A source on faeit212 claims release date for 7th 40k edition is 31st May, preorder date 24th May.
(now) older rumrors:
Spoiler:
anonymous source on Faeit 212 wrote:i can confirm that 7th edition will be released on 24th of may. As off today all rulebooks are removed from the shop floors and known lossed.
(...)
I think the pre order date for the new rule book is the 24th. So sale on the week after. Most shops should have a poster with a commissar on it in there shops. And the date 24th war is coming or something in those lines.
6th edition rulebook and starter box confirmed to be OOP in all languages.
Young_Logan wrote: I can confirm that they have been taken of the shelves and no longer sell in store in the UK as I was in this afternoon as was told about this as I am a regular and that we are told to look to the white dwarf to tell us more in the up coming weeks.
xttz wrote: I'm hearing elsewhere that there was a UKGW managers meeting yesterday, during which they were told to remove 6E rulebook from shelves in preparation for a new one at the end of May. Unsurprisingly, this isn't a popular move even among store managers, as they know how much of a customer backlash will be heading their way.
They've also been told to continue selling Dark Vengeance, but once the new BRB drops they have to put a sticker on the box that says the rules inside aren't current.
Jimmy Ellwood over at Warseer wrote:Just seen an email sent to all GW store managers at 8.40pm last night advising them to remove the 40k rulebook from their stores on Wednesday as it isn't to be sold anymore. If customers ask for it they are to advise them to check out white dwarf.
All the UK store managers are in their managers meeting today so I am sure will be getting their full brief on what is happening.
I have heard more indications that indeed:
1.) New edition is coming end of the month
2.) 6th edition rulebook and starter box are OOP 3.) New starter will be BA vs. Orks.
4.) Escalation and stronghold are included in the new rulebook.
krazynadechukr wrote: It's called 7th edition, over 500 pages, escalation is in it, it's $99.99 usd, and new templates are also coming out along side it.
GW teaser video, added 5/4:
Spoiler:
Added 5/5:
Spoiler:
From Natfka:
via an anonymous source on Faeit 212
The FoC chart is still in the new 40k edition and if you follow it you have what is known as a "Battle Forged" army. It awards (unlisted) bonuses for using the FoC.You can also take a unbound army, these allow you to take whatever you want from your collection and toss out the FoC (while still adhering to unit size and heeding the relationships described in the new Allies Matrix.
Another thing is objective cards, so the objectives of the game can change each turn. The deck will be 36 cards.
There is also a physic phase confirmed now. A pool of warp charge dice is created at the start of the psychic phase, equal to 1d6 + mastery lvl of psychers. You can use as many dice as you like, but increase risk of perils of the warp (which is now a table you roll on.) Enemy psychers can draw on warp charge pool to Deny the Witch and nulify powers.
Also Eternal warrior missions still exist but in addition there are 6 new Maelstrom of War Missions.
via another anonymous source on Faeit 212
Additional information that a Battle Forged list can take as many detachments as they wish, and still get bonus's.. The Unbound lists, is very much whatever you want to throw in to do a battle, and you get to choose which you want to play, and your opponent can do the same.
WD confirmation, added 5/5:
Spoiler:
additional WD info, added 5/7:
Spoiler:
This may be in wrong bit, but as its not a rumour(WD official text) and its not news I wasn't sure, but move if needs be mods
A mate just showed me this picture on FB:
Read the red box text, second paragraph of text, basically Ezekial like the possession......hmmmm
Update of actual release date & additional WD info, added 5/8:
Spoiler:
mikhaila wrote: I just got off the phone with my GW rep. No real new info, but he did state "pre-orders on the 17th and product on the 24th".
Another excerpt from the same issue of WD:
Warhammer 40,000 In the Bunker
With a new edition of Warhammer 40,000 on the horizon, Jes, Dan an Adam locked themselves in the hobby room with games designer Robin Cruddace to try out the new game mechanics.
Dan and Robin teamed up in a desperate alliance of Tau and Space marines, which led to many sideways glances and shifty manoeuvres. Adam and Jes chose Tyranids and had no such problems, chomping their way through everything in their path to steal most of the strategic objectives. In the end, the battle came down to a signle combat between Dan's Riptide and Adam's Hive Tyrant (who was worth a possible four victory points). Sadly, though not unexpectedly, the Hive Tyrant won.
-- So Guys I heard from a pretty reliable source that got to sit down with the book for a few minutes here is what I can remember from what was said.
1. 4ed consolidate in to combat is in
2. If you fail to cast a power you can't cast it the rest of the game
3. Every unit including vehicles will now score
4. Unbound armies may not contest objectives
5. Lords of war are in
6. Escalation and stronghold remaine as they are now
7. Vehicles will be harder to kill the chart changes once more.
8. The book will come out in 3 options Art like warhammer visions, Fluff book, and one that only contains rules and that one is about as think as the current SM book.
9.difficult terrain is just -2 inches
10. Wound allocation has changed a bit.not super clear as to how.
11. D-weapons toned down but he was unclear as what that meant so from the sounds of it they will still be super ugly. --
GW full announcement video, screen caps & more rumors, added 5/12:
My FLGS manager got some info out of his GW rep. Apparently they can spill the beans now, but I only got a bit of new infos about the psychic phase.
At least paste the information... edit: Ahh, he wants blog hits.
I spoke with my FLGS guy who talked to the GW rep this morning. Not all of my questions were answered, but here is what I heard that is not something already all over the internet. This assumes the GW rep had his facts straight, and the FLGS guy relayed them correctly via the game of telephone.
Battle Brothers
Eldar/DE Chaos/Daemons
All Imperium
All others were convenience, desperate or apocalypse.
No answer as to whether you can join units of battle brothers.
Psychic Phase
Roll a D6 and add the total mastery levels of all your psykers. You get that many power dice and your opponent gets that many DTW dice.
To cast a power, you need to roll a 4+ for every warp charge of the power you're using. So warp charge 2 = two 4+, meaning you'd need 4 power dice to have an average shot.
Your opponent dispels the power with a roll of a 6 on their dice. So the more dice they have, the more shots they get at rolling that 6 to cancel out that critical power. I was told that the mastery level of the psyker dispelling the power lowers the roll needed to dispel it. So a ML2 psyker dispels on a 5+, ML3 on a 4+. etc...
That is what I was told.
That seems wrong to me because Fateweaver, Eldrad and Ahriman could dispel anything on a 3+. More likely, I would think you compare mastery levels between the casting psyker and the dispelling psyker, and apply a bonus that way. This is conjecture. What I wrote above is what I was told.
What I also don't know is if there is a dice limit a psyker can use to cast or dispel a power based on their mastery level. I also don't know if you need two 6's to dispel a ML2 power. I assume you do.
You would figure Adamantium Will would give you +1 to DTW for powers cast at a unit with that rule.
Jink Save
Jink is a 4+, however it is no longer always on. You must declare a jink to claim it, and if you do so, it's snapshots only in the next phase.
Sweeping Advance
Unchanged. You do not consolidate into a new combat.
And that's all I got that's new! So you can go runtelldat.
May 13th
Spoiler:
Dark Vengeance
The Dark Vengeance box
set currently contains a
copy of the rules from
the last edition of
Warhammer 40 000 -
rest assured that in the
near future this will be
updated to contain the
new edition of The Rules
Stay tuned to White
Dwarf for news on this
exciting development.
15th May
16th May
Spoiler:
ClockworkZion wrote: From the Blog for the Blood God Facebook page (rehosted to make life easier when it comes to embedding these pics):
40k Radio wrote:The big 40k rumor is: This summer GW will release 7th edition 40k , and 9th edition Fantasy has been shelved, for now.
(...)
All right before all of you blow us up step back and take a deep breath. This is from the source that have us pictures of the Space Marines and the Codex a month early. Also gave us pics of the Dark Elves which we described accurately a month early. Also gave us the info on the Sentinels of Terra. He also let us know that Nids were in January NOT December like so many other rumors sites predicted. So yeah he has been very accurate with the info he has given us. They way it was explained to us is that 7th Edition will be made to include the new Escalation and Stronghold rules. I would also not be surprised to see the Dataslates added to the main rule book.
Yes this is a rumor at this stage so take it with a grain of salt. But then again everything out source has said has come true. Only time will tell. Have a Merry Christmas with your families and don't let this put a knot in your undies.
anymous source on faeit212 wrote:40k 7th edition and the new starter kit Beachhead Stygia. It is small kit, with only five scouts, five blood angels, a commander with jump pack, five meganobs, 10 armoured ork shootas including a nob with two-handed axe and 10 gretchins. There are some destroyed columns, destroyed gothic stone walls and a three-piece stone bridge carried by gargoyles. It has a 96 page book, but only about the half is used for rules including three scenarios. Expert rules like all vehicle-related stuff are omitted completely. There are a handful of dice, a ruler, but no blast markers.
At the same time, there will be a new starter painting kit with 10 snapfit miniatures that will bring the tactical marines from the starter box to a full squad size and gives the ork player 5 additional boyz. It has a 48 page booklet with additional scenarios and hobby guides, brushes, basing sand and glue.
Hmm, if the Blood Angels scouts and Assault marines are iconography over them I have a BA playing mate who will be very happy. I'd be after multiple boxes just for MANz.
Although I will definitely pick up that starter if the Orks are DV quality, I don't think I'll be rushing into buying any new edition of the rulebook since my purchase of the LE was only two years ago...
Accolade wrote: Since it was in the other thread, I figure I'll ask here too: has anyone visited any GW stores to confirm they have stopped selling the rulebook?
Can't confirm in store (its Monday, GWUK stores don't usually do Mondays) but the "Availability" line is missing from the GWUK site.
hotsauceman1 wrote: I believe it is coming, it just isnt going to fix the game like everyone thinks
I'm in general agreement with this. I think some issues in the game will be addressed, but it'll probably be narrative-focused like 6th, and not the tight, tourney-ready ruleset that some clamor for. And I'd be fine with that. I've completely come to terms with 6th edition's general approach.
I have it on good authority that a 6.5 is coming this summer. Weather it be may or not I can't say but it will still be 6th edition, maybe very very minor tweaks but nothing more then making things all inclusive in one book. A new starter set is very probable with the rumors of irks and blood angels making sense since both are needing updates BUT their is a 50/50 shot the starter box will not have a small rulebook. It may only contain quick start rules for very basic play.
The only reason I have actually bought into all of this is it makes sense with what games workshop has been doing. Odds say with a new book that is just all inclusive with all of the supplements they will either repack the starter to not include a book or they will make a new starter. Why wouldn't they make a new starter to boost sales of 2 probable upcoming releases. Dark vengeance has run its course and for current players all of us who are going to buy the starter have, for new players it doesn't matter. So why not make a new starter for those of us currently in the hobby to buy 3-4 of like many of us do. It just seems common sense to me or we could be all way off.
9th ed for fantasy is ready and I wouldn't be suprised to see it drop this fall. I'd say Oct for the Christmas season
Accolade wrote: Since it was in the other thread, I figure I'll ask here too: has anyone visited any GW stores to confirm they have stopped selling the rulebook?
Can't confirm in store (its Monday, GWUK stores don't usually do Mondays) but the "Availability" line is missing from the GWUK site.
Oh right, it's Monday, most GW stores are closed...
I think the fact that 7th most likely won't be a rules tune-up makes me feel that its even MORE of a cashgrab.
Honestly, what purpose could it serve if it's not tightening the rule set up? Do we need a couple new pages of USRs?
EDIT: like a couple others have said I guess it could just be 6.5. I'm not excited that Escalation will become truly integral to the core rules if that is the case though.
while in theory I'd welcome a 7th edition (as 6th is a gigantic mess), unless it's a major reboot, I don't think it's going to do what anyone really wants it to. Half of what needs fixing won't get fixed, half of what gets fixed will get fixed badly, and half of what didn't need changing will get borked.
The rule book will be $80, full color hardback. It will contain tons of pictures of all the minatures, explain the lore and the fluff, and demonstrate several kinds of special scenarios.
As for rules, it will be 1 page explaining a D6, and then 60 blank pages for you to write your own rules for the game so you can forge your own narrative with an ultimate freedom like never before.
Goresaw wrote: As for rules, it will be 1 page explaining a D6, and then 60 blank pages for you to write your own rules for the game so you can forge your own narrative with an ultimate freedom like never before.
I think, a new edition after less than 2 years would be suicidal to 40k and showing, how desperate GW is.
I have absolutely no confidence that a new edition would fix any of the current problems, as the same team of authors has just created those problems, e.g. pushing Apocalypse units down everyone's throat in normal games.
I think there's too many unknowns to say if it will be 'suicidal' yet. If it is really 6.5 with everything put together, I don't think it will be a big deal. If it fixes/faqs issues and makes things more cohesive, I think it will be well received.
If it is a whole new edition, it probably won't go well. Unless, of course, it is that crazy salty 40k/fantasy combo edition and then who knows.
namiel wrote: I have it on good authority that a 6.5 is coming this summer. Weather it be may or not I can't say but it will still be 6th edition, maybe very very minor tweaks but nothing more then making things all inclusive in one book. A new starter set is very probable with the rumors of irks and blood angels making sense since both are needing updates BUT their is a 50/50 shot the starter box will not have a small rulebook. It may only contain quick start rules for very basic play.
The only reason I have actually bought into all of this is it makes sense with what games workshop has been doing. Odds say with a new book that is just all inclusive with all of the supplements they will either repack the starter to not include a book or they will make a new starter. Why wouldn't they make a new starter to boost sales of 2 probable upcoming releases. Dark vengeance has run its course and for current players all of us who are going to buy the starter have, for new players it doesn't matter. So why not make a new starter for those of us currently in the hobby to buy 3-4 of like many of us do. It just seems common sense to me or we could be all way off.
9th ed for fantasy is ready and I wouldn't be suprised to see it drop this fall. I'd say Oct for the Christmas season
I believe this. It isn't 7th edition, it's 6.5. It will just be a more inclusive RB with all the expansions included with some FAQ updates and maybe some data slates. It won't be a new edition.
Mr Morden wrote: If its true thats a very dismal starter set in terms of the contents....not even a blast marker and full rules - very poor
I think GW has realized they could extract more money from customers if they don't sell full rules in the starter box. After all, it's just a starter! Right? Guys?
Hmm, don't like the sound of this unless it's just minor tweaks, and I certainly won't be buying the big rulebook this time. I don't need to pay £45 for a bunch of recycled fluff and some rules changes with, with any luck, will fit on a side of A4 paper.
On the other hand, cheap BA assault marines, especially if they're on par with the DVDA sculpts, will certainly be enough to get my woefully undermanned Blood Angels back into some sort of usable state.
I can confirm that they have been taken of the shelves and no longer sell in store in the UK as I was in this afternoon as was told about this as I am a regular and that we are told to look to the white dwarf to tell us more in the up coming weeks.
Young_Logan wrote: I can confirm that they have been taken of the shelves and no longer sell in store in the UK as I was in this afternoon as was told about this as I am a regular and that we are told to look to the white dwarf to tell us more in the up coming weeks.
Blimey! Which is you local store that opens on a Monday? They're rare animals!
Young_Logan wrote: Southampton, they're closed on tuesdays and wednesdays here. Although I wish they were closed mondays and open wednesdays but what can you do.
Yeah, ours is closed Sun/Mon and opens late and closes early cause the manager has to catch trains from 50 miles away.
One man stores FTW!
Still, nice to have some sort of in-store correlation with the rumour and the webstore.
I really hope they include a mini-rulebook in the new "starter" that would be the biggest reason for me to buy the thing, considering I don't play BA or Ork.
Frankly, I don't think we'll be seeing any rules "tweaks", per say. What we'll see is the Escalation/dataslate/formation expansion stuff get rolled into the main book, and the "rules tweaks" will be them explaining that this is all apart of standard 40K and this is how it works. And that's it.
Games Workshop realizing that their game is broken on a fundamental level and taking a proactive measure to fix it would be displaying a level of competence that I have yet to see from them since I jumped into the game mid-5th edition.
Accolade wrote: Does GW notify FLGS of these product changes?
No.
Just 'product not available', which could mean a redo, a new launch, an availability issue or the item becoming direct only.
Lovely.
Ralis wrote:I really hope they include a mini-rulebook in the new "starter" that would be the biggest reason for me to buy the thing, considering I don't play BA or Ork.
Assuming that rumor is true after all.
I have a feeling personally that the new starter set will only provide a dumbed-down version of the rules. This will force people to pay an additional ~$75 for the large rulebook.
If this does come to pass, I wonder how it will affect starter set sales in the future...
Interesting. I hope it lands soon. I finally decide to give Warhammer 40K a try and I land in the middle of rules limbo. I would love a BA vs Orks starter. I kind of want an Ork army and I have 3rd ed Space Hulk so I already have some Blood Angel Terminators. I guess we will see soon.
The removal of the core rulebook from On-line is a kind of interesting development. Certainly makes this look more true.
Thanks,
Duncan
Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote: More likely they plan on releasing a mini rulebook as a stand alone product this time, after the limited one they did for 6th.
That wasn't a mini-rulebook though. That was a rules-only copy of the hardcover.
Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote: More likely they plan on releasing a mini rulebook as a stand alone product this time, after the limited one they did for 6th.
That wasn't a mini-rulebook though. That was a rules-only copy of the hardcover.
I'm going to laugh and maybe cry a little on the inside if the new ork codex (if it is indeed next) needs a day 1 FAQ/errata because it was written with the 6th edition rules. Also if this is true orks will be 3 editions behind
Personally I think all they're going to do is fold in the current FAQ/Errata into the rules along with escalation etc.
It's not going to be a new ruleset, just combining the rules we already have.
As a business perspective, flipping every two years is enough time for someone to start with an ally detachment then move into a full army after they can't be taken as allies. Then 8th ed comes and allies are back in.
Anpu42 wrote: I have heard so many diffrent things about this, so I am taking everything with a HUGE Grain of Salt.
Keep in mind that the current rule books is "No Longer Available" on GW's site.
That's a pretty solid indication imo.
Or they ran out of stock and are reprinting. NLA on the site has traditionally been seen as a 'OMG CONFIRMED' indicator and hasn't been in a lot of cases.
As a business perspective, flipping every two years is enough time for someone to start with an ally detachment then move into a full army after they can't be taken as allies. Then 8th ed comes and allies are back in.
The rage would be legendary if GW did this. Not saying it isn't possible, but oh my god, the anger that would develop if GW did the ol' switcheroo on allies would be tangible. It certainly would make me do a gut check to see if I wanted to keep playing GW's shell game.
As a business perspective, flipping every two years is enough time for someone to start with an ally detachment then move into a full army after they can't be taken as allies. Then 8th ed comes and allies are back in.
The rage would be legendary if GW did this. Not saying it isn't possible, but oh my god, the anger that would develop if GW did the ol' switcheroo on allies would be tangible. It certainly would make me do a gut check to see if I wanted to keep playing GW's shell game.
Hasn't it happened before? I'm pretty sure there was an edition (before my time) that had allies then removed them.
This will probably be the deciding edition for me. If the rules dont change and its just a big old rule book with everything rolled in then I'll probably just carry on playing 6th edition with my mates.
If they do change it and the mini rule book has all the rules then great, I'll grab a starter set.....anything else and its Flames of War for me.
I don't see them removing allies. It's too much of a cash cow for GW. Right now it's a sure thing that people will go out and buy space marines to compliment their Tau. If allies were removed, those people might go out and buy more Space Marines, to make it a full legal army. Or... they'll just put their Space Marines on the shelf.
Allies are guaranteed money; removing allies is a gamble.
7th?OK not bad not great.No full rules in starter set?FETH GAMESWORKSHOP MAY THEY ALL DIE IN TERRIBLE PAIN!THIS IS SQUIGAK.....at least its from natfka...and therefore its unlikely to be true...thank mork and gork for that...and meganobz...(looks at how much the Rulebook will cost(60 euro OR MORE)DAMN THEIR SOULS!...I don't know whether to be angry or...
So wait, they purposefully break a game's balance completely just to release a new edition soon afterwards in order to raise sales and then be praised by a few sheep for "saving" 40k?
pretre wrote: I think there's too many unknowns to say if it will be 'suicidal' yet. If it is really 6.5 with everything put together, I don't think it will be a big deal. If it fixes/faqs issues and makes things more cohesive, I think it will be well received.
If it is a whole new edition, it probably won't go well. Unless, of course, it is that crazy salty 40k/fantasy combo edition and then who knows.
True, but it wouldn't be a Kroothawk post without a "sky is falling, GW is DOOMED" comment.
The release dates are what is truly interesting. To be available in your FLGS, the orders will have to be placed before the official release date and pre-orders are a week before the release date and the release date is before the end of May. So all of those numbers are listed as sales. Those would be recorded right before the end of the fiscal year for GW and would be included on their finacial reports.
This makes the probability all the more likely.
I would expect it to be more than just 6.5. They need to change enough rules to force everyone to buy a new rule book to get that big boost in sales before the fiscal deadline.
Sigvatr wrote: So wait, they purposefully break a game's balance completely just to release a new edition soon afterwards in order to raise sales and then be praised by a few sheep for "saving" 40k?
I'm not sure if that's genius or downright evil.
I feel the same way Sigvatr.
I just can't see how any release of a new core rulebook after the previous book only had a two-year lifespan is a good thing.
Either they attempted to rebalance the books significantly, which makes me question why they couldn't have planned better in future release...
Or they're just mixing up the rules for the sake of mixing them up, in which case the two-year cycle is even MORE of an insult...
Or they're making all of the expansions core to the main rules, in which case you have to either (a) buy the new rulebook to get these rules, or (b) buy the expansions if you hadn't already (which would probably be as expensive as buying a whole new rulebook).
Anpu42 wrote: I have heard so many diffrent things about this, so I am taking everything with a HUGE Grain of Salt.
Keep in mind that the current rule books is "No Longer Available" on GW's site.
That's a pretty solid indication imo.
Or they ran out of stock and are reprinting. NLA on the site has traditionally been seen as a 'OMG CONFIRMED' indicator and hasn't been in a lot of cases.
They ran out of stock printed in other languages at the same time?
Frankly I like Allies, it keeps the meta fresh and enables folks on the long side of codex update to pick something recent and 'more powerful' to give them a boost.
I don't like certain ally combinations and the unbalance in who gets more or less choices (and think that 'Battle Brothers' should just be removed).
I would welcome a 6.5/7th ed, if I were to guess I'd suggest a ruleset that includes the basics of fortification and escalation rules and provides new rules for D weapons. Lots of rules and things are scattered about in 6th atm, would be handy to see a tidying up and perhaps some serious fine-tuning on the rules themselves (some form of boost to walkers, +1HP on all vehicles etc) to give back some fluidity on play.
Re the title of this thread, I'm in love with the idea of the 40k rulebook being produced in Old English...
Kroothawk wrote: I think, a new edition after less than 2 years would be suicidal to 40k and showing, how desperate GW is.
I have absolutely no confidence that a new edition would fix any of the current problems, as the same team of authors has just created those problems, e.g. pushing Apocalypse units down everyone's throat in normal games.
GW's odd number editions tend to be the popular ones, so it's completely possible that it turns out well.
Mostly just pointing that out to make you say more stuff about how everything is doomed.
I was wondering when they were going to re-call all the poorly written 6th Ed. books and give everyone a complimentary replacement 7th edition book
This should be a reason to take action against GW. Is it illegal to rent a dump truck and block the entrance to corporate office with rulebooks with colourful language?
I can't wait. The book will be sold in a newer higher quality leather bound books at only 8 times the current price. It'll consist mostly of a large pull out measuring about 9 feet long. On one side it will have the compressed FOC and the other the allies matrix to help streamline things.
In all seriousness, it'll only contain updates to buildings, how super heavies and D weapons work, and a new FOC and matrix. That's what I have my money on.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: So, GW made it so that I needed a computer or an e-reader to get my English-only rules. So now, I am going to take advantage of the wide availability of English computer documents containing GW rules for this new edition. Understand that as you will.
Group buy iDexes. You can find places that have iTunes cards for up to 50% off, buy a bunch with friends and share the files, you all have partial ownership, and any copy is for reference. Or have multiple iPads run off one computer. Bam. Get around GWs gouge tactics, they bring this upon themselves.
Anpu42 wrote: I have heard so many diffrent things about this, so I am taking everything with a HUGE Grain of Salt.
Keep in mind that the current rule books is "No Longer Available" on GW's site.
That's a pretty solid indication imo.
Or they ran out of stock and are reprinting. NLA on the site has traditionally been seen as a 'OMG CONFIRMED' indicator and hasn't been in a lot of cases.
No, GW lists that as "Temporarily out of stock" and gives you the ability to sign up for an email notification when it's in stock again.
I was wondering when they were going to re-call all the poorly written 6th Ed. books and give everyone a complimentary replacement 7th edition book
This should be a reason to take action against GW. Is it illegal to rent a dump truck and block the entrance to corporate office with rulebooks with colourful language?
In the US it depends on if you have a permit to protest, but you'd probably have to block the parking lot, not the building itself as to not be considered a "fire hazard".
Anpu42 wrote: I have heard so many diffrent things about this, so I am taking everything with a HUGE Grain of Salt.
Keep in mind that the current rule books is "No Longer Available" on GW's site.
That's a pretty solid indication imo.
Or they ran out of stock and are reprinting. NLA on the site has traditionally been seen as a 'OMG CONFIRMED' indicator and hasn't been in a lot of cases.
No, GW lists that as "Temporarily out of stock" and gives you the ability to sign up for an email notification when it's in stock again.
For comparison I've attached a screencap.
Not to go too far OFT, ClockworkZion, but does that mean the Primaris Psyker is no longer available and will not be returning for sale?
Assuming they're not just "updating" 6th edition and re-releasing it with all the appropiate erratas and slapping the codex expansions in their and maybe tweaking things a little, agreed. A revised rulebook would be reason enough to pull the old one after all.
Anpu42 wrote: I have heard so many diffrent things about this, so I am taking everything with a HUGE Grain of Salt.
Keep in mind that the current rule books is "No Longer Available" on GW's site.
That's a pretty solid indication imo.
Or they ran out of stock and are reprinting. NLA on the site has traditionally been seen as a 'OMG CONFIRMED' indicator and hasn't been in a lot of cases.
No, GW lists that as "Temporarily out of stock" and gives you the ability to sign up for an email notification when it's in stock again.
For comparison I've attached a screencap.
Not to go too far OFT, ClockworkZion, but does that mean the Primaris Psyker is no longer available and will not be returning for sale?
From what customer service told me: yes. If it's "No Longer Available" it is gone. I'm hoping we'll just get a Finecast or plastic replacement soon to make up for the loss of the old metal one.
Assuming they're not just "updating" 6th edition and re-releasing it with all the appropiate erratas and slapping the codex expansions in their and maybe tweaking things a little, agreed. A revised rulebook would be reason enough to pull the old one after all.
...
If the changes are extensive enough to require players to buy a new book, it's a new edition.
Assuming they're not just "updating" 6th edition and re-releasing it with all the appropiate erratas and slapping the codex expansions in their and maybe tweaking things a little, agreed. A revised rulebook would be reason enough to pull the old one after all.
Anpu42 wrote: I have heard so many diffrent things about this, so I am taking everything with a HUGE Grain of Salt.
Keep in mind that the current rule books is "No Longer Available" on GW's site.
That's a pretty solid indication imo.
Or they ran out of stock and are reprinting. NLA on the site has traditionally been seen as a 'OMG CONFIRMED' indicator and hasn't been in a lot of cases.
No, GW lists that as "Temporarily out of stock" and gives you the ability to sign up for an email notification when it's in stock again.
For comparison I've attached a screencap.
Not to go too far OFT, ClockworkZion, but does that mean the Primaris Psyker is no longer available and will not be returning for sale?
From what customer service told me: yes. If it's "No Longer Available" it is gone. I'm hoping we'll just get a Finecast or plastic replacement soon to make up for the loss of the old metal one.
I just can't fanthom how GW can be so supply-limited on models for a codex that just came out!
Assuming they're not just "updating" 6th edition and re-releasing it with all the appropiate erratas and slapping the codex expansions in their and maybe tweaking things a little, agreed. A revised rulebook would be reason enough to pull the old one after all.
...
If the changes are extensive enough to require players to buy a new book, it's a new edition.
If there isn't a cheap book available, well...
It all depends on what they do. If they give us a full errata that covers all the changes at the same time then we're good. If they don't then it's a "new edition".
Also it will be very bad if there is a new starter box that does not contain the full rules.
them offering a hardcover "rules only" book is a very GW thing to do. Getting a quick start guide to playing so that you can still have the idea of a game in a box is what gw wants new customers to buy. It gets them into the hobby at what I consider reasonable, $99(assuming it has the rules, which it wont). After that they drop the big bomb saying now you want to play the real game you have to drop another $70 after someone is already invested(which is bogus). The reason gw can do this is because of their retail sales style. No other company has retail stores(that I know of) and not only do they not have stores but gw places stores where they get a large amount of foot traffic. They want people to see the store, come in try a demo, and buy the starter. No other company offers that. Sure their are game stores out there but your FLGS generally doesn't have such set ups. If people interested in miniatures games were interested before they saw a gw they would end up at the "out of the way" FLGS but that's not the market GW is trying to grab.
A new book that is 6.5 that brings all of the supplements together, with a minor price hike, is what makes the most sense. Since most of the current players already spent the money on the supplements that cash cow is dead. How to create a new one? New starter set for new books coming out (blood angels and orks) and no longer offering rules inside the starter box forcing all players to spend the extra money on the real rule book. Also not allowing play in the stores without using a new ruleset. Gw doesn't allow old books to be used in their stores thus anyone who games at GW stores now has to buy the book as well.
Breaking news guys! The information for the 7th Ed. book has been released!
Spoiler:
''The Warhammer 40,000 Rulebook is your essential guide to playing atmospheric battles in the 41st Millennium. It helps you field majestic armies of Citadel miniatures across the war-ravaged battlefields of the far-future, in the ultimate contest of strategy and skill.
With 440 full-colour pages with blank spaces to forge your own narrative, this hardback Rulebook is packed with absolutely no complex background to keep the younger and the mentally challenged happy and contains none of the rules for fighting pulse-pounding tabletop battles that you would expect. Instead we have given players the freedom to forge narrative rules to help them squeeze the cheese of victory from between the salty teats of Slaanesh! The Rulebook includes exciting features such as being soft and chewable, big pictures with minimal text and even more plastic porn. As well as jaw-dropping artwork produced by our trained monkeys smearing feces on paper, contained within is a basic history of the 41st Millennium and a richly detailed guide to the races and weapons of the far-future. It also features a comprehensive hobby section which is set out like a catalogue to set you on the path to choosing, paying extortionate amounts and building your own Pokédex of Warhammer 40,000 Citadel miniatures.''
One apple ID can support up to 10 devices, so 9 of your buddies and yourself can all have a full interactive codex for less then $6 each (more so with cheap iTunes cards).
Also if GW screws up and falsely advertises it like they did with the army builder feature for marines, you can get the book for free.
Breaking news guys! The information for the 7th Ed. book has been released!
Spoiler:
''The Warhammer 40,000 Rulebook is your essential guide to playing atmospheric battles in the 41st Millennium. It helps you field majestic armies of Citadel miniatures across the war-ravaged battlefields of the far-future, in the ultimate contest of strategy and skill.
With 440 full-colour pages with blank spaces to forge your own narrative, this hardback Rulebook is packed with absolutely no complex background to keep the younger and the mentally challenged happy and contains none of the rules for fighting pulse-pounding tabletop battles that you would expect. Instead we have given players the freedom to forge narrative rules to help them squeeze the cheese of victory from between the salty teats of Slaanesh! The Rulebook includes exciting features such as being soft and chewable, big pictures with minimal text and even more plastic porn. As well as jaw-dropping artwork produced by our trained monkeys smearing feces on paper, contained within is a basic history of the 41st Millennium and a richly detailed guide to the races and weapons of the far-future. It also features a comprehensive hobby section which is set out like a catalogue to set you on the path to choosing, paying extortionate amounts and building your own Pokédex of Warhammer 40,000 Citadel miniatures.''
Breaking news guys! The information for the 7th Ed. book has been released!
Spoiler:
''The Warhammer 40,000 Rulebook is your essential guide to playing atmospheric battles in the 41st Millennium. It helps you field majestic armies of Citadel miniatures across the war-ravaged battlefields of the far-future, in the ultimate contest of strategy and skill.
With 440 full-colour pages with blank spaces to forge your own narrative, this hardback Rulebook is packed with absolutely no complex background to keep the younger and the mentally challenged happy and contains none of the rules for fighting pulse-pounding tabletop battles that you would expect. Instead we have given players the freedom to forge narrative rules to help them squeeze the cheese of victory from between the salty teats of Slaanesh! The Rulebook includes exciting features such as being soft and chewable, big pictures with minimal text and even more plastic porn. As well as jaw-dropping artwork produced by our trained monkeys smearing feces on paper, contained within is a basic history of the 41st Millennium and a richly detailed guide to the races and weapons of the far-future. It also features a comprehensive hobby section which is set out like a catalogue to set you on the path to choosing, paying extortionate amounts and building your own Pokédex of Warhammer 40,000 Citadel miniatures.''
1/10. They'd never use "Pokedex" or "cheese".
Ah, that would explain why I was turned down by the Black Library
It's listed, but I can't see an option to add to cart. As much as I hate to say it, this appears to be happening. There's no way it's the overhaul people are looking for, they haven't even finished the codex updates yet. Fairly sure we're looking at the 6th ed book with the escalation and stronghold assault rules thrown in. Call it 7th edition so people will click on your rumour blog!
Accolade wrote: Yeah, I'm pretty sure Tom Kirby is cited as having called Pokemon a passing fad.
You remember correctly, it was in one of the recent financial reports. Something like "who remembers Pokemon or roleplaying or any of those silly fads". This is especially hilarious because this was published not long after the latest Pokemon video game made more money in 24 hours than GW makes in an entire year.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bull0 wrote: Call it 7th edition so people will click on your rumour blog!
No, call it 7th edition so everyone who bought the 6th edition rulebook has to pay another $75 for the 7th edition rulebook. This is reinforced by the starter set rulebook no longer containing the complete rules, so you can't just ebay a cheap copy of it instead of paying for the expensive hardcover version. I'm sure we can also expect to see some random changes thrown in just to be sure that the game is no longer compatible with 6th edition.
I've tried to distilled the 40k specific rules from that giant chat log:
Spoiler:
Movement: Run: D6 or 2D6 for Flying Monstrous Creatures that are Swooping.
Consolidations: 2D6 pick one, but you only consolidate on your turn. You can charge with your consolidation move. Opponent can overwatch. You only get to fight once per turn, so if you consolidate into a new combat you don’t get to fight, unless your fist combat didn’t fight (opponent flees).
Retreats: 6 + D6 Charge: 2D6, not affected by difficult terrain.
Move through Difficult: 2D6 pick one.
Charge through Difficult: 2D6 (The same, but -2 iniative).
Reserves: Coming in from Reserves: If there is no enemy in 24” of a particular table edge, units from reserve that use this edge to enter the table can march an additional 12”
Flyers have the “Patient Hunter” special rule which means they can choose to stay in ongoing reserves.
Assault: Flee: You can chose to immediately lose combat after Hammer of Wrath, before any blows are struck. Iniative roll off as if you had lost combat. If you win, you do a normal Retreat. It happens before pile-ins.
Overwatch: Must win or tie an iniative roll off to overwatch. Cannot overwatch if Gone to Ground or Pinned.
Charge through Cover: -2 to initiative unless assault grenades or unit being assaulted has Gone to Ground or been Pinned.
Initiative: All models strike at their common Initiative unless they are in a Challenge, or are using Unwieldy weapons like power fists. If a unit has 3 Power Fists, and 2 Chainswords they all strike at Initiative 1.
Hammer of Wrath: Counts as part of combat resolution.
Assaulting Vehicles and Buildings: If the vehicle doesn’t have a WS (walker), then you Sweep Attack them rather than Assault them.
Psychic Powers: Most happen at the end of the movement phase rather than the start. You have to roll for Warp charges like fantasy (complexity 4?)
Psychic powers do not require line of sight.
Unit Types: Jump Infantry: Can use jump packs in all phases. If In difficult, and you use Jump pack, must take dangerous terrain test. Jump Packs in assault give HOW but not Rerolls.
Chariots: can Sweep Attack
Bikes: can Sweep Attack
Vehicles: D6 S6 Hammer of Wrath and have Sweep Attack which seems to replace Tank Shock. Walkers do D6 S:Unit Hammer of Wrath. “Death or Glory” against vehicle sweep attacks mean all models in unit Snapshoot at rear armor, or all models within 3” do CC attacks against rear armor. Must take fear test or WS:1. If they fail to stop the vehicle, then they take 2D6 S6 Hammer of Wrath. Only get cover saves against other vehicles.
Light Walkers: Only do 1 Hammer of Wrath. I’m thinking Killa Kans, Scout Sentinal, War Walkers.
Swarms: Take D3 wounds to Template weapons (flamers).
Special Rules: Fleet add an extra D6, and can discard a D6 in all random moves. No Rerolls.
Move through cover, and you ignore the effects of Difficult Terrain (6” move, no iniative penalty for assault), but not Dangerous.
Shrouded: -2 to BS Stealth: +1 to Cover
Fearless: Cannot chose to Flee
Preferred Enemy: +1 to hit for both Melee and Shooting.
Bulky: gives Hammer of Wrath.
Hit and Run: Gives Sweep Attack, cannot leave combat.
Sweep Attack: Close combat attack in the movement phase can only hit ground targets, and can be hit back. Pause during movement, cannot be within 1”. Any model within 3” can attack, and then finish movement. No Pile-ins allowed. Can be part of a Run Move. You can still shoot after a Sweep Attack. Does include Hammer of Wrath.
Vector Strike: D6 S:Unit AP:- auto hits. Hits Rear Armor. Swooping must pass within 3” of model being vector strike (no longer have to pass over). Does not count as shooting a weapon. All hits are precision hits.
Look Out Sir: On a 2+ the next closest model takes the wounds. Only 1 Look Out Sir roll for all allocated wounds. Look Out Sir is available to all models with special weapons.
Regeneration: 4+ to recover a wound. Grants Feel No Pain.
Other Rules: Snapshooting: -3 BS.
High BS: No Rerolls for BS > 6. 1 always misses, 6 always hits.
FOC: HQ: 0-25%, must have 1 warlord
Elite: 0-25%
Troops: 20-75%
Fast Attack: 0-25%
Heavy Support: 0-25%
Secondary Detachments: 0-25%, it includes Allies, Fortifications, Formations, Lords of War and can also include units from your primary codex. You can have 3, but must pick one after rolling for game, deployment and first turn. The player who wins first turn must select first. See example below.
Allies: Allies are part of the Secondary Detachment, but count in Primary FOC. They do not have a troop or HQ limit, and you must have only 1 ally per Secondary detachment, but you can take formations from other allies.
Fortifications: Fortifications are part of the Secondary Detachment.
Formations: Formations are part of the Secondary Detachment, and don’t count in the Primary FOC.
Lords of War: If one player brings a Lord of war and the other player does not, the first player must declare his Secondary Detachment first, and the opponent has a chance to bring fourth Secondary Detachment. Any Heavy Support in this special Secondary Detachment do not count against the Heavy Support Limit.
Accolade wrote: Yeah, I'm pretty sure Tom Kirby is cited as having called Pokemon a passing fad.
You remember correctly, it was in one of the recent financial reports. Something like "who remembers Pokemon or roleplaying or any of those silly fads". This is especially hilarious because this was published not long after the latest Pokemon video game made more money in 24 hours than GW makes in an entire year.
Man, what is this dude smoking?
Dungeons & Dragons is a fantasy tabletop role-playing game (RPG) originally designed by Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson, and first published in 1974 by Tactical Studies Rules, Inc. (TSR).
---
Founded in 1975 at 15 Bolingbroke Road, London, by John Peake, Ian Livingstone, and Steve Jackson (not to be confused with US citizen Steve Jackson, also a games designer), Games Workshop was originally a manufacturer of wooden boards for games such as backgammon, mancala, Nine Men's Morris, and Go which later became an importer of the U.S. role-playing game Dungeons & Dragons, and then a publisher of wargames and role-playing games in its own right, expanding from a bedroom mail-order company in the process.
Warhammer has been periodically updated and re-released since first appearing in 1983.
Warhammer 40,000, a futuristic companion to Warhammer Fantasy Battle, was released in 1987.
Seriously. D&D was almost 10 years old by the time they released WHFB.
Accolade wrote: Yeah, I'm pretty sure Tom Kirby is cited as having called Pokemon a passing fad.
You remember correctly, it was in one of the recent financial reports. Something like "who remembers Pokemon or roleplaying or any of those silly fads". This is especially hilarious because this was published not long after the latest Pokemon video game made more money in 24 hours than GW makes in an entire year.
Man, what is this dude smoking?
Dungeons & Dragons is a fantasy tabletop role-playing game (RPG) originally designed by Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson, and first published in 1974 by Tactical Studies Rules, Inc. (TSR).
---
Founded in 1975 at 15 Bolingbroke Road, London, by John Peake, Ian Livingstone, and Steve Jackson (not to be confused with US citizen Steve Jackson, also a games designer), Games Workshop was originally a manufacturer of wooden boards for games such as backgammon, mancala, Nine Men's Morris, and Go which later became an importer of the U.S. role-playing game Dungeons & Dragons, and then a publisher of wargames and role-playing games in its own right, expanding from a bedroom mail-order company in the process.
Warhammer has been periodically updated and re-released since first appearing in 1983.
Warhammer 40,000, a futuristic companion to Warhammer Fantasy Battle, was released in 1987.
Seriously. D&D was almost 10 years old by the time they released WHFB.
Kirby isn't a gamer from what I can tell. Which explains a lot actually.
If they make Overwatch hinge on a Initative check, They might as well take it out of the game. the Armies that rely on Overwatch to stay out of assault have low init... Or don't care about assault in the first place.
Accolade wrote: Yeah, I'm pretty sure Tom Kirby is cited as having called Pokemon a passing fad.
You remember correctly, it was in one of the recent financial reports. Something like "who remembers Pokemon or roleplaying or any of those silly fads". This is especially hilarious because this was published not long after the latest Pokemon video game made more money in 24 hours than GW makes in an entire year.
Man, what is this dude smoking?
Tom Kirby seems like a come-to-real life version of Gordon Gecko, or at least "That Guy" from Futurama
Steve Castle: Listen, big guy, now that you're my protégé, it's time I cut you in on the secret to success. Any guesses? Fry: Uh, work really, really hard? Steve Castle: No. Fry: Oh, thank God! Steve Castle: It's all about appearances. That's why it's time to update our company's stodgy image and give it the sleek, dazzling veneer of the 1980's!
And yes, I do mean the 1980s. The internet is just as much of a fad as this Pokemon business!
If they make Overwatch hinge on a Initative check, They might as well take it out of the game. the Armies that rely on Overwatch to stay out of assault have low init... Or don't care about assault in the first place.
Unless they go at full BS, then it's a pretty decent trade.
Hollismason wrote: It makes more sense for them to do a 6th edition revised then 2 years later release 7th that way every two years they update the rules and sell more.
But they aren't calling it 6th revised, its being called 7th so they can charge you again. Its essentially a recall that you have to pay for because they changed the name. Its a no win situation, the only way this benefits the players is if it is a better game that will actually want to play, and considering GWs behaviour and attitude the last 2 years its not looking like a great possibility.
If its a new edition then they are willing to dump editions 2 years in, if the edition is good then its essentially a recall they will never admit to and know they can get away that sort of business practice, hell the goobs will praise them from Dorne to the wall. If the edition is bad then it means its nothing more then another lazily done desperate gouge attempt to keep padding their numbers by any means necessary and points to serious problems.
If its truly 6th revised then its just a new rulebook that you aren't forced to purchase. Everything is fine. Any changes would be put up in an FAQ free of charge and everyone with the digital copies get an update. Everyone is happy. This is the least likely of scenarios.
If they make Overwatch hinge on a Initative check, They might as well take it out of the game. the Armies that rely on Overwatch to stay out of assault have low init... Or don't care about assault in the first place.
Unless they go at full BS, then it's a pretty decent trade.
now picture dark elder with poisoned shooting overwatching at full BS.......
Hollismason wrote: It makes more sense for them to do a 6th edition revised then 2 years later release 7th that way every two years they update the rules and sell more.
But they aren't calling it 6th revised, its being called 7th so they can charge you again.
GW isn't calling it anything yet. We're calling it 7th.
If they make Overwatch hinge on a Initative check, They might as well take it out of the game. the Armies that rely on Overwatch to stay out of assault have low init... Or don't care about assault in the first place.
Unless they go at full BS, then it's a pretty decent trade.
now picture dark elder with poisoned shooting overwatching at full BS.......
tag8833 wrote: Only get cover saves against other vehicles.
This is just so unbelievably stupid that I can't consider those rumors anything more than bad trolling. Even GW couldn't think that this is a good idea.
Look Out Sir: On a 2+ the next closest model takes the wounds. Only 1 Look Out Sir roll for all allocated wounds. Look Out Sir is available to all models with special weapons.
So, you know that wound allocation system and precision shot rule we invented in 6th? Well, just remove them from the book. But only on a 2+, so you still have to learn how the rules work and roll some dice. Dice are very Narrative™.
High BS: No Rerolls for BS > 6. 1 always misses, 6 always hits.
So, you know those characters that have BS 6+? Well, that's just for Narrative™ purposes, so you know how awesome your character is.
FOC: HQ: 0-25%, must have 1 warlord
Elite: 0-25%
Troops: 20-75%
Fast Attack: 0-25%
Heavy Support: 0-25%
Oh good, let's encourage MSU spam and ban using multiple tanks below 2000 points. Oh, and we'd better take all that Escalation nonsense back out of the game.
Lords of War: If one player brings a Lord of war and the other player does not, the first player must declare his Secondary Detachment first, and the opponent has a chance to bring fourth Secondary Detachment.
This doesn't even make any sense. Show up to a game with three alternate detachments, but if you're a psychic and know that your opponent will bring a LoW you can show up with four?
If they make Overwatch hinge on a Initative check, They might as well take it out of the game. the Armies that rely on Overwatch to stay out of assault have low init... Or don't care about assault in the first place.
Unless they go at full BS, then it's a pretty decent trade.
now picture dark elder with poisoned shooting overwatching at full BS.......
I won't argue that Assault doesn't needs some love... But I think you can get that with other changes. such as removing random charge distance. and being able to consolidate into another combat. Any changes to Overwatch will either make it more broken, or make it a non-factor.
I think the stock of 6th rulebooks has run out and that GW deliberately allowed this to happen so they could make a second print run with included FAQ's, Stronghold Assault, Escalation, etc.
I think the core rules will be mostly unchanged with exception to the applied FAQ's, but because of the impending inclusion of super heavies, additional fortifications and possibly formations that all of this is enough of a change to call it 7th edition.
Ralis wrote: If they make Overwatch hinge on a Initative check, They might as well take it out of the game. the Armies that rely on Overwatch to stay out of assault have low init... Or don't care about assault in the first place.
And this. Roll a 5+/4+ to see if you get to attempt to roll some 6s and maybe accomplish something. Don't bother questioning why we keep adding all this tedious dice rolling, dice are Cinematic™!
No, call it 7th edition so everyone who bought the 6th edition rulebook has to pay another $75 for the 7th edition rulebook. This is reinforced by the starter set rulebook no longer containing the complete rules, so you can't just ebay a cheap copy of it instead of paying for the expensive hardcover version. I'm sure we can also expect to see some random changes thrown in just to be sure that the game is no longer compatible with 6th edition.
I was talking about rumourmongers calling it 7th, not GW. Obviously GW publishing another major edition so soon is gakky, does it even need to be said?
BUT I'm still not going to be surprised if it's just "collectors' edition" 6th or whatever, officially. And all that bollocks about the starter set is from Faeit, right? EG not worth the loo roll it's written on?
Does no one else think that the drop of an entirely new set of rules (or updated and modified rules) that would cause instant demand and boost sales, right before financial statements are calculated, seems both totally plausible and entirely fishy at the same time?
Plausible, because it seems like a mad grab for cash from a business that had bad mid-year financials. The main rule book is the only product that everyone needs in order to play the game.
Fishy, because it would be a blatant bilking of their customer base and a slap in the face to those that have given money to the company in the past.
Idolator wrote: Does no one else think that the drop of an entirely new set of rules that would cause instant demand and boost sales, right before financial statements are calculated, seems both totally plausible and entirely fishy at the same time?
Plausible, because it seems like a mad grab for cash from a business that had bad mid-year financials. The main rule book is the only product that everyone needs in order to play the game.
Fishy, because it would be a blatant bilking of their customer base and a slap in the face to those that have given money to the company in the past.
The fiscal year ends in May, the new set would go on sale in June which is FY 2015, too late to actually affect this year.
One apple ID can support up to 10 devices, so 9 of your buddies and yourself can all have a full interactive codex for less then $6 each (more so with cheap iTunes cards).
Also if GW screws up and falsely advertises it like they did with the army builder feature for marines, you can get the book for free.
Unfortunately that solution relies on befriending someone with a high enough Pretension Quotient to own an Apple device, and I'm afraid I just don't have that much time spare to spend sitting in a Starbucks drinking unpronouncable pseudocoffee and listening to them talk about the novel they're never actually going to write.
Kidding, kidding, pitchforks down.
As for the rumour....eh, I'm struggling to find a way to sufficiently express the level of total apathy I feel at this news. I'd love to get all excited at the possibility of rule fixes, or Pancake 2 - The Fantasy Battlening, but after years of Tauroxes & Iron Hands retcons & the Ward/Kirby combo-team I'm just not naive enough to believe this will be anything other than a cynical cash-grab right before the end of year financials. I'd love to be wrong, but I suspect that the best we can hope for out of this is that they don't somehow make things worse.
Idolator wrote: Does no one else think that the drop of an entirely new set of rules that would cause instant demand and boost sales, right before financial statements are calculated, seems both totally plausible and entirely fishy at the same time?
Plausible, because it seems like a mad grab for cash from a business that had bad mid-year financials. The main rule book is the only product that everyone needs in order to play the game.
Fishy, because it would be a blatant bilking of their customer base and a slap in the face to those that have given money to the company in the past.
The fiscal year ends in May, the new set would go on sale in June which is FY 2015, too late to actually affect this year.
No, the preorders (where you give a company money for a product that they haven't given you yet) and sales to retail establishments that will offer them for sale at a later date are all sales accounted for in the month of May. Not sure how they account for the sales of product from their in-house retail establishments, but those sales begin on May 31, at Saturday. Now fiscal years for every company that I have worked at have all begun on a Monday. Meaning that the last day attributed to the fiscal month of May would be June 1. Giving the company two days of physical sales from their own retail establishments as well as all the pre-orders and units that were purchased by independent retail establishments.
One apple ID can support up to 10 devices, so 9 of your buddies and yourself can all have a full interactive codex for less then $6 each (more so with cheap iTunes cards).
Also if GW screws up and falsely advertises it like they did with the army builder feature for marines, you can get the book for free.
Unfortunately that solution relies on befriending someone with a high enough Pretension Quotient to own an Apple device, and I'm afraid I just don't have that much time spare to spend sitting in a Starbucks drinking unpronouncable pseudocoffee and listening to them talk about the novel they're never actually going to write.
Kidding, kidding, pitchforks down.
As for the rumour....eh, I'm struggling to find a way to sufficiently express the level of total apathy I feel at this news. I'd love to get all excited at the possibility of rule fixes, or Pancake 2 - The Fantasy Battlening, but after years of Tauroxes & Iron Hands retcons & the Ward/Kirby combo-team I'm just not naive enough to believe this will be anything other than a cynical cash-grab right before the end of year financials. I'd love to be wrong, but I suspect that the best we can hope for out of this is that they don't somehow make things worse.
I have an Ipad mini! I won it in as a door prize at a corporate event. I did buy a Night's Watch cover to put on it, don't know if that makes me pretentious or just super nerdy. Not that this would be the only thing to make me super nerdy.
Idolator wrote: Does no one else think that the drop of an entirely new set of rules that would cause instant demand and boost sales, right before financial statements are calculated, seems both totally plausible and entirely fishy at the same time?
Plausible, because it seems like a mad grab for cash from a business that had bad mid-year financials. The main rule book is the only product that everyone needs in order to play the game.
Fishy, because it would be a blatant bilking of their customer base and a slap in the face to those that have given money to the company in the past.
The fiscal year ends in May, the new set would go on sale in June which is FY 2015, too late to actually affect this year.
No, the preorders (where you give a company money for a product that they haven't given you yet) and sales to retail establishments that will offer them for sale at a later date are all sales accounted for in the month of May. Not sure how they account for the sales of product from their in-house retail establishments, but those sales begin on May 31, at Saturday. Now fiscal years for every company that I have worked at have all begun on a Monday. Meaning that the last day attributed to the fiscal month of May would be June 1. Giving the company two days of physical sales from their own retail establishments as well as all the pre-orders and units that were purchased by independent retail establishments.
Except GW doesn't actually collect the money until they ship so if they did that they'd have a balance in "accounts payable" (aka product due out) and "accounts receivable" (aka money due in) meaning more headache for the accountants but not much in terms of a revenue gain. I don't think they'd handle it that way honestly because of the extra paperwork.
Of course I could be wrong as I don't know the full ins and outs of British accounting practices but that seems like a lot of extra work to fluff a financial report that has to be completed and independently audited in a short amount of time for the end of year statements.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh and they'd have to basically say that the influx at the end of the year was because of a new edition launch which would not attract investors looking for a stable, slow growing stock (which is what GW tries to market themselves as).
CEO: "Ok guys, we've created this messy and convoluted edition where we just release things too quickly for anyone to keep track of. Let's learn from our mistakes!"
GW idiot: "I've got it! Let's do another release!"
CEO: "That's brilliant!"
If they make a new edition of rules people who like this edition/are just getting used to it/enjoyed an army that may be nerfed will be angry and lose even more interest.
If they just consolidate all the rules into one edition, it will still be bloated and messy.
Really the only way this release could help, is if they include all rules, but organise it into something like 'basic' and 'expanded' or something. Basically so there's liscence for a player to say "I would like a 1500 point game, but i don't want to use super heavies etc. so let's just play 'basic'."
It means basic could include a lot of the core rules, which could be balanced so that tournament play works better, then expanded can be all the crazy gak that allows people to go wild with their models. I could even see justification for putting some things like flyers and allies in the expanded section, so the core game stays way simpler and therefore balanced and competitive.
ClockworkZion wrote: Except GW doesn't actually collect the money until they ship so if they did that they'd have a balance in "accounts payable" (aka product due out) and "accounts receivable" (aka money due in) meaning more headache for the accountants but not much in terms of a revenue gain. I don't think they'd handle it that way honestly because of the extra paperwork.
Of course I could be wrong as I don't know the full ins and outs of British accounting practices but that seems like a lot of extra work to fluff a financial report that has to be completed and independently audited in a short amount of time for the end of year statements.
Generally, sales (and purchase) orders are assigned to the date in which they are created, regardless of when the goods / money change hands. If an order is placed on May 31st, it's classed as a sale made in May, even if the cash isn't received until June. Should the order be cancelled in June, they will just issue a credit dated for May that cancels out the transaction in the accounts.
A great example of this is car sales. I'm sure you've heard the best time to get a deal on a car is to visit just before the end of their sales period, when they're desperate to reach targets. It may well take them a few days to arrange paperwork or check over the car you bought before handing it over, but you can be sure the sale will be recorded in the same month it's made, rather than when it's completed.
I will not be buying this at all. I may be interested in researching what is new to the rules and ignoring them if any thing. GW has ripped me off far too often for me to have any desire to jump on a new rulebook. I still haven't gotten my dollar's worth out of the 6th Edition rule book and I bought it on day one. I can't wait for the hostile take over of the war gaming industry! GW's days are finite. Give it 5 years. There are so many amazing games coming out and that are already out. I can't buy another $75 rule book that will be worth nothing in 2 years when there are so many good games out there that deserve that money. I can't reward GW for being stupid. Bring me the crown of Jack Kirby with the scalp enclosed and then I will buy this hate crime against war gamers.
Altayre wrote: CEO: "Ok guys, we've created this messy and convoluted edition where we just release things too quickly for anyone to keep track of. Let's learn from our mistakes!"
GW idiot: "I've got it! Let's do another release!"
CEO: "That's brilliant!"
If they make a new edition of rules people who like this edition/are just getting used to it/enjoyed an army that may be nerfed will be angry and lose even more interest.
If they just consolidate all the rules into one edition, it will still be bloated and messy.
Really the only way this release could help, is if they include all rules, but organise it into something like 'basic' and 'expanded' or something. Basically so there's liscence for a player to say "I would like a 1500 point game, but i don't want to use super heavies etc. so let's just play 'basic'."
It means basic could include a lot of the core rules, which could be balanced so that tournament play works better, then expanded can be all the crazy gak that allows people to go wild with their models. I could even see justification for putting some things like flyers and allies in the expanded section, so the core game stays way simpler and therefore balanced and competitive.
Idolator wrote: Does no one else think that the drop of an entirely new set of rules that would cause instant demand and boost sales, right before financial statements are calculated, seems both totally plausible and entirely fishy at the same time?
Plausible, because it seems like a mad grab for cash from a business that had bad mid-year financials. The main rule book is the only product that everyone needs in order to play the game.
Fishy, because it would be a blatant bilking of their customer base and a slap in the face to those that have given money to the company in the past.
The fiscal year ends in May, the new set would go on sale in June which is FY 2015, too late to actually affect this year.
No, the preorders (where you give a company money for a product that they haven't given you yet) and sales to retail establishments that will offer them for sale at a later date are all sales accounted for in the month of May. Not sure how they account for the sales of product from their in-house retail establishments, but those sales begin on May 31, at Saturday. Now fiscal years for every company that I have worked at have all begun on a Monday. Meaning that the last day attributed to the fiscal month of May would be June 1. Giving the company two days of physical sales from their own retail establishments as well as all the pre-orders and units that were purchased by independent retail establishments.
Except GW doesn't actually collect the money until they ship so if they did that they'd have a balance in "accounts payable" (aka product due out) and "accounts receivable" (aka money due in) meaning more headache for the accountants but not much in terms of a revenue gain. I don't think they'd handle it that way honestly because of the extra paperwork.
Of course I could be wrong as I don't know the full ins and outs of British accounting practices but that seems like a lot of extra work to fluff a financial report that has to be completed and independently audited in a short amount of time for the end of year statements.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh and they'd have to basically say that the influx at the end of the year was because of a new edition launch which would not attract investors looking for a stable, slow growing stock (which is what GW tries to market themselves as).
The product shipped out to the independent retailers go on the books the moment that they ship as those units have been sold and are no longer in their inventory. The revenue from pre-orders also goes on the books the moment that they ship, putting all digital purchases on the books on May 31 and revenues from physical preorders from the day that they ship which doesn't have to be on or after May 31. Looking at their financials, they don't seem to have a timeline for when sales occurred. I can't even find quarterly breakdowns, just mid year and end year reports. (If anyone has a link to quarterly reports I would love to give them a once over) Meaning that all sales from that division are lumped together for the investors with no discernible way to determine when that revenue was generated, except for a six month window.
Edit: actually xzzt has a better explanation. The sale is recorded the moment money changes hands, that's the way that it works here in the states. I just got overly descriptive and since I don't know UK laws, I based it on the more complicated assumption that a sale has occurred once money and goods are exchanged.
Altayre wrote: Really the only way this release could help, is if they include all rules, but organise it into something like 'basic' and 'expanded' or something. Basically so there's liscence for a player to say "I would like a 1500 point game, but i don't want to use super heavies etc. so let's just play 'basic'."
It means basic could include a lot of the core rules, which could be balanced so that tournament play works better, then expanded can be all the crazy gak that allows people to go wild with their models. I could even see justification for putting some things like flyers and allies in the expanded section, so the core game stays way simpler and therefore balanced and competitive.
They could call it "waffle" edition, because of the way it "waffles" between competitive and narrative.
ClockworkZion wrote: Except GW doesn't actually collect the money until they ship so if they did that they'd have a balance in "accounts payable" (aka product due out) and "accounts receivable" (aka money due in) meaning more headache for the accountants but not much in terms of a revenue gain. I don't think they'd handle it that way honestly because of the extra paperwork.
Of course I could be wrong as I don't know the full ins and outs of British accounting practices but that seems like a lot of extra work to fluff a financial report that has to be completed and independently audited in a short amount of time for the end of year statements.
Generally, sales (and purchase) orders are assigned to the date in which they are created, regardless of when the goods / money change hands. If an order is placed on May 31st, it's classed as a sale made in May, even if the cash isn't received until June. Should the order be cancelled in June, they will just issue a credit dated for May that cancels out the transaction in the accounts.
In the US you'd have to separate cash you've actually collected (as "Cash") and still need to collect ("Accounts Receivable" since you need to still receive them), hence my skeptism on it working quite that way. Like I said, it adds a lot on top of the accounting department's workload while they're already trying to put together the report so it can be audited in time for the release. The auditing will be the big part of the delay in it's release of course.
The sale event may be recorded in May but it doesn't count as actual Cash until June in that respect.
Plus GW has to be open and honest with stockholders and no misrepresent things (there are laws, at least in the US against such practices) meaning if they run up revenue at the last minute they need to say that they did to not misrepresent their normal business cycle.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Idolator wrote: The product shipped out to the independent retailers go on the books the moment that they ship as those units have been sold and are no longer in their inventory. The revenue from pre-orders also goes on the books the moment that they ship, putting all digital purchases on the books on May 31 and revenues from physical preorders from the day that they ship which doesn't have to be on or after May 31. Looking at their financials, they don't seem to have a timeline for when sales occurred. I can't even find quarterly breakdowns, just mid year and end year reports. (If anyone has a link to quarterly reports I would love to give them a once over) Meaning that all sales from that division are lumped together for the investors with no discernible way to determine when that revenue was generated, except for a six month window.
You do know that if it doesn't go on the books until it ships (as you put it there) it won't be in May's report right?
And if you think GW's 6 month window is bad Disney doesn't separate any of it's income (like splitting sales from movies and the parks) and and only seems to have a end-of-year report. It's the bare minimum they need by GAAP and no more. GW does a lot more to split their stuff up than most (like actually telling you what the cost of sales is).
I've tried to distilled the 40k specific rules from that giant chat log:
Spoiler:
Movement: Run: D6 or 2D6 for Flying Monstrous Creatures that are Swooping.
>>Makes sense... but no added bonus to Jump/Jet Pack units? Consolidations: 2D6 pick one, but you only consolidate on your turn. You can charge with your consolidation move. Opponent can overwatch. You only get to fight once per turn, so if you consolidate into a new combat you don’t get to fight, unless your fist combat didn’t fight (opponent flees).
>>This is cool. Adds the idea of 'momentum' to melee troops. Will nearby 6" Tau units be able to overwatch again, if they did use Suppressing Fire in the previous charge? Retreats: 6 + D6 Charge: 2D6, not affected by difficult terrain.
Move through Difficult: 2D6 pick one.
Charge through Difficult: 2D6 (The same, but -2 iniative).
>>This helps melee units without assault grenades (Howling Banshees and Tyranid Warriors/Ravagers).
Reserves: Coming in from Reserves: If there is no enemy in 24” of a particular table edge, units from reserve that use this edge to enter the table can march an additional 12”
>>Very interesting; the game becomes more dynamic. But this isn't very clearly worded. Can I come from a DE player's edge if he brought everything to the center of the table? How about Outflank and Acute Senses? Flyers have the “Patient Hunter” special rule which means they can choose to stay in ongoing reserves.
Assault: Flee: You can chose to immediately lose combat after Hammer of Wrath, before any blows are struck. Iniative roll off as if you had lost combat. If you win, you do a normal Retreat. It happens before pile-ins.
>>Looks a bit like old 5e SM Combat Tactics. If you do receive another charge, would you be able to try Retreat again? Is there a limit/turn per unit? Overwatch: Must win or tie an iniative roll off to overwatch. Cannot overwatch if Gone to Ground or Pinned.
>>I don't like this. Eldar gunline becomes much better than everyone's else (as if they needed the boost). Tau and IG/AM, on the other hand, suffer a lot receiving a charge with this rule, so they'll probably castle even more and buying very long range stuff to kill chargers before they arrive. Or force these armies to throw everything at the enemy. At least Tau, with Supporting Fire, will have some luck getting a 2 in 3-4 units overwatching. More MoS to CSM?Necrons will depend even more on their Flyers to attack before being attacked. Charge through Cover: -2 to initiative unless assault grenades or unit being assaulted has Gone to Ground or been Pinned.
Initiative: All models strike at their common Initiative unless they are in a Challenge, or are using Unwieldy weapons like power fists. If a unit has 3 Power Fists, and 2 Chainswords they all strike at Initiative 1.
>>Whoa, this is a big one. No matter how many Power Swords you have with your Honour Guard, the CM with a TH/SS would make all of them strike at Init 1. Poor Blood Angels and their ICs with Power Axes everywhere. Hammer of Wrath: Counts as part of combat resolution.
Assaulting Vehicles and Buildings: If the vehicle doesn’t have a WS (walker), then you Sweep Attack them rather than Assault them.
>>Seems very strange to sweep a vehicle. Non-Walkers do not possess initative; how the test would be done?
Psychic Powers: Most happen at the end of the movement phase rather than the start. You have to roll for Warp charges like fantasy (complexity 4?)
Psychic powers do not require line of sight.
>>End of movement phase means blessings and maledictions from Deep Strike/Reserve fellas. Not requiring line of sight? Why? And they could add a line to clarify if the same PP stack or not (AFAIK they do now, don't they?)
Unit Types: Jump Infantry: Can use jump packs in all phases. If In difficult, and you use Jump pack, must take dangerous terrain test. Jump Packs in assault give HOW but not Rerolls.
>>I think re-rolling the charge distance is better than HoW, but ok. This eats a lot on RG chapter tactics, but at least they'll be the only ones re-rolling charge with jump units Chariots: can Sweep Attack
Bikes: can Sweep Attack
>>They can in 6th, can't they? Vehicles: D6 S6 Hammer of Wrath and have Sweep Attack which seems to replace Tank Shock. Walkers do D6 S:Unit Hammer of Wrath. “Death or Glory” against vehicle sweep attacks mean all models in unit Snapshoot at rear armor, or all models within 3” do CC attacks against rear armor. Must take fear test or WS:1. If they fail to stop the vehicle, then they take 2D6 S6 Hammer of Wrath. Only get cover saves against other vehicles.
>>HoW on vehicles not only makes a lot of sense, it's more fluid than Tank Shock. But why does DoG hit REAR armour? AV 10 is too fragile. I'd do this with a vehicle that has nothing else to add in the battle or a LR/Sicaran/IK and stuff like that. And not getting cover from infantry? Why? MCs are generally as big as vehicles (if not bigger) and have none of this. Light Walkers: Only do 1 Hammer of Wrath. I’m thinking Killa Kans, Scout Sentinal, War Walkers.
Swarms: Take D3 wounds to Template weapons (flamers).
Special Rules: Fleet add an extra D6, and can discard a D6 in all random moves. No Rerolls.
Move through cover, and you ignore the effects of Difficult Terrain (6” move, no iniative penalty for assault), but not Dangerous.
>>I like both changes. Shrouded: -2 to BS >>Wow. Guardsmen shooting at BS 1, Marines/'Low' Eldar at 2, 'High' Eldar at 3 against Nurgle stuff, Venomthrope-supported Nids, Stealth Suits, Invisilble enemies... Will Ignores Cover apply to it as well? I think this is even better than +2 cover saves Stealth: +1 to Cover
Fearless: Cannot chose to Flee
Preferred Enemy: +1 to hit for both Melee and Shooting.
>>I think this translates the idea of such USR better than just re-rolling 1s. BS5 doesn't need it, however. Bulky: gives Hammer of Wrath.
>>Termies with HoW? hooray! Suits, Centurions and a lot of other things will get it as well. Hit and Run: Gives Sweep Attack, cannot leave combat.
Sweep Attack: Close combat attack in the movement phase can only hit ground targets, and can be hit back. Pause during movement, cannot be within 1”. Any model within 3” can attack, and then finish movement. No Pile-ins allowed. Can be part of a Run Move. You can still shoot after a Sweep Attack. Does include Hammer of Wrath.
>>This seems to translate H&R better than jumping in-and-out of combat, but sounds very complicated. Vector Strike: D6 S:Unit AP:- auto hits. Hits Rear Armor. Swooping must pass within 3” of model being vector strike (no longer have to pass over). Does not count as shooting a weapon. All hits are precision hits.
>>Lost AP3, but double hitting possibility and REAR armour. Chance to eliminate important people down there. I'd call it a sound buff Look Out Sir: On a 2+ the next closest model takes the wounds. Only 1 Look Out Sir roll for all allocated wounds. Look Out Sir is available to all models with special weapons.
>>Harder to snipe special weapon, but way easier to get the warlord/support IC. Regeneration: 4+ to recover a wound. Grants Feel No Pain.
>>More buffs to MCs!
Other Rules: Snapshooting: -3 BS.
High BS: No Rerolls for BS > 6. 1 always misses, 6 always hits.
>>re-rolls make the game slower. The less we have, the better. Snapshooting at -3 BS is a small buff to 'High' Eldar/ICs.
FOC: HQ: 0-25%, must have 1 warlord
Elite: 0-25%
Troops: 20-75%
Fast Attack: 0-25%
Heavy Support: 0-25%
Secondary Detachments: 0-25%, it includes Allies, Fortifications, Formations, Lords of War and can also include units from your primary codex. You can have 3, but must pick one after rolling for game, deployment and first turn. The player who wins first turn must select first. See example below.
Allies: Allies are part of the Secondary Detachment, but count in Primary FOC. They do not have a troop or HQ limit, and you must have only 1 ally per Secondary detachment, but you can take formations from other allies.
Fortifications: Fortifications are part of the Secondary Detachment.
Formations: Formations are part of the Secondary Detachment, and don’t count in the Primary FOC.
Lords of War: If one player brings a Lord of war and the other player does not, the first player must declare his Secondary Detachment first, and the opponent has a chance to bring fourth Secondary Detachment. Any Heavy Support in this special Secondary Detachment do not count against the Heavy Support Limit.
>>These rules are a bit confusing. They're trying to rein in allies shenanigans, but this picking before the game even began strikes me unnecessarily complex. And, of course, Formations do not eat FOC.
At first glance, I saw no nerfs to MCs... just buffs (specially to FMC). Jeebus.
Personally I would not like to see Escalation incorporated into the core rules, however I think it won't happen because why would GW sell you one book when they can sell you two books?
ClockworkZion wrote: Except GW doesn't actually collect the money until they ship so if they did that they'd have a balance in "accounts payable" (aka product due out) and "accounts receivable" (aka money due in) meaning more headache for the accountants but not much in terms of a revenue gain. I don't think they'd handle it that way honestly because of the extra paperwork.
Of course I could be wrong as I don't know the full ins and outs of British accounting practices but that seems like a lot of extra work to fluff a financial report that has to be completed and independently audited in a short amount of time for the end of year statements.
Generally, sales (and purchase) orders are assigned to the date in which they are created, regardless of when the goods / money change hands. If an order is placed on May 31st, it's classed as a sale made in May, even if the cash isn't received until June. Should the order be cancelled in June, they will just issue a credit dated for May that cancels out the transaction in the accounts.
In the US you'd have to separate cash you've actually collected (as "Cash") and still need to collect ("Accounts Receivable" since you need to still receive them), hence my skeptism on it working quite that way. Like I said, it adds a lot on top of the accounting department's workload while they're already trying to put together the report so it can be audited in time for the release. The auditing will be the big part of the delay in it's release of course.
The sale event may be recorded in May but it doesn't count as actual Cash until June in that respect.
Plus GW has to be open and honest with stockholders and no misrepresent things (there are laws, at least in the US against such practices) meaning if they run up revenue at the last minute they need to say that they did to not misrepresent their normal business cycle.
They don't release the mid year report on June 1. They have to conglomerate all sales and expenses from all the months in the period into an investor report that's easy for "little johnny investor" to read.Computers track and calculate the amounts of sales, these are done instantaneously at the time of sale. It is then merely a number that has to be placed on a certain line of the report which is then also calculated by a computer. That part is incredibly simple. When working retail I could tell you the sales of every store from the chain in any country for any given day. If I wanted to tell you the figures for the whole company for the entire year, all I had to do was use two scroll down menus and wait less than a second. They aren't slaving away somewhere adding numbers together with a pencil from sales reports coming in on a ticker tape machine.
ClockworkZion wrote: Except GW doesn't actually collect the money until they ship so if they did that they'd have a balance in "accounts payable" (aka product due out) and "accounts receivable" (aka money due in) meaning more headache for the accountants but not much in terms of a revenue gain. I don't think they'd handle it that way honestly because of the extra paperwork.
Of course I could be wrong as I don't know the full ins and outs of British accounting practices but that seems like a lot of extra work to fluff a financial report that has to be completed and independently audited in a short amount of time for the end of year statements.
Generally, sales (and purchase) orders are assigned to the date in which they are created, regardless of when the goods / money change hands. If an order is placed on May 31st, it's classed as a sale made in May, even if the cash isn't received until June. Should the order be cancelled in June, they will just issue a credit dated for May that cancels out the transaction in the accounts.
In the US you'd have to separate cash you've actually collected (as "Cash") and still need to collect ("Accounts Receivable" since you need to still receive them), hence my skeptism on it working quite that way. Like I said, it adds a lot on top of the accounting department's workload while they're already trying to put together the report so it can be audited in time for the release. The auditing will be the big part of the delay in it's release of course.
The sale event may be recorded in May but it doesn't count as actual Cash until June in that respect.
Plus GW has to be open and honest with stockholders and no misrepresent things (there are laws, at least in the US against such practices) meaning if they run up revenue at the last minute they need to say that they did to not misrepresent their normal business cycle.
They don't release the mid year report on June 1. They have to conglomerate all sales and expenses from all the months in the period into an investor report that's easy for "little johnny investor" to read.Computers track and calculate the amounts of sales, these are done instantaneously at the time of sale. It is then merely a number that has to be placed on a certain line of the report which is then also calculated by a computer. That part is incredibly simple. When working retail I could tell you the sales of every store from the chain in any country for any given day. If I wanted to tell you the figures for the whole company for the entire year, all I had to do was use two scroll down menus and wait less than a second. They aren't slaving away somewhere adding numbers together with a pencil from sales reports coming in on a ticker tape machine.
Don't forget that a large portion of that is the report being audited though. The mid-year report comes out by the middle of January so that 2 month time lag for the annual one isn't all the accounting department by themselves. It looks like ~45 days is an independent auditor.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I just realized the title of the thread says "Old English" rulebook discontinued. Gods and here I was thinking the rules were in modern English. No wonder they're so unclear!
You do know that if it doesn't go on the books until it ships (as you put it there) it won't be in May's report right?
And if you think GW's 6 month window is bad Disney doesn't separate any of it's income (like splitting sales from movies and the parks) and and only seems to have a end-of-year report. It's the bare minimum they need by GAAP and no more. GW does a lot more to split their stuff up than most (like actually telling you what the cost of sales is).
Several things here.
I stated that it could be shipped before the official release date.
That the release date is in May, and should be shipped that day. They don't just sit around in a warehouse and start packaging these things at midnight of the release day. They have them all ready to go and have the mailman/fed-ex guy pick them all up that day.
Money changed hands prior to the end of the month.
Product has changed hands before the end of the month. By shipping to retailers, shipping to consumers and downloading product.
I would think that placing sales figures from one year to the other and denying this knowledge to their investors would constitute a fairly major crime in the UK. It is here in the States.
I do think that it is bad, but that's the way that it is. There is no way to discern if the sales occurred in January or May, no way to tell if it was from an unexpected Codex Space Marine sales jump or the latest book released.
Don't forget that a large portion of that is the report being audited though. The mid-year report comes out by the middle of January so that 2 month time lag for the annual one isn't all the accounting department by themselves. It looks like ~45 days is an independent auditor.
Which doesn't negate the fact that all sales made in May, right up until the end of the fiscal year are calculated in the annual report.
You do know that if it doesn't go on the books until it ships (as you put it there) it won't be in May's report right?
And if you think GW's 6 month window is bad Disney doesn't separate any of it's income (like splitting sales from movies and the parks) and and only seems to have a end-of-year report. It's the bare minimum they need by GAAP and no more. GW does a lot more to split their stuff up than most (like actually telling you what the cost of sales is).
Several things here.
I stated that it could be shipped before the official release date.
That the release date is in May, and should be shipped that day. They don't just sit around in a warehouse and start packaging these things at midnight of the release day. They have them all ready to go and have the mailman/fed-ex guy pick them all up that day.
Money changed hands prior to the end of the month.
Product has changed hands before the end of the month. By shipping to retailers, shipping to consumers and downloading product.
Pre-orders go up the last Saturday of the month and are released the following Saturday. They wouldn't ship until after May ended in this case since the following Monday is in June.
Money doesn't actually enter GW's hands until the product is in the mail (I just cancelled an order last week and they didn't have to process a refund, they just cancelled a hold on the funds and the bank gave it back pretty quickly).
Idolator wrote: I would think that placing sales figures from one year to the other and denying this knowledge to their investors would constitute a fairly major crime in the UK. It is here in the States.
I do think that it is bad, but that's the way that it is. There is no way to discern if the sales occurred in January or May, no way to tell if it was from an unexpected Codex Space Marine sales jump or the latest book released.
Which is basically my point, using this to "fluff" the sales data wouldn't actually help the company since they'd have to admit that they did just that and it wouldn't do anything to help the company or its stock prices. Basically it's a conspiracy that wouldn't do a single bit of good.
You do know that if it doesn't go on the books until it ships (as you put it there) it won't be in May's report right?
And if you think GW's 6 month window is bad Disney doesn't separate any of it's income (like splitting sales from movies and the parks) and and only seems to have a end-of-year report. It's the bare minimum they need by GAAP and no more. GW does a lot more to split their stuff up than most (like actually telling you what the cost of sales is).
Several things here.
I stated that it could be shipped before the official release date.
That the release date is in May, and should be shipped that day. They don't just sit around in a warehouse and start packaging these things at midnight of the release day. They have them all ready to go and have the mailman/fed-ex guy pick them all up that day.
Money changed hands prior to the end of the month.
Product has changed hands before the end of the month. By shipping to retailers, shipping to consumers and downloading product.
Pre-orders go up the last Saturday of the month and are released the following Saturday. They wouldn't ship until after May ended in this case since the following Monday is in June.
Money doesn't actually enter GW's hands until the product is in the mail (I just cancelled an order last week and they didn't have to process a refund, they just cancelled a hold on the funds and the bank gave it back pretty quickly).
Idolator wrote: I would think that placing sales figures from one year to the other and denying this knowledge to their investors would constitute a fairly major crime in the UK. It is here in the States.
I do think that it is bad, but that's the way that it is. There is no way to discern if the sales occurred in January or May, no way to tell if it was from an unexpected Codex Space Marine sales jump or the latest book released.
Which is basically my point, using this to "fluff" the sales data wouldn't actually help the company since they'd have to admit that they did just that and it wouldn't do anything to help the company or its stock prices. Basically it's a conspiracy that wouldn't do a single bit of good.
f
Did you actually see when the pre-orders were rumored to go up? The actual release date is stated as being the last Saturday of the month with the preorders slated to be available the Saturday before that on the 24th. It would be odd in the extreme to have preorders placed up on the day that you can just go buy one at a store or download the rules.
So, once again were back to money and product changing hands for the independent retailers before the end of may. Money and product changing hands for digital customers. As well as money and product changing hands for mail order customers because the preorders are shipped on or before the end of the fiscal year.
Pre-orders being that early in the month is unusual (not the first time it's been done, but it is unusual).
And no I didn't see that because the last I read it was rumored to be the 31st not the 24th for pre-orders.
How hard is it to not assume things about people?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Seriously, at this point the rumors for when 7th is coming seem to change from the morning to the afternoon.
And nothing about when GW gets the money invalidates the fact it can't work as a strategy to fluff their numbers because they have to openly admit just that.
Idolator wrote: I would think that placing sales figures from one year to the other and denying this knowledge to their investors would constitute a fairly major crime in the UK. It is here in the States.
I do think that it is bad, but that's the way that it is. There is no way to discern if the sales occurred in January or May, no way to tell if it was from an unexpected Codex Space Marine sales jump or the latest book released.
Which is basically my point, using this to "fluff" the sales data wouldn't actually help the company since they'd have to admit that they did just that and it wouldn't do anything to help the company or its stock prices. Basically it's a conspiracy that wouldn't do a single bit of good.
What!?! They wouldn't have to admit anything. They just tell you that they made X amount of money within a six month period without having to tell you that they made it all in the last few days. Companies do this all the time. Blow out sales at the end of a quarter to boost the numbers without ever having to mention that it was just the blowout sale that saved their bottom line.
Idolator wrote: I would think that placing sales figures from one year to the other and denying this knowledge to their investors would constitute a fairly major crime in the UK. It is here in the States.
I do think that it is bad, but that's the way that it is. There is no way to discern if the sales occurred in January or May, no way to tell if it was from an unexpected Codex Space Marine sales jump or the latest book released.
Which is basically my point, using this to "fluff" the sales data wouldn't actually help the company since they'd have to admit that they did just that and it wouldn't do anything to help the company or its stock prices. Basically it's a conspiracy that wouldn't do a single bit of good.
What!?! They wouldn't have to admit anything. They just tell you that they made X amount of money within a six month period without having to tell you that they made it all in the last few days. Companies do this all the time. Blow out sales at the end of a quarter to boost the numbers without ever having to mention that it was just the blowout sale that saved their bottom line.
I'm pretty sure there are some issues regarding falsely representing how "healthy" the company is by doing that actually. If they don't report it I'm pretty sure they can get slammed legally for it, at least in the long run since it can be considered misleading investors.
ClockworkZion wrote: Pre-orders being that early in the month is unusual (not the first time it's been done, but it is unusual).
And no I didn't see that because the last I read it was rumored to be the 31st not the 24th for pre-orders.
How hard is it to not assume things about people?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Seriously, at this point the rumors for when 7th is coming seem to change from the morning to the afternoon.
And nothing about when GW gets the money invalidates the fact it can't work as a strategy to fluff their numbers because they have to openly admit just that.
How hard is it not to assume things about people??? You've been going on and on basing your statements on incorrect data. I had no idea that you didn't read it. The only assumption that I had was that you had a working knowledge of the facts (rumors).
ClockworkZion wrote: Pre-orders being that early in the month is unusual (not the first time it's been done, but it is unusual).
And no I didn't see that because the last I read it was rumored to be the 31st not the 24th for pre-orders.
How hard is it to not assume things about people?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Seriously, at this point the rumors for when 7th is coming seem to change from the morning to the afternoon.
And nothing about when GW gets the money invalidates the fact it can't work as a strategy to fluff their numbers because they have to openly admit just that.
How hard is it not to assume things about people??? You've been going on and on basing your statements on incorrect data. I had no idea that you didn't read it. The only assumption that I had was that you had a working knowledge of the facts (rumors).
Your posts basically read (to me) that I was being thickheaded on purpose. I wasn't, I was just basing it off different information that conflicts with the information you were working off of. This is what happens when rumors keep changing unfortunately (especially when I'm reading what little I can between classes at college).
Regardless I stand by my assessment than this doesn't actually give GW a real net benefit, especially if even half of the people who say they're not jumping into a new edition actually follow through with that the sales will be abysmal.
What!?! They wouldn't have to admit anything. They just tell you that they made X amount of money within a six month period without having to tell you that they made it all in the last few days. Companies do this all the time. Blow out sales at the end of a quarter to boost the numbers without ever having to mention that it was just the blowout sale that saved their bottom line.
I'm pretty sure there are some issues regarding falsely representing how "healthy" the company is by doing that actually. If they don't report it I'm pretty sure they can get slammed legally for it, at least in the long run since it can be considered misleading investors.
There's no falsity there. The company has to report its revenue both to the government and it's investors. In the agreed upon and legal manner. Is it shady....sure. Is it legal....sure.
What!?! They wouldn't have to admit anything. They just tell you that they made X amount of money within a six month period without having to tell you that they made it all in the last few days. Companies do this all the time. Blow out sales at the end of a quarter to boost the numbers without ever having to mention that it was just the blowout sale that saved their bottom line.
I'm pretty sure there are some issues regarding falsely representing how "healthy" the company is by doing that actually. If they don't report it I'm pretty sure they can get slammed legally for it, at least in the long run since it can be considered misleading investors.
There's no falsity there. The company has to report its revenue both to the government and it's investors. In the agreed upon and legal manner. Is it shady....sure. Is it legal....sure.
The reports require more than just a break down of the numbers. They actually force transparency on a number of things to allow investors to get a much better understanding what's going on behind closed doors (that's why the thing is 60+ pages long and has explanations on every item in it).
What!?! They wouldn't have to admit anything. They just tell you that they made X amount of money within a six month period without having to tell you that they made it all in the last few days. Companies do this all the time. Blow out sales at the end of a quarter to boost the numbers without ever having to mention that it was just the blowout sale that saved their bottom line.
I'm pretty sure there are some issues regarding falsely representing how "healthy" the company is by doing that actually. If they don't report it I'm pretty sure they can get slammed legally for it, at least in the long run since it can be considered misleading investors.
There's no falsity there. The company has to report its revenue both to the government and it's investors. In the agreed upon and legal manner. Is it shady....sure. Is it legal....sure.
The reports require more than just a break down of the numbers. They actually force transparency on a number of things to allow investors to get a much better understanding what's going on behind closed doors (that's why the thing is 60+ pages long and has explanations on every item in it).
Then please direct me to the page that details the sales figures for the Codex Space Marines book, or the revenue generated by the sale of Captain Badrukk model, or the sales of printed rules material from September 2013.
Edit:
The reason why these types of things aren't listed in public investor reports is to protect businesses. Anyone could take these figures and correlate them to determine exactly which products and business practices provide the the most revenue from the company as well as pinpointing weaknesses for other businesses to exploit. I'm sure that competitors would love to know if there is a big demand for orc models wearing pirate garb, or that there is a greater demand for scary space elves than that for good-hearted space elves. Even breaking down the report into monthly increments would give this kind of information.
I've tried to distilled the 40k specific rules from that giant chat log:
Spoiler:
Movement: Run: D6 or 2D6 for Flying Monstrous Creatures that are Swooping.
>>Makes sense... but no added bonus to Jump/Jet Pack units? Consolidations: 2D6 pick one, but you only consolidate on your turn. You can charge with your consolidation move. Opponent can overwatch. You only get to fight once per turn, so if you consolidate into a new combat you don’t get to fight, unless your fist combat didn’t fight (opponent flees).
>>This is cool. Adds the idea of 'momentum' to melee troops. Will nearby 6" Tau units be able to overwatch again, if they did use Suppressing Fire in the previous charge? Retreats: 6 + D6 Charge: 2D6, not affected by difficult terrain.
Move through Difficult: 2D6 pick one.
Charge through Difficult: 2D6 (The same, but -2 iniative).
>>This helps melee units without assault grenades (Howling Banshees and Tyranid Warriors/Ravagers).
Reserves: Coming in from Reserves: If there is no enemy in 24” of a particular table edge, units from reserve that use this edge to enter the table can march an additional 12”
>>Very interesting; the game becomes more dynamic. But this isn't very clearly worded. Can I come from a DE player's edge if he brought everything to the center of the table? How about Outflank and Acute Senses? Flyers have the “Patient Hunter” special rule which means they can choose to stay in ongoing reserves.
Assault: Flee: You can chose to immediately lose combat after Hammer of Wrath, before any blows are struck. Iniative roll off as if you had lost combat. If you win, you do a normal Retreat. It happens before pile-ins.
>>Looks a bit like old 5e SM Combat Tactics. If you do receive another charge, would you be able to try Retreat again? Is there a limit/turn per unit? Overwatch: Must win or tie an iniative roll off to overwatch. Cannot overwatch if Gone to Ground or Pinned.
>>I don't like this. Eldar gunline becomes much better than everyone's else (as if they needed the boost). Tau and IG/AM, on the other hand, suffer a lot receiving a charge with this rule, so they'll probably castle even more and buying very long range stuff to kill chargers before they arrive. Or force these armies to throw everything at the enemy. At least Tau, with Supporting Fire, will have some luck getting a 2 in 3-4 units overwatching. More MoS to CSM?Necrons will depend even more on their Flyers to attack before being attacked. Charge through Cover: -2 to initiative unless assault grenades or unit being assaulted has Gone to Ground or been Pinned.
Initiative: All models strike at their common Initiative unless they are in a Challenge, or are using Unwieldy weapons like power fists. If a unit has 3 Power Fists, and 2 Chainswords they all strike at Initiative 1.
>>Whoa, this is a big one. No matter how many Power Swords you have with your Honour Guard, the CM with a TH/SS would make all of them strike at Init 1. Poor Blood Angels and their ICs with Power Axes everywhere. Hammer of Wrath: Counts as part of combat resolution.
Assaulting Vehicles and Buildings: If the vehicle doesn’t have a WS (walker), then you Sweep Attack them rather than Assault them.
>>Seems very strange to sweep a vehicle. Non-Walkers do not possess initative; how the test would be done?
Psychic Powers: Most happen at the end of the movement phase rather than the start. You have to roll for Warp charges like fantasy (complexity 4?)
Psychic powers do not require line of sight.
>>End of movement phase means blessings and maledictions from Deep Strike/Reserve fellas. Not requiring line of sight? Why? And they could add a line to clarify if the same PP stack or not (AFAIK they do now, don't they?)
Unit Types: Jump Infantry: Can use jump packs in all phases. If In difficult, and you use Jump pack, must take dangerous terrain test. Jump Packs in assault give HOW but not Rerolls.
>>I think re-rolling the charge distance is better than HoW, but ok. This eats a lot on RG chapter tactics, but at least they'll be the only ones re-rolling charge with jump units Chariots: can Sweep Attack
Bikes: can Sweep Attack
>>They can in 6th, can't they? Vehicles: D6 S6 Hammer of Wrath and have Sweep Attack which seems to replace Tank Shock. Walkers do D6 S:Unit Hammer of Wrath. “Death or Glory” against vehicle sweep attacks mean all models in unit Snapshoot at rear armor, or all models within 3” do CC attacks against rear armor. Must take fear test or WS:1. If they fail to stop the vehicle, then they take 2D6 S6 Hammer of Wrath. Only get cover saves against other vehicles.
>>HoW on vehicles not only makes a lot of sense, it's more fluid than Tank Shock. But why does DoG hit REAR armour? AV 10 is too fragile. I'd do this with a vehicle that has nothing else to add in the battle or a LR/Sicaran/IK and stuff like that. And not getting cover from infantry? Why? MCs are generally as big as vehicles (if not bigger) and have none of this. Light Walkers: Only do 1 Hammer of Wrath. I’m thinking Killa Kans, Scout Sentinal, War Walkers.
Swarms: Take D3 wounds to Template weapons (flamers).
Special Rules: Fleet add an extra D6, and can discard a D6 in all random moves. No Rerolls.
Move through cover, and you ignore the effects of Difficult Terrain (6” move, no iniative penalty for assault), but not Dangerous.
>>I like both changes. Shrouded: -2 to BS >>Wow. Guardsmen shooting at BS 1, Marines/'Low' Eldar at 2, 'High' Eldar at 3 against Nurgle stuff, Venomthrope-supported Nids, Stealth Suits, Invisilble enemies... Will Ignores Cover apply to it as well? I think this is even better than +2 cover saves Stealth: +1 to Cover
Fearless: Cannot chose to Flee
Preferred Enemy: +1 to hit for both Melee and Shooting.
>>I think this translates the idea of such USR better than just re-rolling 1s. BS5 doesn't need it, however. Bulky: gives Hammer of Wrath.
>>Termies with HoW? hooray! Suits, Centurions and a lot of other things will get it as well. Hit and Run: Gives Sweep Attack, cannot leave combat.
Sweep Attack: Close combat attack in the movement phase can only hit ground targets, and can be hit back. Pause during movement, cannot be within 1”. Any model within 3” can attack, and then finish movement. No Pile-ins allowed. Can be part of a Run Move. You can still shoot after a Sweep Attack. Does include Hammer of Wrath.
>>This seems to translate H&R better than jumping in-and-out of combat, but sounds very complicated. Vector Strike: D6 S:Unit AP:- auto hits. Hits Rear Armor. Swooping must pass within 3” of model being vector strike (no longer have to pass over). Does not count as shooting a weapon. All hits are precision hits.
>>Lost AP3, but double hitting possibility and REAR armour. Chance to eliminate important people down there. I'd call it a sound buff Look Out Sir: On a 2+ the next closest model takes the wounds. Only 1 Look Out Sir roll for all allocated wounds. Look Out Sir is available to all models with special weapons.
>>Harder to snipe special weapon, but way easier to get the warlord/support IC. Regeneration: 4+ to recover a wound. Grants Feel No Pain.
>>More buffs to MCs!
Other Rules: Snapshooting: -3 BS.
High BS: No Rerolls for BS > 6. 1 always misses, 6 always hits.
>>re-rolls make the game slower. The less we have, the better. Snapshooting at -3 BS is a small buff to 'High' Eldar/ICs.
FOC: HQ: 0-25%, must have 1 warlord
Elite: 0-25%
Troops: 20-75%
Fast Attack: 0-25%
Heavy Support: 0-25%
Secondary Detachments: 0-25%, it includes Allies, Fortifications, Formations, Lords of War and can also include units from your primary codex. You can have 3, but must pick one after rolling for game, deployment and first turn. The player who wins first turn must select first. See example below.
Allies: Allies are part of the Secondary Detachment, but count in Primary FOC. They do not have a troop or HQ limit, and you must have only 1 ally per Secondary detachment, but you can take formations from other allies.
Fortifications: Fortifications are part of the Secondary Detachment.
Formations: Formations are part of the Secondary Detachment, and don’t count in the Primary FOC.
Lords of War: If one player brings a Lord of war and the other player does not, the first player must declare his Secondary Detachment first, and the opponent has a chance to bring fourth Secondary Detachment. Any Heavy Support in this special Secondary Detachment do not count against the Heavy Support Limit.
>>These rules are a bit confusing. They're trying to rein in allies shenanigans, but this picking before the game even began strikes me unnecessarily complex. And, of course, Formations do not eat FOC.
At first glance, I saw no nerfs to MCs... just buffs (specially to FMC). Jeebus.
If this is true, suddenly all Tyranid lists have 3 or 4 models with Regeneration. That and I think they'll see an influx of players.
krazynadechukr wrote: Love the misspellings and gramatical errors in the first (anonymous, btw) rumor... "as off today" & "known lossed" & "in there shops."
I think you'll find you fell prey to Muphry's Law.
Also, good spelling and grammar don't a good rumor make. Not that you have the best track record for figuring out which rumors are good or not.
Idolator wrote: Computers track and calculate the amounts of sales, these are done instantaneously at the time of sale. It is then merely a number that has to be placed on a certain line of the report which is then also calculated by a computer. That part is incredibly simple. When working retail I could tell you the sales of every store from the chain in any country for any given day. If I wanted to tell you the figures for the whole company for the entire year, all I had to do was use two scroll down menus and wait less than a second. They aren't slaving away somewhere adding numbers together with a pencil from sales reports coming in on a ticker tape machine.
That would however be deliciously in character with the narrative they forge in 40k! Just add in the flying skull of a former retail red shirt that didn't meet his sales quota and the mental image is complete.
If they make Overwatch hinge on a Initative check, They might as well take it out of the game. the Armies that rely on Overwatch to stay out of assault have low init... Or don't care about assault in the first place.
Unless they go at full BS, then it's a pretty decent trade.
now picture dark elder with poisoned shooting overwatching at full BS.......
I've tried to distilled the 40k specific rules from that giant chat log:
Spoiler:
Movement: Run: D6 or 2D6 for Flying Monstrous Creatures that are Swooping.
>>Makes sense... but no added bonus to Jump/Jet Pack units? <- it wasn't clear to me one way or the other.
Consolidations: 2D6 pick one, but you only consolidate on your turn. You can charge with your consolidation move. Opponent can overwatch. You only get to fight once per turn, so if you consolidate into a new combat you don’t get to fight, unless your fist combat didn’t fight (opponent flees).
>>This is cool. Adds the idea of 'momentum' to melee troops. Will nearby 6" Tau units be able to overwatch again, if they did use Suppressing Fire in the previous charge? Retreats: 6 + D6 Charge: 2D6, not affected by difficult terrain.
Move through Difficult: 2D6 pick one.
Charge through Difficult: 2D6 (The same, but -2 iniative).
>>This helps melee units without assault grenades (Howling Banshees and Tyranid Warriors/Ravagers).
Reserves: Coming in from Reserves: If there is no enemy in 24” of a particular table edge, units from reserve that use this edge to enter the table can march an additional 12”
>>Very interesting; the game becomes more dynamic. But this isn't very clearly worded. Can I come from a DE player's edge if he brought everything to the center of the table? How about Outflank and Acute Senses? <- no specific information here. My guess is it doesn't effect which board edge you come in from, just how far you move when you come in.
Flyers have the “Patient Hunter” special rule which means they can choose to stay in ongoing reserves.
Assault: Flee: You can chose to immediately lose combat after Hammer of Wrath, before any blows are struck. Iniative roll off as if you had lost combat. If you win, you do a normal Retreat. It happens before pile-ins.
>>Looks a bit like old 5e SM Combat Tactics. If you do receive another charge, would you be able to try Retreat again? Is there a limit/turn per unit? <- I should have added losing the initiative roll off means you are destroyed. They might have mentioned a scenario of what happens if you already fled once, but I'm not sure.
Overwatch: Must win or tie an iniative roll off to overwatch. Cannot overwatch if Gone to Ground or Pinned.
>>I don't like this. Eldar gunline becomes much better than everyone's else (as if they needed the boost). Tau and IG/AM, on the other hand, suffer a lot receiving a charge with this rule, so they'll probably castle even more and buying very long range stuff to kill chargers before they arrive. Or force these armies to throw everything at the enemy. At least Tau, with Supporting Fire, will have some luck getting a 2 in 3-4 units overwatching. More MoS to CSM?Necrons will depend even more on their Flyers to attack before being attacked. Charge through Cover: -2 to initiative unless assault grenades or unit being assaulted has Gone to Ground or been Pinned.
Initiative: All models strike at their common Initiative unless they are in a Challenge, or are using Unwieldy weapons like power fists. If a unit has 3 Power Fists, and 2 Chainswords they all strike at Initiative 1.
>>Whoa, this is a big one. No matter how many Power Swords you have with your Honour Guard, the CM with a TH/SS would make all of them strike at Init 1. Poor Blood Angels and their ICs with Power Axes everywhere. Hammer of Wrath: Counts as part of combat resolution.
Assaulting Vehicles and Buildings: If the vehicle doesn’t have a WS (walker), then you Sweep Attack them rather than Assault them.
>>Seems very strange to sweep a vehicle. Non-Walkers do not possess initative; how the test would be done? <- They can't attack back or overwatch so no need for initiative.
Psychic Powers: Most happen at the end of the movement phase rather than the start. You have to roll for Warp charges like fantasy (complexity 4?)
Psychic powers do not require line of sight.
>>End of movement phase means blessings and maledictions from Deep Strike/Reserve fellas. Not requiring line of sight? Why? And they could add a line to clarify if the same PP stack or not (AFAIK they do now, don't they?) <- The fluff explanation is that "Warp Sight" is not the same as regular sight.
Unit Types: Jump Infantry: Can use jump packs in all phases. If In difficult, and you use Jump pack, must take dangerous terrain test. Jump Packs in assault give HOW but not Rerolls.
>>I think re-rolling the charge distance is better than HoW, but ok. This eats a lot on RG chapter tactics, but at least they'll be the only ones re-rolling charge with jump units Chariots: can Sweep Attack
Bikes: can Sweep Attack
>>They can in 6th, can't they? <- "Sweep attack" is a new thing. You are thinking of sweeping an enemy post combat resolution. The new Sweep Attack is more like vector strike.
Vehicles: D6 S6 Hammer of Wrath and have Sweep Attack which seems to replace Tank Shock. Walkers do D6 S:Unit Hammer of Wrath. “Death or Glory” against vehicle sweep attacks mean all models in unit Snapshoot at rear armor, or all models within 3” do CC attacks against rear armor. Must take fear test or WS:1. If they fail to stop the vehicle, then they take 2D6 S6 Hammer of Wrath. Only get cover saves against other vehicles.
>>HoW on vehicles not only makes a lot of sense, it's more fluid than Tank Shock. But why does DoG hit REAR armour? AV 10 is too fragile. I'd do this with a vehicle that has nothing else to add in the battle or a LR/Sicaran/IK and stuff like that. And not getting cover from infantry? Why? MCs are generally as big as vehicles (if not bigger) and have none of this. <- Fluff explanation is that because the vehicle is passing by, the unit death or Glorying can hold their fire for the back armor or weak points. I don't know if MC's lose cover against infantry. They might.
Light Walkers: Only do 1 Hammer of Wrath. I’m thinking Killa Kans, Scout Sentinal, War Walkers.
Swarms: Take D3 wounds to Template weapons (flamers).
Special Rules: Fleet add an extra D6, and can discard a D6 in all random moves. No Rerolls.
Move through cover, and you ignore the effects of Difficult Terrain (6” move, no iniative penalty for assault), but not Dangerous.
>>I like both changes. Shrouded: -2 to BS >>Wow. Guardsmen shooting at BS 1, Marines/'Low' Eldar at 2, 'High' Eldar at 3 against Nurgle stuff, Venomthrope-supported Nids, Stealth Suits, Invisilble enemies... Will Ignores Cover apply to it as well? I think this is even better than +2 cover saves <- I have no more information. It was kind of a off hand comment that I may have interpreted wrong.
Stealth: +1 to Cover
Fearless: Cannot chose to Flee
Preferred Enemy: +1 to hit for both Melee and Shooting.
>>I think this translates the idea of such USR better than just re-rolling 1s. BS5 doesn't need it, however. <- BS5 doesn't get it. 1 is always a miss. No more Rerolls for BS6+
Bulky: gives Hammer of Wrath.
>>Termies with HoW? hooray! Suits, Centurions and a lot of other things will get it as well. Hit and Run: Gives Sweep Attack, cannot leave combat.
Sweep Attack: Close combat attack in the movement phase can only hit ground targets, and can be hit back. Pause during movement, cannot be within 1”. Any model within 3” can attack, and then finish movement. No Pile-ins allowed. Can be part of a Run Move. You can still shoot after a Sweep Attack. Does include Hammer of Wrath.
>>This seems to translate H&R better than jumping in-and-out of combat, but sounds very complicated. <- It does seem very complicated. I had a hard time figuring out how to word it. They suggested there was a whole box about it in the rule book.
Vector Strike: D6 S:Unit AP:- auto hits. Hits Rear Armor. Swooping must pass within 3” of model being vector strike (no longer have to pass over). Does not count as shooting a weapon. All hits are precision hits.
>>Lost AP3, but double hitting possibility and REAR armour. Chance to eliminate important people down there. I'd call it a sound buff <- It loses Ignores Cover, which is a bit of a Nerf, but overall seems buffed.
Look Out Sir: On a 2+ the next closest model takes the wounds. Only 1 Look Out Sir roll for all allocated wounds. Look Out Sir is available to all models with special weapons.
>>Harder to snipe special weapon, but way easier to get the warlord/support IC. Regeneration: 4+ to recover a wound. Grants Feel No Pain.
>>More buffs to MCs! <- This might be a change that only effects fantasy. It was hard to tell. I went back and forward on if this should be included in my summary.
Other Rules: Snapshooting: -3 BS.
High BS: No Rerolls for BS > 6. 1 always misses, 6 always hits.
>>re-rolls make the game slower. The less we have, the better. Snapshooting at -3 BS is a small buff to 'High' Eldar/ICs.
FOC: HQ: 0-25%, must have 1 warlord
Elite: 0-25%
Troops: 20-75%
Fast Attack: 0-25%
Heavy Support: 0-25%
Secondary Detachments: 0-25%, it includes Allies, Fortifications, Formations, Lords of War and can also include units from your primary codex. You can have 3, but must pick one after rolling for game, deployment and first turn. The player who wins first turn must select first. See example below.
Allies: Allies are part of the Secondary Detachment, but count in Primary FOC. They do not have a troop or HQ limit, and you must have only 1 ally per Secondary detachment, but you can take formations from other allies.
Fortifications: Fortifications are part of the Secondary Detachment.
Formations: Formations are part of the Secondary Detachment, and don’t count in the Primary FOC.
Lords of War: If one player brings a Lord of war and the other player does not, the first player must declare his Secondary Detachment first, and the opponent has a chance to bring fourth Secondary Detachment. Any Heavy Support in this special Secondary Detachment do not count against the Heavy Support Limit.
>>These rules are a bit confusing. They're trying to rein in allies shenanigans, but this picking before the game even began strikes me unnecessarily complex. And, of course, Formations do not eat FOC. <- If I show up to a game, and someone tries to list tailor to me, I might be pissed. Formations do not eat FOC, but they do eat Secondary Detachment limits. The FOC changes are what excites me the most, but also seem to have the most initial resistance. I think once people start using the percentage system they will love it.
At first glance, I saw no nerfs to MCs... just buffs (specially to FMC). Jeebus.
Some of your initial reaction was due to how I chose to summarize things. I play Tyranids, and my buddy plays Tau, and I was mainly putting together this summery to talk over with him, so I paid special attention to things that would impact our games. If you want to get the full details, I suggest you read the original chat logs that I was trying to summarize. They can be found at the link I posted.
ClockworkZion wrote:From what customer service told me: yes. If it's "No Longer Available" it is gone. I'm hoping we'll just get a Finecast or plastic replacement soon to make up for the loss of the old metal one.
Things are a bit more complicated:
Codex Militarum Tempestus was listed as "No longer available" in North America 2 days after release. And now North America is the only place that lists them as available:
Spoiler:
Also, GW webstores for Europe don't state availablility, but give you the option to put the book on a wishlist, usually done for reprints.
ClockworkZion wrote:The fiscal year ends in May, the new set would go on sale in June which is FY 2015, too late to actually affect this year.
The first post is quite consistent about it:
Preorders start 24th May, release 31st May, so peak sales online and by stores are in May. This is clearly to compensate for the sales drop in the previous 11 months, so that they can hide the decline one more year to the casual observer, who only sees another flat annual total revenue. Will GW be able to release another Space Marine Codex and another new 40k edition and another flood of new Codices and armybooks to keep the revenue flat for another year? Doubtfull!
ClockworkZion wrote:I just realized the title of the thread says "Old English" rulebook discontinued. Gods and here I was thinking the rules were in modern English. No wonder they're so unclear!
That would have been Ye Olde English Rulebook Anyway, title changed as all other language editions are withdrawn from the shop as well.
Kroothawk wrote: Preorders start 24th May, release 31st May, so peak sales online and by stores are in May. This is clearly to compensate for the sales drop in the previous 11 months, so that for the casual observer, annual total revenue looks more or less flat.
Oh good, let's encourage MSU spam and ban using multiple tanks below 2000 points. Oh, and we'd better take all that Escalation nonsense back out of the game.
I don't see a problem with this. Will help to stop Death Stars which quite frankly ruin the game for most people.
Plus it might help my DE in Purge the Alien missions. Its stupid when I practically table my opponent, have half my army left but still lose on kill points because I have 22 to give away and my opponent has 11.
I wonder if this release will backfire on GW. Every last gamer in my group has sworn to stick with 6th edition, warts and all. A lot of new games have come out that cost around the same as a core rule book and contain EVERYTHING you will ever need. I am to the point with 40k where I want to trim the fat and sell 60% of my collection. Not buy more GW garbage from now until the end of time. I have a definite end-game when it comes to collecting 40k now. In years past, my attitude was that I would never be done collecting until the day I die. Now, the prices are so outrageous that I am trying to be done with buying into 40k altogether. I have 10s of thousands of points worth of models to assemble and/or paint. Models to keep me occupied for years to come. All of the rules that I own still function and it may not be perfect, but I don't have time for GW's crap anymore. People take this game way too seriously anyway and I will be happy to play the complete version I own and focus my money towards other companies that do things right.
Oh good, let's encourage MSU spam and ban using multiple tanks below 2000 points. Oh, and we'd better take all that Escalation nonsense back out of the game.
I don't see a problem with this. Will help to stop Death Stars which quite frankly ruin the game for most people.
Plus it might help my DE in Purge the Alien missions. Its stupid when I practically table my opponent, have half my army left but still lose on kill points because I have 22 to give away and my opponent has 11.
Yea I agree. I have far less issues with MSU then I do with stupid unkillable units making a boring rubber match.
Kroothawk wrote: Preorders start 24th May, release 31st May, so peak sales online and by stores are in May. This is clearly to compensate for the sales drop in the previous 11 months, so that for the casual observer, annual total revenue looks more or less flat.
Tinfoil hat engaged!
I don't know why a tinfoil hat would be needed. It would be a prudent short term business practice. Long term...not so much.
It would buy time to make some changes to improve the business without having a large sell off of shares leading to disaster. It also would have the added effect of keeping share prices up for six months allowing those in the know to quietly sell off their interests before panic selling or a hostile takeover.
Kroothawk wrote: Preorders start 24th May, release 31st May, so peak sales online and by stores are in May. This is clearly to compensate for the sales drop in the previous 11 months, so that for the casual observer, annual total revenue looks more or less flat.
Tinfoil hat engaged!
Only when the last HQ has been closed,
the last GW event has been cancelled,
the last store has reduced its staff and opening hours to nil,
the last non-English support has been stopped, and
the last customer has quit due to quadrupling of prices,
only then will you notice that GW might have a problem
BTW reminds me: Given GW's recent trend to not translate most game related words, the new non-English language rulebooks will probably look like google translates "Kapitel™ 17™: Special Rules™:
Ein Modell mit der 'Move through Cover'™ Sonderregel besteht automatisch 'Dangerous Terrain'™ Tests."
I'm a big fan of all things 40k, but if it's another full version which follows the same core system then I might well be done. I'm still trying to get my head around some of the rules in 6th, and feel that this is just too soon. We've just got our 6th edition house rules sorted!
If it is a complete overhaul then I would be very happy. The clunky UGOIGO system is looking very dated, and the amount of USRs is almost prohibitive. I'm flirting with other games, and a new edition without a serious revamp may be enough to make me take the kids to grandma's and file for a divorce.
If it's a consolidation into '6.5' with Escalation into the core rules and a cool new starter set, then I'll stick with it until 7th.
Couldn't it just be that GW is out of printed books and they made them unavailable til they print new ones? Then people saw it was unavailable and started firing up rumors of 6.5/7th edition?
If we are getting a new edition/consolidation of rulebooks, I hope they fix some of the errors in the current edition and stream line the rules. Maybe these new rules will bring the power level of 6th edition armies in line a little better.......*pops happy pills* I can still dream!!!
Idolator wrote: Then please direct me to the page that details the sales figures for the Codex Space Marines book, or the revenue generated by the sale of Captain Badrukk model, or the sales of printed rules material from September 2013.
Edit:
The reason why these types of things aren't listed in public investor reports is to protect businesses. Anyone could take these figures and correlate them to determine exactly which products and business practices provide the the most revenue from the company as well as pinpointing weaknesses for other businesses to exploit. I'm sure that competitors would love to know if there is a big demand for orc models wearing pirate garb, or that there is a greater demand for scary space elves than that for good-hearted space elves. Even breaking down the report into monthly increments would give this kind of information.
I never said it got that detailed, just that do need to break things down and often explain them in more detail. For example if you look at the report for 2013 you can find the below on page 33 (for the record they spent 56,032,000 GBP in FY 2013 (you just subtract the supply costs out to get the number) on "sales" which would be largely the B&Ms, a large reason why I think they'd make more if they'd just cut the stores and operate purely through FLGS stores like other wargaming companies do) (edit: it's on the bottom because of how attachments stack into the mix apparently):
Kroothawk wrote: Preorders start 24th May, release 31st May, so peak sales online and by stores are in May. This is clearly to compensate for the sales drop in the previous 11 months, so that for the casual observer, annual total revenue looks more or less flat.
Tinfoil hat engaged!
Pft, that's purely amateur hour. Tinfoil HOUSE engaged!
Oh good, let's encourage MSU spam and ban using multiple tanks below 2000 points. Oh, and we'd better take all that Escalation nonsense back out of the game.
I don't see a problem with this. Will help to stop Death Stars which quite frankly ruin the game for most people.
Plus it might help my DE in Purge the Alien missions. Its stupid when I practically table my opponent, have half my army left but still lose on kill points because I have 22 to give away and my opponent has 11.
Yea I agree. I have far less issues with MSU then I do with stupid unkillable units making a boring rubber match.
Agreed. Deathstars have been the thing that utterly ruined 40k to so many players. They tended to make the actual game a formality in which you either had a deathstar of equal or greater value, or you got to spend several turns picking your models up off the board without inflicting any damage in return. The rumored FOC changes make a huge step toward fixing that problem, so I applaud it.
I also think it is worth noting that the FOC doesn't outlaw deathstars outright. You can still use most of them, but only in higher point games. So if you love your Ovesa-star, you can play 3000 point games, and if you want to avoid Ovesa-stars, just play 1500 point games. It is a scalability that was lacking in the old FOC. This also addresses the issues with Lord of Wars. On Saturday at my FLGS, I setup to play a guy, and we had to pre-negotiate our game, because he wanted to play his LOW, but I don't have one, so to keep the game fun, he changed up his list. With percentage FOC rules, LOW don't unlock until higher point games, and the pre-negotiation has been formalized so that there are fewer negative feelings when someone does bring a deathstar or a LOW.
Even the Imperial Knight becomes more manageable. You basically can't ally one in if you are playing less than 1850, and you can only bring in 1 until 3500 or so.
When I go to the FLGS, every conversation about 40k revolves around how it is broken because of this deathstar build or that deathstar build, or this spam list or that spam list. We've got groups of players that don't want to play outside their group because of not fun games against deathstars or spam builds that have soured them on the 40k player base as a whole. I expect a percentage FOC to make a good step toward improving this, and the greater scalability is just awesome.
If it's because you're going for a limited edition, then it seems like complaining about the price is rather silly.
No limited edition rule book. It was the first hard cover book. Now I forget how much I paid for. I thought it was around $100 Canadian for it.
But seeing how much codicies are now, and how little content some of them have, and how much was in the last rule book, and IF were are suppose to get Stronghold Assault and Escalation, I can't see GW selling it any less than $150 if not $200 since that how much it would cost you now to but all 3 books.
Grot 6 wrote: Really wish this game was a viable choice. How far the mighty have fallen.
If GW maintains its track record of the odd numbers being the good ones then this will be a great edition! Otherwise brace for the flood of angry tears!
Idolator wrote: Then please direct me to the page that details the sales figures for the Codex Space Marines book, or the revenue generated by the sale of Captain Badrukk model, or the sales of printed rules material from September 2013.
Edit:
The reason why these types of things aren't listed in public investor reports is to protect businesses. Anyone could take these figures and correlate them to determine exactly which products and business practices provide the the most revenue from the company as well as pinpointing weaknesses for other businesses to exploit. I'm sure that competitors would love to know if there is a big demand for orc models wearing pirate garb, or that there is a greater demand for scary space elves than that for good-hearted space elves. Even breaking down the report into monthly increments would give this kind of information.
I never said it got that detailed, just that do need to break things down and often explain them in more detail. For example if you look at the report for 2013 you can find the below on page 33 (for the record they spent 56,032,000 GBP in FY 2013 (you just subtract the supply costs out to get the number) on "sales" which would be largely the B&Ms, a large reason why I think they'd make more if they'd just cut the stores and operate purely through FLGS stores like other wargaming companies do):
What the heck does any of that have to do with what we were discussing? I know that you can find things like that. Never said that you couldn't .
We were discussing the fact that sales made in May could not be discerned from the information that they publish. That revenue gets lumped into the rest of the year and no one outside the board of directors or management staff have any idea if the revenue came in the last week of May or the month after the mid-year report. Making the bottom line sales and revenue figures look good.
Only those that follow the company closely would even be able to make the educated guess that this is merely due to a clever marketing ploy to increase demand for the most necessary component, in the final weeks of the fiscal year, and that this ploy would not be easily repeated.
Edit: You don't subtract those supply costs. They are inherently part of total expenditures. Expenditure in this case means monies spent.
I would buy it but it would be very frustrating to me. I am on a limited budget and I would have to buy 2 rulebooks (my 10 yo daughter plays as well). While that is dooable that would mean that I would no be able to buy any models that month. Also frustrating that I just started playing 8 weeks ago.
On the plus side everyone will have to learn the rules at the same time as me so it will even the playing field some.
Idolator wrote: Then please direct me to the page that details the sales figures for the Codex Space Marines book, or the revenue generated by the sale of Captain Badrukk model, or the sales of printed rules material from September 2013.
Edit:
The reason why these types of things aren't listed in public investor reports is to protect businesses. Anyone could take these figures and correlate them to determine exactly which products and business practices provide the the most revenue from the company as well as pinpointing weaknesses for other businesses to exploit. I'm sure that competitors would love to know if there is a big demand for orc models wearing pirate garb, or that there is a greater demand for scary space elves than that for good-hearted space elves. Even breaking down the report into monthly increments would give this kind of information.
I never said it got that detailed, just that do need to break things down and often explain them in more detail. For example if you look at the report for 2013 you can find the below on page 33 (for the record they spent 56,032,000 GBP in FY 2013 (you just subtract the supply costs out to get the number) on "sales" which would be largely the B&Ms, a large reason why I think they'd make more if they'd just cut the stores and operate purely through FLGS stores like other wargaming companies do):
What the heck does any of that have to do with what we were discussing? I know that you can find things like that. Never said that you couldn't .
We were discussing the fact that sales made in May could not be discerned from the information that they publish. That revenue gets lumped into the rest of the year and no one outside the board of directors or management staff have any idea if the revenue came in the last week of May or the month after the mid-year report. Making the bottom line sales and revenue figures look good.
Only those that follow the company closely would even be able to make the educated guess that this is merely due to a clever marketing ploy to increase demand for the most necessary component, in the final weeks of the fiscal year, and that this ploy would not be easily repeated.
You did skip past my whole comment about the company being open to this point about large changes to the product line (for example: launching the new paint line) for you to be correct they'd have to be mum on this.
Idolator wrote: Then please direct me to the page that details the sales figures for the Codex Space Marines book, or the revenue generated by the sale of Captain Badrukk model, or the sales of printed rules material from September 2013.
Edit:
The reason why these types of things aren't listed in public investor reports is to protect businesses. Anyone could take these figures and correlate them to determine exactly which products and business practices provide the the most revenue from the company as well as pinpointing weaknesses for other businesses to exploit. I'm sure that competitors would love to know if there is a big demand for orc models wearing pirate garb, or that there is a greater demand for scary space elves than that for good-hearted space elves. Even breaking down the report into monthly increments would give this kind of information.
I never said it got that detailed, just that do need to break things down and often explain them in more detail. For example if you look at the report for 2013 you can find the below on page 33 (for the record they spent 56,032,000 GBP in FY 2013 (you just subtract the supply costs out to get the number) on "sales" which would be largely the B&Ms, a large reason why I think they'd make more if they'd just cut the stores and operate purely through FLGS stores like other wargaming companies do):
What the heck does any of that have to do with what we were discussing? I know that you can find things like that. Never said that you couldn't .
We were discussing the fact that sales made in May could not be discerned from the information that they publish. That revenue gets lumped into the rest of the year and no one outside the board of directors or management staff have any idea if the revenue came in the last week of May or the month after the mid-year report. Making the bottom line sales and revenue figures look good.
Only those that follow the company closely would even be able to make the educated guess that this is merely due to a clever marketing ploy to increase demand for the most necessary component, in the final weeks of the fiscal year, and that this ploy would not be easily repeated.
You did skip past my whole comment about the company being open to this point about large changes to the product line (for example: launching the new paint line) for you to be correct they'd have to be mum on this.
a
Where did you comment on the company being open about large changes in their product line? I honestly didn't see it?
Besides that.....Huh!?
How does advertising a new product have anything to to with reporting when money was made on a twice a year basis? Of course they're open about what they currently sell, they aren't running a speak-easy. They aren't open about new products in the works or which products are discontinued. Otherwise there wouldn't be internet threads dedicated to rumors.
I really hope these rumors are false, which I believe them to be. The starter box seems really lame. If it was generic marines I'd be a little more excited, but Blood Angels? No. Not interested.
Some of those rumored rules just add more dice rolling.
Since when has GW ever pulled a book when there's a new one being released? And if they did pull the book because there's a new edition, why is the digital edition still available?
Ghaz wrote: Since when has GW ever pulled a book when there's a new one being released? And if they did pull the book because there's a new edition, why is the digital edition still available?
Because a digital verstion dosen't take up shelf sapce, thus they can keep makeing money off of it.
Also the French Verstion of Dark Vengence is no longer on the Canadian GW site. Not sure if that's recent or not.
whembly wrote: Hmmm... interestingly, you can't place the rule book in the online cart.
Must be for realz?
I'm digging it since the next Ork codex would be 7th ed "ready".
Take it from me, as a CSM player. You really don't want to be the first codex after an edition when their good intentions haven't been completely dissolved yet. Judging by this edition you want to be 4th/5th in line to catch the writers when they're peaking.
MarsNZ wrote: Take it from me, as a CSM player. You really don't want to be the first codex after an edition when their good intentions haven't been completely dissolved yet. Judging by this edition you want to be 4th/5th in line to catch the writers when they're peaking.
Meh, not really true. The 4th ed Ork and Daemon books both were solid throughout 5th ed. Likewise 5th ed Necrons were great throughout 6th. There's really nothing about writers peaking in stride, CSM just kinda got the short end of the stick.
hotsauceman1 wrote: I believe it is coming, it just isn't going to fix the game like everyone thinks
A minor (really minor) quibble - it isn't going to fix the game like everyone hopes, not thinks.
There are a fair number of folks that don't expect it to fix the game - but I think that everyone at least hopes that it does. (Even if those hopes are low.)
Goresaw wrote: The rule book will be $80, full color hardback. It will contain tons of pictures of all the minatures, explain the lore and the fluff, and demonstrate several kinds of special scenarios.
As for rules, it will be 1 page explaining a D6, and then 60 blank pages for you to write your own rules for the game so you can forge your own narrative with an ultimate freedom like never before.
So, still an improvement over sixth edition, then?
I had my heart set on a June release of the new Ork Codex and Minis only to find out that GW is going to grace us with a new Rule Book, version 6.5 or 7 or other wise.
GW, Keep the new Fething Rule Book and release the new Ork Codex and Minis already!
I had my heart set on a June release of the new Ork Codex and Minis only to find out that GW is going to grace us with a new Rule Book, version 6.5 or 7 or other wise.
GW, Keep the new Fething Rule Book and release the new Ork Codex and Minis already!
I'm desperate for the new Ork stuff, but I figure his gives me more time to save up for the inevitable one click wallet murder.
I can't wait for this edition to hit, and tick off a bunch of people. Maybe they will all leave the game, and Dakka can be a place where gamers that love Warhammer can discuss their hobby, instead of post 7 pages of moaning and complaining and threats to go to a different game....
Oh wait...what am I saying...this is the internet...
CaptainLoken wrote: I can't wait for this edition to hit, and tick off a bunch of people. Maybe they will all leave the game, and Dakka can be a place where gamers that love Warhammer can discuss their hobby, instead of post 7 pages of moaning and complaining and threats to go to a different game....
Oh wait...what am I saying...this is the internet...
Splendid contribution guy, still surprises me that people think moaning about moaners is apparently a hip thing to be doing.
I had my heart set on a June release of the new Ork Codex and Minis only to find out that GW is going to grace us with a new Rule Book, version 6.5 or 7 or other wise.
GW, Keep the new Fething Rule Book and release the new Ork Codex and Minis already!
I'm desperate for the new Ork stuff, but I figure his gives me more time to save up for the inevitable one click wallet murder.
Yeah, If this is the case, they will have officially priced me out. I played IG, Orks and Space Marines. The last set of rules was so bad that I quit playing and was waiting for fixes. Instead I've had or will have every one of my rule sets and core rules invalidated. In less than a year!
For the price of a single codex I can get two starter sets of X-wing, for the price of a BRB and a codex I can get an awesome set up with a bunch of ships to play a complete game with a lot of variety. I believe that other people have noticed similar things as well. Not a good sign for those located in Sherwood Forest.
CaptainLoken wrote: I can't wait for this edition to hit, and tick off a bunch of people. Maybe they will all leave the game, and Dakka can be a place where gamers that love Warhammer can discuss their hobby, instead of post 7 pages of moaning and complaining and threats to go to a different game....
Oh wait...what am I saying...this is the internet...
Yeah, there are people out there that don't complain every single post about just a game with plastic game pieces. The gaming group I'm with still has fun with the critically derided 'Worst edition of 40k'.
Honestly, why would people expect a completely awesome new edition after only 2 years and about half of the codices are still not updated yet.
CaptainLoken wrote: I can't wait for this edition to hit, and tick off a bunch of people. Maybe they will all leave the game, and Dakka can be a place where gamers that love Warhammer can discuss their hobby, instead of post 7 pages of moaning and complaining and threats to go to a different game....
Oh wait...what am I saying...this is the internet...
I see 7 pages of rumour discussion from people that all seem to have an interest in Warhammer, or Wargaming in general. Which is what this thread is for, no? Dakka would get boring really quickly if everyone had exactly the same opinion.
I saw very little moaning till your post.
ace101 wrote: Honestly, why would people expect a completely awesome new edition after only 2 years and about half of the codices are still not updated yet.
Because the only good reason for releasing a new edition after only 2 years is that they realised what a train-wreck their current edition is?
CaptainLoken wrote: I can't wait for this edition to hit, and tick off a bunch of people. Maybe they will all leave the game, and Dakka can be a place where gamers that love Warhammer can discuss their hobby, instead of post 7 pages of moaning and complaining and threats to go to a different game....
Oh wait...what am I saying...this is the internet...
Yes, because all the complaints are JUST people whining without any reason...
azreal13 wrote: You can still get a June Ork book, the rumours kicking around for a new Edition in May will still be technically correct if it happens.
People are still having trouble adjusting to weekly releases I guess.
I really hope so, Orks are so overdue for a new Codex. Maybe it'll be a blessing in disguise if the Ork release follows hot on the heels of the new RB release and all of the new material and changes get rolled into the new Ork Codex.
azreal13 wrote: You can still get a June Ork book, the rumours kicking around for a new Edition in May will still be technically correct if it happens.
People are still having trouble adjusting to weekly releases I guess.
I really hope so, Orks are so overdue for a new Codex. Maybe it'll be a blessing in disguise if the Ork release follows hot on the heels of the new RB release and all of the new material and changes get rolled into the new Ork Codex.
It's just taking the Waaagh a little while to build up.
Customer Service finally wrote me back. Didn't even put a name on this. Smells of a form email sent out just to hush people's concerns:
Hello there,
Currently the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook is out of stock and I do not have a date as to when they will be back in stock right now. We will have to keep watching the Games Workshop website and White Dwarf for more information. You can still get the mini rulebook in the Dark Vengeance core set. Should you need anything else please give us a call at 1-800-394-4263 and we will work to get you helped out.
Thanks,
Games Workshop
North America Customer Services
Automatically Appended Next Post: The WD part especially makes me laugh as if it's just "out of stock" why would the WD say anything about it!?
CaptainLoken wrote: I can't wait for this edition to hit, and tick off a bunch of people. Maybe they will all leave the game, and Dakka can be a place where gamers that love Warhammer can discuss their hobby, instead of post 7 pages of moaning and complaining and threats to go to a different game....
Dakka is a place where gamers who love Warhammer can discuss their hobby.
Unfortunately, some of them prefer to just gripe about the fact that other people don't currently enjoy the game as much as they do, rather than contributing with the sort of positive discussion they claim to want to see...
A forum is a collection of people all sharing their opinions. More positive discussion only happens if people contribute positively.
azreal13 wrote: You can still get a June Ork book, the rumours kicking around for a new Edition in May will still be technically correct if it happens.
People are still having trouble adjusting to weekly releases I guess.
I really hope so, Orks are so overdue for a new Codex. Maybe it'll be a blessing in disguise if the Ork release follows hot on the heels of the new RB release and all of the new material and changes get rolled into the new Ork Codex.
It's just taking the Waaagh a little while to build up.
I know ... but I'm ready to release the Waaagh right now!
ace101 wrote: Honestly, why would people expect a completely awesome new edition after only 2 years and about half of the codices are still not updated yet.
Because the only good reason for releasing a new edition after only 2 years is that they realised what a train-wreck their current edition is?
Right, because everyone spams deathstars and D weapons Might as well call DakkaDakka the voice of the tournament scene, because everything must be competitive or its utter crap.
azreal13 wrote: You can still get a June Ork book, the rumours kicking around for a new Edition in May will still be technically correct if it happens.
People are still having trouble adjusting to weekly releases I guess.
I really hope so, Orks are so overdue for a new Codex. Maybe it'll be a blessing in disguise if the Ork release follows hot on the heels of the new RB release and all of the new material and changes get rolled into the new Ork Codex.
It's just taking the Waaagh a little while to build up.
I know ... but I'm ready to release the Waaagh right now!
CaptainLoken wrote: I can't wait for this edition to hit, and tick off a bunch of people. Maybe they will all leave the game, and Dakka can be a place where gamers that love Warhammer can discuss their hobby, instead of post 7 pages of moaning and complaining and threats to go to a different game....
Oh wait...what am I saying...this is the internet...
Yes, because all the complaints are JUST people whining without any reason...
You can't complain that this has been the single shortest ruleset! So what that it's only been two years? That's not a legitimate complaint at all you hater!
Just say "Boy, do I love giving GW money!" and walk into your local GW store, give them their $75, and then get the hell out.
ace101 wrote: Right, because everyone spams deathstars and D weapons ...
'Everyone' doesn't need to. Just enough people to make the game not fun for those who don't.
The incredible imbalance inherent in the current system doesn't just hurt competitive play. It hurts casual play more. As has been discussed to death elsewhere.
ClockworkZion wrote: We will have to keep watching the Games Workshop website and White Dwarf for more information.
So North America's customer service gets their product information from the website and White Dwarf now?
That's hilarious.
Except I don't think 'hilarious' is actually the word that I mean.
I think it was more of a "subtle" hint to look at the website and the WD for more information in the future because they can't actually say. Customer Service has full access to the inventory system and all that (for order corrections and the like) so I'm willing to bet they know if something is coming or not.
ClockworkZion wrote: We will have to keep watching the Games Workshop website and White Dwarf for more information.
So North America's customer service gets their product information from the website and White Dwarf now?
That's hilarious.
Except I don't think 'hilarious' is actually the word that I mean.
I think it was more of a "subtle" hint to look at the website and the WD for more information in the future because they can't actually say. Customer Service has full access to the inventory system and all that (for order corrections and the like) so I'm willing to bet they know if something is coming or not.
azreal13 wrote: You can still get a June Ork book, the rumours kicking around for a new Edition in May will still be technically correct if it happens.
People are still having trouble adjusting to weekly releases I guess.
I really hope so, Orks are so overdue for a new Codex. Maybe it'll be a blessing in disguise if the Ork release follows hot on the heels of the new RB release and all of the new material and changes get rolled into the new Ork Codex.
It's just taking the Waaagh a little while to build up.
I know ... but I'm ready to release the Waaagh right now!
ace101 wrote: Honestly, why would people expect a completely awesome new edition after only 2 years and about half of the codices are still not updated yet.
Because the only good reason for releasing a new edition after only 2 years is that they realised what a train-wreck their current edition is?
Right, because everyone spams deathstars and D weapons Might as well call DakkaDakka the voice of the tournament scene, because everything must be competitive or its utter crap.
Having just spent an evening being on the receiving end of Wave Serpent spam full of Dire Avengers backed up with the Wraithknight twins, kindly, for my continued ability to post if nothing else, don't start this nonsense.
Squidbot wrote: "Shut up and wait for the announcement, citizen!"
If this was 1984 perhaps...but generally, yes. I did point out in reply that "out of stock" is not the same as "no longer available" on their website though.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: The starter set sounds like it's going to a bit thin, only 5 Marines, 5 Scouts and a character?
An attempt to discourage picking up multiple starters and trading with others perhaps? Goes well with the rumored incomplete rulebook. Didn't the Hobbit have an incomplete rulebook in the starter to encourage sales of the big book?
AllSeeingSkink wrote: The starter set sounds like it's going to a bit thin, only 5 Marines, 5 Scouts and a character?
An attempt to discourage picking up multiple starters and trading with others perhaps? Goes well with the rumored incomplete rulebook. Didn't the Hobbit have an incomplete rulebook in the starter to encourage sales of the big book?
It did, they didn't include points values so you needed the big book. Although I think they might have released a PDF or added a page to the box around the time the second movie came out to try and encourage people to buy those dusty old limited edition sets.
Eldarain wrote: Didn't the Hobbit have an incomplete rulebook in the starter to encourage sales of the big book?
Nope, The Hobbit had the complete book, but NO stats fore the rest of the units beside the main Hobbit characters in the movie, and what stats they did have, had no point costs. GW did after what 1 year finally give out a PDF for the point costs. Can't remember if the rest of the units were in there as well or not.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: The starter set sounds like it's going to a bit thin, only 5 Marines, 5 Scouts and a character?
An attempt to discourage picking up multiple starters and trading with others perhaps? Goes well with the rumored incomplete rulebook. Didn't the Hobbit have an incomplete rulebook in the starter to encourage sales of the big book?
Brilliant!
"People are buying a ton of starter sets!"
"Well, gak, how do we stop that?"
Much as I like most of the rumored changes, I doubt they are real. My money is on the new book just getting a new cover, integrating FAQ material, and being used to boost the upcoming starter box of BA and Orks.
I also don't quite get the whole fleeing from combat thing. It seems to make most CC even weaker than before: get charged, run away (especially from orks and low-initiative armies), shoot them silly on your turn. The FOC percentage limit is also weird. No using Abaddon, Draigo and pretty much all Greater Daemons at 2000 and lower?
Lots of it is plain common sense, though. High BS no longer being so absurdly better than high WS, overwatch being less of an auto-suicide for non-power weapon CC armies, making Move Through Cover help during assault...
ace101 wrote: Honestly, why would people expect a completely awesome new edition after only 2 years and about half of the codices are still not updated yet.
Because the only good reason for releasing a new edition after only 2 years is that they realised what a train-wreck their current edition is?
Well. Sadly it has to be pointed out that with GW's falling profits they might of just felt they needed a new edition to drive sales up.
Thow it seems to me that the community as a whole has rejected escalation as part of the "standard game". So to me the question is if GW will keep trying to force broken apoc units into 40k.
I played in two tourni in the last two weeks. Been having the most fun playing 40k that i have had in a long time. Dakkaites are so focused in seeing only the negative when it comes to discussing GW.
I heard a rumour next edition codex's and rulebook will be digital only? I Really hope this isn't the case. I like digital for novels and the like (but prefer a physical book) but for the past 14 years i've been a fan of the big rulebook and like the physical codex.
I heard a rumour next edition codex's and rulebook will be digital only? I Really hope this isn't the case. I like digital for novels and the like (but prefer a physical book) but for the past 14 years i've been a fan of the big rulebook and like the physical codex.
Given how well the limited edition hardcovers have been doing, I wouldn't expect this to be true.
Sephyr wrote: I also don't quite get the whole fleeing from combat thing. It seems to make most CC even weaker than before: get charged, run away (especially from orks and low-initiative armies), shoot them silly on your turn.
You can choose to flee. If you do so, it is just as if you have lost combat, and failed your moral test. If you lose an initiative roll-off, then the unit is destroyed, if you win the initiative roll-off then you are running away, and need to pass a leadership test to regroup, and can only shoot snap shots. So, if Termagants (I4) flee from orks(I2), and the Orks roll 2 higher, then the unit is destroyed without getting to attack back. If not, they are snap shooting. It is probably a bad example, because Termagants in synapse are fearless and can't flee even if they wanted to.
Sephyr wrote: The FOC percentage limit is also weird. No using Abaddon, Draigo and pretty much all Greater Daemons at 2000 and lower?
So, I don't play Demons, but my battlescribe tells me Abbadon costs 265, so in order for you to run him, you would have to be playing a 1250 game (max 312): . A 1000 point game only gives you 250 points to spend in HQ. The same is true for Draigo who costs 275. You can play him at 1250, but not 1000. Now, I play against Draigo sometimes, and I would be pissed if someone brought him to a sub-1000 point game, so I think the percentages help to eliminate me being pissed at the player who wants to ambush me with Draigo in a 750 point game.
WarOne wrote: Wasn't even two years....so are we going to see new editions every year now?
It is the only thing that every player must have in order to play the game! So if you have 500,000 players and want to make some money......
Even more true if the hamstrung rulebook in the starter box is true. That would mean that all the people who say that they can just get a cheap copy of the little rules off from eBay for $20 would no longer have that out as the little rulebook would only have quick-play rules for the figures in the starter box.
It would force even more sales if they chose to invalidate all the releases (especially digital releases) from this past year. Those who remain would need to repurchase 7th Edition versions of the various dataslates and supplemental codices...
Granted, that could just be the cynic in me watching this unfold and having to shake my head the absurdity of it all.
I heard a rumour next edition codex's and rulebook will be digital only? I Really hope this isn't the case. I like digital for novels and the like (but prefer a physical book) but for the past 14 years i've been a fan of the big rulebook and like the physical codex.
Given how well the limited edition hardcovers have been doing, I wouldn't expect this to be true.
That is why they will make all the printed copies limited edition (at a quantity not yet defined...say 100,000 or so) and they will sell them at 3 times the previous price. Granted you can buy the eBook version for the low, low price of $100 - a savings of almost $200 off the printed price.
It is a messed up way to run a hobby business - but it is GW's way to run a hobby business.
Don't care what y'all are talking about. I will happily throw down $70 for a new "fixed" edition. Game is fun now, kill death stars and its gonna be golden.
oddworx wrote: Don't care what y'all are talking about. I will happily throw down $70 for a new "fixed" edition. Game is fun now, kill death stars and its gonna be golden.
What makes you think that they would kill those?
If anything - from a business perspective - it would suit GW better to sell more deathstars at a higher cost in dollars per model.
I honestly see things like the Knight codex as a trial balloon for things to come from GW. 1 army with 3 models that costs almost as much as an IG or Ork horde army. The bean counters at GWHQ would rather sell the knights than the IG or Orks. Based on what I have heard - they sold enough of those to probably think it is a good idea moving forward, so as opposed to fixing problems with OP units...I would guess the marching orders will probably be more OP units for everyone.
Btw, I honestly doubt that GW will manage to come up with a proper, balanced, fair, fun, simple yet complex (not complicated!) ruleset
without
AN OPEN BETA and LOTS OF OUTSIDE PLAYTESTING.
Privateer Press did this some years ago before they released their MK2 of Warmachine. It did the system SOOOOO good to have thousends of people having their eyes on an early draft. Sure, some things slipped through and are not 100% balanced. But imagine what could've happened without any form of open discussion.
MarsNZ wrote: Take it from me, as a CSM player. You really don't want to be the first codex after an edition when their good intentions haven't been completely dissolved yet. Judging by this edition you want to be 4th/5th in line to catch the writers when they're peaking.
Meh, not really true. The 4th ed Ork and Daemon books both were solid throughout 5th ed. Likewise 5th ed Necrons were great throughout 6th. There's really nothing about writers peaking in stride, CSM just kinda got the short end of the stick.
Bolded the part you appear to have overlooked.
Also I don't think you got my definition of 'peaking'.
So i emailed my local FLGS, asking to the availability of a 6th ed rulebook, wondering what the story was and the resonse i got was.
"We aren’t restocking them. I have heard rumours on the forums that a new book is only a month or so off, if it was me, I would hold off an wait."
now i dont know business' that run off rumours, nor than all of a sudden have an out of stock on a product in time with everywhere else.
(edit: as above doesnt mean stockbrokers etc which run exclusively off it, i mean flgs type business, and if they bought stock can they NOT return them for a credit. i dont know GW's return policy)
so call me a nutter but if i went between the lines there... thatll be a new book is for sure on the way.
which i dont mind as long as some rules are tidied up.
as to that question about who pays 120 bucks for a rulebook... well thats all us aussies, ...
oddworx wrote: Don't care what y'all are talking about. I will happily throw down $70 for a new "fixed" edition. Game is fun now, kill death stars and its gonna be golden.
Problem is - you don't know if that's all they'll fix, or if they'll fix that at all. And if they do, how far they swing the pendulum - killing deathstars sounds great until something they would have countered becomes known.
The amusing thing about all of this is that there won't be any official notification about this rumour not being true if that's the case, or visa-versa. People in Nottingham knew that the internet was going mental about pancake edition, knew that it was fake, and yet were happy to sit there watching (and I had that on good authority). How hard would it have been to send out comms/a memo, and stop people rolling around and fighting in the mud about it? They really don't give a flying feth about the veteran/hardcore fanbase.
oddworx wrote: Don't care what y'all are talking about. I will happily throw down $70 for a new "fixed" edition. Game is fun now, kill death stars and its gonna be golden.
Problem is - you don't know if that's all they'll fix, or if they'll fix that at all. And if they do, how far they swing the pendulum - killing deathstars sounds great until something they would have countered becomes known.
Edition changes are never all roses.
Haha no right, it will be a minor update which fixes some things and breaks others, but most importantly necessitates every player of the game buying a boxset or rulebook from them. Rince, cycle, repeat.
I await the reviews.. Then i will make my opinion.
But i would like to drop this hobby, save money and frustration over the bs. This could be a good opportunity for me, but i'll probably be still here >.<
eskimo wrote: I await the reviews.. Then i will make my opinion.
But i would like to drop this hobby, save money and frustration over the bs. This could be a good opportunity for me, but i'll probably be still here >.<
There are other games in the hobby without all the BS surrounding it, of course... GW isn't the whole hobby. But wait to see what 7th brings perhaps.
eskimo wrote: I await the reviews.. Then i will make my opinion.
But i would like to drop this hobby, save money and frustration over the bs. This could be a good opportunity for me, but i'll probably be still here >.<
You don't have to drop the hobby, if GW annoy you there are plenty of others out there.
Infinity just this weekend announced a new version for instance, no need for rumours or speculation, they wait until one of the biggest tournaments they have, and tell everyone that later this year a new version will be released. Now, the rules are free for that game so buying the book is optional anyway, but this gives consumers an informed choice when purchasing stuff, Corvus Belli may even take a sales hit between now and the release if people hold off buying stuff, but one assumes they think that good will is more important. A bit less revenue for a short period but much less likely to have a bunch of annoyed players.
It isn't all like GW, the hobby has some well ran businesses in it too.
oddworx wrote: Don't care what y'all are talking about. I will happily throw down $70 for a new "fixed" edition. Game is fun now, kill death stars and its gonna be golden.
Problem is - you don't know if that's all they'll fix, or if they'll fix that at all. And if they do, how far they swing the pendulum - killing deathstars sounds great until something they would have countered becomes known.
Edition changes are never all roses.
While it is true we do not know if they are fixing the things the community has been bitching about, it seems evident to me that GW has not put out FAQ's for a while because they were gearing up for this new release/fix which was needed. They made a push to expand the playable universe in short order. The amount of content pushed out was (to me) awesome, the rules left a bit to be desired. Anyone who knows me wouldn't call me an optimist, but I think this is a genuine effort to fix what is mostly a good system that has a couple of nasty flaws. And of course like everything GW does also happens to be a cash grab. Thems the breaks when you play a game put out by large corporate company.
It would be a really bold move to go digital only with the rulebook, or even codices.... There could be a future upside to it though, I think I would generally prefer to pay a license per year for rules and lets say 2 codices of my choice.... With varying license's for additional codices and/or dataslates, supplements etc etc.
Releases would come out faster, no need for Faq's as they can just sort out the problem on the format to then be updated by the player, whole new editions wouldn't be required as they can tinker as they go along... Well, new editions may be required but they would be on a much longer cycle.
It will most likely happen in the future, probably not now as it relies heavily on their customers investing in the tech, but in the future if/when tablets do indeed become even cheaper and more essential.
So, we have 10 pages of doomsaying, speculation, premature ragequits and panic based on the fact that the core book is currently unavailable..? Good thing thing that 40k radio actually said that a new edition will be coming shortly, otherwise this would seem a bit silly.
Here's my only gripe if the rule book goes digital only...
I like books. Actual books. Paper and hardback books.
I own an iPad, but I don't want to read a book on another screen. I write scripts for films all day on a computer, why the hell would I want to look at another screen?
As for 6th, I never played in a competitive environment, so I never saw the Deathstars... I can't comment on them.
I do hate the fact that CC got hammered and I hope 7th changes this.
I also welcome the percentage limits.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also... They need to change the way Allies work. It's too abusable in its current form.
Kosake wrote: So, we have 10 pages of doomsaying, speculation, premature ragequits and panic based on the fact that the core book is currently unavailable..? Good thing thing that 40k radio actually said that a new edition will be coming shortly, otherwise this would seem a bit silly.
I'm hearing elsewhere that there was a UKGW managers meeting yesterday, during which they were told to remove 6E rulebook from shelves in preparation for a new one at the end of May. Unsurprisingly, this isn't a popular move even among store managers, as they know how much of a customer backlash will be heading their way.
They've also been told to continue selling Dark Vengeance, but once the new BRB drops they have to put a sticker on the box that says the rules inside aren't current.
Kosake wrote: So, we have 10 pages of doomsaying, speculation, premature ragequits and panic based on the fact that the core book is currently unavailable..? Good thing thing that 40k radio actually said that a new edition will be coming shortly, otherwise this would seem a bit silly.
I'm hearing elsewhere that there was a UKGW managers meeting yesterday, during which they were told to remove 6E rulebook from shelves in preparation for a new one at the end of May. Unsurprisingly, this isn't a popular move even among store managers, as they know how much of a customer backlash will be heading their way.
They've also been told to continue selling Dark Vengeance, but once the new BRB drops they have to put a sticker on the box that says the rules inside aren't current.
I thought most of the dark vengeance boxes were sent back to HQ a few weeks ago? I'm sure I saw a thread about something to that effect, though I may be mistaken...
Kosake wrote: So, we have 10 pages of doomsaying, speculation, premature ragequits and panic based on the fact that the core book is currently unavailable..? Good thing thing that 40k radio actually said that a new edition will be coming shortly, otherwise this would seem a bit silly.
I'm hearing elsewhere that there was a UKGW managers meeting yesterday, during which they were told to remove 6E rulebook from shelves in preparation for a new one at the end of May. Unsurprisingly, this isn't a popular move even among store managers, as they know how much of a customer backlash will be heading their way.
They've also been told to continue selling Dark Vengeance, but once the new BRB drops they have to put a sticker on the box that says the rules inside aren't current.
I thought most of the dark vengeance boxes were sent back to HQ a few weeks ago? I'm sure I saw a thread about something to that effect, though I may be mistaken...
If I recall correctly, that was only for some of the non-English versions in central Europe (such as Dutch / German). UK/US editions weren't affected.
Jimmy Ellwood over at Warseer wrote:Just seen an email sent to all GW store managers at 8.40pm last night advising them to remove the 40k rulebook from their stores on Wednesday as it isn't to be sold anymore. If customers ask for it they are to advise them to check out white dwarf.
All the UK store managers are in their managers meeting today so I am sure will be getting their full brief on what is happening.
lethlis over at Warseer wrote:I am interested in seeing that the psychic cards were pulled as well. Implies that they are doing an overhaul of the powers. Probably reduce the power of diviniation a little bit or change the language and probably increase the powers of other lores.
latro over at Warseer wrote:I'd laugh if it was the same book they just changed Imperial Guard to 'Astra Militarum'
Kosake wrote: So, we have 10 pages of doomsaying, speculation, premature ragequits and panic based on the fact that the core book is currently unavailable..? Good thing thing that 40k radio actually said that a new edition will be coming shortly, otherwise this would seem a bit silly.
I'm hearing elsewhere that there was a UKGW managers meeting yesterday, during which they were told to remove 6E rulebook from shelves in preparation for a new one at the end of May. Unsurprisingly, this isn't a popular move even among store managers, as they know how much of a customer backlash will be heading their way.
They've also been told to continue selling Dark Vengeance, but once the new BRB drops they have to put a sticker on the box that says the rules inside aren't current.
I thought most of the dark vengeance boxes were sent back to HQ a few weeks ago? I'm sure I saw a thread about something to that effect, though I may be mistaken...
If I recall correctly, that was only for some of the non-English versions in central Europe (such as Dutch / German). UK/US editions weren't affected.
Ah, fair enough... Seems rather odd though, in the circumstance.
Haha no right, it will be a minor update which fixes some things and breaks others, but most importantly necessitates every player of the game buying a boxset or rulebook from them. Rince, cycle, repeat.
Jimmy Ellwood over at Warseer wrote:Just seen an email sent to all GW store managers at 8.40pm last night advising them to remove the 40k rulebook from their stores on Wednesday as it isn't to be sold anymore. If customers ask for it they are to advise them to check out white dwarf.
Oh, GW when will you realise the internet is a thing now? Do you really think your customers are going to be so naive to buy such an obviously bs explanation?
SHUPPET wrote: So what word do we have on assault changes?
Until photos start to appear, all we know is that a new book is coming. Anyone claiming to know specific rules without evidence may as well be writing Pancake V2.
I expect the first concrete details we'll see will be a general summary of changes in a leaked White Dwarf.
Jimmy Ellwood over at Warseer wrote:Just seen an email sent to all GW store managers at 8.40pm last night advising them to remove the 40k rulebook from their stores on Wednesday as it isn't to be sold anymore. If customers ask for it they are to advise them to check out white dwarf.
Say what you will about Games Workshops previous business strategies, but this is the first time I've actually felt personally offended.
Jimmy Ellwood over at Warseer wrote:Just seen an email sent to all GW store managers at 8.40pm last night advising them to remove the 40k rulebook from their stores on Wednesday as it isn't to be sold anymore. If customers ask for it they are to advise them to check out white dwarf.
Say what you will about Games Workshops previous business strategies, but this is the first time I've actually felt personally offended.
Indeed. Whilst I'm not offended as frankly nothing GW does surprises me now, but in the past when a new edition was imminent they have put stickers on the old rulebooks informing customers, or gave them a voucher to redeem for the new book as with the case of 6th to 7th WHFB.
Jimmy Ellwood over at Warseer wrote:Just seen an email sent to all GW store managers at 8.40pm last night advising them to remove the 40k rulebook from their stores on Wednesday as it isn't to be sold anymore. If customers ask for it they are to advise them to check out white dwarf.
Say what you will about Games Workshops previous business strategies, but this is the first time I've actually felt personally offended.
Indeed. Whilst I'm not offended as frankly nothing GW does surprises me now, but in the past when a new edition was imminent they have put stickers on the old rulebooks informing customers, or gave them a voucher to redeem for the new book as with the case of 6th to 7th WHFB.
Now? Nothing.
But... a voucher is a discount, and GW cannot and will not and must not give discounts, because that would be disrespectful to the customers (didn't Kirby say something to that effect?) since they will pay what is worth.
I have to say I'm chuckling right now. If just enough changes to force buying a new book, this might end very badly for GW, although I love on other sites seeing the same crowd of "GW is doing everything right, it's just the internet whining!" people justifying this as good.
I really do hope they fix 40k, but holding my breath because they don't seem to even get the real problem and just keep trotting out that "forge the narrative" line of gak when ironically their shoddy rules hurt playing narrative games just as much, if not more, than competitive games.
SHUPPET wrote: So what word do we have on assault changes?
Until photos start to appear, all we know is that a new book is coming. Anyone claiming to know specific rules without evidence may as well be writing Pancake V2..
I can only imagine what some of those inspired changes could be....
Assault charges are now 2d6-2d6. So you can actually roll and get a negative charge amount and thus fall back.
Powerfists are now 2x divided by 2.
You must wait 3 turns before assaulting out of a vehicle.
Matt Ward may make up rules on the fly and they become canon in game. A legion of scribes will be given over to this task as C.S. Goto isn't doing anything right now.
Stormbreed wrote: Consolidate into another combat and fix battle brothers.
I wonder what they felt was wrong in 6th edition for such a quick edition change. Personally i think 6th was decent. However rumour is they are pullling the psychic cards which likely means psychic powers are being overhauled.
Personally i rather have minor changes to 6th edition fixing some of the more abusive issues. And since i dont expect a major overhaul I have decent expectations that this update will fix some major current issues such as allies.
Stormbreed wrote: Consolidate into another combat and fix battle brothers.
I wonder what they felt was wrong in 6th edition for such a quick edition change. Personally i think 6th was decent. However rumour is they are pullling the psychic cards which likely means psychic powers are being overhauled.
Personally i rather have minor changes to 6th edition fixing some of the more abusive issues. And since i dont expect a major overhaul I have decent expectations that this update will fix some major current issues such as allies.
Jimmy Ellwood over at Warseer wrote:Just seen an email sent to all GW store managers at 8.40pm last night advising them to remove the 40k rulebook from their stores on Wednesday as it isn't to be sold anymore. If customers ask for it they are to advise them to check out white dwarf.
Say what you will about Games Workshops previous business strategies, but this is the first time I've actually felt personally offended.
Indeed. Whilst I'm not offended as frankly nothing GW does surprises me now, but in the past when a new edition was imminent they have put stickers on the old rulebooks informing customers, or gave them a voucher to redeem for the new book as with the case of 6th to 7th WHFB.
Now? Nothing.
this time theyve pulled them a month before hand rather then like the codecies still being sold up till the last minute... so ill take this as an bonus.
Stormbreed wrote: Consolidate into another combat and fix battle brothers.
I wonder what they felt was wrong in 6th edition for such a quick edition change. Personally i think 6th was decent. However rumour is they are pullling the psychic cards which likely means psychic powers are being overhauled.
Personally i rather have minor changes to 6th edition fixing some of the more abusive issues. And since i dont expect a major overhaul I have decent expectations that this update will fix some major current issues such as allies.
They could fix allies with out a new rulebook.
Imagine the wave of the future where any rule changes that were done with FAQs now must involve purchasing a new book to fix....
I just heard about this from chatter at my FLGS. I can't believe they would release a new edition after only two years, that's insane.
A new starter box I'd understand, as the dark angels / Chaos mini's in DV, as nice as they are, are too limited. It's hard to sell the set to anyone not playing those two armies. Generic space marines vs (insert random bad guys) is much better.
But a whole new edition, invalidating all those codex's. Expecting another £45+ out of every player for a rulebook, after just two years.
GW really must be desperate.
I can't see this doing anything other than driving off a large number of players.
Stormbreed wrote: Consolidate into another combat and fix battle brothers.
I wonder what they felt was wrong in 6th edition for such a quick edition change. Personally i think 6th was decent. However rumour is they are pullling the psychic cards which likely means psychic powers are being overhauled.
Personally i rather have minor changes to 6th edition fixing some of the more abusive issues. And since i dont expect a major overhaul I have decent expectations that this update will fix some major current issues such as allies.
I think it's mainly two things: Psykers and Allies. Both seems badly broken right now.
And if they had to fix that, they might as well relaunch 40K as Apocalyspe-light with Escalation now being the default game-type.
Stormbreed wrote: Consolidate into another combat and fix battle brothers.
I wonder what they felt was wrong in 6th edition for such a quick edition change. Personally i think 6th was decent. However rumour is they are pullling the psychic cards which likely means psychic powers are being overhauled.
Personally i rather have minor changes to 6th edition fixing some of the more abusive issues. And since i dont expect a major overhaul I have decent expectations that this update will fix some major current issues such as allies.
They could fix allies with out a new rulebook.
Imagine the wave of the future where any rule changes that were done with FAQs now must involve purchasing a new book to fix....
TBH I think GW finances must be really screwed for them to push product this fast. And the quality of some of the products, re-enforces this belief.
I agree; this does seem like a cash grab (it's not even 2 years since the last one, and it's been a consisten 4-year cycle since starting), especially since it launches the weekend before the financial year. I don't expect it to be much more than a reprint, either.
Tamereth wrote: I just heard about this from chatter at my FLGS. I can't believe they would release a new edition after only two years, that's insane.
A new starter box I'd understand, as the dark angels / Chaos mini's in DV, as nice as they are, are too limited. It's hard to sell the set to anyone not playing those two armies. Generic space marines vs (insert random bad guys) is much better.
But a whole new edition, invalidating all those codex's. Expecting another £45+ out of every player for a rulebook, after just two years.
GW really must be desperate.
I can't see this doing anything other than driving off a large number of players.
I'll be surprised if it's only £45 when launched. If it includes all the supplements it'll probably be nearer £60/70. With a collectors edition being double that.
I'm sure they'll follow up a year later with the "just rules" book for about £35 though, for those that don't want to buy the big book.
Whether or not anyone will still be playing by that point is another matter entirely.
I ve heard about treeman with archers stationed on him like he is a living building, I ve heard of war hawks and way watchers multi kit, I ve heard about wardancers with animals faces and claws. Nope, I didn't see anything like that, sorry bout that. If I don't see a book I won't believe it. A new book is coming ok. Why did they release escalation and stronghold a couple of months ago and now they will remove them. Seriously. I don't really think so.
ausYenLoWang wrote: this time theyve pulled them a month before hand rather then like the codecies still being sold up till the last minute... so ill take this as an bonus.
Agreed. It's an actual improvement of not shilling off a product they know is becoming invalid onto an unsuspecting customer base.
avedominusnox wrote: I ve heard about treeman with archers stationed on him like he is a living building, I ve heard of war hawks and way watchers multi kit, I ve heard about wardancers with animals faces and claws. Nope, I didn't see anything like that, sorry bout that. If I don't see a book I won't believe it. A new book is coming ok. Why did they release escalation and stronghold a couple of months ago and now they will remove them. Seriously. I don't really think so.
Thing is, you're ignoring the rapid disappearance of the existing book, and the fact that the original source for this rumour has, at this point, an almost perfect record dating back to the Marine book last year.
To address the wider point of such a quick turnaround in edition.
One has to consider that the criticisms of 6th have been loud, and more importantly, consistent, amongst the online community for some time now. People often claim that the online community is the vocal minority, but it is a fairly easy assumption to make that it is a growing minority because the one thing above all others that would make GW sit up and pay attention has happened for the first time in a long time.
Their sales have fallen
There is no point in looking at it from a gaming point of view, one has to look at it from a business point of view, and at this point, it makes a lot of sense, especially given the timing with their FYE.
The only question, in my mind, is will it be a short term cash grab or a genuine attempt to give the game a framework that it can begin to grow again.
Sadly, I know which I think is most likely, but until then, 7th is Schrodinger's Cat.
avedominusnox wrote: I ve heard about treeman with archers stationed on him like he is a living building, I ve heard of war hawks and way watchers multi kit, I ve heard about wardancers with animals faces and claws. Nope, I didn't see anything like that, sorry bout that. If I don't see a book I won't believe it. A new book is coming ok. Why did they release escalation and stronghold a couple of months ago and now they will remove them. Seriously. I don't really think so.
Thing is, you're ignoring the rapid disappearance of the existing book, and the fact that the original source for this rumour has, at this point, an almost perfect record dating back to the Marine book last year.
To address the wider point of such a quick turnaround in edition.
One has to consider that the criticisms of 6th have been loud, and more importantly, consistent, amongst the online community for some time now. People often claim that the online community is the vocal minority, but it is a fairly easy assumption to make that it is a growing minority because the one thing above all others that would make GW sit up and pay attention has happened for the first time in a long time.
Their sales have fallen
There is no point in looking at it from a gaming point of view, one has to look at it from a business point of view, and at this point, it makes a lot of sense, especially given the timing with their FYE.
The only question, in my mind, is will it be a short term cash grab or a genuine attempt to give the game a framework that it can begin to grow again.
Sadly, I know which I think is most likely, but until then, 7th is Schrodinger's Cat.
Do GW still have the quality of staff to turn this around??
azreal13 wrote: A significant issue, and I personally have my doubts.
The community guy from Mantic, James, has just gone to work as a writer, he had a hand in dreadball so he may prove a talent, obviously he wont have any involvement at all in this one, but I think beyond the names that people know there is probably still talent at lenton.
In the midst of all this though, the question I havent seen asked is a simple one.
What does this mean for Fantasy, it's been bumped off it's cycle to release a new 40K. That doesnt really bode well long term.
ClockworkZion wrote: We will have to keep watching the Games Workshop website and White Dwarf for more information.
So North America's customer service gets their product information from the website and White Dwarf now?
That's hilarious.
Except I don't think 'hilarious' is actually the word that I mean.
Actually that's not a GW exclusive problem. I was working in customer service for a large international scientific publishing house. When we wanted to know reliable release dates for our books, we looked at amazon and often customers called about some special deals we didn't know anything about.
Nothing concrete. Rulebook "No longer available", and that's all we know for certain. People feel personally offended.
Oh, internet, don't ever change.
I suspect the big change will be the complete removal of the allies matrix
GW wants people to be able to buy all their toys and use them
Allies are a source of argument about 'fluffiness' etc
So if they pull the allies matrix entirely and replace it with a simple Main army + (any other army/formation x whatever) they'll make it simpler for all those who treat GWs word as gospel
