Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://natfka.blogspot.co.uk/2016/02/rumors-40k-moving-to-formations-only.html?m=1

Rumors of change to army building in 40k

Be interesting to see how this turns out, and what they actually mean by "formations"

Oh look, it's natfka! Making more crap up!

For those who don't want to click through to their garbage dump of a site:

Warhammer 40,000 moving to formations only? That is what this rumor says, and that it will come this year but will not be called the End Times.


Please give this a ton of salt right now. The information comes filtered down through a very reliable person. That says nothing for the original source, of which I have no additional information.

This is one of those hard to take pills, that I am not going to take, but may be worth the discussion. A new edition like this is what most of us 40k players fear could happen.

What would you think of a 40k that was formation based, with no points?

via anonymous sources
A very very salty rumor about 40k End Times. From an undisclosed message, it seems End Times will come through this year with another name(s), it will be (translate from spanish) more changes about game system than fluff. Expect to play only formations and the point system will be gone.

40k end times seems to be this years buzz words also

No evidence at all its coming either.

I'd welcome the end times and the removal of points. Makes things much much easier.

He doesn't make anything up, he reports what he hears, trust me he has a lot of sources and contacts. He knows what he is doing, and withholds a lot of information he gets

 Korlandril wrote:
He doesn't make anything up, he reports what he hears, trust me he has a lot of sources and contacts. He knows what he is doing, and withholds a lot of information he gets

Rubbish. He talks a lot of bollocks:

Natfka on Faeit 212 - Total rumors: (384 TRUE) / (832 FALSE) / (75 PARTIALLY TRUE/VAGUE)

Looks like chance to me...

I like the points system personally I like writing lists, I don't see why they can't have both

I think this has been coming ever since most codexes have been updated to 7th edition, this is unprecedented compared to previous editions


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 zedmeister wrote:

 Korlandril wrote:
He doesn't make anything up, he reports what he hears, trust me he has a lot of sources and contacts. He knows what he is doing, and withholds a lot of information he gets

Rubbish. He talks a lot of bollocks:

Natfka on Faeit 212 - Total rumors: (384 TRUE) / (832 FALSE) / (75 PARTIALLY TRUE/VAGUE)

Looks like chance to me...

He just relays rumors, gathers them up, he is not a source himself and none of the rumours are his own so those stats prove nothing

 Kanluwen wrote:
Oh look, it's natfka! Making more crap up!

Hey now! That's not fair! You have no evidence that natfka is making that up!

It could easily be someone else making it up. [rimshot]

That said, it would be stupidly easy to make this come true rules-wise.

Step 1: Rules say, "Your army must be composed entirely of formations."
Step 2: Make a formation that says, "Take whatever you want! (But you can't claim objectives, etc.)"

Is that different than how it is now? Technically yes, but effectively no.

- H8

 Korlandril wrote:


He just relays rumors, gathers them up, he is not a source himself and none of the rumours are his own so those stats prove nothing

Relays rumours? Hardly. Unless he's willing to divide up rumours by different sources, he's still talking rubbish. And even then, it's still rubbish. Those stats show that his rumours are as reliable as BoLS (not very much) and are reliable indicator on whom to listen to (not natfka).

Thhrrrrp! Nurgle's farted! Quick there's new nurgle minis coming out! Natfka you so crazy.

Well, looks like Unbound Armies might not be such a bad thing anymore.

Personally I think this is a terrible idea.

They would have to make alot more formations for every Faction, utilizing every model in their ranges. Complete with "free" bonuses.

Seeing what they did to Daemons, are we really gonna want to be FORCED to get 6+ units of troops? 3+ units of tacticals? 5+ Battlewagons? 15 Meganobz? A full company of guardsman?

I don't see that happening. I don't want GW telling me how I have to play my army.

 Korlandril wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 zedmeister wrote:

 Korlandril wrote:
He doesn't make anything up, he reports what he hears, trust me he has a lot of sources and contacts. He knows what he is doing, and withholds a lot of information he gets

Rubbish. He talks a lot of bollocks:

Natfka on Faeit 212 - Total rumors: (384 TRUE) / (832 FALSE) / (75 PARTIALLY TRUE/VAGUE)

Looks like chance to me...

He just relays rumors, gathers them up, he is not a source himself and none of the rumours are his own so those stats prove nothing

Actually, by serving as a rumor clearinghouse he is the source. The fact that he also just posts them as "anonymous rumors" does not help his reputation, as he seems to spend no time whatsoever vetting or attempting to vet these rumors.

A formation as a fixed list with no points sounds like the worst of both worlds.

"Start Collecting" boxes coming with a formation + AOS/End Times = rumour every month until it happens.

We already have 40k Formation armies.

We just call them detachments.

I wonder how Natfka keeps those million monkeys with typewriters fed...

Oh, ad revenue from a site that's 90% ads.

Well the armies are so unbalanced now it won't make a huge amount of difference, nor even would lack of points - so meaningless have they become with the 7.5 edition codex's

Sadly it will likely see a purge of armies that have not had a chance to sell in favour of more Marines.

An Anonymous source of an anonymous source of Natfka

Well...

Alot of salty jealous people haha

 Korlandril wrote:
Alot of salty jealous people haha

And the point of this post was...?

As likely as GW bringing back 1/2 points

 zedmeister wrote:

 Korlandril wrote:
Alot of salty jealous people haha

And the point of this post was...?

And the point of the numerous salty posts about natfka was?




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Saying the same things nonetheless

I stopped reading at Natfka. If I could be arsed, I'd look at what his rumor track record is but I'm sure it's abysmal.

 Korlandril wrote:
[

And the point of the numerous salty posts about natfka was?

Saying the same things nonetheless

No, you've now resorted to name calling instead of providing a rebuttal or refuting the stats we presented showing how Natfka is not a reliable source. Either put up or shut up.

Shall we leave the source of the rumour out of it and look at the actual proposal and discuss that???

While I don't think a fixed formation would ever work, I think GW might consider splitting the current codexes into much cheaper mini-codexes, that look like a formation with some options around a core list of units.

Assuming minimal fluff and pictures, these could be put out as cheap paperbacks or even as free downloads like the War Scrolls.

Since the cost of codexes definitely is a reason why some people have stopped playing, a budget codex idea might help to re-engage lapsed players. Though speaking for myself, I would also need the cost of the core rulebook to be drastically reduced.

I really don't understand the hate that Natfka gets. His site is a useful complilation of all the rumours out there. It is up to the reader to decide if something is true. He could improve his accuracy a lot if he omitted certain sites (Bols), but it is useful place to find out what people are talking about.

This particular rumour seems unlikely, but I do think some kind of 40k shake up is coming especially if GW wants to extend it for another 30 years.

I hope reliable rumor mongers like SadPanda can clear this up. I don't mind formations but no points is not a game.

If true, which I very much doubt given the source, it would give those with an already poor idea of balance even more reason to be given a wide berth.

This is one of those "no smoke without fire" ones for me.
Whilst I think it would be a big change for 40k and seems unlikely at first glance, as someone else mentioned, 40k has most definitely gone down the formation heavy release/suppliments and list builds of late.

Look at it purely through a GW lens - we want to sell more kits.

What might sell more - formation builds where you need X,Y and Z to either play and/or be competitive or standard CADs with points.

Sure I must take 2 tropps in a CAD but that can be a box of 20 quid Grots. With a new formation based build, GW can put in "army taxes" galore and make some formations ultra powerful ingame (at the expense of one having to shell out for the more expensive kits etc).

I think its possible.....

Yeah, I don't really get the griping either, but that's neither here nor there.

The number one complaint against AoS I hear online and in rl is how there's no balance mechanic. It made competitive gaming for competitive gamers that much harder, it made pick-up games with strangers and fellow hobbyists harder, and all but asked you to declare a game winner when playing your friends before the game began. Every story I hear about successful communities being built around AoS involve a home-brewed system of balancing it out.

I don't like the notion of having to make up my own rules to make GW's game work for them.

Now adversely as its' been pointed out, most everyone plays armies with available formations now as it is. If by going formation they mean just boxing the stuff that we already box together for us, maybe it's not as terrible as it sounds. Still terrible for anyone who wants to play units differently, but I doubt GW could so much as sneeze without a group of people saying they sneezed wrong.

...but the most recent edition has unbound, meaning nobody needs to pay a "troop tax" anymore. I just don't buy it. Maybe if Age of Sigmar had been some kind of runaway success, but I don't think anyone's suggesting it has been.