Vehicles to get Hull Points in 6th edition! Close Combat Weapons to get AP values! This is what we are looking towards for the new and latest infomation for 6th edition with a little bit of Chaos thrown in there. Ahriman has psyker mastery level 4!

Please remember that until we have the book in our grubby little hands, these are all rumors.
Thanks again Grant, we appreciate every little bit.

Via Grant
Hey mates,
All the stuff in this link is 100% the real deal. ( Ive posted it below)

As far as 6th ed...
I will also add that vehicles use "hull points" in 6th. If a vehicle has 3 hull points it will die after 3 shaken results, but it can still explode after 1 shot as normal.

All cc weapons have AP values in 6th similar to what was in the fake 6th ed rule book leak.
There are going to be no different levels of Eternal Warrior either.

Cheers,
Grant

via Grant
regarding theDark Generals rumors from earlier this morning.

I'm sorry chaps, there are no legion specific rules. TheDarkGeneral is merely guessing and he is wrong. The best you can do is unlock certain elites as troops with specific special characters. Of which, there are no new ones mate. But they are all pretty good. Ahriman is a bloody psyker mastery level 4 now.

Cheers,
Grant

via Bigred on Bols
Chaos Marines
-The "flying dragon thingy" is coming. It is a flyer and one of two entirely new units added to the codex.
-The second new unit is said to be a Chaos answer to the Grey Knight Dreadknight.
-The Chaos Dreadnought is indeed still there (take a breath people), but gets a new name, and a rules overhaul.
-Hardcover book (just like Fantasy army books)

6th Edition
-Many of the general concepts from magic from Warhammer Fantasy are coming to Warhammer 40,000.
-There will be "lore equivalents"
-Psychic powers will be generated randomly by psykers (like fantasy)
-Entirely new rules for constructing army lists (~Look at Fantasy for hints)
-The FOC may be history

60 Comments:

  1. I really hope that they go a bit more granular with the AP values of the different close combat weapons than the leak did. Cause I would really like to see Chain weapons have a better AP than normal CCW's.

    ReplyDelete
  2. csm rumors are prob WFB chaos rumors + made up stuff :D

    to many csm rumors lately IMO

    ReplyDelete
  3. All AP values do is screw non-Marine armies, PERIOD. Sure, give Chainswords AP:5. Goodbye, armour saves on most non-Marine units. Random psychic powers? Fantasy style army lists? Because fantasy is an AWESOME game that everyone plays, right? Sounds more and more like 6th is the death knell of 40K.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I despise the sound of random psychic powers and % army list FOC, fantasy style... This is not cool...

      Delete
    2. Yeah, since non-Marines can reliably stand up to Marines in combat anyway...

      ;)

      All it will do is make those combats end more quickly, which may well be a good thing for those non-Marine armies. Plus, it really does make more sense for chainswords to ignore some types of armour saves, IMHO.

      Delete
  4. Not looking forward to 6th ed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. me too... sound like they are rbinging back 2nd in a worse way -.-

      Delete
  5. Agreed with the CCW AP value. No way non marines are going to get any use from it, except maybe nids. But the way GW goes it wouldn't surprise me.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I hate the idea of magic based pskic powers cause ill have to change lists to include psykers which i dont really like :(

    ReplyDelete
  7. No one complaining how crap this "hull points" thing is then? Sounds the be the deathknell of tanks.

    You are almost better off getting multiple glancing than 1 Penning.....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gauss weapons should have be awesome again! Glances on 6 and most of the time you getting shaken/ stunned results anyways, so that is deffinately awesome for necrons! Sorry non necron players :P

      Delete
  8. Why would supposedly 6th Edition friendly codices such as Grey Knights and Blood Angels have psychic powers if psychic powers are randomly generated?

    "Every codex since Tyranids was written with 6th Edition in mind."

    I'm just pointing out that these powers might be 'extra' to what you purchase from the codex.

    So your space marine has Smite and Fury of the Ancients. Those are his from his codex. But wait, now he can randomly generate other powers too.

    White Dwarf once introduced 'minor psychic powers' which didn't replace the army specific 'major powers'. Minor powers were things like telekinesis.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My be is that all the psychic powers will get a complete make over, like spells did in WFB 8th. The psychic powers lists will be in the MRB and replace the ones in the current codices.

      Each army will probably have a signature power, that they can choose to replace one random power if the don't like it.

      Delete
    2. More likely IMHO that they'll bring in some random tables, like the old Minor Psychic Powers of 3rd edition in Chapter Approved. You still purchase your main psychic powers, but may take a limited number of minor powers depending on your mastery level, etc.

      Delete
    3. Yeah, I don't think that is what they are planning it makes no sense and could potentially get confusing.

      Delete
  9. Hardcover books are good news, the Fantasy ones are amazing already. Psychic Power revamp in and on itself is a solid idea, but random powers are terrible, they already tried that in 3rd ed with the minor powers. Worst case scenario: Dispell dice. Yeah, that sounds like fun in 40k, right?
    All in all, I spot alltogether too many "like Fantasy" tags in there. *shrugs*
    Everything elso sounds terrible, to be frank.
    Dreadknight equivalent: Yes, we had those already, they were called demonprinces and greater demons. Superfluous.
    Chaos Dragon: What is this, WHFB? No matter how often I read this, it just seems stupid, in all honesty. Does not fit the style of CSM, either, considering they wanted to tone down on deamon-stuff.
    New name for the dread: Why? Is Chaos going the way of the Blood Angels, where everything has to be Blood-something? I don't get it. Pointless change seems pointless, unless the plan is to exchange the classic dread with a €47 kit.
    Hull points: I can see this messing up vehicle-heavy armies and massivly buffing necrons. Kinda ambivalent about it.
    CCW with AP: This will go over well, MEQs tearing apart 5+saves even more easily is just what the game needed.
    FOC removal: The %-based system of WHFB is propably the most annoying thing of the otherwise solid 8th edition, so I'm hoping this won't go the same way.
    And the best one for last: No rules for certain Legions. Fantastic. Basically ignoring one of the most pleaded-for distinctions since 3.5 seems like a really dumb move, no matter how you look at it. Curious question: Does that mean cult-troops like cult-terminators or -dreads are out of the picture, again?
    Also, out of sheer curiosity, who is writing the codex? All of this bears a hauntingly familiar stench...

    ...sorry, I just had to get all of this out of my system.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dude, I just doubt most of the rumors know. Everything we've heard earlier on by reliable sources has been invalidated by Grant or Tastytaste who claim to have insider knowledge on the codex. The fact that only a few short months ago the new chaos was looking like a 3.5 revival means to me that they wouldn't just scrap everything pointed at originially. I'm just lugging it out till I get it. If I don't like it, I'll just make some house rules to play with friends, I don't do tournaments anyways.

      Delete
    2. Anyone ever thought that 'Grant' is pulling this out of his a**e? "100% real deal"...sounds like a sleazy car salesman. I love it how he bags out the other rumour mongers, considering he wasn't one until about a week ago.

      All of this sounds like WHFB. In Space.

      Delete
    3. I know right! One day he shows up on the scene claiming to have the new codex and everyone starts listening to him as if he were a rumor god! Many of the other rumor mongers who gave us information on the legions book were credible sources, and now all of thats being discredited by Grant, who stated these so called "facts" without giving any proof whatsoever.

      Delete
    4. Just have to wait several weeks to know who was throwing smoke up from the rear.

      Delete
    5. Maybe Grant IS Ghost21, who like a ghost has come back to haunt and deceive us 0.o

      Delete
    6. More like thedarkgeneral is

      Delete
    7. So far Grant has more crediblity than several of the rumor sources we have had in the past. He has only given us a few tidbits of unique info. They seem reasonable so far.

      Tastytaste has a very good track record even when he says things like Sisters of Battle will be a White Dwarf codex.

      Only time will tell, and we will do a rumor check as things get closer and things get released.

      Delete
    8. The only thing Grant has done is say the rumors with CONFIDENCE that's it. It doesn't mean he knows more than us but if someone can come and boldly claim they do with confidence,then that's why we're believing him. If anything he's probably just a one trick pony and after CSM blows over we won't hear from him again.

      Delete
  10. THIS IS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT I THOUGHT SO IT MUST BE BAD!!!!!!!!! Haha. I love how people predict the demise of 40k, and talk about how horrible the game will be, based off of rumors. I heard that the cool kids wait until it comes out and they have played it a bit before throwing out doomsday rants.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. they are makeing it like WFB
      and that was not very welcome in the beginning
      also their sails droped after the releas of WFB

      i don´t want to wait for 4-5 dexes to come out before i can have somewhat ok games... and i surely don´t want to pay extra for stuff in need in order to use caster units

      the starter box should be about makeing bad units buyable again and not nerfing good units... it should be about getting cheap minis to start the game not about spending ages reading tones of rules and buying 2 boxes just to use 1 caster in youre army, like it was in 2nd ED

      but thats just my take on it
      i sure wont continue to play if they are going the WFB max profit & bad playability rout

      Delete
    2. I would like to thank damn the valley for that refreshing remark. I look on here everyday ( and work for GW) and NOTHING annoys me more than people piddling and whinging that based on a rumour that my nan heard the milkman say he'd seen drawn on a toilet door near jervis johnsons house, the next edition will FAIL, the skies will rain off-milk and bacon will become illegal. In my opinion this kind of nonsensical rambling is the death knell of the internet, nothing more. and in reply to the above, the only thing that droped after WFB was grammar levels apparently. 6th ed is happenning, it will be different and if you dont like it play magic or hold your breath until 7th ed.

      Delete
    3. Or keep playing 5th editon. *gasp*

      Delete
    4. "I look on here everyday ( and work for GW)" chaos legions is smth i care about so i get emotional about it...
      if gw would ever talk about what they do like evryone else (smth plz?) it would't be like this
      ...and the internet is more than this in fact this is a comment section of a post in a blog about a little hobby

      Delete
  11. I look forward to a 6th edition that is more complex and gets rid of children and slack minded (faster gamer, faster tourney) players. 5th Ed 40K as it is is a dull affair at the best of times and I hope upon hopes that 6th will make me excited for the rules for the 1st time since RT first came out.

    If these rumours turn out to be true, awesome - they sound like they'll be something almost entirely refreshing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. its not realy 5th thats broken its more the SW BA and GK IG dexes that made it so IMO

      Delete
    2. Do not make the mistake of assuming random=complexity. In fact the ability to choose powers and therefore tailor your list to best compliment them or vice versa realistically gives 40k a huge tactical aspect.far more so than the LOL WUT ROLL WIN! magic of fantasy.

      Delete
    3. Random psychic powers would absolutely add tactical complexity to the game, since you would have have to adjust how you play your army based on what powers you get. Hopefully they will avoid the massive, kill entire units type spells you find in fantasy though.

      Delete
    4. and what about armies like Nids or eldar, where those powers aren't just a nice boost or a different way of playing but are fundamentally CRUCIAL to the army actually working on the table.

      Delete
    5. Simply design the powers in such a way that the armies can work with any of them. Armies requiring an exact psychic power to function is poor design anyway.

      Delete
    6. You could also give certain units, Farseers for example, the ability to select which powers they have. Some armies can do that in Fantasy, no reason to believe it wouldn't be possible here.

      Delete
  12. No FOC? I don't likeit. Some hate it but it balances the game maybe "reworked" is a better term?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Structure points on vehicles is fantastic. The worst thing about vehicles in the current rules is the insane level of variance. I like AP on CC weapons also. It's silly it isn't there already, and power weapon have way too much of an advantage as it is. It gives me some hope for Striking Scorpions.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Too many rumours going in different directions at the moment. Too many coming out too close to each other.

    Somebody is muddying the water....

    ReplyDelete
  15. I belive that it AP on ccw was mentioned in that fake 6th ed awhile go. As i recall they were only ap6

    ReplyDelete
  16. Are there no more gamers who play 40k AND fantasy? And I would like to point out to all the nay-sayers that 8th ed fantasy is an excellent rules set that has made a lot of people very happy and leads to consistently fun and exciting games, whereas 5th ed 40k is pretty awful, let's be honest. The issue: if you ask me, and I admit this is an opinion only, is that 5th ed 40k has rules for a skirmish based game but is balanced for 2000+ points, leading to dull games that are way too big for the rules set they live in. Fantasy on the other hand is a set of rules intended for large battles, and that's why it works so much better. Ever played 500 points vs orks... try it and you'll see what I mean. 40k should be balanced for 1000-1500 and playable at 2000, any more than that and you're getting into apocalypse range.
    And further, AP CCW should only benefit marines. Have you ever played against guard?? It's obscene that they pay 5 points per guy and have 4+ cover saves pretty much anywhere on the table, I think the marines deserve this kind of boost.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No cover saves in CC though.

      Delete
  17. Mmmm, Wyches with CC AP? Raiders, Venoms and Ravagers with Hull Points? Cool...

    ReplyDelete
  18. Hull points just make glancing hits more dangerous - and it's not hard to get those. I don't like the sound of this...
    On the other hand, I do want AP CCW. It's something that should always have been there. I mean, a guardsman punching someone is just as likely to go through someone's armour as a berserker smashing their head in with a chainaxe? Really?
    And anon(2:17), the bit I don't like is the reference to FOC in fantasy. That's the only reason I don't play fantasy. I despise the thought of not being able to take more than 25% of your army as HQs (40k equivalent for those who don't know much about fantasy).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't know if that is so bad, they have been tending to price HQs cheaper in general.

      Delete
    2. I run Ahriman and a daemon prince - comes to 460 points, and I have a good 1500 point army list. I don't wan to start playing games at 1840+ points just so I can use them both.

      Delete
  19. @Natfka - The BigRed BoLS rumours are just reposts of rumours from TastyTaste at Blood of Kittens.

    It would probably be better to credit the original source (TastyTaste) rather than BigRed since otherwise it gives the appearance of a second corroborating rumour, which is simply not the case.

    These circular rumours just tend to confuse things.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I didnt have the time to track them down, I will change the source though. Bols often times does not put up where their sources come from and makes it quite hard to track down.

      Delete
    2. Not all of them were Tasty's, some were genuinely from BOLS.

      Delete
  20. The thing to remember with rumors, is that lots of people have the same info at the same time.

    Lots of folks talk to us, and if we take something from another site like dakka, or warseer, we note it.

    Today's CSM/6th rumors for example were sourced ourselves.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Bigred. That is how I originally had it sourced. I will put that back on.

      I appreciate the correction, it really helps clarify things.

      Delete
  21. @shrike, you'd be surprised how well it works in fantasy, and I'd imagine it would force more balance on 40k, tbh you should be running 50% of your army as troops anyhow, and spending more than 500pts on HQ in a 2k game would be madness.

    As primarily a fantasy player returning to 40k after a long time off I'd really reccomend giving it a try, 8th fixed most of the problems with 7th, and makes for more enjoyable games.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why should I spend so much on troops? I'm considering starting renegade militia/traitor guard, and the restrictions this would impose means that in a 2000 point game, I would need at least 500 points of troops, up to 1000, which roughly equates to 80-160 guardsmen. Considering the price of the FW things, this is a little ridiculous (about £320 for 80). In actual fact, I tried a test run of an army list I wrote, and won with only two platoons.
      Even with my current chaos list, I have less than 500 points of troops, including transports. I prefer to destroy their troops units with daemon princes and tanks, and park my units on objectives (if that's what we're playing). By your logic, I would need to double my troops units to be a normal list, which I feel is a little ridiculous.

      Delete
    2. Well Shrike if you look at Gk its nearly 40+ points for a GK terminator troop...which adds up depending on your play style...

      Delete
  22. I don't think the CCW AP rumour is all that sound, as it doesn't make much sense really, not without significant FAQs being released. In most codices (here I consider those allegedly designed with 6th edition in mind), there is only a statement of a model having a "close combat weapon" (and if it doesnt it is assumed that it fights with a rifle butt or whatever is at hand). Even in the Marine codex, assualt squads come with bolt pistols and close combat weapons, though the actual models come with chainswords, i.e. the chainsword is a generic close combat weapon.

    Now I would not expect run-of-the-mill troops' close combat weapons to have an AP value, and I would expect extra points to be expended to obtain a weapon with an AP. So if chainswords are given an AP, then that means having to FAQ the SM codex to allow them to have this option. Same goes for Space Wolf etc.

    I wonder though, if this rumour is confusing the use of pistols as close combat weapons with an AP (similar to the leaked 6th edition). In that document, it appeared that the best AP a pistol could have in close combat is 5+ (regardless as to its long range AP). Yes this seriously advantages marines who all come with a bolt pistol's against Guard and Dark eldar.

    If the rumour is true, then could GW be going back to the old idea of AP based upon users strength. If you recall, in earlier editions of 40k (cant recall which edition) you had save modifiers for weapons (which modified the save roll), and each each successful close combat wound received a -1 modifier for each point of strength above 3 a model was (S4 was -1, S5 was -2 etc). So if this rumour is true could CCW AP be based upon a similar idea where the AP decreases by 1 for each point of strength above 3?

    For example a marine's (S4) attacks would be 6+, an Orgyn (S5) would be 5+, a lictor's (S6) would be 4+ etc, with S8 being 2+.

    That might make things interesting (and doesnt make the SM all powerful against guard or dark eldar), and gives some races further advantage with furious charge ability. An imperial guard unit with furious charge would gain AP 6+ (handy against tyranid gaunts), but a genestealer brood with furious charge would be even more effective against the guard gaining AP 5+ against them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They did price inferno pistols on Seraphim in SoB pretty high points-wise which could indicate this being somewhat true. It could also explain all the bolt pistols added to the various units in that "codex".

      Delete
  23. 8th edition Fantasy is terrible. I totally quit playing after it came out. If 40k goes that route...well say goodbye to my money GW...

    ReplyDelete

 
Top
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...