6th Edition...... Already?

Its been a little over a year since I first heard rumors about the possibility of 6th edition being only a couple of years off. At first, I just said its someone trying to get out their own cheesy version of what they want to see in the next edition, but as every month has passed, I have seen more and more rumors and possible rule changes posted. Now, before you read any further, this is not going to be a cut and copied post about the latest rumors on what the new rule changes will be. This is a discussion about whether or not the hobby and its fans are ready for 6th edition, and if by releasing this new edition, it will help or hurt the hobby. I will discuss some things to expect, and of course I might go off on some tangents about other things, but for the most part I want to focus on the timing of 6th edition and its potential impact on what we know now about the game.

Its been only three years. Three years and some change to be more innaccurate about the timeline, since we saw 5th edition hit the shelves. There were many changes, some subtle and some quite important (true line of sight...), but ultimately it created more than just new rules, it made it necessary for everyone to once again buy new rule books, as well as forcing Games Workshop to update all of its codexes. More than anything else, all players had to adapt to the new impacts that the rules changes caused to their respective armies. Some armies where not effected (such as Orks) while others where pushed even further into obscurity (Dark Eldar, Grey Knights, Necrons). While I will admit that adapting to new rules adds more fun challenges, it also nullified certain strengths for specific armies. Games Workshop should have updated all of its codexes right away, making sure that all armies got to benefit from the new rule changes immediately. Some armies will undoubtedly get left behind, leading to another lapse in consistency amongst the rules between different codexes from different editions. I think that before a new edition is released, all of the codexes should be brought up to speed, to at least ensure a level of consistency amongst the rules for different armies. I wonder if bringing in a new set of rules in a brand new edition is going to help the hobby, in terms of keeping the game fair and balanced so that all armies have the chance to compete on the tabletop.

Counts-As: is it Good or Evil?

With the national tournament season in full swing, and the Feast of Blades Qualifiers behind us I'm left with one sour note in my otherwise bittersweet song of an experience. No, I'm not sour that I didn't get an invite to the November Invitational and I'm not regretting the army I brought. Out of a long day at Black Knight Games in Littleton, CO, the only thing that has been eating away at the back of my mind is the thought of how people over use Count-As models in their army. Is Counts-As overused in our community?

Since our wonderful 40K community finds it necessary to fill our thoughts with a specific jargin and lingo, lets define what a Counts-As model is. Before I lay my thoughts out on this digital paper, I thought it necessary for everyone to be on the same page in terms of understanding. A count-as model is one that is meant to represent a model that the current Games-Workshop product line does not offer. Typically this is done to represent a unique Independent Character from any given codex or the like.

Tournament Talk...........BOHICA

So I'm not a very seasoned tournament player, but I've learned (in the 3 I've played in)........that in order to be competitive, one must get rid of any fun, balance, and desire that they have for a specific army list.

Running a balanced list makes sense to all of us, but doesn't really hit home at most tournaments. And you can get rid of the fun because it comes to ultra competitive, and you have those people that call every little rule, then scrutinize you for not knowing the rule book, cover to cover. You know, that guy who's played since 1st Edition. His models look somewhat dusty, because the morning of the tournament, he took off the shelf. And he's included in every conversation in the room, because he knows everything about everything 40K related. And forget about running that cool character you like in your codex.......cause unless he's EXTREMELY over the top, and around the points value of say.........300, then he's not gonna match up to that one character who is.....and you'll get squashed.

Now I'm pretty sure there hasn't been a major tournament winner who has ran a balanced army. I play the close-combat heavy, Black Templar, and even I run a balanced list. For, the biggest reason, because I paid for a full codex, and I want to use it all. Not just 3 or 4 pages out of it. And I love the fun in having different attributes to an army. I build balanced lists because I want to challenge myself, and challenge my friends. I don't see any fun in just 2-turning people, walking threw them. When I think about really nasty army lists, I think of "The Drive-by Tau", The Imperial Guardsmen "Leafblower", or "Mech-Vet",............(those damn guardsmen), and almost any Space Marine "3 Land Raiders Down Your Throat".

No!! I wanna go First!!-The Importance of Stealing the Initiative

The Armies are ready to go. Infiltrators have been placed, meat shields have been deployed, the wall of orks are ready, and the basilisks are prepared to unleash an onslought of firepower. BUT, just when your figuring out your first movement and target priority, your opponent rolls one last dice to see if he can steal the initiative. The dice bounces and rolls and finally lands. All six of those pips are staring at you, almost making the shape of a middle finger being held high right at your face. Just when you though you where gonna go first, you have to take the opening volly of fire. So what? Does it really matter if you go first or second? Is it gonna change that much of the game?