human speech? (then delete this section) 22.214.171.124 09:36, 28 September 2012 (BST)
- In English: "Matt Ward's Ultramarine and Tau alliance is not canon(yet)". To elaborate, there has been a lot of references to Tau being the Emperor's Chosen Race because of their immunity to the Warp and Chaos. As such the Ultramarines, as the "epitome" of the Space Marines, should ally with the Tau officially. Yet, in the current rulebook there is no fluff to support such an alliance and a lot of the fluff has Ultramarines killing Tau just because with no context. To make a long story short, be glad the fluff wasn't changed with the Rules update.--126.96.36.199 23:36, 20 October 2012 (BST)
I've started posting a list of updates to the crunch I've seen. But its late and I'm going to bed. I'll finish up after work tomorrow unless someone else picks up where I left off.---JackKnrsh7- 06:53, 2 July 2012 (BST)
Also, not sure how in depth GW would be(if they ever found it)/is comfortable with this going. I've put the changes in my own words, but you never know. If you think its too close, let me know. I can revise it.---JackKnrsh7- 06:56, 2 July 2012 (BST)
Should we just delete the rumors section now that a large percentage of us have the rulebook and can confirm what is or isn't in it?
I like being able to compare the rumours to the facts. It's interesting to see the accuracy!
- I'll work on that tonight, since I'll have the rulebook in hand. CrazyThang 20:24, 18 July 2012 (BST)
"...Deathwatch mentioned as chamber militant of Ordo Xenos instead of Grey Knights..." Isn't Deathwatch a part of Ordo Xenos where as Grey Knights is Hereticus? -ABC
Just to clear things up, these are the Inquisitorial Ordo - chamber militant pairings: Ordo Hereticus - Sisters of Battle (witch hunters), Ordo Xenos - Deathwatch (alien hunters), Ordo Malleus - Grey Knights (daemon hunters) --Cykeisme 22:15, 6 August 2012 (BST)
I found a pic of the Allies Matrix. Should I post it on the main page or is the description good enough? --Orion Nexus 00:44, 29 July 2012 (BST)
Just making a quick statement about the Allies Matrix.. I believe Imperial Guard have that alliance level with Chaos purely to allow "representation" of normal Chaos-worshipping human troops.. like the Blood Pact in Dan Abnett's Gaunt's Ghosts series, and the soldiers the Iron Warriors used in Graham McNeill's Storm of Iron, for example. Note that I still find many, many of the alliance levels on the rest of the Allies Matrix to be completely retarded junk that makes no fucking sense with regards to established lore. Aside from "representing" something entirely different, as in the IG/human Chaos troops example above, in my opinion no Imperial force should have lower than "Allies of Convenience" with any other Imperial force, and Imperial forces should never have anything higher than "Desperate Allies" with any non-Imperial force. Anything else is shitting on twenty years of lore. --Cykeisme 22:09, 6 August 2012 (BST)
Amen, brother. --Orion Nexus 23:06, 6 August 2012 (BST)
I believe that this Matrix doesn't represent relationship between races. Instead it's something like "IF they find a reason to fight together, they can co-operate like this...". So, having better Ally rating makes armies co-operate better (or whatever), but doesn't make it more likely from fluff standpoint. For example, Tau+SM team: Tau are capable to look beyond differences (old story) while Mahreens are disciplined enough to clench their teeth and co-operate with Tau effectively if needed, but it doesn't mean that this co-operation is prominent or highly desireable for either side. Application of such ideas can make it all less weird. Warhammer 40k of modern times meant to support all the matchups it seems, even it would take enormous effort to explain such events fluff-wise. But hey, for some people it's part of the fun... Addendum: Some things still don't make sense though. Maybe this matrix was developed with mostly crunch in mind?.
So have we heard anything about who the next update? I heard from a blog that I know nothing about the reliability of that the next update is Dark Angels, then Tau, then Eldar, and one codex that hasn't been decided on between Tau and Eldar. And another article I don't know the validity of on Bell of Lost Souls says that January will have daemons get an update in both games, and an update for Warriors of Chaos. Can anybody say anything about how valid this stuff is? I will say the Dark Angels getting an update soon seems likely since they're on the cover of the rulebook.
Unrelated, I also heard about there being some Lord of Rings models, from the same BOLS article, to cash in on the release of the first Hobbit movie.
Add New 6th Edition Codexes?
Since the new Chaos Space Marine Codex came out should there be mention of it on this page? Just spitballing.--188.8.131.52 14:41, 22 October 2012 (BST)
So what is actually new in this iteration of the fluff? So much of the write up seems to hinge on noting things that stayed the same, or stating things that I thought were canon all long.
My fault, if you want to just condense it down to, "Nothing Changed" go for it. Thought it might be prudent to have it just in case people ask what's going on with 6e fluff. Hold on think I solved the problem.
This is the discussion page, so I will discuss my butthurt. The fact that character squads got bawleeted ruins my Ork Nob blob. There, I said it, openly and clearly for all to see, but there is also a logical reason for me to want my character squads back. See, character squads are made up of important guys, with cool, exceptional backstories, and in any other instance would be considered characters themselves. However, this isn't the case, because GW doesn't want its players to play musical wounds (or Orks to be good) anymore.
But seriously, this loophole should have been glossed over. It only buffed older armies like Space Wolves and Orks, who really need any bone they can get nowadays; exception being Grey Knights, who are already overpowered cheese-machines that nobody likes to play against anyways. When the new codexes for the old armies come out, then GW can take away character squads because the new codex will give the army all kinds of other cool tricks in return.
Side Note: Not that I play in tournaments, but since using the overpowered Dredmob or Orky Artillery lists are a no-no in tournaments due to the rejection of Imperial Armor volumes, how exactly are Ork players having fun in tournament play?
- Answer to the Side note: Low point matches and shenanigans. I almost won a tournament on sheer luck. First match I had more captured objectives than my opponent whose Death Company was the only thing on the field close to a point. Second match(Big Guns) had my Killa Kanz(Last one too) camp a point and due to killing two Land Raiders with deff koptas I had more points, even though the other guy had done more damage to me. Last fight was the Scouring vs tau and I would of one had I not decided to take 3 squads of 1 deffkopta and picked the low capture points. Note, I did have fun, but felt like I cheated on technicalities.
Okay, so does anyone else find it stupid that fortifications are placed before terrain? I mean, a cunning general surveys the battlefield then reacts accordingly, right? And whats to stop That Guy from placing a tall ruin in front of your quad cannon? It just seems rather idiotic to me.
Description of new Codexes
Can we stick to what's changed in the codex, and let the tactics pages trash the models and rules?