So I've just been told that GW has ordered their UK stores to remove the 40K Rulebook from shelves and sale on the evening of Sunday 28th May.

Staff have been told to answer customers questions by saying something very exciting is around the corner. Typical GW 'I know something you don't know' policy.

The boxed game (AOBR) is staying on sale for the time being.

Seems like this is more proof that 6th Ed will be here soon enough.

Cool. Nice of them to not try and screw newbies in the last month before 6th.

Is this a little early for a july release?

edit: Not like GW to try and stop people from spending money

Well, I guess AoBR is still relatively a good deal in terms of the models you get inside (so no great loss if the new version comes out a month later).

But, anyone unsuspecting and sold a copy of that 5th edition book a month before the new one comes out = instantly one lost customer.

OK, so I know GW didn't follow the suggestion for a price freeze for 2012, but how about this?

- Take your copy of the 5th edition rulebook (BRB) into the store, GW will give you a FREE copy of the new rules. Obviously not the hardback edition, but a smaller softback which otherwise contains all of the rules and most of the background/artwork.

If a relatively small company out of New Zealand (which also has to compete with it's miniature ranges, it's very easy to buy other 15mm WW2 stuff) then why not GW which has pretty much an exclusive mandate over all of its models?

You never know, could be released in June as a total suprise (stranger things have been known to happen...)

Isn't the release model for rules one of the book first, starter set later? Or was it the other way round? Can't remember..

Rules in July, starter set in september!

lunarman wrote:Rules in July, starter set in september!

Are you sure?

Whens Chaos?

Maybe its June/august? I can't see GW pulling the 5e rulebook for an entire month. I'd think this says that 6e is closer than we think (nuts, my summer league will fall into anarchy with a new rule set, I was hoping August for 6e).

Probably after, November would be my guess based on rumour.

They could easily squeeze a Warhammer release between the rulebook and box, to justify two 40K releases ina row. Plus, nothing stopping a fantasy wave coming out in the same month as the 40K box.

Aeon wrote:

lunarman wrote:Rules in July, starter set in september!

Are you sure?

That's how it's been for 40k 5th, Fantasy 8th, and maybe 4th/7th respectively.

40K 6th Edition this summer = worst kept 'secret' ever?

Just another in a long line tbh.

BramGaunt wrote:I have nothing on rules yet, but I can give you a releasedate: 30th of June. I am 100% certain of that.

Also, come monday, the current BRB won't be for sale any more.

I can believe this as GW is targeting kids, whose parents wont be happy that she brought timmy that large expensive book only a month or so later to be asked to buy a book which even has a higher price than the first one. If I was a parent I would say no I wont be buying you anything more from there.

Chaos wont be till 2013.

Alpharius wrote:40K 6th Edition this summer = worst kept 'secret' ever?

Everything yo have been told is a LIE!

SlaveToDorkness wrote:

Alpharius wrote:40K 6th Edition this summer = worst kept 'secret' ever?

Everything yo have been told is a LIE!

I don't think they will every live that down.

The Decapitator wrote:..........GW has ordered their UK stores to remove the 40K Rulebook from shelves and sale on the evening of Sunday 28th May.

...........

28th May is a Monday.........

Anyway interesting news - any chance it could be BS?

30 June is a better deal than 7 July, i say. Given BramGaunt's impeccable record in rumor mongering, and the fact that he says it's 100% go, My countdown timer just jumped from 42 days to 35 days left until 6th ed 40K.

Woo-Hoo!!!

tetrisphreak wrote:30 June is a better deal than 7 July, i say. Given BramGaunt's impeccable record in rumor mongering, and the fact that he says it's 100% go, My countdown timer just jumped from 42 days to 35 days left until 6th ed 40K.

Woo-Hoo!!!

+1

Never been this excited before lol, was not expecting 6th to be this soon,

waiting for someone to come along and debunk this whole thing as nothing more that bs

Astartesworkshop wrote:Chaos wont be till 2013.

Thats if there even is a 2013...

EmperorsChampion wrote:

Astartesworkshop wrote:Chaos wont be till 2013.

Thats if there even is a 2013...

Who else is scheduling an Apocalypse game for December 21 this year?

A week ago I'd be excited by this news, now there's a price rise coming less so.

I'm sure i'll play 6th but i'm not buying anything from them ever again.

And now I've seen Dropzone commander, if the price is right, I have something to fill the void.

tetrisphreak wrote:30 June is a better deal than 7 July, i say. Given BramGaunt's impeccable record in rumor mongering, and the fact that he says it's 100% go, My countdown timer just jumped from 42 days to 35 days left until 6th ed 40K.

Woo-Hoo!!!

This could result in me only playing another two or three games of 5th edition 40K.

That does feel close.

I lost my little rulebook last weekend I guess I'm done until 6th drops. So June would be sweet!

This would be exciing etc but with the price hike/gouge etc its worthless now

Jayce_The_Ace wrote:

The Decapitator wrote:..........GW has ordered their UK stores to remove the 40K Rulebook from shelves and sale on the evening of Sunday 28th May.

...........

28th May is a Monday.........

Anyway interesting news - any chance it could be BS?

I doubt it, pretty much everything Decapitator's posted has been spot on in the past.

EmperorsChampion wrote:

Astartesworkshop wrote:Chaos wont be till 2013.

Thats if there even is a 2013...

If they had any sense they'd release new Chaos stuff on December 20th. At least make a few sales before we all get ejected into space... jeebus...

And just when I am finally getting the hang of 5th. Gosh darn it !!!

I sold my BRB a few months back. Damn, that reminds me, I gotta offload my 5th Ed mini rulebook quick.

-666- wrote:And just when I am finally getting the hang of 5th. Gosh darn it !!!

Don't worry, it's likely to be almost exactly the same.

...except for the 2-3 minor tweaks (like wound allocation, LOS, cover, and transport rules) that will completely change your army.

I get paid a bonus at the end of June so happy times for me! But, I really hope that the 6th ed book isn't a big hardback. It's not the price hike that I'm against but the size and the fact it's just harder to lug around. I'd rather they just did a softback and if they wanted to increase the price, just add more pictures and fluff into it.

It will be a massive 500 page hardback with 50 pages of rules, most likely.

I don't care, I'm ready for the new rules.

Pacific wrote:Well, I guess AoBR is still relatively a good deal in terms of the models you get inside (so no great loss if the new version comes out a month later).

But, anyone unsuspecting and sold a copy of that 5th edition book a month before the new one comes out = instantly one lost customer.

OK, so I know GW didn't follow the suggestion for a price freeze for 2012, but how about this?

- Take your copy of the 5th edition rulebook (BRB) into the store, GW will give you a FREE copy of the new rules. Obviously not the hardback edition, but a smaller softback which otherwise contains all of the rules and most of the background/artwork.

If a relatively small company out of New Zealand (which also has to compete with it's miniature ranges, it's very easy to buy other 15mm WW2 stuff) then why not GW which has pretty much an exclusive mandate over all of its models?

There was a guy down at the shop last night who bought a rule book as well. I feel really sorry for him now cause he will soon have to buy another.

-666- wrote:And just when I am finally getting the hang of 5th. Gosh darn it !!!

Look at it this way will all be starting off on the same foot again. Only problem I see is finding people to play with in the future.

EmperorsChampion wrote:

Astartesworkshop wrote:Chaos wont be till 2013.

Thats if there even is a 2013...

If this has anything to do with the Mayan calender I will burst out laughing.

SlaveToDorkness wrote:

Alpharius wrote:40K 6th Edition this summer = worst kept 'secret' ever?

Everything yo have been told is a LIE!

Can someone please explain this reference to me? I've seen it several times. I have some 10 year old copies of WD I got on Ebay when I started playing in 2009 but have no idea what it means.

Ouze wrote:

SlaveToDorkness wrote:

Alpharius wrote:40K 6th Edition this summer = worst kept 'secret' ever?

Everything yo have been told is a LIE!

Can someone please explain this reference to me? I've seen it several times. I have some 10 year old copies of WD I got on Ebay when I started playing in 2009 but have no idea what it means.

I'm guessing its from The Matrix.

EDIT: Actually, it looks to be from Inquisitor. Just read the second page.

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1320029_Inq_Rulebook_part_1.pdf

Excellent. I am waiting for 6th ed, I am getting awfully tired for 5th.

Ouze wrote:

SlaveToDorkness wrote:

Alpharius wrote:40K 6th Edition this summer = worst kept 'secret' ever?

Everything yo have been told is a LIE!

Can someone please explain this reference to me? I've seen it several times. I have some 10 year old copies of WD I got on Ebay when I started playing in 2009 but have no idea what it means.

IIRC, it is tied into material that came out when Inquisitor was released.

Ouze wrote:

SlaveToDorkness wrote:

Alpharius wrote:40K 6th Edition this summer = worst kept 'secret' ever?

Everything yo have been told is a LIE!

Can someone please explain this reference to me? I've seen it several times. I have some 10 year old copies of WD I got on Ebay when I started playing in 2009 but have no idea what it means.

GW used along their space hulk release....the worst of secrecy..... even so far as to have their own staff anouncing they can't show us space hulk at a GD on Sunday followed by the 'official' release at Monday. And yes it was " EyhbtiaL ".

well, well, i guess im buying 2 more AOBR boxes soon.

Wow, guess the whispers were (this time) on the up and up.

Dang! only 1 more week till payday!!! please let there be 2 boxes for me then!!!!

lord_blackfang wrote:

BramGaunt wrote:I have nothing on rules yet, but I can give you a releasedate: 30th of June. I am 100% certain of that.
.

I wont disagree

HAH !! I never bought the hardcover 5th Edition Rulebook, so I don't really feel upset by this.

Just debating buying another AOBR for the models before thier supply dries up.

Plastic cultists and deathwing terminators with plasmacannons here we go

This the same week Beasts of War start a competition to win a 5th Ed rulebook. Talk about timing...

Alright so I got my issue of White Dwarf today and I noticed something:

July's issue of White Dwarf goes on sale June 23, 2012. 7 days before the June 30 date that BramGaunt threw out this morning. Coincidence? Possibly, but i think that fact alone (given GW's one-week pre-release policy) throws a couple more nails in the signpost that points towards 6th Edition.

I'm really excited. Some of the rumored new rules I think will improve the game..nerfing cover saves, assault before shooting, glancing being -1 instead of a -2 modifier, 6+ psychic saves for everything....all of those would be awesome. Random charge distances or that stupid evasion attribute would not be....

I will not be getting the hardback rulebook. I'll wait until there is a paperback one and get it from a bits site or ebay.

Not thrilled with 6th or the new price increases. Who really knows what is going on anymore?

I personally cannot wait for 6E!

5th is such a steaming pile that it cant possibly be worse!

Fixing Cover saves, Wound Allocation etc... is a welcome change and one I am excited to see.

With that said, I have zero faith in GW's ability to fix their own game and if it resembles the quagmire of crap that is 5E, I will be selling ALL my 40k Stuff and moving on to Infinity and Fow.

Although I dont mind 8E WHFB rules and will still play that and buy the odd unit here and there for it.

Milisim wrote:I personally cannot wait for 6E!

5th is such a steaming pile that it cant possibly be worse!

Fixing Cover saves, Wound Allocation etc... is a welcome change and one I am excited to see.

With that said, I have zero faith in GW's ability to fix their own game and if it resembles the quagmire of crap that is 5E, I will be selling ALL my 40k Stuff and moving on to Infinity and Fow.

I feel pretty much exactly the same, except I won't be starting another miniatures game.

H.B.M.C. wrote:This the same week Beasts of War start a competition to win a 5th Ed rulebook. Talk about timing...

What kind of prize is that to giveaway when you know that a 6th Ed rulebook is just round the corner. Obviously they are just wanting to offload old stock before 6th Ed release. Ugh.

It's an autographed copy.

So it'll be an obsolete book with a signature in it. The competition is still stupid given the timing.

I don't think the competition is bad when you look at it. Basically, post up what's the cheesiest thing from 5th. Have a look at the quote written in the book and it's fairly obviously tongue in cheek. http://www.beastsofwar.com/groups/warhammer-40000/forum/topic/break-5th-ed-win-a-signed-copy/

As for removing the BRB from sale, I've seen independent stockists with Skull Pass still on sale within the last 6 months. Personally I'd like GW do pull the book a bit earlier, 3-6 months would be good. I can understand why the don't though and do feel sorry for anyone who buys a copy just before it gets pulled.

Makes me glad I got my 5th ed rule book really cheap. Someone had it on ebay listed as 4th, but pic showed the 5th book. Price was right so I pulled the trigger on the deal...sure enough, a nearly mint 5th ed book for the price of a used 4th book.

Any idea how much the new one will be?

I'm gonna guess around $65 - $70.

I hope that wound allocation isn't completely changed....I have just collected a 1.5k nob biker list lol

Lovepug13 wrote:I hope that wound allocation isn't completely changed....I have just collected a 1.5k nob biker list lol

Is that not what games worksop does now though?

New rulset to make all current armies useless = more money in sales as people build new armies

fredox wrote:Have a look at the quote written in the book and it's fairly obviously tongue in cheek.

"Thanks for breaking my rules."

And thanks to you, Mr. Salvatore, for a set of poorly written slap-dash rules!

tuiman wrote:

Lovepug13 wrote:I hope that wound allocation isn't completely changed....I have just collected a 1.5k nob biker list lol

Is that not what games worksop does now though?

New rulset to make all current armies useless = more money in sales as people build new armies

Tankbusta's and Flash Gitz spam to follow

Lovepug13 wrote:I hope that wound allocation isn't completely changed....I have just collected a 1.5k nob biker list lol

I miss messing people up with Nob Bikers, especially when it was Blood Angels. My advice is to troll as many dudes as you can this month because it'll be all change no doubt.

So if I'm planning on buying AoBR as a way of getting back into the game, I definitely should wait instead?

I may actually buy the Rule Book this time!

It's not like half of the last rule book, wasn't rules.

Oh wait.......

I'm curious about what variations of the book they will release such as collectors ed like they did for Fantasy.

tetrisphreak wrote:

EmperorsChampion wrote:

Astartesworkshop wrote:Chaos wont be till 2013.

Thats if there even is a 2013...

Who else is scheduling an Apocalypse game for December 21 this year?

Too busy preparing for the inevitable zombie apocalypse this December...

Maybe if you also survive and the internet somehow still works we can arrange a big 'ol worldwide game of 6th edition, survivors-day!

Bloodwin wrote:I'm curious about what variations of the book they will release such as collectors ed like they did for Fantasy.

Me too... It might seriously affect what I buy in the next year or so. Anyway, I have mixed feelings about 6th ed. I guess I'll just wait until I have the book in hand to pass judgement.

I need this edition starter to come out so I can work the birthday present angle with the wife.

I was telling a friend about how 6th is probably going to come out around October, and my GW Store manager stopped me and said "Nah, sooner."

tuiman wrote:

Lovepug13 wrote:I hope that wound allocation isn't completely changed....I have just collected a 1.5k nob biker list lol

Is that not what games worksop does now though?

New rulset to make all current armies useless = more money in sales as people build new armies

Here's an idea, I know it's a little out there but hear me out; how about.......you buy a balanced all-comers army and throw in a few units you just like the sound of, rather than building your whole force around the exploitation of a single rules quirk and hand-carving the models out of prime aged cheddar, then complaining that said quirk gets fixed in the new edition, you know, that thing that games do in order to fix quirks and mistakes.

Nocturn wrote:I'm gonna guess around $65 - $70.

Ouch. Guess Ill watch the forums for details on the changes before I jump into that. If its not a big enough change from 5th Ill stick with the Shockforce/Warengine system for my 28mm needs.

Yodhrin wrote:

tuiman wrote:

Lovepug13 wrote:I hope that wound allocation isn't completely changed....I have just collected a 1.5k nob biker list lol

Is that not what games worksop does now though?

New rulset to make all current armies useless = more money in sales as people build new armies

Here's an idea, I know it's a little out there but hear me out; how about.......you buy a balanced all-comers army and throw in a few units you just like the sound of, rather than building your whole force around the exploitation of a single rules quirk and hand-carving the models out of prime aged cheddar, then complaining that said quirk gets fixed in the new edition, you know, that thing that games do in order to fix quirks and mistakes.

Settle down...I was merely passing comment that I "hope" they are not completely useless in the new edition....but thanks for the feedback it was really out there!!! If it makes you feel better I have never even used the list and managed to build the models up over a long period. (perhaps to keep you happy I wont even use them now and pack them away forever )

I'm never privy to juicy insider info, but I heard something similar this week from a GW store manager here in the States.

Yodhrin wrote:
Here's an idea, I know it's a little out there but hear me out; how about.......you buy a balanced all-comers army and throw in a few units you just like the sound of, rather than building your whole force around the exploitation of a single rules quirk and hand-carving the models out of prime aged cheddar, then complaining that said quirk gets fixed in the new edition, you know, that thing that games do in order to fix quirks and mistakes.

Well, if you get that theory to spread you will eliminate 40k players faster than the price increases do.

In all seriousness I agree with you. I guess optimized/maxed armies are fine for tournies and competitive play...but I vastly prefer friendly games with cool themed or fluff armies. Me, I love Terminators, and Im working on a Deathwing (counts-as) army...tough sure, but also has some tactical limitations.

http://natfka.blogspot.com/2012/05/6th-edition-release-is-imminent-letter.html

From Faeit 212, basically adding more of the same rumours above to the 6th edition release date.

Interestingly it mentions the mid-June manager's meeting. Here's hoping at that time we see some good 6th leaks pour out of the woodwork leading up to June 30 release.

Roll on 6E....

Don't let the door hit 5E on the way out!

You know what this means, right? All those models from the AoBR set are going to be even cheaper. it'll be great, getting a dreadnought for $12.

Umm... wouldn't they get more expensive?

McNinja wrote:You know what this means, right? All those models from the AoBR set are going to be even cheaper. it'll be great, getting a dreadnought for $12.

That would be nice, but that might be wishful thinking for you and me both. Unless you're being facetious, in which case "agreed".

I think the rulebook will be £45 or possibly £50, and the codexes will be £20 or £25 and hardback.

Kilkrazy wrote:I think the rulebook will be £45 or possibly £50, and the codexes will be £20 or £25 and hardback.

Agreed, they'll match the precedent set by Fantasy: £45 large hardback rulebook with £25 full colour hardback codexes. Or whatever the new prices are for the rulebook/armybooks after the price rise next week.

What I'm looking forward to are £8 plastic characters for 40K in the same vein as the new Fantasy ones

At a guess rulebook £50, codexes? £25. Plastic characters £10+

"A source" Told me 6th is supposedly comming out at the end of next month... he also told me AOBR is soon gonna be taken off the shelves.

Lovepug13 wrote:I hope that wound allocation isn't completely changed....I have just collected a 1.5k nob biker list lol

That's the risk you run when you build an army around exploiting a particular rule. Everyone running Draigowing is going to face the same dilemma.

There is no 6th... it has a different name.

Interweb users who will refer to it as 6th will be burnt .

Faeit 212 wrote:The latest 6th rumors breaking all over say:

-Look for random game length to head into history.
-That random terrain a la fantasy is only the beginning - look for being able to not only purchase a select group of terrain options for your army lists (bunkers, trenches, etc...) but....

wait for it...

-Template weapons are said to have the ability to SET TERRAIN AFLAME!!!!

-In the Games Workshop "hidden in plain sight" department there is word that all 5th Edition rulebooks will get pulled from shelves this upcoming week. There is normally a 30 day window between old obsolete product being pulled and its replacement arriving on store shelves. If I owned a game company, I certainly wouldn't want my primary game system to sit on shelves without a rulebook for too long...

- Finally there is word that an initial set of 6th product codes will become available for retailer ordering late June, including "new rulebook, templates, dice and either markers or cards for psychic powers"

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2012/05/40k-rumors-6th-imminent-and-tidbits.html

WHFB-like rules in 40k?
Heh, 40k is wavy to competive for that.

A less comp edition sounds good to me!

I'd like to see walkers be re-evaluated, more specifically their rules for CC.

But I'm definitely banking on the new rulebook coming out in time for my birthday mid-July.

thenoobbomb wrote:WHFB-like rules in 40k?
Heh, 40k is wavy to competive for that.

That's funny.

Tauzor wrote:There is no 6th... it has a different name.

Interweb users who will refer to it as 6th will be burnt .

The new 40k? ?

I hope 6th ed is like the leaked pdf. Mainly because I told someone I'd do a nudie lap of our gaming club if it wasn't real....

Trasvi wrote:

Tauzor wrote:There is no 6th... it has a different name.

Interweb users who will refer to it as 6th will be burnt .

The new 40k? ?

I hope 6th ed is like the leaked pdf. Mainly because I told someone I'd do a nudie lap of our gaming club if it wasn't real....

The leaked PDF was an internal playtest according to BoW, and I find no reason to doubt them mainly because no person would go to those lengths to fake one. I hope the whole evasion thing remains, it should be harder to hit an Eldar Harlequin than it is to hit a Rhino, regardless of BS!

Rumor mill in Seattle currently places the new B?B in July and the starter set in September.

Bramgaunt said he's 100% certain its June 30th apparently.

Well the only GW store in NI is just down the street and.today's the suppossed day. Sundays are wholly goven over to beginner lessons but I'll be in tomorrow to pick up WD (I want a Stormtalon and my brother has SM and Orks) so I can check tomorrow.

Just saw this come across twitter:

@deepstrikeradio wrote:@EternalWarriors 40K Rulebook no longer available on GW website.

And I double checked... I can't find the 40k rulebook on their website

Alfndrate wrote:Just saw this come across twitter:

@deepstrikeradio wrote:@EternalWarriors 40K Rulebook no longer available on GW website.

And I double checked... I can't find the 40k rulebook on their website

Praise Chaos! I hope the changes are good. The game could use some revitalization.

I hope that for once they break their preview nonsense and actually hype up the new edition release more than 2 weeks in advance.

Yes anything concrete from GW will be hugely embraced by the community.

What's new today could show rules teasers on the changes and really get people talking.

tetrisphreak wrote:Yes anything concrete from GW will be hugely embraced by the community.

What's new today could show rules teasers on the changes and really get people talking.

I remember the White Dwarf from a few months before 4th edition had a whole bunch of details on things changing and it was a cool read. Wish they'd do that again!

Brother SRM wrote:

tetrisphreak wrote:Yes anything concrete from GW will be hugely embraced by the community.

What's new today could show rules teasers on the changes and really get people talking.

I remember the White Dwarf from a few months before 4th edition had a whole bunch of details on things changing and it was a cool read. Wish they'd do that again!

I recently dug out some old White Dwarf issues, and in one case they had Epic 40k articles and previews 2-3 months before it was released. The fact that you only get a week's notice about GW updating their flagship product is insane.

Yay, I can plan a 6th eddition party, where we all try and play using the new rules, and probably getting them all wrong.

the 5th edition rulebook is now no longer available on GW's website.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/armySubUnitCats.jsp?catId=cat440343a&rootCatGameStyle=

had a read of the leaked PF the other day. i actualyl like the Evasion thing. The movement modifier confused me a little (charge = doubel distance, fleet = +2 to movement). if thsi works otu then scarabs just got a lot nastier:

Move 9 (beasts move 7 and fleet adds 2)
Charge 27 (beasts can "gallop" which means they charge 3x movement rather than 2)

Scarabs total movement into combat = 36" with no rolling required!!!
Also Swarms get +1 to Evasion so scarabs are also now tougher to hit.

Wonder what else will get nastier once the new rules hit.

Sadly I think they said they scraped the evasion thing, but we can't believe anything they say. After all, Everything is a lie!

My 2 cents... I also was told at the weekend that its coming this time next month. Also if anyone bought the book in store this month - they'd get a small rulebook replacement (but I think this might be a country/language specific deal).

Milisim wrote:A less comp edition sounds good to me!

Why? A more competitive ruleset doesn't hurt you in any way, and if anything would make the game more enjoyable for everyone to play.

I don't understand why people are like this. Making the game, any game, balanced for competitive play doesn't actually hurt or hinder your ability to play it casually at all. If anything it would probably make the game even better, because all those "obviously bad" choices in your codex that you would only ever use "for fun" wouldn't be "obviously bad" in the first place, and there would probably be less "no-brainer" choices that you take in every game because they're so much better than everything else, too. And let's not forget that all those stupid rules arguments that shouldn't happen, but do because of GW's poor writing (Like when the DE codex came out and a lot of people were trying to argue that flicker fields "do nothing" because vehicles can't have invulnerable saves per the rulebook?), would probably happen a lot less if GW cared more about catching that gak during play-testing.

But no, you're right, go on. Keep that imaginary divide between competitive and casual players alive, please.

well i am excited..possibly in vain, but this is a fantastic opportunity to totally finish painting my chaos army, just 6 dudes left. Then top up on models for my daemons, and complete the list to completely finished status (which i am excited about too). then i have 2 finished painted armys ready to play with 6th ed and no need to buy anything, just enjoy the game.

if something exciting comes out it will be easy to assimilate into the armys (fingers crossed for chaos drop pods and viable raptors for me) and if the rumor on beast movement is right...oh baby my flesh hounds will be the bomb...x3 yay.

minimum cash spending, new rule book, and hot armys to play with...oh yeah i'm excited

I don't know whether to use all my cash on the new book and starter set or go for the tau in 2013. They are probably spaced enough that I can get the book and go for dex updates later knowing GW.

Find a friedn who plays DA or Chaos (if the rumours are true that is going to be the starter set).

When Black reach came out a friend and i went halves on the set, i started a SM army and he started an Ork one. amazing deal.

I keep telling you lot. Stop calling it 6th !

Does anyone know anything about what they are actually releasing for chaos in 6th? I've heard the starter set is to include a plastic dreadnaught, cultists, and chosen, but has anyone heard anything beyond that? I want a Slaanesh army that could stand on its own...

Tauzor wrote:I keep telling you lot. Stop calling it 6th !

Enlighten us, what should we call it?

DarthOvious wrote:

Tauzor wrote:I keep telling you lot. Stop calling it 6th !

Enlighten us, what should we call it?

Warhammer 40K - Fantasy Edition?

So, what IS a competitive ruleset anyway? How the hell do you have an uncompetative ruleset?

If by competitive you mean more clarity, more choices and more fantasy elements while maintaining the best of 40k stuff, then I'm all for it.

You know what walkers need? Stomp attacks. A SM dread can only kill 2 grots a turn? bullshizzle.

Gw store managers yold to tell customers that ask about the rule book that something exciting is
Just around the corner......and that june meetings will be revolutionary, but nothing new will be shown.

I was at GW and they still had 40k books on display with the price tag. When I whispered this rumour to the staff on duty they said, well, basically, bull.

terranarc wrote:So, what IS a competitive ruleset anyway? How the hell do you have an uncompetative ruleset?

Balanced? An "uncompetitive" ruleset is a ruleset that's poorly balanced, and/or one that I would say is also poorly written and therefore hard to understand. All the things people complain the most about 40k, but no one wants to fix because in their mind "competitive" is a dirty word because they knew one or two guys that were self-proclaimed "competitive" gamers that were dicks.

If 40k was more competitive we wouldn't have these issues where some units are obviously bad and never used, and others are obviously good and you never see a list without them. Making the game more competitive (and more balanced) would allow more variety in armies, because you aren't shackled to one or two choices that you must spam in order to win.

Sidstyler wrote:

terranarc wrote:So, what IS a competitive ruleset anyway? How the hell do you have an uncompetative ruleset?

Balanced? An "uncompetitive" ruleset is a ruleset that's poorly balanced, and/or one that I would say is also poorly written and therefore hard to understand. All the things people complain the most about 40k, but no one wants to fix because in their mind "competitive" is a dirty word because they knew one or two guys that were self-proclaimed "competitive" gamers that were dicks.

If 40k was more competitive we wouldn't have these issues where some units are obviously bad and never used, and others are obviously good and you never see a list without them. Making the game more competitive (and more balanced) would allow more variety in armies, because you aren't shackled to one or two choices that you must spam in order to win.

^ This.

The biggest problem with 40k are the WAAC types that roll with things like Longfang spam, MSU spam, etc. As a Tau player, there are certain units (*coughVespidcough*) that are practically useless and take up FOC slots better saved for more useful units. Obviously, there are these units present in every army, which is a real shame. Why even have these units if you know that many of the folks that spend the most money on the hobby won't buy them? I think the FOC needs to be eliminated, and each specific unit needs to have its own limit on what you can take. I dunno...just my 2 cents. Unfortunately, I'm not too confident in GW's ability to balance out the game when each new Codex creeps up in power level. I am anxious to see the changes that take place in 6th ed, though. It'll be nice to have a (hopefully) fresh, new take on the game.

I wonder if there's a way to keep the codexes around without relying on them for Army Lists.

Current, simple, balanced lists should be online -- and updated frequently.

Good thing i didnt buy this editions hardback rulebook.

Deadshot wrote:I was at GW and they still had 40k books on display with the price tag. When I whispered this rumour to the staff on duty they said, well, basically, bull.

This is strange. They are usually quite dead on and on the ball with these things. With the amount of other stores and the website removing it i doubt its bull.

I was once told that Tervigon and Thunderwolves couldnt be done because of the chapterhouse lawsuit in Jan by one of them though. Majority are good people.

Sidstyler wrote:If 40k was more competitive we wouldn't have these issues where some units are obviously bad and never used, and others are obviously good and you never see a list without them.

That has nothing to do with a game being competitive. Magic, one of the most competitive games on the market, with clear, concise rules is a prime example of this - 99% of all cards in any given non limited format are utterly worthless. Balance* does not equal competitiveness and vice versa.

*balance in Magic is different to balance in 40k, but the point stands.

His Master's Voice wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:If 40k was more competitive we wouldn't have these issues where some units are obviously bad and never used, and others are obviously good and you never see a list without them.

That has nothing to do with a game being competitive. Magic, one of the most competitive games on the market, with clear, concise rules is a prime example of this - 99% of all cards in any given non limited format are utterly worthless. Balance* does not equal competitiveness and vice versa.

*balance in Magic is different to balance in 40k, but the point stands.

Or they could go the way Infinity did and make every unit balanced for it's point cost. There no reason money should be more important then a soild balance game system. What they only had like 30 years to get it right, guess they need more time.

oldone wrote:I can believe this as GW is targeting kids, whose parents wont be happy that she brought timmy that large expensive book only a month or so later to be asked to buy a book which even has a higher price than the first one. If I was a parent I would say no I wont be buying you anything more from there.

They've long priced themselves out of kids and teenagers.

-Loki- wrote:

Lovepug13 wrote:I hope that wound allocation isn't completely changed....I have just collected a 1.5k nob biker list lol

That's the risk you run when you build an army around exploiting a particular rule. Everyone running Draigowing is going to face the same dilemma.

Its possible they change it, but Id be a bit surprised if they got rid certain SC rules and not others...like Draigo and Belial unlocking terminators as troops. If anything Id say they would make it so a regular SM company master can have that same rule...as they should, allowing players to run a 1st company army regardless of the chapter they play. Though that might have to wait for an update to the regular marine codex.

Of course this is GW, and its entirely possible they nerf that rule...as it would cause all Draigo/deathwing players to have to restructure their armies and buy tactical squads.

Unless they get rid of the FOC...which Im wildly in favor of...Id like to structure my army any way Id like. Simply require a HQ and then its open structure. Just look at SM company structure...the main bulk is tactical companies, but they also have all terminator companies, all devastator companies, all scout companies, etc. Im sure all armies have fluff examples of similar...why not make the game rules allow a player to build theses armies?

Heres the things I would consider neccessary for a rule set.

A: Clarity. Have someone who has taken technical writing courses write the rulebook and have someone other than the designers' wives edit and proofread it. Bring in a wide range of people with varying experience to playtest, don't explain anything other than handing them the manual, and see how rules get interpreted and misinterpreted.

B: Balance. There shouldn't be "you're an idiot if you don't take these" or "you're an idiot if you do take these" options outside of needing certain troop types to fulfill mission objectives.

C: A greater degree of the game's outcome determined by player skill. When people say "competitive" they're actually talking about this. The game having random elements is fine, as long as they're predictable to a degree by players. If you fire 30 lasgun shots at an enemy squad, the number of shots that hit will be a normal distribution curve around 15; that's fine. The stuff like "Roll a d6 and unless you get a 4+ your unit can't charge" is terrible though. Major game decisions shouldn't be left to a flat probability curve with a 16% minimum step. Adding more things like random charges and random powers either reduces the game to a coin flip or causes a serious push for units that mitigate that randomness.

People keep seeing this as a "WAAC vs casuals" argument. The problem is that GW keeps dumping blue shells in their game.

DoctorZombie wrote:They've long priced themselves out of kids and teenagers.

Im a teenager, i havent been priced out, i just have to save for a bit longer to get the kits i want

Teenagers and young, single men (and women) actually have the most spare cash. Teens normally have a summer or part time job, and don't pay morgages or whatever, while single people don't pay for children and just a little less. Kiddies have to rely on mum and dad who pay for bloody everything, and those same mum and dads can't afford hobby themselves, squirreled away for little timmy. My mate's dad is lucky to get one or two small model a year while my mate himself gets maybe a tank and a squad every 3 months.

RogueRegault wrote:
C: A greater degree of the game's outcome determined by player skill. When people say "competitive" they're actually talking about this. The game having random elements is fine, as long as they're predictable to a degree by players. If you fire 30 lasgun shots at an enemy squad, the number of shots that hit will be a normal distribution curve around 15; that's fine. The stuff like "Roll a d6 and unless you get a 4+ your unit can't charge" is terrible though. Major game decisions shouldn't be left to a flat probability curve with a 16% minimum step. Adding more things like random charges and random powers either reduces the game to a coin flip or causes a serious push for units that mitigate that randomness.

You do realise that this is the exact opposite of what most rumours say will happen in 6th edition, right?

PhantomViper wrote:

RogueRegault wrote:
C: A greater degree of the game's outcome determined by player skill. When people say "competitive" they're actually talking about this. The game having random elements is fine, as long as they're predictable to a degree by players. If you fire 30 lasgun shots at an enemy squad, the number of shots that hit will be a normal distribution curve around 15; that's fine. The stuff like "Roll a d6 and unless you get a 4+ your unit can't charge" is terrible though. Major game decisions shouldn't be left to a flat probability curve with a 16% minimum step. Adding more things like random charges and random powers either reduces the game to a coin flip or causes a serious push for units that mitigate that randomness.

You do realise that this is the exact opposite of what most rumours say will happen in 6th edition, right?

Which is why I don't see myself playing much 40k in the next decade...

Are you certain?

Because you invest a lot of time talking about it/criticizing it/running it down/etc.!

Mad4Minis wrote:

-Loki- wrote:

Lovepug13 wrote:I hope that wound allocation isn't completely changed....I have just collected a 1.5k nob biker list lol

That's the risk you run when you build an army around exploiting a particular rule. Everyone running Draigowing is going to face the same dilemma.

Its possible they change it, but Id be a bit surprised if they got rid certain SC rules and not others...like Draigo and Belial unlocking terminators as troops. If anything Id say they would make it so a regular SM company master can have that same rule...as they should, allowing players to run a 1st company army regardless of the chapter they play. Though that might have to wait for an update to the regular marine codex.

Of course this is GW, and its entirely possible they nerf that rule...as it would cause all Draigo/deathwing players to have to restructure their armies and buy tactical squads.

Unless they get rid of the FOC...which Im wildly in favor of...Id like to structure my army any way Id like. Simply require a HQ and then its open structure. Just look at SM company structure...the main bulk is tactical companies, but they also have all terminator companies, all devastator companies, all scout companies, etc. Im sure all armies have fluff examples of similar...why not make the game rules allow a player to build theses armies?

Yea eliminating the FOC and reverting to 2nd makes them TONS of cash too. If it mirrors 2nd and it's 25% support (HS) then you could field 6 dakka predators at 2000 points . That's mind blowing, that move alone would sell them more kits, including these precious fliers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
5 annihilation barges!.... yes please!

I'm going to play 6th to death, I can't wait for 6th, I'm 24, about to start work (well, probably) but I've spent 3 years of university on buying Space Marines. I fething love them, I can't get enough. I'm hooked.

I started the hobby probably at the start of 4th edition. I took a puberty break and got back into it a few years ago. I played my first game about a year ago. 6th edition feels like a chance to join a local gaming group and start fresh with everyone else.

The fact is, regardless of the book almost, that the game will be as competitive as the players are. Look at Formula 1 racing - everyone knows the rules and they're allowed to build a car within those (army lists) and the drivers (players) skill makes the difference beyond that.

Sometimes the best cars just dominate, sometimes exceptional drivers take the gold. As long as everyone is playing by the same rules, the game is competitive.

Saying 6th won't be competitive is nonsense, because the players who care enough will be. Me? I'll be running the same list I'm building now, it'll make the wins and losses more meaningful than a copy-pasted adepticon winners list full of bloody long fangs or whatever.

I just don't see it. I've heard all of this stuff about uncompetitiveness but in 6 months of playing I've never seen any evidence of it.

Belials Deathwing, utterly rinsed by my Orks. Imperial Guard with rules that quite frankly I'm sure they just make up, rinsed by my Orks. By that same token I've fallen foul of the damn Leman Russ (that one perhaps should cost more or at least not be able to be taken in squads). And when I have been taken out it has been by Whirlwinds and other things that do make it difficult to move forward not by supposed special cheating rules.

Grey knights are a great case in point, people have learned to deal with them and now they aren't seen as being any more competitive, hell I've read BR's where Tau have beaten them and Tau badly need those updates.

Imperial Guard are the one army that if a player wanted to be a douche could make a really silly stupidly powerful list with 9 Leman Russ' etc. But with so many armies thats a pretty good game GW managed to create.

Alpharius wrote:Are you certain?

Because you invest a lot of time talking about it/criticizing it/running it down/etc.!

And haven't played a game in months (and before that it was almost a full year since my last game). I imagine if 6th is a steaming pile of horsegak then I'll be playing even less.

Sidstyler wrote:

terranarc wrote:So, what IS a competitive ruleset anyway? How the hell do you have an uncompetative ruleset?

Balanced? An "uncompetitive" ruleset is a ruleset that's poorly balanced, and/or one that I would say is also poorly written and therefore hard to understand. All the things people complain the most about 40k, but no one wants to fix because in their mind "competitive" is a dirty word because they knew one or two guys that were self-proclaimed "competitive" gamers that were dicks.

If 40k was more competitive we wouldn't have these issues where some units are obviously bad and never used, and others are obviously good and you never see a list without them. Making the game more competitive (and more balanced) would allow more variety in armies, because you aren't shackled to one or two choices that you must spam in order to win.

I agree with this whole heartedly. But I reallly don't think its the ruleset. Its the codexes that are the issue. When a codex alloys you to take spam RBacks with spamed long fangs then that is the real issue, at least IMHO.

I never saw a problem with the game until about the newer codexes where written. BA, Wolves, Gaurd, GK's. Balance the codexes and the rules won't be an issue. In my eyes anyways.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Unless they get rid of the FOC...which Im wildly in favor of...Id like to structure my army any way Id like. Simply require a HQ and then its open structure. Just look at SM company structure...the main bulk is tactical companies, but they also have all terminator companies, all devastator companies, all scout companies, etc. Im sure all armies have fluff examples of similar...why not make the game rules allow a player to build theses armies?

We all ready have spam armies as it is, this would bring out alot more. I say maybe a littel loser FOC. but to get rid of it would be bad.

Well that big event is this Saturday, June 2nd so I am thinking the announcement of 6th will be then. But that is just my thoughts.

Sidstyler wrote:

Alpharius wrote:Are you certain?

Because you invest a lot of time talking about it/criticizing it/running it down/etc.!

And haven't played a game in months (and before that it was almost a full year since my last game). I imagine if 6th is a steaming pile of horsegak then I'll be playing even less.

You mean less than 1 game in a 12 to 18 month period? You are exactly the type of person gW should care about and try to make happy, someone who doesn't even play the game. You dont even understand the state of the current metabase not having played against all the new codexes! Next we will be asking the opinion of people who drive to work how best to improve mass transit and vegitarians for meat BBQ recipes.

I don't think that the FOC is going to change (no matter how much I'd like it to). The Necron codex, which was allegedly written with 6th Ed. in mind, has a FOC printed in it. So either the FOC is here to stay, or else the idea that the Necron codex being written with 6th Ed. in mind is a lie.


I honestly think that 6th Ed. will just be 5.01 Ed. where you'll see some new USRs like Fliers and Heavy, but I don't expect to see anything miraculous. (but as I've said before, the closer 6th Ed. is to the Pancake edition, the happier I'll be)

I just hope for the structure point rumors to be true...my Necrons will rejoice, glancing everything to death once again after Gauss was nerfed TWICE.

I also agree with the point about codexes being the main problem for current balance problems. What makes GK ridiculously overpowered is their codex as they get everything everyone else has and even more for a lower price, forcing you to get in the TFG-zone by tailoring lists specifically against GK (then again, you can never be TFG if you plan to counter GK). Same for BA and their slowed "cheaper transports" rule.

5th ed rules are borderline ok (with the exception of open-topped being a really high risk), just a few minor balance problems. If only 50% of the old playtest codex was true, 40k might get an awesome new ruleset...which is all one can hope for.

*except of a WD GK Codex update that increases all costs by 33,p3% and removes Psi-ammunition.

nkelsch wrote:You are exactly the type of person gW should care about and try to make happy, someone who doesn't even play the game.

I'm sorry? I used to play every week or two. And then started playing less and less until finally I just quit altogether.

GW should care that I quit playing their fething game, and try to get me back into it. You think I'm the only one out there who got fed up and quit?

Or no, I forgot. They already got my money, who cares if I still play or not? It's not like I could ever want to buy more armies or add new units to the ones I have or anything. I forgot GW's whole business model revolved around getting people to buy a few hundred bucks worth of gak during their first visit to the store and then quitting a month later.

Mad4Minis wrote:

-Loki- wrote:

Lovepug13 wrote:I hope that wound allocation isn't completely changed....I have just collected a 1.5k nob biker list lol

That's the risk you run when you build an army around exploiting a particular rule. Everyone running Draigowing is going to face the same dilemma.

Its possible they change it, but Id be a bit surprised if they got rid certain SC rules and not others...like Draigo and Belial unlocking terminators as troops. If anything Id say they would make it so a regular SM company master can have that same rule...as they should, allowing players to run a 1st company army regardless of the chapter they play. Though that might have to wait for an update to the regular marine codex.

Of course this is GW, and its entirely possible they nerf that rule...as it would cause all Draigo/deathwing players to have to restructure their armies and buy tactical squads.

Unless they get rid of the FOC...which Im wildly in favor of...Id like to structure my army any way Id like. Simply require a HQ and then its open structure. Just look at SM company structure...the main bulk is tactical companies, but they also have all terminator companies, all devastator companies, all scout companies, etc. Im sure all armies have fluff examples of similar...why not make the game rules allow a player to build theses armies?

Devastator and Scout companies aren't battle companies though. They are support companies. Usually comapnies 1-5 are battle companies. The Veteran company is however a battle company so the point about Termies & vets stands.

Tau vs GK is a good match up, due to Tau's ability to spam LOW AP weapons that Rapid Fire..

Tau beating GK is not a sign that the GK are NOT overpowered.

Gk arent unbeatable, people just think they are overpowered for the cost or abilities are OP.

Sidstyler wrote:

nkelsch wrote:You are exactly the type of person gW should care about and try to make happy, someone who doesn't even play the game.

I'm sorry? I used to play every week or two. And then started playing less and less until finally I just quit altogether.

GW should care that I quit playing their fething game, and try to get me back into it. You think I'm the only one out there who got fed up and quit?

Or no, I forgot. They already got my money, who cares if I still play or not? It's not like I could ever want to buy more armies or add new units to the ones I have or anything. I forgot GW's whole business model revolved around getting people to buy a few hundred bucks worth of gak during their first visit to the store and then quitting a month later.

Take it easy there..... If you aren't going to play, fair enough, let the thread carry on about the removal of the old rulebook and the possible introduction of a 6th edition, not your personal experience with GW

I like the look of most of the pancake edition. it does seem a bit over-complicated in places though.

The whoel "assault before shooting" thing confused me but havign read it, i dont thin it woudl make a massive difference to the game. It woudl also stop arguements like "If i shoot this transport, can i assault the unit inside/another unit".

Sidstyler wrote:GW should care that I quit playing their fething game, and try to get me back into it.

If someone gets out of my restaurant ranting about my dishes, I don't try to get him back (it's more than likely that he will rant again in the future for wathever reason), i just try to replace him with fresh clients. You spent your money in the past, so you did your part in their business.

Different case is the typical teenage break: no money, too many girls, studies, "life sucks" feelings, girls again, first jobs, party with first pays... Those people are willing to get back into the hobby, so just new awesome plastic minis that you can compare with your dusty old metal ones is enough to grant them a second try.

Deadshot wrote:My mate's dad is lucky to get one or two small model a year while my mate himself gets maybe a tank and a squad every 3 months.

Parenthood is slavery in so many ways but I'm sure his dad prefers having just one model if his son can have a few squads.



And about BRB... I am waiting for this new book since I reentered the hobby almost two years ago. It's my opportunity to start new rules and learn them properly from the first day.

Gotta chip in and say... 6th Edition will be my opportunity to finally dig into the game and play the damnable thing. I have no experience in 5th Edition at all, haven't played Fantasy nor 40k since I was 13, over a decade ago. I personally cannot wait for 6th...

As for pricing, i think GW should do 'half squad' boxes of all the main troops in Fantasy and 40K like the mini ones for Space Marines and Orks.

Most boxes have a couple of full sprues, all they have to do is make it one sprue to a box for half the price.

When I was a kid I often gradually built up a unit of archers or spearmen one blister at a time over each weekend.

yeah, i remember when i first started playign CSm i used to be able to go in and spend around £5 for a CSM Combat Squad of 5 marines.

no options, just 5 spare bodies with bolters. Great for bulking out units.

They still have those little boxes, 'cept it's 3 for 5.50 now.

And i think they are liek the AoBR models - snap fit.

Before it was 5 models as if they had come out fo the prper marine box. Separate arms, heads etc so more poseable.

Why would anyone ever by four ork boyz?

Unless you are completely unaware of the internet, you can easily get five times those boyz for just $15, by getting AOBR boyz off ebay.

azazel the cat wrote:I don't think that the FOC is going to change (no matter how much I'd like it to). The Necron codex, which was allegedly written with 6th Ed. in mind, has a FOC printed in it. So either the FOC is here to stay, or else the idea that the Necron codex being written with 6th Ed. in mind is a lie.


I honestly think that 6th Ed. will just be 5.01 Ed. where you'll see some new USRs like Fliers and Heavy, but I don't expect to see anything miraculous. (but as I've said before, the closer 6th Ed. is to the Pancake edition, the happier I'll be)

The FOC had to be included as it is a big part of the current rules. If 6th eliminates it, you simply ignore it, it only takes up part of a page.

Now 6th being essentially a 5.01 is my big worry...and the reason Im not going to rush out and drop $70+ on the book right away. Ill wait a couple weeks and keep an eye ont he forums, it wont take long for the details to hit. If the changes are significant enough and work well Ill jump in, if not Ill pass on 40k all together stick to Warengine, using 40k models.

Edit:spelling

Praxiss wrote:And i think they are liek the AoBR models - snap fit.

Before it was 5 models as if they had come out fo the prper marine box. Separate arms, heads etc so more poseable.

The combat squads still exist, yet for some crazed reason, they cost like £15 or so

/Sigh

Praxiss wrote:And i think they are liek the AoBR models - snap fit.

Before it was 5 models as if they had come out fo the prper marine box. Separate arms, heads etc so more poseable.

Yeah, they are AoBR-style models. Most armies have them. The combat squad boxes were literally just 5 Marines from the tactical squad box without the upgrade sprues, and at this point in time they cost almost as much as the full 10 man squads. They're the worst deal out there far as I'm concerned.

Brother SRM wrote:

Praxiss wrote:And i think they are liek the AoBR models - snap fit.

Before it was 5 models as if they had come out fo the prper marine box. Separate arms, heads etc so more poseable.

Yeah, they are AoBR-style models. Most armies have them. The combat squad boxes were literally just 5 Marines from the tactical squad box without the upgrade sprues, and at this point in time they cost almost as much as the full 10 man squads. They're the worst deal out there far as I'm concerned.

I'd say that the finecast FO are even worse

The Combat squad, IIRC, is simply 5 marines, not the snap fits, but the customisable ones like in the Battleforce or Tactical Squad box. There is a 3 pack of snap fits though.

I personally hope very few if any rules from fantasy are put into 6th edition. I personally think very few, if any of the fantasy rules would work well with the 40k ruleset. If they change around any of the turn structure, it will end up being that most codexes will be screwed over. THe thing that needs to be realised is that they need to design a ruleset that doesnt entirely screw over their current armies rules, so Id be suprised if you see anything very dramatic in the new rules.

US stores have also been told the same.

Yodhrin wrote:

tuiman wrote:

Lovepug13 wrote:I hope that wound allocation isn't completely changed....I have just collected a 1.5k nob biker list lol

Is that not what games worksop does now though?

New rulset to make all current armies useless = more money in sales as people build new armies

Here's an idea, I know it's a little out there but hear me out; how about.......you buy a balanced all-comers army and throw in a few units you just like the sound of, rather than building your whole force around the exploitation of a single rules quirk and hand-carving the models out of prime aged cheddar, then complaining that said quirk gets fixed in the new edition, you know, that thing that games do in order to fix quirks and mistakes.

Most sensible thing I've heard all year. People complaining about how GW is trying to fleece them out of their money is getting really old. Every company in the WORLD is trying to do that. Why don't all these people complain about all the other companies ripping them off too?

In any case, I don't think GW is changing their rules in order to rip people off. They do it to make a better game. The price hikes, now, that's how they rip people off.

SgtSixkilla wrote:Most sensible thing I've heard all year. People complaining about how GW is trying to fleece them out of their money is getting really old. Every company in the WORLD is trying to do that. Why don't all these people complain about all the other companies ripping them off too?

In any case, I don't think GW is changing their rules in order to rip people off. They do it to make a better game. The price hikes, now, that's how they rip people off.

1) People do complain about all of those other companies. However, they choose a different forum, as last I checked, DakkaDakka wasn't really dedicated to the GE community, nor Ford, nor Johnson & Jehnson, etc.

2) GW does not do it to make a better game. They do it to sell models. Revamping the core rules is something that tends to bring new life to a stagnant system, and thus encourages consumer growth. GW has on numerous occasions referred to themselves as a modelling company, and not a gaming company. GW does not make much money from new rules, as they are expensive to write, produce, playtest and distribute; and their markup is likely much lower than it is on their miniatures. However, those new rules are an investment, with the end goal of bolstering sales of their miniatures line.

SgtSixkilla wrote:People complaining about how GW is trying to fleece them out of their money is getting really old. Every company in the WORLD is trying to do that. Why don't all these people complain about all the other companies ripping them off too?

Contrary to what you might think it is possible to make money and foster goodwill with your customer base at the same time. These things needn't be mutually exclusive, no matter how much GW acts like they are.

Ha HBMC!

I just had an argument with a step-father-in-law where his argument for hating all supermarkets was that even when they dropped prices they secretly were chasing profits... hence is was lying!!

Companies don't have to FLEECE customers to make profit, infact unless you are a true monopoly... that is rarely a long term strategy (and I believe GW when they say that they are really trying not too... odd as I feel when I write that... just they don't get the balance between optionality and price points on new stuff)

Yay 6th! I just got back into the game after not playing since 2nd ed. Was just about to play my first game this sunday with my nearly completed force. But I might wait now so I can be on the same level as everyone else.

As long as they don't make it (too much) more random and fantasy like i'll be happy.

Yea, and if someone is exploiting a rules quirk, and always wins.... DON'T PLAY AGAINST THEM. If everyone does this, they will soon see the error of their ways. I can see the problem for tourneys though. What about special tournament rules (eg: No more than 3 nob bikers allowed)?

Kavish wrote:What about special tournament rules (eg: No more than 3 nob bikers allowed)?

2010 called, they wan't their "unbeatable" army list back...

I'm not sure I follow. What happened in 2010?

Kavish wrote:I'm not sure I follow. What happened in 2010?

The Ork Nob Biker army is kind of a 2010 (2009??) army and is considered to be far from overpowered nowadays...

Oh ok. Err... No Draigo or something? You get my point anyhow.

Yodhrin wrote:
Here's an idea, I know it's a little out there but hear me out; how about.......you buy a balanced all-comers army and throw in a few units you just like the sound of, rather than building your whole force around the exploitation of a single rules quirk and hand-carving the models out of prime aged cheddar, then complaining that said quirk gets fixed in the new edition, you know, that thing that games do in order to fix quirks and mistakes.

This.

When 5th and the new SM codex hit, all I had to do to keep my White Scars current was to build a Captain on bike to keep my bikes troops. I think I dropped one Land Speeder to fit him in.

Kavish wrote:Yay 6th! I just got back into the game after not playing since 2nd ed.

Funny, my last game of 40k was in 2nd Ed as well.

might be wasting everyones time but adeptus minitures fb page is saying about possible 6th rulebook pdf

http://www.facebook.com/#!/AdeptusMinatures

not sure if i can put this up.

I really hope that 6th does come soon, give me an excuse to really get into the game, love the models but people have always spammed a loophole when I played them so now hopefully I can get some games in before they discover the new ones

decoy101 wrote:might be wasting everyones time but adeptus minitures fb page is saying about possible 6th rulebook pdf

http://www.facebook.com/#!/AdeptusMinatures

not sure if i can put this up.

I see smoke but no fire. Probably just fishing for "Likes"

lord_blackfang wrote:

decoy101 wrote:might be wasting everyones time but adeptus minitures fb page is saying about possible 6th rulebook pdf

http://www.facebook.com/#!/AdeptusMinatures

not sure if i can put this up.

I see smoke but no fire. Probably just fishing for "Likes"

Considering how easy it is to just upload a .pdf anywhere, then yeah I'm inclined to agree with you.

it would give me a reason to get into 40k again
should start seeing more things in the next few weeks

Brother SRM wrote:

lord_blackfang wrote:

decoy101 wrote:might be wasting everyones time but adeptus minitures fb page is saying about possible 6th rulebook pdf

http://www.facebook.com/#!/AdeptusMinatures

not sure if i can put this up.

I see smoke but no fire. Probably just fishing for "Likes"

Considering how easy it is to just upload a .pdf anywhere, then yeah I'm inclined to agree with you.

Heh, when I called their bluff they deleted all my comments.

lord_blackfang wrote:

Brother SRM wrote:

lord_blackfang wrote:

decoy101 wrote:might be wasting everyones time but adeptus minitures fb page is saying about possible 6th rulebook pdf

http://www.facebook.com/#!/AdeptusMinatures

not sure if i can put this up.

I see smoke but no fire. Probably just fishing for "Likes"

Considering how easy it is to just upload a .pdf anywhere, then yeah I'm inclined to agree with you.

Heh, when I called their bluff they deleted all my comments.

Did you ask them to link it or shut up ?

Pretty much.

I don't really think we need anymore proof....

Mad4Minis wrote:

Nocturn wrote:I'm gonna guess around $65 - $70.

Ouch. Guess Ill watch the forums for details on the changes before I jump into that. If its not a big enough change from 5th Ill stick with the Shockforce/Warengine system for my 28mm needs.

Wait, I can't believe that anyone can be surprised by this number...especially with GW's record for price hikes. The current Warhammer Fantasy BRB is $75, and all of the army books released since are hardcover (about 96 pages each) @$42. I would be VERY surprised if the 40K 6th ED model did NOT follow this trend. Do I think these are ridiculous prices for a game that inherently has serious balance issues? Yes! (I'm talking 40K here, and no matter what they do to the core rules it won't balance all of the current Codices). GW doesn't seem to realize that the viable alternatives to their core games are growing, offering superior rules, superior organized play options, superior customer service, etc.

I was a GW fan-boy since I started with Rogue Trader in 1989...but the GW corporation of today has driven me away consistently for the past 7or 8 years. Every price hike, every badly balanced army book that is made to POWN the previous...has rotted away the last of my good will. We're down to one 'Games Day' in the US now where once we had almost a half a dozen. They charge $10 each for a monthly product advertisement catalog (white dwarf) that in most cases has maybe 2/3 content NOT applicable to someone playing just one of GWs 3 games.

I know what could make 40K a better game....farm out the rules to Fantasy Flight. FFG can write the rules, make them look good, and keep them balanced...and GW (Citadel) can concentrate on what they do best, making amazing miniatures.

I will look over the rules for 6th edition, but I'm not holding out much hope for an improved, more balanced game. In the mean time I will be playing Warmachine where they:

involved their fanbase in playtesting their very well balanced and clearly written MKII rules
have new involved, story-driven, seasonal campaign systems/rules every year
have a fantastic competitive tournament system that gets updated rules every year
have a core rulebook that costs half of that of GW's
have 144 page full color faction books that are offered in soft or hard back (which you don't even have to buy to play because each model's stats are included on a card when you buy it)
release a new book every year that gives every faction a few more toys to play with (Which helps them keep everything a little more balanced, and keeps all players engaged and expanding their forces...instead of waiting 7 years for a re-boot of your faction along with a few plastic kits and a few overpriced failcast singles)

...or I'll break out Malifaux, Infinity, Flames of War, Dust Warfare...the list of games that I'd rather play goes on for a while.

GW has decided that since they sell luxury goods, and that luxury goods are considered to be economically inelastic from a supply/demand perspective....that they can just keep raising their prices to milk every last disposable cent out of their fanbase, while providing substandard game rules and next to zero organized play support. The problem with that model is that every time they squeeze, they loose a little bit more of that fanbase...not to mention they price out interested parties from even starting. Kids have to have wealthy parents to be able to get in on the ground floor...and lets not kid ourselves, GW has been catering to that demographic more and more. Meanwhile, more and more of our money gets pumped into competitor's products. They aren't the only kid on the block anymore, and there will be a breaking point. I know I'm not the first hard-core fan-boy turned bitter malcontent, and at this rate I certainly wont be the last.

lord_blackfang wrote:

Brother SRM wrote:

lord_blackfang wrote:

decoy101 wrote:might be wasting everyones time but adeptus minitures fb page is saying about possible 6th rulebook pdf

http://www.facebook.com/#!/AdeptusMinatures

not sure if i can put this up.

I see smoke but no fire. Probably just fishing for "Likes"

Considering how easy it is to just upload a .pdf anywhere, then yeah I'm inclined to agree with you.

Heh, when I called their bluff they deleted all my comments.

I think their FB page is deleted now

Charax wrote:
I think their FB page is deleted now

Yeah, I looked for it and couldn't find it. I'd already been there earlier today and now that link goes nowhere. So yeah, I guess that's that.

Fango wrote: season campaign rules every year.

Explain this please? Do you mnea take 6 weeks every season of the year, fight a campaign, and each season has special rules. For example if it were WHFB then in spring life of life and Empire/Bretonnians/High Elves/Dark Elves/Wood Elvesget a boost? And in summer Lore of Fire and Tomb Kings and Lizardmen get a boost?

Deadshot wrote:

Fango wrote: season campaign rules every year.

Explain this please? Do you mnea take 6 weeks every season of the year, fight a campaign, and each season has special rules. For example if it were WHFB then in spring life of life and Empire/Bretonnians/High Elves/Dark Elves/Wood Elvesget a boost? And in summer Lore of Fire and Tomb Kings and Lizardmen get a boost?

Every year privateer press does a league that falls within each season, the players get cool bonuses and patches every season. It's something that I have not really seen gw do except that one for storm of magic last year, but that kind of flopped IMO

The GW around my way is doing that for fantasy. Summer season starts next saturday. Spring already over.

Brother SRM wrote:

Charax wrote:
I think their FB page is deleted now

Yeah, I looked for it and couldn't find it. I'd already been there earlier today and now that link goes nowhere. So yeah, I guess that's that.

Seems an odd publicity stunt to pull. "Look, we're going to tease you with this rumor, then delete our entire facebook profile!"

Their last post was that GW threatened to sue them if they published the leak. Regardless of whether they actually had one, that could make them crap their pants.

I've read on this monster topic thread, that the 40k release day is June 30th.

Is there hardcore proof to this, or another rumor?

In all seriousness, I can't see it being out on June 30th.

GW games ALWAYS have at least a month for new players to try the rules in store and to pre order the book.

If June 30th is the release date, then GW would be publicising it. It's too big a product for them not to do that.

Puscifer wrote:I've read on this monster topic thread, that the 40k release day is June 30th.

Is there hardcore proof to this, or another rumor?

In all seriousness, I can't see it being out on June 30th.

GW games ALWAYS have at least a month for new players to try the rules in store and to pre order the book.

If June 30th is the release date, then GW would be publicising it. It's too big a product for them not to do that.

BramGaunt said it, he's very reliable.

How much preview time did we get with fantasy 8th, could be similar to that I guess

I'm sure GW changes the way it does things, just to feth up our heads.

This is the first rulebook since their stunning marketing campaign of complete silence began.

i think they called it "Operation FUBAR"

Worst marketing strategy ever...if these guys were on the apprentice, they would be fired in the first 5 minutes of the show.

Puscifer wrote:I've read on this monster topic thread, that the 40k release day is June 30th.

Is there hardcore proof to this, or another rumor?

In all seriousness, I can't see it being out on June 30th.

GW games ALWAYS have at least a month for new players to try the rules in store and to pre order the book.

If June 30th is the release date, then GW would be publicising it. It's too big a product for them not to do that.

The old book is gone, from shops and online.

I really cannot see GW having NO rules available for a game for very long & I highly suspect the chance to see the rules in store before they are available as doubtful.

More then likely pre-orders will go up the week before, the rulebook will drop at the same time as WD (see dreadfleet). Giving No one the chance to look over the rules prior to going out and buying the thing on release day.

I'm confident that the rumours of the 30th June are true, too many things are pointing that way. To the point I'm setting the money aside for the pre-order (one week before payday, Grrrr).

What do you think the chances are of GW offerign some sort of PDF version?

None, i know. It woudl be a massive seller though. i'd certainly buy, even if i already had the big book. having a rulebook (even a reduced one like the AOBR one) which i can search through by word on my smartphone? Win.

deejaybainbridge wrote:

Puscifer wrote:I've read on this monster topic thread, that the 40k release day is June 30th.

Is there hardcore proof to this, or another rumor?

In all seriousness, I can't see it being out on June 30th.

GW games ALWAYS have at least a month for new players to try the rules in store and to pre order the book.

If June 30th is the release date, then GW would be publicising it. It's too big a product for them not to do that.

I really cannot see GW having NO rules available for a game for very long & I highly suspect the chance to see the rules in store before they are available as doubtful.

More then likely pre-orders will go up the week before, the rulebook will drop at the same time as WD (see dreadfleet). Giving No one the chance to look over the rules prior to going out and buying the thing on release day.

I think GW will have preview nights incoming so people can learn the rules. No core game has ever gone on sale without one, doing so would be suicide.

Kirby Says "Okay here is the plan, we need to increase our revenue by selling a TON of new 6th edition stuff. It's our most popular game so we're going to make sure everyone buys it by not letting anyone know its coming out. In addition, we won't give our trusted partner stores any advanced knowledge so they can't plan any kind of huge events in advance.

This strategy will be called "Confuse and Ignore" and it is guaranteed to sell tons of models. If players don't know what's coming then they can't decide to not buy it!"

GW Drones all clap and tell Kirby he's amazingly brilliant

Puscifer wrote:

deejaybainbridge wrote:

Puscifer wrote:I've read on this monster topic thread, that the 40k release day is June 30th.

Is there hardcore proof to this, or another rumor?

In all seriousness, I can't see it being out on June 30th.

GW games ALWAYS have at least a month for new players to try the rules in store and to pre order the book.

If June 30th is the release date, then GW would be publicising it. It's too big a product for them not to do that.

I really cannot see GW having NO rules available for a game for very long & I highly suspect the chance to see the rules in store before they are available as doubtful.

More then likely pre-orders will go up the week before, the rulebook will drop at the same time as WD (see dreadfleet). Giving No one the chance to look over the rules prior to going out and buying the thing on release day.

I think GW will have preview nights incoming so people can learn the rules. No core game has ever gone on sale without one, doing so would be suicide.

As already mentioned. This is the first core game release under the new "no news" regime. Whether they'll still apply the same rules to this as any other release remains to be seen.

If GW fail to even show off some of the rules that just screams bad move. No doubt some people will buy 6th either way as they think it will be the greatest thing ever but it could turn out to be the worst thing ever. With no info on the game or rules unless they put it in WD which even then I wont buy as that thing blows. Its just a bad move.
Think without a preview I would just wait a month or so and see what other people say but i`m not holding out for a change from GW and I think 6th will blow as bad as Fantasy 8th

As much as I would absolutely LOVE a preview of the rules so i could start digesting them before the release date, given GW's new policy I don't see that happening.

So did anybody notice with June's huge wave of fliers there was no real battle report in the White Dwarf? And that the back teaser page was a battle report, using fliers? Who else with me suspects that the battle for the airfield is the first WD BatRep using 6th ed rules, to show the resiliency of fliers in the new edition? Chances are the new WD will have pre-orders for the BRB and use the BatRep as a means of showing some of the new mechanics in the rules. Then 7 days later, BOOM, hardback rulebooks on shelves.

My prediction anyway.

Someone also mentioned before how the next WD comes out before the 30th (expected 6th release) and earlier than it usually would IIRC, so may be intended for it's usual preview role.

Grimtuff wrote:

Puscifer wrote:

deejaybainbridge wrote:

Puscifer wrote:I've read on this monster topic thread, that the 40k release day is June 30th.

Is there hardcore proof to this, or another rumor?

In all seriousness, I can't see it being out on June 30th.

GW games ALWAYS have at least a month for new players to try the rules in store and to pre order the book.

If June 30th is the release date, then GW would be publicising it. It's too big a product for them not to do that.

I really cannot see GW having NO rules available for a game for very long & I highly suspect the chance to see the rules in store before they are available as doubtful.

More then likely pre-orders will go up the week before, the rulebook will drop at the same time as WD (see dreadfleet). Giving No one the chance to look over the rules prior to going out and buying the thing on release day.

I think GW will have preview nights incoming so people can learn the rules. No core game has ever gone on sale without one, doing so would be suicide.

As already mentioned. This is the first core game release under the new "no news" regime. Whether they'll still apply the same rules to this as any other release remains to be seen.

Hence my understanding that it will be dropped on us with no warning or chance to read the rules, we will be forced to buy blind as was done with dreadfleet.

Just Dave wrote:Someone also mentioned before how the next WD comes out before the 30th (expected 6th release) and earlier than it usually would IIRC, so may be intended for it's usual preview role.

Interesting, as a Subscriber I should get a letter telling me of the change in release date ( I did when the WD dreadfleet issue was released later then usual due to the game ). So, if that does happen I will post said info.

Just Dave wrote:Someone also mentioned before how the next WD comes out before the 30th (expected 6th release) and earlier than it usually would IIRC, so may be intended for it's usual preview role.

Teaser page says July White Dwarf goes on sale June 23, 2012. 7 Days before Hastings' prediction that 6th edition will go on sale.

tetrisphreak wrote:

Just Dave wrote:Someone also mentioned before how the next WD comes out before the 30th (expected 6th release) and earlier than it usually would IIRC, so may be intended for it's usual preview role.

Teaser page says July White Dwarf goes on sale June 23, 2012. 7 Days before Hastings' prediction that 6th edition will go on sale.

Same day pre-orders will go up then assuming the new book is coming at the end of the month. I can only assume stores will get a copy and everyone will have a week to look things over. I hope so anyway, as the other option is far less desired. ( I would hate to buy a £50 book blind only to find very little has changed)

caminacambob wrote:I really hope that 6th does come soon, give me an excuse to really get into the game, love the models but people have always spammed a loophole when I played them so now hopefully I can get some games in before they discover the new ones

Thats one of my biggest problems with the current rules...every army has just a couple lists that are of any use, and if you dont play them your probably going to get beat every time, and thats no fun. What the game needs is a set unit design structure...not just a random assignment of points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

deejaybainbridge wrote:

I'm confident that the rumours of the 30th June are true, too many things are pointing that way. To the point I'm setting the money aside for the pre-order (one week before payday, Grrrr).

Im not giving them $70+ for a rulebook until I have proof that they have made a vast improvement over the current rules. However, I am counting on the folks like you who will blindly give them a big chunk of cash to report on the new rules.

Mad4Minis wrote:

caminacambob wrote:I really hope that 6th does come soon, give me an excuse to really get into the game, love the models but people have always spammed a loophole when I played them so now hopefully I can get some games in before they discover the new ones

Thats one of my biggest problems with the current rules...every army has just a couple lists that are of any use, and if you dont play them your probably going to get beat every time, and thats no fun. What the game needs is a set unit design structure...not just a random assignment of points.

I disagree. I think most 5th Ed. Codices have a wide variety of possible builds. IMHO the usual netlists, such as Razorspam etc. are simply the more forgiving armies, but most 5th Ed. Codices actually have a lot of viable units and builds that can be competitive, particularly in the hands of a skilled player.

I disagree. I think most 5th Ed. Codices have a wide variety of possible builds. IMHO the usual netlists, such as Razorspam etc. are simply the more forgiving armies, but most 5th Ed. Codices actually have a lot of viable units and builds that can be competitive, particularly in the hands of a skilled player.

That may be true, but when you go to a tournament and no one uses these different builds, they might as well not even exist because you will never see them. Sad, really. 40k was much better before the internet allowed these spam list to get around so quickly.

Just Dave wrote:I disagree. I think most 5th Ed. Codices have a wide variety of possible builds.

Possible builds, yes. Good builds? No.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Just Dave wrote:I disagree. I think most 5th Ed. Codices have a wide variety of possible builds.

Possible builds, yes. Good builds? No.

Good builds too IMHO.
Not necessarily tournament winning, but enough not a case of "your probably going to get beat every time".

My plan:

pdf until the starter set gets released, then buy the starter set rule book from ebay!

Mad4Minis wrote:

caminacambob wrote:I really hope that 6th does come soon, give me an excuse to really get into the game, love the models but people have always spammed a loophole when I played them so now hopefully I can get some games in before they discover the new ones

Thats one of my biggest problems with the current rules...every army has just a couple lists that are of any use, and if you dont play them your probably going to get beat every time, and thats no fun. What the game needs is a set unit design structure...not just a random assignment of points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

deejaybainbridge wrote:

I'm confident that the rumours of the 30th June are true, too many things are pointing that way. To the point I'm setting the money aside for the pre-order (one week before payday, Grrrr).

Im not giving them $70+ for a rulebook until I have proof that they have made a vast improvement over the current rules. However, I am counting on the folks like you who will blindly give them a big chunk of cash to report on the new rules.

Ha-ha. I can see your point, however I am happy to take the risk I have made that commitment to myself that I will be playing 6th Edition when it come out. I could leave it, read the forums and see everyone saying it's terrible and decide the best course of action is to avoid, but then what? I have three armies I may not get to use much as the people I play with move over to 6th Edition and I don't.

This is the void of space between the rock and the hard place!

It seems to me that if your attitude on codices and army books put out by GW is one of disdain at the lack of 'good builds', you may as well ask Workshop to cut and paste the last big tournament winning list, add fluff and put it out there.

I can understand things like Orks having trouble with vehicles, but then I believe that adds character to them. I don't want them to bring out some new, super cool Ork Baneblade that's an automatic Heavy choice.

Tournaments aren't the beginning and ending of wargaming. In fact, the vast majority of games are friendly. If all you care about is winning, there are books and lists better suited for you. If you play Tau atm, you don't care about winning every game, you care about inventing strategies and testing them out.

Variety is the spice of life

Davylove21 wrote:It seems to me that if your attitude on codices and army books put out by GW is one of disdain at the lack of 'good builds', you may as well ask Workshop to cut and paste the last big tournament winning list, add fluff and put it out there.

I can understand things like Orks having trouble with vehicles, but then I believe that adds character to them. I don't want them to bring out some new, super cool Ork Baneblade that's an automatic Heavy choice.

Tournaments aren't the beginning and ending of wargaming. In fact, the vast majority of games are friendly. If all you care about is winning, there are books and lists better suited for you. If you play Tau atm, you don't care about winning every game, you care about inventing strategies and testing them out.

Variety is the spice of life

I don't think you quite understand the concept of "balance".

Davylove21 wrote:It seems to me that if your attitude on codices and army books put out by GW is one of disdain at the lack of 'good builds', you may as well ask Workshop to cut and paste the last big tournament winning list, add fluff and put it out there.

I can understand things like Orks having trouble with vehicles, but then I believe that adds character to them. I don't want them to bring out some new, super cool Ork Baneblade that's an automatic Heavy choice.

Tournaments aren't the beginning and ending of wargaming. In fact, the vast majority of games are friendly. If all you care about is winning, there are books and lists better suited for you. If you play Tau atm, you don't care about winning every game, you care about inventing strategies and testing them out.

Variety is the spice of life

This.

I play Tau, mostly against Orks, for a challenge. My army has a weakness which suits my enemy and vice versa so me and my opponent must use tactics to take advantage of the other's weaknesses and play to our strengths.

I don't want an uber book to ruin this by making either of us better than the other, this would ruin the game entirely.

This is one fo the reason i quite like the new 'cron dex. there is not 1 atuo-build. There a few builds whcih people gravitate towards (scarab farm, 5 barge Wraith wing etc).

But you dont HAVE to use them to win games or even hold your own.

Personally I think their rulebooks are pretty good value regardless of the changes (If you like to actually read them that is).

Im really looking forward to a new set as Ive been tired of 5th for over a year now

PhantomViper wrote:

Davylove21 wrote:It seems to me that if your attitude on codices and army books put out by GW is one of disdain at the lack of 'good builds', you may as well ask Workshop to cut and paste the last big tournament winning list, add fluff and put it out there.

I can understand things like Orks having trouble with vehicles, but then I believe that adds character to them. I don't want them to bring out some new, super cool Ork Baneblade that's an automatic Heavy choice.

Tournaments aren't the beginning and ending of wargaming. In fact, the vast majority of games are friendly. If all you care about is winning, there are books and lists better suited for you. If you play Tau atm, you don't care about winning every game, you care about inventing strategies and testing them out.

Variety is the spice of life

I don't think you quite understand the concept of "balance".

Does anyone? Is it even possible without having only one army in the entire game?

If you want balance, play chess.

Davylove21 wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

Davylove21 wrote:It seems to me that if your attitude on codices and army books put out by GW is one of disdain at the lack of 'good builds', you may as well ask Workshop to cut and paste the last big tournament winning list, add fluff and put it out there.

I can understand things like Orks having trouble with vehicles, but then I believe that adds character to them. I don't want them to bring out some new, super cool Ork Baneblade that's an automatic Heavy choice.

Tournaments aren't the beginning and ending of wargaming. In fact, the vast majority of games are friendly. If all you care about is winning, there are books and lists better suited for you. If you play Tau atm, you don't care about winning every game, you care about inventing strategies and testing them out.

Variety is the spice of life

I don't think you quite understand the concept of "balance".

Does anyone? Is it even possible without having only one army in the entire game?

If you want balance, play chess.

You REALLY don't understand the concept of balance... And I'm taking a wild stab in the dark here, but you never experienced any other miniature game other than GW, am I right?

Go talk to a Infinity, Malifaux or Warmahordes player, you'll find that games with multiple balanced armies are indeed possible and these marvellous mythological creations even exist in our day and age!

PhantomViper wrote:

Davylove21 wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

Davylove21 wrote:It seems to me that if your attitude on codices and army books put out by GW is one of disdain at the lack of 'good builds', you may as well ask Workshop to cut and paste the last big tournament winning list, add fluff and put it out there.

I can understand things like Orks having trouble with vehicles, but then I believe that adds character to them. I don't want them to bring out some new, super cool Ork Baneblade that's an automatic Heavy choice.

Tournaments aren't the beginning and ending of wargaming. In fact, the vast majority of games are friendly. If all you care about is winning, there are books and lists better suited for you. If you play Tau atm, you don't care about winning every game, you care about inventing strategies and testing them out.

Variety is the spice of life

I don't think you quite understand the concept of "balance".

Does anyone? Is it even possible without having only one army in the entire game?

If you want balance, play chess.

You REALLY don't understand the concept of balance... And I'm taking a wild stab in the dark here, but you never experienced any other miniature game other than GW, am I right?

Go talk to a Infinity, Malifaux or Warmahordes player, you'll find that games with multiple balanced armies are indeed possible and these marvellous mythological creations even exist in our day and age!

I don't even understand what you are trying to say with that image...

That an orange is slightly heavier than an apple of course! It's a bit silly to say that it's "apples and oranges" to compare one companies ability to balance games vs GW.. It's the same thing, the main difference is GW doesn't care as much because they're a model company not a game company as they've said.

Rule balance = Rule balance.. one company is just lazy

PhantomViper wrote:You REALLY don't understand the concept of balance... And I'm taking a wild stab in the dark here, but you never experienced any other miniature game other than GW, am I right?

Go talk to a Infinity, Malifaux or Warmahordes player, you'll find that games with multiple balanced armies are indeed possible and these marvellous mythological creations even exist in our day and age!

Warmahordes isn't balanced, it's just so convoluted that it's hard to tell. But at the end of the day each faction only has about 3 casters that you will ever see in tournaments, there are some terrible rock-paper-scissors matchups that make Nids vs Venomspam look like a fair game, and there is a clear hierarchy of faction power levels.

Cant' speak for the other two but they are also both more complex than 40k so I suspect it's easier to hide the imbalance there, too.

Kirasu wrote:That an orange is slightly heavier than an apple of course! It's a bit silly to say that it's "apples and oranges" to compare one companies ability to balance games vs GW.. It's the same thing, the main difference is GW doesn't care as much because they're a model company not a game company as they've said.

Rule balance = Rule balance.. one company is just lazy

I just didn't wan't to believe that he would actually consider using the "apple and oranges" argument when he used as the only example for a balanced game comparable with 40K.... chess...

I love big books, especially books with lots of pictures and background, so if the 6th edition 40K book follows the trend of Fantasy, I won't mind, and I'll probably buy some sort of collectors edition of it if they release something like that. I already spent thousands on armies, so I find GW's rulebooks surprisingly good value for money content wise.

lord_blackfang wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:You REALLY don't understand the concept of balance... And I'm taking a wild stab in the dark here, but you never experienced any other miniature game other than GW, am I right?

Go talk to a Infinity, Malifaux or Warmahordes player, you'll find that games with multiple balanced armies are indeed possible and these marvellous mythological creations even exist in our day and age!

Warmahordes isn't balanced, it's just so convoluted that it's hard to tell. But at the end of the day each faction only has about 3 casters that you will ever see in tournaments, there are some terrible rock-paper-scissors matchups that make Nids vs Venomspam look like a fair game, and there is a clear hierarchy of faction power levels.

Cant' speak for the other two but they are also both more complex than 40k so I suspect it's easier to hide the imbalance there, too.

Of course it isn't. You are completely right in everything you say!

And everyone in the entire universe agrees with you that warmahordes is the most convoluted bunch of rules ever written the rule books are practically undecipherable! Every single warmahordes game is so stock full of rules arguments and accusations of RaW vs RaI that it is impossible to finish a game in under 3 hours. And the game only ends because usually one of the players throws the table upside down in disgust!

Also I completely agree with you that no single game in the entire world can't be balanced and I heartily support your effort to decry games that you admittedly know absolutely nothing about as imbalanced and complex...

/sarcasm (just in case anyone had interpreted my post any other way)

PhantomViper wrote:

Kirasu wrote:That an orange is slightly heavier than an apple of course! It's a bit silly to say that it's "apples and oranges" to compare one companies ability to balance games vs GW.. It's the same thing, the main difference is GW doesn't care as much because they're a model company not a game company as they've said.

Rule balance = Rule balance.. one company is just lazy

I just didn't wan't to believe that he would actually consider using the "apple and oranges" argument when he used as the only example for a balanced game comparable with 40K.... chess...

A bit of a strawman here. He actually said if you wanted balance in a game then play chess. The reason why chess is balanced is because both side have exactly the same rules for exactly the same pieces. You were the one who wanted to compare "balance" between different games.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

PhantomViper wrote:Also I completely agree with you that no single game in the entire world can't be balanced and I heartily support your effort to decry games that you admittedly know absolutely nothing about as imbalanced and complex...

You can always play chess

DarthOvious wrote:
A bit of a strawman here. He actually said if you wanted balance in a game then play chess. The reason why chess is balanced is because both side have exactly the same rules for exactly the same pieces. You were the one who wanted to compare "balance" between different games.

So he can give an example of another game that he perceives is balanced (and if you wan't to nitpick, chess isn't balanced because the white pieces always go first), but I can't give examples of other games that the community believes are balanced because then I'm comparing apples to oranges... right...

Nothing wrong with wanting a well written ballanced game... will we get that..... hell no.


Just remember its always swings and roundabouts, currently spash wooofs are OP and Gray Nits are too, but next time they will get it soooo hard by the nerf bat..l. well lol


My main fear is that DA become sooo OP that all the GK/SW/IG bandwagoners flock to it and ruin my armies rep

PhantomViper wrote:

lord_blackfang wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:You REALLY don't understand the concept of balance... And I'm taking a wild stab in the dark here, but you never experienced any other miniature game other than GW, am I right?

Go talk to a Infinity, Malifaux or Warmahordes player, you'll find that games with multiple balanced armies are indeed possible and these marvellous mythological creations even exist in our day and age!

Warmahordes isn't balanced, it's just so convoluted that it's hard to tell. But at the end of the day each faction only has about 3 casters that you will ever see in tournaments, there are some terrible rock-paper-scissors matchups that make Nids vs Venomspam look like a fair game, and there is a clear hierarchy of faction power levels.

Cant' speak for the other two but they are also both more complex than 40k so I suspect it's easier to hide the imbalance there, too.

Of course it isn't. You are completely right in everything you say!

And everyone in the entire universe agrees with you that warmahordes is the most convoluted bunch of rules ever written the rule books are practically undecipherable! Every single warmahordes game is so stock full of rules arguments and accusations of RaW vs RaI that it is impossible to finish a game in under 3 hours. And the game only ends because usually one of the players throws the table upside down in disgust!

Also I completely agree with you that no single game in the entire world can't be balanced and I heartily support your effort to decry games that you admittedly know absolutely nothing about as imbalanced and complex...

/sarcasm (just in case anyone had interpreted my post any other way)

The salt is strong in this one.

WM/H is relatively balanced, but in higher level play there are builds, just like in 40k. Some things nobody can deny, like Khador usually coming out in top in the grand scheme of things. Besides, he never said every game was "so stock full of rules arguments and accusations of RaW vs RaI that it is impossible to finish a game in under 3 hours. And the game only ends because usually one of the players throws the table upside down in disgust!" Sarcasm is so common nowadays (and so immature IMO), if you disagree with him it's better to intelligently discuss it rather than post a bitter, sarcastic tone that to me is just plain unpleasant to read. This is a community, let's start acting like one and play nice with each other.

Has anyone else ever heard of "you can't please all the people all the time"?

No matter what they do (even if they listened to us gamers suggestions) GW is never going to be able to produce a ruleset that everyone is happy with.

Some peope obviously hate 5th ed. lots of people are ok with it. i woudl hazard a guess that the vast majority of people will just accept that these are the rules and live with it.

I sometimes think that some people take thsi hobby/game a little too seriously.

PhantomViper wrote:
And everyone in the entire universe agrees with you that warmahordes is the most convoluted bunch of rules ever written the rule books are practically undecipherable! Every single warmahordes game is so stock full of rules arguments and accusations of RaW vs RaI that it is impossible to finish a game in under 3 hours. And the game only ends because usually one of the players throws the table upside down in disgust!

I meant that the rules create complex tactical situations. By way of combining special abilities. Which I'm sure you damn well know. It's easy to glance at a 40k unit entry and its points cost and immediately see whether it's worth it or not. Not so with a Warmachine model. The synergies between models can give them a power boost that isn't immediately evident and it's hard to price a unit correctly when its value depends so heavily on the rest of the army list.

I'm not exactly sure why I bothered to defend myself against your inane accusations since you can't refute any of the actual points I made, but there we have it.

Justus wrote:The salt is strong in this one.

WM/H is relatively balanced, but in higher level play there are builds, just like in 40k. Some things nobody can deny, like Khador usually coming out in top in the grand scheme of things. Besides, he never said every game was "so stock full of rules arguments and accusations of RaW vs RaI that it is impossible to finish a game in under 3 hours. And the game only ends because usually one of the players throws the table upside down in disgust!" Sarcasm is so common nowadays (and so immature IMO), if you disagree with him it's better to intelligently discuss it rather than post a bitter, sarcastic tone that to me is just plain unpleasant to read. This is a community, let's start acting like one and play nice with each other.

I have found out a long time ago that there is no point arguing with someone that doesn't know what the hell he is talking about, but just to prove this once again, here is the top 10 list of last weekends UK masters:

Name - Faction
Jamie Perkins - Khador
Phil Manwaring - Trollbloods
Martyn Jenkins - Circle Orboros
John Dale - Protectorate of Menoth
Andrew Galea - Trollbloods
Pat Vance - Legion of Everblight
Nathan Hoole - Cygnar
Liam Jordon - Minions
Tony Moore - Legion of Everblight
Alasdair Johnstone - Cryx

Your so called "best faction in game" is represented by 1 player and out of the 11 factions that Warmahordes has, 8 of them are represented in the top 10 of an 115 player event! I'd call that pretty balanced myself...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

lord_blackfang wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:
And everyone in the entire universe agrees with you that warmahordes is the most convoluted bunch of rules ever written the rule books are practically undecipherable! Every single warmahordes game is so stock full of rules arguments and accusations of RaW vs RaI that it is impossible to finish a game in under 3 hours. And the game only ends because usually one of the players throws the table upside down in disgust!

I meant that the rules create complex tactical situations. By way of combining special abilities. Which I'm sure you damn well know. It's easy to glance at a 40k unit entry and its points cost and immediately see whether it's worth it or not. Not so with a Warmachine model. The synergies between models can give them a power boost that isn't immediately evident and it's hard to price a unit correctly when its value depends so heavily on the rest of the army list.

I'm not exactly sure why I bothered to defend myself against your inane accusations since you can't refute any of the actual points I made, but there we have it.

I just refuted.

To further refute your point, I'll call your attention to Jamie Perkins and Jake "Neutralize" who are considered to be the best players in both the UK and the USA respectively. Go watch their tournament results: when 2 players consistently win tournaments with 100+ people in them I would argue that the player themselves is what differentiates a faction from another and IMHO, when player decisions in the table top matters more than dice or list building, then you have a reasonably balanced game.

The same thing can be observed if you analyse the Malifaux tournament scene, the same restricted number of players wins most tournaments. The players win the tournaments, not the armies themselves and that, to me and allot of other people is the proof of a balanced game.

I can't offer proof of Infinity because AFAIK, Infinity still doesn't have an organized tournament "scene".

PhantomViper wrote: So he can give an example of another game that he perceives is balanced (and if you wan't to nitpick, chess isn't balanced because the white pieces always go first), but I can't give examples of other games that the community believes are balanced because then I'm comparing apples to oranges... right...

Yes white always goes first but you alternate between players who get to go white.

Yes, you are comparing apples to oranges because you are forgetting that 40K is a completely different game system than those other games with a LOT MORE OPTIONS. I have never seen any vehicles in Warmachine like tanks, I have only seen Dreadnought like comparisons. I haven't seen any jump infantry, etc, etc. The more options in 40K is where it becomes more difficult to balance. Of course Warmachine is more balanced but then Warmachine is also less diverse.

Plus, much like 40k, whoevrr goes second can.move/deploy to counter white/player 1.

DarthOvious wrote:

PhantomViper wrote: So he can give an example of another game that he perceives is balanced (and if you wan't to nitpick, chess isn't balanced because the white pieces always go first), but I can't give examples of other games that the community believes are balanced because then I'm comparing apples to oranges... right...

Yes white always goes first but you alternate between players who get to go white.

Yes, you are comparing apples to oranges because you are forgetting that 40K is a completely different game system than those other games with a LOT MORE OPTIONS. I have never seen any vehicles in Warmachine like tanks, I have only seen Dreadnought like comparisons. I haven't seen any jump infantry, etc, etc. The more options in 40K is where it becomes more difficult to balance. Of course Warmachine is more balanced but then Warmachine is also less diverse.

Yeah... You're kind of wrong again...

Taking one faction from each game:

http://www.maelstromgames.co.uk/index.php?act=cat&cre=min-wmc-cyg

http://www.maelstromgames.co.uk/index.php?act=cat&cre=min-40k-spm

Look at the amount of different choices you have for a Warmachine faction compared to a 40K faction. If anything Warmachine is allot more diverse than 40K. For tanks you have War Engines, for instance. For jump infantry you have flying infantry and burrowing infantry (and flying and burrowing warjacks)...

And I'm not even going to enter the nightmare that must be for PP to balance two distinct rules sets in the same game (Warmachine and Hordes), and yet they manage it to a very successful degree.

But the bottom line is that if PP, Corvus Belli and Wyrd can do it, then GW could do it as well! But having an imbalanced rule set helps them sell more models with less effort and at the end of the day that is all that they care about!

Also yes, players alternate between black and white pieces, but a chess match has an uneven number of games, so one player will always has the whites more often then the other.

When people start arguing and getting heated and start posting messages that are only images...

...see you in the thread that will undoubtedly pop up when there's an actual date/rulebook/news/etc. to discuss!