I know its one of these heard it from a redshirt but a friend of mine was in GW (Dublin) this week chatting to the managers and they seemed fairly convinced 9th ed was pencilled in for this Summer 2020.
Whether its 8.5 or pure 9th wasnt said but something to ruminate on I suppose.

Anyone heard similar?

Not a thing. Managers likely wouldn't know until around March or April for a May or June release though.

The persistent rumour is Psychic Awakening books until the summer, then some sort of re-launch or new edition.

9th rumors started the day 8th released. Until I see something substantial (i.e. not "heard from a guy who knows a guy who once had a beer with a dude who used to work for Gee Dubs"), I'll continue to ignore them.

There are a few signs of 9th edition coming:

#1 - Psychic Awakening should end at that point, which leaves a big 'ol "what's next?" hanging over everything. A new edition would make sense.

#2 - The Psychic Awakening books have been similar to previous series of campaign books that culminated in a new edition, having been the case with both Warhammer Fantasy transitioning into Age of Sigmar, and 7th transition transitioning into 8th edition.

#3 - There's supposedly a big release in the summer that the employees aren't allowed to take time off for. Usually these are just done for massive releases like new editions.


So that all seems to make sense, yeah? Well, who the heck really knows, because I've been hearing "New Daemon Primarch soon!" for ages now, and nothing's happened. But there do seem to be things that suggest a new edition. New edition would likely be like the move from 3rd ed to 4th, 4th to 5th, 5th to 6th, or 6th to 7th - which were all pretty minor and backwards compatible.

Wasn't the scuttle around 8th that it was the end of "editions" and that it was now effectively a living ruleset?

Or would people accept a reprint of the core book with subsequently printed FAQ and errata in it as "9th?"

beast_gts wrote:
The persistent rumour is Psychic Awakening books until the summer, then some sort of re-launch or new edition.

Indeed. They want you to buy all the books that will be obsoleted shortly after buying.

On the positive side, 40K needs an enema. Badly. They need to consolidate rules, points, lists.

They need to cease the moving target and settle down and sort out problems. 8th edition has beyond jumped the shark.. it has passed beyond nuking the fridge.. it is at a whole new level of insanity.

They need to fix 40k....

At the moment, without paying for a 3rd party app (even then it has errors and omissions) I cannot actually be certain about an opponents list (is it legal? Is it up to date?) when facing random people in pickup battles. Without some kind of several hours long vetting and use of a literal library pile of books to search through I just have to trust that it is both up to date and legal. The number of special rules is similarly massive, inconsistent, and spread over many books... this leaves me unable to be certain if the special rules are actual rules or not.. again without using a 3rd party app.. with errors.. and books that would require searching through. I just have to presume he is telling the truth.

It is no way to have the rules of the game. I shouldn't have to constantly print out FAQs, Errata, buy CAs (esp when CAs often contradict so sure new supersedes old except where there is no new in the new version so the old version is still valid for all things not included in the new version so the book is both invalid and valid at the same time), let alone needing to seek through book after books.. old books new books, books that are both out of date and valid again.. depending on if there is a FAQ, ERRATA, or it isn't "updated" in the new one. Omissions, Misprints on top.

This on top of all of the "no army wide perm special rules.. except for space marines.. because now we have those for them.. but not others no we follow the 8th edition build rules for them.. but not Space Marines.. but.. except we don't follow this core concept here.. but we do here.. because we are totally random! Also we based this rule and points cost on 7th edition without taking into account any of the changes in 8th.. Stat Lines that were just copy pasted w/o accounting for rules and system changes.

The mind truly boggles that ITC has been able to sort things out enough to run rational serious tournaments. Esp with GW moving the goal posts between planning and actual event date.

I still play 7th because.. its not insane. It's stable. The rules are always the same. A few house rules fix EVERY SINGLE REAL ISSUE with it.. Also.. there are no primaris ;p

 Yarium wrote:


#3 - There's supposedly a big release in the summer that the employees aren't allowed to take time off for. Usually these are just done for massive releases like new editions.

This is literally the case every year, its nothing new.

Rather than say "9th" Edition, perhaps people would be happier and would be more inclined to accept something like "Updated Current Edition".

I think it's fairly likely we see a consolidation and changes of the core rules in Summer, as others have noted - we're seeing patterns that we see typically before this sort of change.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Wasn't the scuttle around 8th that it was the end of "editions" and that it was now effectively a living ruleset?

Or would people accept a reprint of the core book with subsequently printed FAQ and errata in it as "9th?"

People said the same when the General's Handbook for AoS was introduced, hoping for GW to get their act together (in a way, see below) and simply improve an existing edition until it's complete and good. Yet here we are in AoS 2nd ed.

40k will be no different. In spite of Chapter Approved providing a means of updating the game and selling extra books to people, GW's approach to the rules has always been to make rules overhauls that rewire the game enough that it never settles in a stable set of rules. They're not looking for improvement leading to the best rule set they can make but for change to the status quo that will get people to buy new models. Along the way they'll sell a new rule book and starter set. Chapter Approved and the General's Handbook are simply another purchase on top of that, not a replacement.

Some editions are complete overhauls while others are backwards compatible with older army books and 9th ed will be the latter. But it's not realistic to expect that GW is going to drop the big boost to the bottom line a new edition brings with it.

 Geifer wrote:

People said the same when the General's Handbook for AoS was introduced, hoping for GW to get their act together (in a way, see below) and simply improve an existing edition until it's complete and good. Yet here we are in AoS 2nd ed.

The difference now is that the General's Handbook was intended to provide points and things of that nature, initially, to a game that did not have them.

After GHB dropped, army books started coming with points printed inside of them and the GHB became what Chapter Approved is: updated points and potentially updated/revised rules.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Wasn't the scuttle around 8th that it was the end of "editions" and that it was now effectively a living ruleset?

Or would people accept a reprint of the core book with subsequently printed FAQ and errata in it as "9th?"

GW always says new edition is the ultimate edition

Living ruleset is just fanfic made by, well fans.

40k moving from round bases to square! Rank fighting ala British Colonial Redcoats!

or not.

I'd be ok with an edition change or whatever they end up calling it. The 8th ed codices are really uneven in terms of quality, which reflect a lot of lessons learned throughout the edition. That's to be expected though since 8th ed was the largest changeset since third, so there were bound to be some gotchas.

With that said I don't think they are going to redo the dark imperium box, and they would more or less have to if they did a hard edition change since DI comes with the 8th ed rulebook. So I expect a soft edition change, probably at the conclusion of PA. PA is there to make sure no one is as bad off as the index armies were waiting for their new codexes.

 Grimgold wrote:
I'd be ok with an edition change or whatever they end up calling it. The 8th ed codices are really uneven in terms of quality, which reflect a lot of lessons learned throughout the edition. That's to be expected though since 8th ed was the largest changeset since third, so there were bound to be some gotchas.

Sadly, most of the gotchas are in the codexes, which will linger.

A reboot won't shock me, but hopefully they'll ease up on the pacing afterwards. Settle in and update books slowly and focus on getting the model range updated instead.

There needs to be some rule consolidation at some point, I can barely keep up.

 Grimgold wrote:
I'd be ok with an edition change or whatever they end up calling it. The 8th ed codices are really uneven in terms of quality, which reflect a lot of lessons learned throughout the edition. That's to be expected though since 8th ed was the largest changeset since third, so there were bound to be some gotchas.

With that said I don't think they are going to redo the dark imperium box, and they would more or less have to if they did a hard edition change since DI comes with the 8th ed rulebook. So I expect a soft edition change, probably at the conclusion of PA. PA is there to make sure no one is as bad off as the index armies were waiting for their new codexes.

I'm anticipating more redone Codexes in the latter half of this year, integrating the PA rules with some additional changes.

That's one reason why I'm only buying the PAs I need for the armies I'm currently playing competitively. They're likely going to be obsolete in 6-12 months and there's not enough missions and campaign rules to make them worthwhile after their matched play content rotates out.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Geifer wrote:

People said the same when the General's Handbook for AoS was introduced, hoping for GW to get their act together (in a way, see below) and simply improve an existing edition until it's complete and good. Yet here we are in AoS 2nd ed.

The difference now is that the General's Handbook was intended to provide points and things of that nature, initially, to a game that did not have them.

After GHB dropped, army books started coming with points printed inside of them and the GHB became what Chapter Approved is: updated points and potentially updated/revised rules.

To be fair, 1st edition AoS was an objectively terrible product that required supplementary materials and effort on the part of the end user to make functional.

2nd is a patched up to bare bones core as a result of Rowntree’s Herculean efforts to salvage the system.

To be fair, it only required those "supplementary materials" if you had powergaming twits whose sole goal in life is to make everyone else miserable.

Per local Redshirt: "Absolutely not - lots of other stuff in the pipeline and they would just roll out more army books and indexes at this point"

Local redshirts generally don't know much more than average joe so...

GW tends to keep things secret. As it is forge world for example heard of 8th ed when GW revealed it to the public...They do not leak stuff easily except when they want. And when they want it's not via redshirt for sure.

The whole "people can't take time off around their s release" sounds impressive until you remember that most stores are 1 person with a part time weekend person, when the manager is off someone from a rare 2 person store has to cover and even then it results in shorter hours.

 Grimgold wrote:
I'd be ok with an edition change or whatever they end up calling it. The 8th ed codices are really uneven in terms of quality, which reflect a lot of lessons learned throughout the edition. That's to be expected though since 8th ed was the largest changeset since third, so there were bound to be some gotchas.

With that said I don't think they are going to redo the dark imperium box, and they would more or less have to if they did a hard edition change since DI comes with the 8th ed rulebook. So I expect a soft edition change, probably at the conclusion of PA. PA is there to make sure no one is as bad off as the index armies were waiting for their new codexes.

Dark Vengence was used for two editions so I could see them keeping DI around and simply tossing a new book in it.

although yeah had they been planning an edition change anytime soon I would have expected that to be shadowspear, had they tossed a rulebook in it would have been a pretty decent starter set

tneva82 wrote:
Local redshirts generally don't know much more than average joe so...

GW tends to keep things secret. As it is forge world for example heard of 8th ed when GW revealed it to the public...They do not leak stuff easily except when they want. And when they want it's not via redshirt for sure.

Wouldn't that be great? If for every big release, a single random redshirt was given an exclusive scoop, and they are in fact given free rein to tell it to whoever they wished, as GW knows barely anyone would believe them anyway...

 Coenus Scaldingus wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Local redshirts generally don't know much more than average joe so...

GW tends to keep things secret. As it is forge world for example heard of 8th ed when GW revealed it to the public...They do not leak stuff easily except when they want. And when they want it's not via redshirt for sure.

Wouldn't that be great? If for every big release, a single random redshirt was given an exclusive scoop, and they are in fact given free rein to tell it to whoever they wished, as GW knows barely anyone would believe them anyway...

But then they get killed on an away mission and the secret is lost forever :(

Well I'm shocked.

No.

Wait.

The other one.

Not shocked.

So how many years did 8th last, 2 or 3? It can't be 4 can it?

To be fair they're not just going to kill off 8E and start from scratch again with another set of codexes. This will be more like the 2018 update of AoS, where some of the structural issues* get addressed but everything largely works as before.

*I'm looking at you, CP generation & terrain rules

There are very few problems with the game that can be fixed by changing the 8 pages of core rules.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:
I'd be ok with an edition change or whatever they end up calling it. The 8th ed codices are really uneven in terms of quality, which reflect a lot of lessons learned throughout the edition. That's to be expected though since 8th ed was the largest changeset since third, so there were bound to be some gotchas.

With that said I don't think they are going to redo the dark imperium box, and they would more or less have to if they did a hard edition change since DI comes with the 8th ed rulebook. So I expect a soft edition change, probably at the conclusion of PA. PA is there to make sure no one is as bad off as the index armies were waiting for their new codexes.

Dark Vengence was used for two editions so I could see them keeping DI around and simply tossing a new book in it.

although yeah had they been planning an edition change anytime soon I would have expected that to be shadowspear, had they tossed a rulebook in it would have been a pretty decent starter set

Is it just me or was there something incongruous about shadowspear and vigilus, because they feel different from the other releases at the time, and the releases since. Formations are unique to the two Vigilus books and actually seemed to be the main selling feature of the books, but since their release, GW appears to be doing their round best to get rid of them. I mean are we looking at a near miss where GW changed their plans at the last moment, and the miniatures we are getting now were meant for Vigilus style supplements? Because at the time of Vigilus 2, it looked GWs plan for late-game 8th was endless formation heavy splat books like they did in late 7th ed. With PA it looks like we are moving towards 9th edition, or 8.5, or whatever we decide to call a soft reboot of the rules and codices.

Sometime in 2021, while also updating Kill Team and Apocalypse.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
There are very few problems with the game that can be fixed by changing the 8 pages of core rules.

I can think of a few things that need to be addressed.

1 - Terrain
2 - CP generation
3- rapid fire weapons just being better then most dedicated anti-tank weapons.

1 and 2 are easy. 3 would require the creation of some new weapon rules, likely adding a new type to it and some serious errata.

Here we go again...

I do wonder how long before GW runs out of material to print and rolls out a new edition. If PA books will peter out by June, that to me gives credence that a new/revised edition could be slotted into a summer release. Seems how that was how AoS to AoS 2.0 was handled.

I’m through with buying books though, I have a complete set of all the Codexes I’ll need for 8E, and I’m not interested in the rules bloat beyond Codexes. I’ve reached the age I’m over trying to keep up with an ever-changing system, and I just want the neat models anyways.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrianDavion wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
There are very few problems with the game that can be fixed by changing the 8 pages of core rules.

I can think of a few things that need to be addressed.

1 - Terrain
2 - CP generation
3- rapid fire weapons just being better then most dedicated anti-tank weapons.

1 and 2 are easy. 3 would require the creation of some new weapon rules, likely adding a new type to it and some serious errata.

On #3, I wish the game would move to “One attack per model (or gun, for monsters and vehicles)”, rather than trying to model each individual shot. I think this may be how Apocalypse handles things? Seems like rapid fire should increase the chance of scoring a hit than making a bunch of seperate attack rolls. For things like MG’s, maybe make the able to do multiple single wounds to infantry targets, but can’t do more than 1 wound to a single target (one roll to hit, D6 wounds, Max 1 wound/model)?

BrianDavion wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
There are very few problems with the game that can be fixed by changing the 8 pages of core rules.

I can think of a few things that need to be addressed.

1 - Terrain
2 - CP generation
3- rapid fire weapons just being better then most dedicated anti-tank weapons.

1 and 2 are easy. 3 would require the creation of some new weapon rules, likely adding a new type to it and some serious errata.

Actually, number 3 would just require rolling back the current to wound chart back to 7th ed, with a minor change that you always wound on sixes. It's actually something that's bothered me this entire edition, the whole doubling thing creates a lumpy distribution of ideal stats, like T5 is just soo much better than T4, but T6 and T7 are more expensive than T5 without being better for the vast majority of use cases. Same with Str, 5 is great, 6 and 7 are overpriced, and 8 is a bargain. So much of what is wrong with 40k could be laid at the feet of this one change.

The 'big summer thing' is probably Primaris Wave 3 (or whatever wave we're on).

 John Prins wrote:
The 'big summer thing' is probably Primaris Wave 3 (or whatever wave we're on).

that's not exactly at odds with a new edition though, each primaris wave was accompanies by a new box set featuring all new minis.

In fact we've been getting new Ork rumors so... gonna take a WILD guess here.. the SW vs Orks box set we've been hearing rumor of? Is actually gonna be a 9th edition boxed set. Space Wolves (with new gravis stuff!) vs Orks! with Orks beign the first new codex of 9th edition.

 Grimgold wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
There are very few problems with the game that can be fixed by changing the 8 pages of core rules.

I can think of a few things that need to be addressed.

1 - Terrain
2 - CP generation
3- rapid fire weapons just being better then most dedicated anti-tank weapons.

1 and 2 are easy. 3 would require the creation of some new weapon rules, likely adding a new type to it and some serious errata.

Actually, number 3 would just require rolling back the current to wound chart back to 7th ed, with a minor change that you always wound on sixes. It's actually something that's bothered me this entire edition, the whole doubling thing creates a lumpy distribution of ideal stats, like T5 is just soo much better than T4, but T6 and T7 are more expensive than T5 without being better for the vast majority of use cases. Same with Str, 5 is great, 6 and 7 are overpriced, and 8 is a bargain. So much of what is wrong with 40k could be laid at the feet of this one change.

TBH that will happen with every wound chart you could make. Because different T's are more popular than others, some S will be more "worth it" than others.

BrianDavion wrote:
that's not exactly at odds with a new edition though, each primaris wave was accompanies by a new box set featuring all new minis.

In fact we've been getting new Ork rumors so... gonna take a WILD guess here.. the SW vs Orks box set we've been hearing rumor of? Is actually gonna be a 9th edition boxed set. Space Wolves (with new gravis stuff!) vs Orks! with Orks beign the first new codex of 9th edition.

What new gak do my Orkz get Brian? I want details here so we can cite you when they turn up on the rumour mill sites! Be very specific and sound confident!

 Yarium wrote:
#3 - There's supposedly a big release in the summer that the employees aren't allowed to take time off for.

Summer of Fliers!

It's finally happening!

I got a rumor, it's something big!
GW will pull a Microsoft!!!!

Remember how Windows went from Windows 8 to Windows 10? Warhammer 40k 10th edition incoming, you heard it here first!!!!

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
that's not exactly at odds with a new edition though, each primaris wave was accompanies by a new box set featuring all new minis.

In fact we've been getting new Ork rumors so... gonna take a WILD guess here.. the SW vs Orks box set we've been hearing rumor of? Is actually gonna be a 9th edition boxed set. Space Wolves (with new gravis stuff!) vs Orks! with Orks beign the first new codex of 9th edition.

What new gak do my Orkz get Brian? I want details here so we can cite you when they turn up on the rumour mill sites! Be very specific and sound confident!

If I was a betting man, plastic Ghaz, likely a massive mini, around the size of Gulliman and Abaddon (with a fancy base like theirs)

BrianDavion wrote:

 John Prins wrote:
The 'big summer thing' is probably Primaris Wave 3 (or whatever wave we're on).

that's not exactly at odds with a new edition though, each primaris wave was accompanies by a new box set featuring all new minis.

In fact we've been getting new Ork rumors so... gonna take a WILD guess here.. the SW vs Orks box set we've been hearing rumor of? Is actually gonna be a 9th edition boxed set. Space Wolves (with new gravis stuff!) vs Orks! with Orks beign the first new codex of 9th edition.

Don't wish 'first codex' on the poor orks. That always turns out poorly.

BrianDavion wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
that's not exactly at odds with a new edition though, each primaris wave was accompanies by a new box set featuring all new minis.

In fact we've been getting new Ork rumors so... gonna take a WILD guess here.. the SW vs Orks box set we've been hearing rumor of? Is actually gonna be a 9th edition boxed set. Space Wolves (with new gravis stuff!) vs Orks! with Orks beign the first new codex of 9th edition.

What new gak do my Orkz get Brian? I want details here so we can cite you when they turn up on the rumour mill sites! Be very specific and sound confident!

If I was a betting man, plastic Ghaz, likely a massive mini, around the size of Gulliman and Abaddon (with a fancy base like theirs)

Valrak and Spikey Bits will be quoting you tomorrow.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Remember how Windows went from Windows 8 to Windows 10? Warhammer 40k 10th edition incoming, you heard it here first!!!!

LOL! That would actually be kind of amazing. 8th Ed gets replaced with "Warhammer 40,000 - Edition X!".

 Grimgold wrote:
Actually, number 3 would just require rolling back the current to wound chart back to 7th ed, with a minor change that you always wound on sixes. It's actually something that's bothered me this entire edition, the whole doubling thing creates a lumpy distribution of ideal stats, like T5 is just soo much better than T4, but T6 and T7 are more expensive than T5 without being better for the vast majority of use cases. Same with Str, 5 is great, 6 and 7 are overpriced, and 8 is a bargain. So much of what is wrong with 40k could be laid at the feet of this one change.

This would go a long way to fixing a few problems that crop up in Codices where units that should be tough are not because of the To Wound chart (I'm looking at you, Mr. Carnifex, who is inexplicably more fragile than a frickin' Rhino!).

The cover/LOS rules could do with a looksee as well. As would melee in general.

Right now melee units have to:

1. Make it across the board.
2. Make their charge without flubbing a random roll.
3. Weather overwatch before they even get to throw a single punch.
4. Watch their opponents just walk away at the start of the next round and then get shot to pieces.

Meanwhile shooting units just have to:

1. Be in range.

There's no (real) downside to Falling Back, and you always get to do it, leaving HTH units high and dry.

 Grimgold wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
There are very few problems with the game that can be fixed by changing the 8 pages of core rules.

I can think of a few things that need to be addressed.

1 - Terrain
2 - CP generation
3- rapid fire weapons just being better then most dedicated anti-tank weapons.

1 and 2 are easy. 3 would require the creation of some new weapon rules, likely adding a new type to it and some serious errata.

Actually, number 3 would just require rolling back the current to wound chart back to 7th ed, with a minor change that you always wound on sixes. It's actually something that's bothered me this entire edition, the whole doubling thing creates a lumpy distribution of ideal stats, like T5 is just soo much better than T4, but T6 and T7 are more expensive than T5 without being better for the vast majority of use cases. Same with Str, 5 is great, 6 and 7 are overpriced, and 8 is a bargain. So much of what is wrong with 40k could be laid at the feet of this one change.

Indeed, see my post how I mention Stat Lines priced based on 7th edition but in 8th edition context makes the costs nonsensical and inconsistent.

In many ways the problems with 8th is 8th is pointed, designed, and engineered off the previous edition rather than in it's own context. That is why it is so, well, odd in a lot of areas. Why the points make no sense. Why, as you say the T values make little sense vs cost when taken in context of effectiveness in the 8th edition rules set and meta.

That and the complete failure to follow the "Keyword" methodology, the default back into "formations" as well as the return of "army wide perma-bonuses".

8th is an internally inconsistent system as it stands. That is a major issue. A lot of the rules and systems would be fine.. if the T-values were costed in context. If the S-values, the same. If the armies followed the "no/limited" army wide bonuses. If the followed the keywording system and method of inheritance. If they followed the concept of the CP Economy instead of bloating the ever loving hell out of it.

Should I be the one to point out that we're now 2 full pages into a N&R thread without a single credible rumor source or news linked? Is this now the Speculation and Wishlisting forum?

 EnTyme wrote:
Should I be the one to point out that we're now 2 full pages into a N&R thread without a single credible rumor source or news linked? Is this now the Speculation and Wishlisting forum?

A third-hand rumor is a credible source...oh wait.

You want something credible?

As of now every faction (barring the truly lost and damned like Arbites and Squats) has a codex and plastic line.

Just about everyone has a flier and super heavy.

The game is done. Complete.

So GW has to do some sort of churn or people might (gasp) buy slightly less!

9th will come for sure

it will bring changes to the core to mess with the system just enough so that current list making has to change and everyone starts waiting for a new Codex again.

and new editions are likely to released during summer

the only thing are the new campaign books, which will be finished before 9th hit, so it could be autumn or winter.

With GW it is a case of 'when', rather than 'if'. A new edition is guaranteed... there is a reason why 40K is currently on its 8th edition.

It won't be a massive change, just enough tweeks here and there to mean that everyone has to buy the books all over again.

This has been GW's strategy for decades (along with yearly price increases), and it works, people still continue to buy the product.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
You want something credible?

As of now every faction (barring the truly lost and damned like Arbites and Squats) has a codex and plastic line.

Just about everyone has a flier and super heavy.

The game is done. Complete.

So GW has to do some sort of churn or people might (gasp) buy slightly less!

funny you menton the lost and the damned, as I'd not be TOOO suprised to see a traitor guard codex this year. given all the Blackstone fortress traitor guard we've been getting

 Stormonu wrote:
I’m through with buying books though, I have a complete set of all the Codexes I’ll need for 8E, and I’m not interested in the rules bloat beyond Codexes. I’ve reached the age I’m over trying to keep up with an ever-changing system, and I just want the neat models anyways.

I could stomach buying a new BRB, but my Codexes are less than 6 months old right now (Chaos Knights and SM 2.0), so I'd be pretty miffed if they weren't compatible with any new edition less than a year after they were released, especially when I've already forked out for a second SM codex this edition.

 Brother Castor wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:
I’m through with buying books though, I have a complete set of all the Codexes I’ll need for 8E, and I’m not interested in the rules bloat beyond Codexes. I’ve reached the age I’m over trying to keep up with an ever-changing system, and I just want the neat models anyways.

I could stomach buying a new BRB, but my Codexes are less than 6 months old right now (Chaos Knights and SM 2.0), so I'd be pretty miffed if they weren't compatible with any new edition less than a year after they were released, especially when I've already forked out for a second SM codex this edition.

they'll be compatable. just like they always are, 8th edition was an rare event. before 8th we had 5 editions where the codices where cross compatable. Obviously if you got a updated codex you used that, but as I understand it, it was possiable to use a 3rd edition codex with 7th edition rules.

sisters of battle until late 5th edition where still using a 3E 'dex for example

 Brother Castor wrote:

I could stomach buying a new BRB, but my Codexes are less than 6 months old right now (Chaos Knights and SM 2.0), so I'd be pretty miffed if they weren't compatible with any new edition less than a year after they were released, especially when I've already forked out for a second SM codex this edition.

Oh, and cards, don't forget that little money spinner too.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Brother Castor wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:
I’m through with buying books though, I have a complete set of all the Codexes I’ll need for 8E, and I’m not interested in the rules bloat beyond Codexes. I’ve reached the age I’m over trying to keep up with an ever-changing system, and I just want the neat models anyways.

I could stomach buying a new BRB, but my Codexes are less than 6 months old right now (Chaos Knights and SM 2.0), so I'd be pretty miffed if they weren't compatible with any new edition less than a year after they were released, especially when I've already forked out for a second SM codex this edition.

they'll be compatable. just like they always are, 8th edition was an rare event. before 8th we had 5 editions where the codices where cross compatable. Obviously if you got a updated codex you used that, but as I understand it, it was possiable to use a 3rd edition codex with 7th edition rules.

sisters of battle until late 5th edition where still using a 3E 'dex for example

That's good to hear.

I jumped from 1st edition to 8th edition so missed out on what happened in between.

BrianDavion wrote:

 John Prins wrote:
The 'big summer thing' is probably Primaris Wave 3 (or whatever wave we're on).

that's not exactly at odds with a new edition though, each primaris wave was accompanies by a new box set featuring all new minis.

In fact we've been getting new Ork rumors so... gonna take a WILD guess here.. the SW vs Orks box set we've been hearing rumor of? Is actually gonna be a 9th edition boxed set. Space Wolves (with new gravis stuff!) vs Orks! with Orks beign the first new codex of 9th edition.

Oh bugger in that case. First wait over year for codex, then suffer fate of first npc to get new edition codex aka you are junk.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I got a rumor, it's something big!
GW will pull a Microsoft!!!!

Remember how Windows went from Windows 8 to Windows 10? Warhammer 40k 10th edition incoming, you heard it here first!!!!

I joked this a few months ago and the fanbois shot me down telling me they don't use edition numbers etc. Lol.

In reality, I can envision a new release this summer. Rules changes will be minimal enough to keep current books valid, but enough changes so everyone buys the new rulebook anyway. A bit like they used to do. Then they'll re-release codex books over the next couple of years again until there's an event that starts the cycle over again.

Ignoring CA 2018 and the first SM codex (and datacards) that I've sold, I've still got £££ invested in 8th edition rules:

BRB (£35) + Open War Cards (£10)
Codex SM (£25) + datacards (£10)
Codex Ultramarines (£17.50) + datacards (£10)
Codex Chaos Knights (£25) + datacards (£10)
CA 2019 (£20)

TOTAL: £162.50

Okay, so I probably got 15% off all that not buying through GW, but still, I'd not want to have to re-buy everything. In fact that concern is one of the things that stops me starting a third army or buying campaign books too...

I wonder if GW will ever move the rules online, turn them into an online subscription model with regular updates and army building tools.

Probably. But not this time. It would be a significant enough investment we'd hear about it and it would take a major bomb of a rules set for GW to risk that gamble.

 Brother Castor wrote:


BRB (£35) + Open War Cards (£10)
Codex SM (£25) + datacards (£10)
Codex Ultramarines (£17.50) + datacards (£10)
Codex Chaos Knights (£25) + datacards (£10)
CA 2019 (£20)

TOTAL: £162.50

This right here is why GW will never switch to online rules, and continue to release new editions. It is too much of an easy revenue for them to lose. Seeing that all of the above will be invalidated at some point in the new edition, means that they are a repeat purchase when updated.

Easy money for GW, they are figuratively printing money.

 stonehorse wrote:

 Brother Castor wrote:


BRB (£35) + Open War Cards (£10)
Codex SM (£25) + datacards (£10)
Codex Ultramarines (£17.50) + datacards (£10)
Codex Chaos Knights (£25) + datacards (£10)
CA 2019 (£20)

TOTAL: £162.50

This right here is why GW will never switch to online rules, and continue to release new editions. It is too much of an easy revenue for them to lose. Seeing that all of the above will be invalidated at some point in the new edition, means that they are a repeat purchase when updated.

Easy money for GW, they are figuratively printing money.

And of course with the new Schemes of War rules in CA 2019, datacards are no longer just an optional convenience if you want to play Maelstrom missions. The only thing in that list I don't technically need is the open war cards.

Do you reckon the 'big Summer reveal' could be a move towards a living, subscription-based ruleset?

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Just about everyone has a flier and super heavy.

The game is done. Complete.

How are you defining this, Kid? Including or excluding FW? Individual books or IMPERIUM/CHAOS/ELDAR level?

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
I wonder if GW will ever move the rules online, turn them into an online subscription model with regular updates and army building tools.

Probably. But not this time. It would be a significant enough investment we'd hear about it and it would take a major bomb of a rules set for GW to risk that gamble.

They did it for AoS (Azyr) and by all accounts it was a flop.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Do you reckon the 'big Summer reveal' could be a move towards a living, subscription-based ruleset?

Not impossible with Rountree-GW, but also not likely because selling books makes money, no matter how often they make an ass of themselves with products requiring day 1 patches on a medium that doesn't really support patches at all.

Do you reckon the 'big Summer reveal' could be a move towards a living, subscription-based ruleset?

Can dream I suppose.

 Brother Castor wrote:
Ignoring CA 2018 and the first SM codex (and datacards) that I've sold, I've still got £££ invested in 8th edition rules:

BRB (£35) + Open War Cards (£10)
Codex SM (£25) + datacards (£10)
Codex Ultramarines (£17.50) + datacards (£10)
Codex Chaos Knights (£25) + datacards (£10)
CA 2019 (£20)

TOTAL: £162.50

Okay, so I probably got 15% off all that not buying through GW, but still, I'd not want to have to re-buy everything. In fact that concern is one of the things that stops me starting a third army or buying campaign books too...

If you don't want to buy new rules periodically you are alas in wrong hobby. You can expect new rules and codexes every 3-5 years generally, more often with some factions(sm). Unless you are faction that gets ignored for looooooooong times but not sure is it fun to have no codex in certain edition as you are waaaay behind in power curve then with power creeps.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Brother Castor wrote:

And of course with the new Schemes of War rules in CA 2019, datacards are no longer just an optional convenience if you want to play Maelstrom missions. The only thing in that list I don't technically need is the open war cards.

At least any poker card set can be bought instead for cards if you wish.

I don't think a subscription based ruleset is completely out of the question or even unlikely. GW just needs to math out how much the average consumer spends on rulebooks over what period and then charge that on an annual basis (with a large margin of course).

Potentially they could charge less because the costs of updating an app or what have you should be cheaper than the printing cost of books.

I suppose the issue is that many consumers (myself included) love the books so they'd have to run both products for a while that would lead to massive inefficiencies.

I would be amazed if actually buying the majority of rules books an individual gamer uses is the norm nowadays, given that you kinda need to acquire every codex that comes out to follow the meta anyhow. People certainly tend to get the physical codex for their main army, but that’s about it from what I’ve seen.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Potentially they could charge less because the costs of updating an app or what have you should be cheaper than the printing cost of books.

Depends. Assuming you would have an app in a similar complexity to battlescribe, I'd guess you'd have to employ an entire software development team all year to maintain that, at twice the price if you are using contractors for that (they should). You can print quite some books for that kind of cash.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
You want something credible?

As of now every faction (barring the truly lost and damned like Arbites and Squats) has a codex and plastic line.

Just about everyone has a flier and super heavy.

The game is done. Complete.

So GW has to do some sort of churn or people might (gasp) buy slightly less!

That's . . . still speculation. I'll gladly discuss rumors of 9th edition if anyone actually has a link to them from a credible source. I've yet to see a single one. As far as every army having a codex, didn't we get two codices each for Space Marines and Chaos Space Marines this edition? Do they have to release a new edition to justify a new run of codices? Obviously not. The News & Rumors forum should have a higher standard than "feels like it's about time."

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
You want something credible?

As of now every faction (barring the truly lost and damned like Arbites and Squats) has a codex and plastic line.

Just about everyone has a flier and super heavy.

The game is done. Complete.

So GW has to do some sort of churn or people might (gasp) buy slightly less!

Wow. Pretty much every faction fails at least one of those criteria.
Some still need a lot of work to get to 'plastic line' status, let alone junk like fliers and super heavies.

So, no, that isn't it.

I really don’t think we’ll see a large shift with a new edition.

Consider 3rd-7th. Over that period, one could field any Codex from that era. Granted with varying results, but it could still be done as they were all by and large compatible.

9th? Well, we’ve had three years of CA which can be folded in, no? That’s enough for a new edition, without changing any Codecies.

 EnTyme wrote:

That's . . . still speculation. I'll gladly discuss rumors of 9th edition if anyone actually has a link to them from a credible source. I've yet to see a single one. As far as every army having a codex, didn't we get two codices each for Space Marines and Chaos Space Marines this edition? Do they have to release a new edition to justify a new run of codices? Obviously not. The News & Rumors forum should have a higher standard than "feels like it's about time."

Truthfully, one of the things to consider is that with something like this? We rarely actually get "credible" sources. GW gets cagey about this kind of thing, since it can kill sales "until the new edition drops".

We might see a teaser announcement at the LVO, but I'd think Adepticon would be about right for an announce.

I've rattled the bones, consulted the oracle and sacrificed a Kit-Kat to the Gods.

The portents are good, the suspicion an attempt to deal with massive point-cost armies with titans everywhere and the vision was thus:

- All 40K models shall be re-based on square bases.

- All Infantry will be arranged in rank-and-file blocks in groups of 10, 15 to 20 strong.

- All units shall have facings (front, back and flanks)

- A unit may only move forwards, unless it uses some of its movement allowance to change facing

- Different units for different races shall have movement values.

- Psychic powers shall be renamed Magic and have different schools.

I felt there was more, but the vision ended abruptly with the screams of a thousand fantasy players

And just like that, Wulfmar was provided us with a rumor just as credible as anything else in this thread. For future reference, Wulfie, you didn't have to sacrifice a full Kit-Kat. The rumor gods are often satisfied with just one wafer.

Isn't it more likely to just be like AOS 2nd edition with Codex updates to update/power up the various factions.

At least most of the Marines are finally done - unless we get a 3rd version and the same for the supplements........... god forbid.

they're not going to switch to an online subscription model, not everyone wants that. the people who do might be vocal but I suspect aren't eneugh to warrent it.

A online only presence tends to be a game killer because it becomes a lot harder to get new blood into it.

"you can play this game for 15 bucks a month" "......... or I could get wow for 15 bucks a month and not fiddle with miniatures."

I strongly suspect 9th will be just a refined iteration of 8th - as noted above, similar to AoS --> AoS 2.0.

I suspect the main changes will be to:

- CP generation (inspired by Armageddon's handling)
- Subfaction traits (as seen from PA)
- Consolidation of new/primaris units into various SM codexes
- Continued regulation of older (mostly finecast) models to legends and disappearance from codexes
- Continued loss of options for units towards an A/B loadout

BrianDavion wrote:
they're not going to switch to an online subscription model, not everyone wants that. the people who do might be vocal but I suspect aren't eneugh to warrent it.

Well, not everyone wanted story progression either, I suspect more people didn't want it, and yet here we are .
Doesn't matter if people want it or not, if we got no other choice to get rules we'll buy it.

BrianDavion wrote:
they're not going to switch to an online subscription model, not everyone wants that. the people who do might be vocal but I suspect aren't eneugh to warrent it.

A online only presence tends to be a game killer because it becomes a lot harder to get new blood into it.

"you can play this game for 15 bucks a month" "......... or I could get wow for 15 bucks a month and not fiddle with miniatures."

Why not both? Either buy books and free faq/errata with chapter approved doing its thing, or a subscription service to unlock either select or all rules plus updates for x per month. Include a good quality army builder and it'd be popular.

A subscription-only rule system would cause issues for future boxsets like Dark Imperium or Soul Wars. They would be entering the hassle of software requirements...

Requires a PC with an internet connection or a smart phone with either Android 6.0 or the latest Apple OS, and a Warhammer digital account.

...assistants in their stores would then have to deal with customers who have issues setting up accounts and displaying the pdfs. Giving players a digital option is great because you have physical copies available should such problems arise; if the problem cannot be solved for whatever reason you can at least, out of good will, send them a physical copy to resolve the matter and keep the customer happy. While GW takes the odd £5 loss, they don't have to go through the refund proceedure and keep their loyal customer - there is no point where they have to say "well, there is nothing else we can do. Your device is simply not compatiable."

The reason online subscriptions work is because they are used in a domain that is digital and already dealing with software issues. A tabletop game, on the other hand, is not fundamentally a digital product so it makes sense to keep its components physical, with optional digital services.

The best thing GW can do at this point is to have slim softbacks of their rules and codices like they used to have, in addition to the hardbacks for the hardcore players. As a player I only need a rough idea of who my chosen faction are - not 40 pages of waffle. I need to get to the game fast and access the rules and datasheets with minimum hassle. I also want to consider other armies but £25 for each codex is offputting and don't want a book collection with too much weight.

I applaud the AOS: Gaming Book and Kill Team manuals for going this route.

I've said ti before but one thing they could do is include a free digital copy with every codex. other gaming companies do it already and it's great. the one problem is they'd likely only be able to do this for direct orders so people buying a codex through their FLGS might have some issues

BrianDavion wrote:
I've said ti before but one thing they could do is include a free digital copy with every codex. other gaming companies do it already and it's great. the one problem is they'd likely only be able to do this for direct orders so people buying a codex through their FLGS might have some issues

That be welcome, indeed!

BrianDavion wrote:
I've said ti before but one thing they could do is include a free digital copy with every codex. other gaming companies do it already and it's great. the one problem is they'd likely only be able to do this for direct orders so people buying a codex through their FLGS might have some issues

Yeah, no. That's another thing they'd have to maintain.

 Kanluwen wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
I've said ti before but one thing they could do is include a free digital copy with every codex. other gaming companies do it already and it's great. the one problem is they'd likely only be able to do this for direct orders so people buying a codex through their FLGS might have some issues

Yeah, no. That's another thing they'd have to maintain.

they already have digital codices. and the technology to "enter a code, and get X" wouldn't be too hard to maintain, they already have gift cards

BrianDavion wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
I've said ti before but one thing they could do is include a free digital copy with every codex. other gaming companies do it already and it's great. the one problem is they'd likely only be able to do this for direct orders so people buying a codex through their FLGS might have some issues

Yeah, no. That's another thing they'd have to maintain.

they already have digital codices. and the technology to "enter a code, and get X" wouldn't be too hard to maintain, they already have gift cards

And then they have to get pretty strict about photos near books in shops, since the code would be in the book and people get sticky fingers.

I mean hell, comics do this with little one-shot stories and even then 'theft' can be a problem.

 Kanluwen wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
I've said ti before but one thing they could do is include a free digital copy with every codex. other gaming companies do it already and it's great. the one problem is they'd likely only be able to do this for direct orders so people buying a codex through their FLGS might have some issues

Yeah, no. That's another thing they'd have to maintain.

they already have digital codices. and the technology to "enter a code, and get X" wouldn't be too hard to maintain, they already have gift cards

And then they have to get pretty strict about photos near books in shops, since the code would be in the book and people get sticky fingers.

I mean hell, comics do this with little one-shot stories and even then 'theft' can be a problem.

You place it in a glued shut ad page in the middle of the codex which is then shrink wrapped. The books are already shrink wrapped. 2 pages lightly stuck together is what magazines sometimes have for 5-8.00 a mag. So it's can't be that expensive.

Of course it's still possible to steal it. But anyone buying the book would know 1) the shrink wrap is broken and 2) the pages are unstuck which tells you everything you need to know about whether the code has been used.

Or make it a scratch off code in one of the covers. Again, you will know if it was stolen or not. Again, scratch offs are given away for free all the time. Can't be that expensive.

At least here codexes are wrapped in plastic. Good luck taking photo inside book wrapped in plastic

(another option it's not IN codex but you get it when you buy one)

 Lance845 wrote:

You place it in a glued shut ad page in the middle of the codex which is then shrink wrapped. The books are already shrink wrapped. 2 pages lightly stuck together is what magazines sometimes have for 5-8.00 a mag. So it's can't be that expensive.

Of course it's still possible to steal it. But anyone buying the book would know 1) the shrink wrap is broken and 2) the pages are unstuck which tells you everything you need to know about whether the code has been used.

Or make it a scratch off code in one of the covers. Again, you will know if it was stolen or not. Again, scratch offs are given away for free all the time. Can't be that expensive.

And then GW can no longer accept returns of books without the code, and we get to hear the endless whining online.

No. If people want a digital book, let them buy it digital.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:
At least here codexes are wrapped in plastic. Good luck taking photo inside book wrapped in plastic

They are...unless they're a returned copy.

(another option it's not IN codex but you get it when you buy one)

And then the stores need to be stocked with codes to hand out or they have to set up a redemption system. Nah.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

You place it in a glued shut ad page in the middle of the codex which is then shrink wrapped. The books are already shrink wrapped. 2 pages lightly stuck together is what magazines sometimes have for 5-8.00 a mag. So it's can't be that expensive.

Of course it's still possible to steal it. But anyone buying the book would know 1) the shrink wrap is broken and 2) the pages are unstuck which tells you everything you need to know about whether the code has been used.

Or make it a scratch off code in one of the covers. Again, you will know if it was stolen or not. Again, scratch offs are given away for free all the time. Can't be that expensive.

And then GW can no longer accept returns of books without the code, and we get to hear the endless whining online.

No. If people want a digital book, let them buy it digital.

Who gives a gak? If you buy something with a scratch off code and you scratch it off you are done. Think you might return it? Don't scratch it off.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:
At least here codexes are wrapped in plastic. Good luck taking photo inside book wrapped in plastic

They are...unless they're a returned copy.

(another option it's not IN codex but you get it when you buy one)

And then the stores need to be stocked with codes to hand out or they have to set up a redemption system. Nah.

The code can print on a receipt a can be entered in the digital store. This system has work for other companies for years.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

You place it in a glued shut ad page in the middle of the codex which is then shrink wrapped. The books are already shrink wrapped. 2 pages lightly stuck together is what magazines sometimes have for 5-8.00 a mag. So it's can't be that expensive.

Of course it's still possible to steal it. But anyone buying the book would know 1) the shrink wrap is broken and 2) the pages are unstuck which tells you everything you need to know about whether the code has been used.

Or make it a scratch off code in one of the covers. Again, you will know if it was stolen or not. Again, scratch offs are given away for free all the time. Can't be that expensive.

And then GW can no longer accept returns of books without the code, and we get to hear the endless whining online.

No. If people want a digital book, let them buy it digital.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:
At least here codexes are wrapped in plastic. Good luck taking photo inside book wrapped in plastic

They are...unless they're a returned copy.

(another option it's not IN codex but you get it when you buy one)

And then the stores need to be stocked with codes to hand out or they have to set up a redemption system. Nah.

Somehow every other game company selling books manage to provide digital copies with their books. It's obviously not a problem.

What companies are actually doing this?
As far as I know it isn't Corvus Belli, when I stopped looking at their stuff it wasn't Privateer, and I don't think FFG or Knight do it.


All that said, given the entitled attitude of gamers these days when it comes to anything GW related? Nope. It ain't happening. You lot sunk it yourselves, whining incessantly about how they handled stuff with AoS.

Comic book companies have been printing digital codes for their books inside for years.

Movies have had digital codes included in the blu ray for years.

Why can’t the greedy plastic army men company include a digital copy with their books too? They invalidate the rules in the book within a few weeks of release anyways, the least they could do is give us a digital copy that can be updated to reflect the changes they make.

 Kanluwen wrote:
What companies are actually doing this?

As far as I know it isn't Corvus Belli, when I stopped looking at their stuff it wasn't Privateer, and I don't think FFG or Knight do it.
So what are these mythical companies that are doing such with miniatures games?

Wrong question. It doesn't matter if anyone is doing anything with miniature war games. The question is why isn't it being done when the tech exists to do it and people are doing it with other product already.

When I by a game physically that comes with some additional virtual content I get a one time use code for the shop in the package or on the receipt.. When I purchased the new new Alien RPG it came with PDFs of the books and I got emailed purchase links to a website to "purchase" and download them. I got the same for Forbidden Lands expansion.

A codex SHOULD be a one time purchase. And if GW is insisting on changing them constantly then I should have access to a digital version that is updated. The purchase of the book has MANY avenues of providing me with a code that does not cost money beyond the creation of the digital system that accommodates it.

A TTRPG book isn't functionally different from a codex. If they can do it so can "Miniature War Games". And there isn't really a reason not to.

 Lance845 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
What companies are actually doing this?

As far as I know it isn't Corvus Belli, when I stopped looking at their stuff it wasn't Privateer, and I don't think FFG or Knight do it.
So what are these mythical companies that are doing such with miniatures games?

Wrong question. It doesn't matter if anyone is doing anything with miniature war games. The question is why isn't it being done when the tech exists to do it and people are doing it with other product already.

When you and others have implied that it's being done in miniature wargames, yeah the question is exactly that. I figured there must be some company out there doing it, but I wouldn't be shocked if it isn't being done or it's only being done with Kickstarters.

It's also interesting that the only company I know of that has done "digital only" items, which was what Corvus Belli did with the Dire Foes setup...it was NOT well received at all. Because CB's system was trash despite them having invested heavily into doing it for the missions and fluff. Download codes didn't work for a good chunk of people, despite them being brand new boxes.

When I buy a game physically that comes with some additional virtual content I get a one time use code for the shop in the package or on the receipt.. When I purchased the new new Alien RPG it came with PDFs of the books and I got emailed purchase links to a website to "purchase" and download them. I got the same for Forbidden Lands expansion.

Were these Kickstarters or actual products?

A codex SHOULD be a one time purchase. And if GW is insisting and changing them constantly then I should have access to a digital version that is updated.

How many codices are "changed constantly"? Do you really consider FAQs to be so onerous to your experience that you feel you are owed a digital version?

The purchase of the book has MANY avenues of providing me with a code that does not cost money beyond the creation of the digital system that accommodates it.

A TTRPG book isn't functionally different from a codex. If they can do it so can "Miniature War Games". And there isn't really a reason not to.

It's always funny seeing these "it will cost them nothing!"...when yeah, it would.
They need to create a digital system, they need to maintain it, they need staff that can help troubleshoot problems with it, etc. Alternatively they have to outsource it to a company that can do all of that.

 zend wrote:
They invalidate the rules in the book within a few weeks of release anyways, the least they could do is give us a digital copy that can be updated to reflect the changes they make.

You have a strange definition for "invalidate" if clarifying or rewording a rule "invalidates" it.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
What companies are actually doing this?

As far as I know it isn't Corvus Belli, when I stopped looking at their stuff it wasn't Privateer, and I don't think FFG or Knight do it.
So what are these mythical companies that are doing such with miniatures games?

Wrong question. It doesn't matter if anyone is doing anything with miniature war games. The question is why isn't it being done when the tech exists to do it and people are doing it with other product already.

When you and others have implied that it's being done in miniature wargames, yeah the question is exactly that. I figured there must be some company out there doing it, but I wouldn't be shocked if it isn't being done or it's only being done with Kickstarters.

Incorrect. There is no functional difference between a TTRPG book and a codex, or a comic, or a movie. Just because a niche genre of game has not done it doesn't mean jack gak.

When I buy a game physically that comes with some additional virtual content I get a one time use code for the shop in the package or on the receipt.. When I purchased the new new Alien RPG it came with PDFs of the books and I got emailed purchase links to a website to "purchase" and download them. I got the same for Forbidden Lands expansion.

Were these Kickstarters or actual products?

Forbidden Lands, a Kickstarter. Alien, actual product. Movies, actual product. Comics, actual product. Video games, actual product.

A codex SHOULD be a one time purchase. And if GW is insisting and changing them constantly then I should have access to a digital version that is updated.

How many codices are "changed constantly"? Do you really consider FAQs to be so onerous to your experience that you feel you are owed a digital version?

Every book released by GW has had some changes 2 times within 12 months of the release of their book and at least 1 more time every 12 months since. First in the FAQ errata where they constantly make mistakes large and small and once a year in point values in CA. Yes. That is so onerous that people should get digital versions.

The purchase of the book has MANY avenues of providing me with a code that does not cost money beyond the creation of the digital system that accommodates it.

A TTRPG book isn't functionally different from a codex. If they can do it so can "Miniature War Games". And there isn't really a reason not to.

It's always funny seeing these "it will cost them nothing!"...when yeah, it would.
They need to create a digital system, they need to maintain it, they need staff that can help troubleshoot problems with it, etc. Alternatively they have to outsource it to a company that can do all of that.

They have staff to do that already. They run their virtual store. The only thing that webstaff has to do is create a system that produces randomized codes and add them to the printing of the books. It's crazy easy to write the code to produce a 16 digit alpha numeric code. Any "Team" of coders could produce stable code that does that within a couple weeks to a month while maintaining their normal duties. And if they don't want to there are lots of companies that produce packages of virtual store features that I am sure GW could purchase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The printers that make their books can print those labels on a dymo printer for 0.025 per label american. (9.00 a roll 350 labels per roll - That is the price you and I would pay btw. Not a corporate price.) and put the sticker on the inside of the cover before shrink wrapping.

https://www.uline.com/Product/Detail/S-8504/Dymo-Label-Printers-and-Labels/Uline-Mini-Printer-Labels-White-Paper-1-1-8-x-3-1-2?pricode=WB0307&gadtype=pla&id=S-8504&gclid=Cj0KCQiAmZDxBRDIARIsABnkbYSU7xdh8vWb_Ka2OjBBdN-KsdwHWYAb5hdmIIlJmG4wttXya1WbY0gaAp2FEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds

What if they made reverse overeatch to make melee more enticing?

If a unit falls back from combat, each model gets to make close combat attacks hitting on 6's? (Close com

 Huoshini wrote:
What if they made reverse overeatch to make melee more enticing?

If a unit falls back from combat, each model gets to make attacks hitting on 6's?

Overwatch sucks. A chance to hit on a 6 + wounds + saves is mostly a futile exercise in rolling dice to no effect. It's not enough to stop people from charging and it won't be enough to stop people from falling back because it's mostly just not a risk at all. The whole system of overwatch needs to change.

 Lance845 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

It's always funny seeing these "it will cost them nothing!"...when yeah, it would.
They need to create a digital system, they need to maintain it, they need staff that can help troubleshoot problems with it, etc. Alternatively they have to outsource it to a company that can do all of that.

They have staff to do that already. They run their virtual store. The only thing that webstaff has to do is create a system that produces randomized codes and add them to the printing of the books. It's crazy easy to write the code to produce a 16 digit alpha numeric code. Any "Team" of coders could produce stable code that does that within a couple weeks to a month while maintaining their normal duties. And if they don't want to there are lots of companies that produce packages of virtual store features that I am sure GW could purchase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The printers that make their books can print those labels on a dymo printer for 0.025 per label american. (9.00 a roll 350 labels per roll - That is the price you and I would pay btw. Not a corporate price.) and put the sticker on the inside of the cover before shrink wrapping.

 solkan wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

It's always funny seeing these "it will cost them nothing!"...when yeah, it would.
They need to create a digital system, they need to maintain it, they need staff that can help troubleshoot problems with it, etc. Alternatively they have to outsource it to a company that can do all of that.

They have staff to do that already. They run their virtual store. The only thing that webstaff has to do is create a system that produces randomized codes and add them to the printing of the books. It's crazy easy to write the code to produce a 16 digit alpha numeric code. Any "Team" of coders could produce stable code that does that within a couple weeks to a month while maintaining their normal duties. And if they don't want to there are lots of companies that produce packages of virtual store features that I am sure GW could purchase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The printers that make their books can print those labels on a dymo printer for 0.025 per label american. (9.00 a roll 350 labels per roll - That is the price you and I would pay btw. Not a corporate price.) and put the sticker on the inside of the cover before shrink wrapping.

You're looking at the wrong cost. That's the cost to put a label with a magic number printed on it in a book.

Print that book, and then try to use the code from that book three years from now. Or print that book, have someone buy the book, and then give the book to someone else and then the second person tries to use the code.

It's like finding an old copy of a game witha license code in the box. Is the license verification system for that game still going to exist?

How long do those codes in the book need to be valid for? How do you deal with second hand books?
And then there's the occasional disaster scenario like a print run getting the wrong codes?

Making those codes work costs more than printing them and putting them in the books.

Thats why it's not a verification code that has to log into some server every time you want to play to verify it. It's a purchase code for a webstore. And they only need to be valid for as long as the product is in the virtual store. A simple line saying "Code only usable once. Only valid while product is available" say you don't have to do gak.

Nobody is doubting that there ARE costs. What is being said is that the cost is 99% 1 time up front building the system (which other industries and companies have done already) and the rest is less than the massive profit margin GW is already putting on their products.

I have made this equation before. A good quality TTRPG book has double the pages of a codex with all of them being actual content with higher quality binding, covers, and paper for the same price GW charges you for your codex. Their core book is more expensive for roughly the same page count and less content while having the same quality drops. GW can afford to print you a code for the digital version.

Didn’t play or buy 6,7 or 8th edition. I’d be interested in buying into 9ths rulebook as 8th looks very interesting, having return to looking at GW stuff. I’m not buying an 8th rulebook this far into an edition though, as it’ll have a short life span.

Roll on 9th. As quick as possible!

SamusDrake wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
I've said ti before but one thing they could do is include a free digital copy with every codex. other gaming companies do it already and it's great. the one problem is they'd likely only be able to do this for direct orders so people buying a codex through their FLGS might have some issues

That be welcome, indeed!

Totally agree. Although I love thumbing through rulebooks, reading fluff and admiring the art, there are times when you want to be able to access the rules without having to lug around multiple books.I am, however, loathe to purchase another copy of the rules (especially when it is almost the same price as a physical copy) that I already own

 Kanluwen wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
I've said ti before but one thing they could do is include a free digital copy with every codex. other gaming companies do it already and it's great. the one problem is they'd likely only be able to do this for direct orders so people buying a codex through their FLGS might have some issues

Yeah, no. That's another thing they'd have to maintain.

Yeah, that's sounds hard. It's easier to just put in the effort once in 2-3 years and resell it at full price instead.

 warboss wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
I've said ti before but one thing they could do is include a free digital copy with every codex. other gaming companies do it already and it's great. the one problem is they'd likely only be able to do this for direct orders so people buying a codex through their FLGS might have some issues

Yeah, no. That's another thing they'd have to maintain.

Yeah, that's sounds hard. It's easier to just put in the effort once in 2-3 years and resell it at full price instead.

If you want to argue that they should lower prices on books? Cool, I'm down for that.
If you want to argue that maybe they should attempt some kind of scheme for people to trade in books? Again, down for that.

But let's not pretend that there's nothing that goes into books or that some kind of "free digital copy with every codex!" scheme is something genius or reasonably feasible.

My vision was more like a WD subscription, for $10 a month you can look at any codex or rulebook online, or access an Army Builder tool with rules baked in.

Obvious possible problems with people sharing usernames (cap the number of devices?) but that's true for any online service.

 Kanluwen wrote:
But let's not pretend that there's nothing that goes into books or that some kind of "free digital copy with every codex!" scheme is something genius or reasonably feasible.

As has been pointed out before, such a scheme exists in the TTRPG market - I know, because I've ended up with PDFs of RPG books I've bought from my LGS through it.

The main example I'm familiar with is called Bits and Mortar - you've got both large and small companies in there, proving that giving a digital copy of a book when the physical is bought in a store is feasible for a variety of companies.

Seriously, Kan - why do you think this is something which wouldn't be feasible for GW to do, if they were feeling consumer-friendly?

Honestly? Because while it might be consumer friendly, I don't think the upkeep would be worth it in the long run for a gimmick.

Remember the good old days, when it took 4-5 years to get a new codex because GW didn't update them? Back then you had to wait for a new edition to the rules and hope your army book was updated towards the middle because of rules creep. So now GW does FAQ's and updates within weeks of releasing a codex and balances the points once a year and still everyone gives them crap. Can't satisfy everyone I guess.

BTW, we're now up to 4 pages of wishlisting and speculation without a single link to a credible rumor or news about a new edition. Could a mod at least move this to the 40k discussion forum so it isn't clogging up N&R?

Meanwhile, it takes 5 minutes to find other, less reputable sources of rules. GW faces the same issue that gaming and music industry faced, that being why pay if it's more convenient to not pay? They resolved it by making paying for their products extremely convenient. GW instead is stuck with the most user un-friendly model imaginable, where you need to buy the main book, the army book, the supplements they release in the meantime and the annual patch-supplement. Oh, and errata pdfs, to ensure maximum confusion.

Cronch wrote:
Meanwhile, it takes 5 minutes to find other, less reputable sources of rules. GW faces the same issue that gaming and music industry faced, that being why pay if it's more convenient to not pay? They resolved it by making paying for their products extremely convenient. GW instead is stuck with the most user un-friendly model imaginable, where you need to buy the main book, the army book, the supplements they release in the meantime and the annual patch-supplement. Oh, and errata pdfs, to ensure maximum confusion.

PDFs of DnD books have always been stupid easy to find.

Wizards solved that with DnD Beyond. They have their own digital library service that has a ton of tools to help facilitate not just the account user but their whole player group. People love to pay Wizards directly for a digital image that costs them no physical overhead and no print costs because of the convenience and the service.

As you say, GW is just back peddling in the opposite direction. As cumbersome and complicated for the user as possible.

 Kanluwen wrote:
All that said, given the entitled attitude of gamers these days when it comes to anything GW related? Nope. It ain't happening. You lot sunk it yourselves, whining incessantly about how they handled stuff with AoS.

Jesus Kan. Did someone strike a nerve?

Haven't seen Kan slam the shields up so hard for ages.

It's made me sort of nostalgic.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Honestly? Because while it might be consumer friendly, I don't think the upkeep would be worth it in the long run for a gimmick.

A service running since 2011 is hardly a gimmick.

When you think about it, it isn't really that different to the AutoRip service Amazon provides with some music CDs.

It's funny seeing some posters throwing every excuses in the book in order to defend GW outdated and exploitative practices.

Kind of a capitalist version of the Stockholm syndrome

This rumor thread's certainly taking a certain anti-GW turn as typical of rumors without substance.

 streetsamurai wrote:

Kind of a capitalist version of the Stockholm syndrome

GW games are built around that and it is their main business model to keep people playing their stuff

if you sink enough money into something, accepting that it was mistaken is very hard and the way forward of just using it and invest more money is easier.

see this also with companies that invest billions to pretend a dead horse is still alive instead of accepting that mistakes were made and write it off.

buying 1000 for a game, invest 100+ hours to build/paint and say that everything is fine is easier than acknowledge that you don't like it any more or that something is wrong

this is why we see a lot of people leave games with new editions
no matter what changed or if the game becomes better, it is the best chance to pull the plug (from past experience lot of people stay with one edition change and leave with the second)

So just to sum up the thread so far: there aren’t actually any new rumours worth commenting on, and we’re rehashing all the usual? K.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
So just to sum up the thread so far: there aren’t actually any new rumours worth commenting on, and we’re rehashing all the usual? K.

That's pretty much a given on most topics on this forum these days

The meta-commentary is so much more useful though...

I don't think there is a 9th Edition rumour to begin with.

Just speculation based on a) Codexes are essentially complete and b) GW tends to release new editions / starter boxes in the summer.

Everything I ever saw there was even hedging their bets on whether its just a slight update or a genuine new Edition. So it seems like nobody actually has any inside scoop or information and are just making up click-bait based on probability.

Maybe there'll be a new rule book in the summer of 2020. And if there isn't, expect another round of "9th Edition in the summer of 2021" ... cough ... "rumours". And if there isn't in 2021, gear up for "rumours" for 9th Edition in 2022. They'll be correct eventually.

Indeed. And wasn't the word about 8th edition being one GW wanted to stick with for a while?

Carlovonsexron wrote:
Indeed. And wasn't the word about 8th edition being one GW wanted to stick with for a while?

They said that about AoS too, and that they weren’t going to do new editions, but then 2.0 came out. 8th is a bit of a mess atm with all the FAQs and white dwarfs. I’m not a fan either of the metric crap ton of supplements they’ve been chucking out too, and these campaign books, all these books adding pages of extra bloat on top of bloat. The amount of stratagems people get now is just ridiculous.

Then again, I doubt a 9th edition would change most of that.

Sure.

It's probably there'll be an updated rulesbook at some point.

It's probably it'll be released as is traditional in the summer with a new boxed set.

It's not super improbably it'll happen in 2020.

None of that qualifies as a rumour though. That's just speculation and informed guess work based on past releases.

Carlovonsexron wrote:
Indeed. And wasn't the word about 8th edition being one GW wanted to stick with for a while?

Like they have said just about every edition so far

I really don't see how a new edition would fix anything but CP generation, cover or transports.
Maybe they change how consolidate/pile-in works so you don't have to move charging models four times in one turn and prevent the un-intuitive drifting glitch.

All of those would be nice fixes, but hardly comparable to other edition changes, not even 6th=>7th.

If they do their usual table-flip-it's-a-new-game thing, I would not be amused.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
I don't think there is a 9th Edition rumour to begin with.

There have been multiple rumours of a 9th ed this summer for about six months.

The reliability is somewhat suspect of those.

 Jidmah wrote:
I really don't see how a new edition would fix anything but CP generation, cover or transports.
Maybe they change how consolidate/pile-in works so you don't have to move charging models four times in one turn and prevent the un-intuitive drifting glitch.

All of those would be nice fixes, but hardly comparable to other edition changes, not even 6th=>7th.

If they do their usual table-flip-it's-a-new-game thing, I would not be amused.

Well, one of the rumours is that there'd be psychic phase reworking to have endless spells like AOS, and that... feels like something GW would do tbh.

I'm not familiar with the rules of AOS, could someone explain to me how Endless Spells work? I'm aware that they have miniatures to represent them on the table, and have effects that last over multiple turns but I don't understand the mechanics.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
I'm not familiar with the rules of AOS, could someone explain to me how Endless Spells work? I'm aware that they have miniatures to represent them on the table, and have effects that last over multiple turns but I don't understand the mechanics.

you pay points for endless during list building(you also pick the spells at that time). Then instead of casting a normal spell you can cast one of the endless spells you bought(only one of each spell can be on the table at the same time and each wizard can only cast one), the casting is just like a normal spell, if successfully cast without being unbinded you place the model on the table like the spell tells you. The effects are on the warscroll card(datasheet) of the spell. If a spell is predatory it can move now. Then at the start of a battle round after the priority roll(in AoS priority is determined each battle round) has been made, the second player may move a predatory spell, then the first etc. until all spells have been picked and each spell can only be picked once.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
I'm not familiar with the rules of AOS, could someone explain to me how Endless Spells work? I'm aware that they have miniatures to represent them on the table, and have effects that last over multiple turns but I don't understand the mechanics.

The brief rundown:

Endless Spells are purchased using points and once they are, any Wizard in your army can utilize them. Wizards cannot attempt to cast more than one Endless Spell in a turn, even if it is a different one to that which they cast. You can attempt to Unbind an Endless Spell when it is cast as normal. Endless Spells remain in play until they are dispelled, it moves off the edge of the battlefield(this only applies to Predatory Endless Spells--more on this in a second!), or in some instances the criteria on the warscroll are met for the spell expiring. Endless Spells cannot be subjected to more than one Dispel attempt per Hero Phase.

Predatory Endless Spells get moved at the start of each battle round, after determining who has the first turn but before the first turn begins. Players alternate picking a predatory endless spell to move starting with whoever has the second turn. The effects and abilities of predatory endless spells are resolved by the player who moved it for that turn...meaning that it can be turned against you.

Wasn't endless spells added to AoS before the new edition?

they where added at the same time, with an expanion that includes the generic endless of that time

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
I'm not familiar with the rules of AOS, could someone explain to me how Endless Spells work? I'm aware that they have miniatures to represent them on the table, and have effects that last over multiple turns but I don't understand the mechanics.

The brief rundown:

Endless Spells are purchased using points and once they are, any Wizard in your army can utilize them. Wizards cannot attempt to cast more than one Endless Spell in a turn, even if it is a different one to that which they cast. You can attempt to Unbind an Endless Spell when it is cast as normal. Endless Spells remain in play until they are dispelled, it moves off the edge of the battlefield(this only applies to Predatory Endless Spells--more on this in a second!), or in some instances the criteria on the warscroll are met for the spell expiring. Endless Spells cannot be subjected to more than one Dispel attempt per Hero Phase.

Predatory Endless Spells get moved at the start of each battle round, after determining who has the first turn but before the first turn begins. Players alternate picking a predatory endless spell to move starting with whoever has the second turn. The effects and abilities of predatory endless spells are resolved by the player who moved it for that turn...meaning that it can be turned against you.

Would this be a good addition or a bad addition to 40K?

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Would this be a good addition or a bad addition to 40K?

It would depend upon how it's done.

Carlovonsexron wrote:Indeed. And wasn't the word about 8th edition being one GW wanted to stick with for a while?

GW has gone back on / not lived up to everything they've said about 8th edition; absolutely everything. It's like fething battered persons syndrome anymore.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Would this be a good addition or a bad addition to 40K?

It would depend upon how it's done.

It would be bad. Very bad. W40K, while having 'magic' is not about 'magic'; where AoS is all about it.

Furthermore, endless spells were actually bad for AoS. In my experience, a lot of casual players choose not use them and a lot of people interested in playing AoS become deterred by them.

I disagree. Endless spells are fun. I play AOS. Many people use endless spells. Besides adding a cool visual component, they become another piece in your army and they expand on what your psykers can do. I can't wait to see them in 40K..

GW is already going above and beyond to sell as many books as they can for W40K and it's turning people off. I believe that it would be extremely detrimental to do the same thing with actual models. Additionally, it would be more books, more rules, more bloat, more slowing down game play... More of all the things that are upsetting the player base and driving players out of the game at the moment.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And of course there would be even more fething stratagems to come with them (i.e. Endless Spells).

 oni wrote:
Furthermore, endless spells were actually bad for AoS.

Disagree, I think they are a great addition. My entire social media presence is dedicated to AoS(and AoS adjacent games) and I've never witnessed someone complain about Endless Spells. Maybe the complaint (justified) that you have to buy the entirety of the Malign Sorcery boxed set to just get the spells you want, but secondhand market usually has that covered.

And the spells are usually pretty simple and have never seemed like a millstone on game time.

 oni wrote:
In my experience, a lot of casual players choose not use them and a lot of people interested in playing AoS become deterred by them.

I've seen alot of casual players not use the realm specific spells/relics in the main book, just like alot of casuals don't use the terrain rules, but I've never witnessed someone get hung up on the concept of Endless Spells to the point where they don't want to play. "I think I want to play Fyreslayers, but the Magmic Invocations(Prayer equivalents to Endless Spells) just turn me off. Why would I want a prayer that can devastate horde armies, or another that can boost Bravery while putting some hurt on multiple units or a prayer that blocks my enemies LOS. Ewww! Forget this game!" Just doesn't seem like an internal monologue that happens.

The army specific spells are already in the battletomes, so its just like another unit. And the fact that they cost points is a plus.

Too many bells and whistles is the first sign of a bad engine imhe...

 jeff white wrote:
Too many bells and whistles is the first sign of a bad engine imhe...

The engine GW wants to sell is the plastic, lol.

The rules are just the shiny marketing magazine that's supposed to make you wanna buy the next "engine", despite having plenty in your cupboard, I mean, garage already.

I am so glad I got off this merry-go-round.....

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
You want something credible?

As of now every faction (barring the truly lost and damned like Arbites and Squats) has a codex and plastic line.

Just about everyone has a flier and super heavy.

The game is done. Complete.

So GW has to do some sort of churn or people might (gasp) buy slightly less!

The game is clearly not done or complete, and 9th edition wouldn't accomplish the "churn" you seek anyway. GW has told us repeatedly over the last 2 years that they want to move away from codex based release schedules and release models and rules updates independent of the codex cycle - thus far we have seen many, many, *many* examples of that in action. The logical conclusion is that GW will continue getting their "churn" by way of releasing supplement books like Vigilus and the Psychic Awakening series and 2-player box sets with new minis and updated rules included, etc. as well as the annual Chapter Approved release which is an almost mandatory annual purchase for anyone playing the game. Throw in the occasional "2.0" codex release like we've already seen for some, and you've basically eliminated any real need for the traditional "churn" of edition and codex cycles.

Beyond that, we also know that GW has said they have about 5 years worth of model releases for all the existing factions, as well as a stated desire to introduce/reintroduce other factions into the game. GW has more than enough to keep the money flowing without needing to churn books.

BESIDES THAT, we're already seeing that GW is taking steps to move beyond the tabletop game as its core business, if the Eisenhorn tv series takes off, in 10 years time I expect the game will be just a small fraction of GWs income, it seems pretty clear that they have set their sights on their IPs becoming multimedia franchises in their own right, using Disney and Lucasfilm as a model for what the future of the business might look like. On that basis alone from the management side of things it might be more advantageous for GW to minimize churn, as its a big expenditure of time and energy to do something which doesn't necessarily drive the business as a whole forward (I.E. - spinning your wheels but not going anywhere), as its not really a "value added" type activity - GW can gain a lot more value by driving their narrative forward through PA style releases which generate much more content that can be mined for video games, film, tv shows, comics, etc. than they will by rereleasing the same book with a couple minor edits every 18-24 months.

I think at this point we'd all rather see 8th edition fine-tuned rather than have another edition.

 Easy E wrote:
I am so glad I got off this merry-go-round.....

It wasn't even that merry... Just another GW go-round.

not sure I can see a 9th just yet, when we do get it I'm expecting it to be basically what we have now, a few bits tidied up and a new starter set to launch a new faction/range of models to update something.

not sure the current starter has been around long enough.

I could however see a new one being timed to be six months ahead of the AoS partwork magazine ending, to coincide with a second run at a 40k partwork with new models?

only real changes to the rules I'm expecting are for the <KEYWORD> system to be expanded to weapons so stuff like <BOLT>, <PLASMA> etc. plus something around command point generation - and with luck better terrain rules. can't see anything fundamental changing that outright invalidates books, but enough that they can justify re-releasing them all with minor updates over time

people complain about the churn and new releases etc, but at the same time we've had pretty regular complaint threads about some factions getting insufficant releases. it's pretty clear to me that for every complainer about bloat and new stuff there are proably one or more players who WANT it

If there's no real news should we move this to discussions so we can feel free to speculate?

I've only been suggesting that for five pages now, Kid.

BrianDavion wrote:
people complain about the churn and new releases etc, but at the same time we've had pretty regular complaint threads about some factions getting insufficant releases. it's pretty clear to me that for every complainer about bloat and new stuff there are proably one or more players who WANT it

The two things aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, the same person could have an issue with continual releases and still be unhappy that there aren't enough for something they're specifically interested in.

Plus, of course, there's a clear delineation between "bloat" and "a large quantity of grade A material." I suspect people would have fewer complaints about GW pumping out quality book after quality book than we do about them releasing a book which has a small portion that useful, or relevant to a player's chosen factions.

I think the main issue with regards to bloat is that there isn't any sort of platform to manage it all in - i.e. an officially supported listbuilding app and rules reference. Mainly, the complaints I see about the bloat seem to be more based in the fact that there are so many *sources* for rules that need to be referred to, rather than the fact that they exist.

chaos0xomega wrote:
I think the main issue with regards to bloat is that there isn't any sort of platform to manage it all in - i.e. an officially supported listbuilding app and rules reference. Mainly, the complaints I see about the bloat seem to be more based in the fact that there are so many *sources* for rules that need to be referred to, rather than the fact that they exist.

Yup,but that wont change due to gw rellying on sales of their booklets...

BrianDavion wrote:
people complain about the churn and new releases etc, but at the same time we've had pretty regular complaint threads about some factions getting insufficant releases. it's pretty clear to me that for every complainer about bloat and new stuff there are proably one or more players who WANT it

Those are two separate issues that can both be true at the same time. GW can be churning out way too much content (books, rules, models) for a handful of armies, while leaving lots of other armies lay fallow, unloved and unremembered.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

chaos0xomega wrote:
I think the main issue with regards to bloat is that there isn't any sort of platform to manage it all in - i.e. an officially supported listbuilding app and rules reference. Mainly, the complaints I see about the bloat seem to be more based in the fact that there are so many *sources* for rules that need to be referred to, rather than the fact that they exist.

All of the other major Wargames (Infinity, X-Wing, WarmaHordes) have all created a digital list building tool which allows the company to adjust points totals and errata units digitally without the need to print an expensive book each and every year.

GW has avoided this because - in truth - the campaign books and codexes are one of their biggest revenue generators. They do not want to switch to a digital experience because it would hurt their bottom line.

chaos0xomega wrote:
I think the main issue with regards to bloat is that there isn't any sort of platform to manage it all in - i.e. an officially supported listbuilding app and rules reference. Mainly, the complaints I see about the bloat seem to be more based in the fact that there are so many *sources* for rules that need to be referred to, rather than the fact that they exist.

I think GW's solution is the cards.

A lot of us are hesitant to buy 40K cards because we're afraid at how quickly they'll be invalidated.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
A lot of us are hesitant to buy 40K cards because we're afraid at how quickly they'll be invalidated.

IMO the cards should be included in the codex

 Azreal13 wrote:
Wasn't the scuttle around 8th that it was the end of "editions" and that it was now effectively a living ruleset?

Or would people accept a reprint of the core book with subsequently printed FAQ and errata in it as "9th?"

Pretty much everything they stated from launching 8th has turned out to be a lie or at least a half truth. The release dates for FAQs has been fluid, spring update has moved around a few times. It's not really a living rules if they keep churning editions which all signs point to they will and they say in one breath bloat helped to kill the game before then become even more bloated than before ( especially if you play Chaos all your rules are spread out along how many different books now ? ). If its a soft launch of basically 8.1 or real 9 who could say, I'd vote more towards 8.1 as why not charge people again for the same book with some changes ? Sounds right like the old/new GW.

GW has never really changed so new/old gw is meaningless term. Only change was they hired couple more PR guys.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
A lot of us are hesitant to buy 40K cards because we're afraid at how quickly they'll be invalidated.

never said it was a good solution. I'm one of those. just I think GW's solution is the cards. the hard thing to remember is all the strats etc, and the cards would make that easier. and it also means we have to buy more stuff which from GW's POV is seen as a win

Plastic packs with extra cards to add to your decks would have been awesome for PA...

 Jidmah wrote:
Plastic packs with extra cards to add to your decks would have been awesome for PA...

Yes especially for the new tactical objectives for maelstorm games.

Of course then gw couldn't get us to pay $40 for four pages of rules.

GW's current relationship with card-based products is... poor... to say the least. Just ask any Necromunda player!

I think that the way that unit cards are limited releases each time an AoS book comes out is a mistake. It'd be nice if all races had unit card packs.

Of course, with the quick way GW cycle through rules with FAQs, I fear that so many of these packs would be invalidated not long after their first printing, and with GWs continued and steadfast dedication to play-testing and especially to proofreading, we may never get a set of card accessories that are worth the paper they're printed on.

I think the only way they're going to improve is to get a card printing machine and the staff to run it. They're just not agile enough when working with external contractors, and because of that they do stuff in a 'fire and forget' fashion

if they had the ability to manage their own production I think they'd handle things a lot better although there would always be hiccups

I think the rumor of Codex Adeptus Custodes 2.0 (from leaked/datamined shipping manifests) more or less kills the idea of 9th coming.

chaos0xomega wrote:
I think the rumor of Codex Adeptus Custodes 2.0 (from leaked/datamined shipping manifests) more or less kills the idea of 9th coming.

Unless Custodes are the Imperium faction in the next starter set and their Codex 2.0 is released that same month.

Update: We're now up to 6 pages without a link to a credible source.

chaos0xomega wrote:
I think the rumor of Codex Adeptus Custodes 2.0 (from leaked/datamined shipping manifests) more or less kills the idea of 9th coming.

Assuming 9th is not a total re-write of the rules, then all 8th edition codexes could easily be legal in 9th. GW released the 4th edition Daemon Codex like 2 months before 5th edition dropped.

 EnTyme wrote:
Update: We're now up to 6 pages without a link to a credible source.

Feel free to stop reading the thread whenever you wish. I presume no one is forcing you to participate.

I think this can move to discussions, it's a good thread, just not a news one.

If the Custodes 2.0 rumor is true it's both good and bad. Good in that everyone will get rules equivalent to space marines 2.0.Bad in that everyone will get rules equivalent to space marines 2.0.

I just hope they don't stretch out the releases like they did the sm supplements. That would mean throwing balance all over the place for months while everyone waits for their updated codex.

Gadzilla666 wrote:
If the Custodes 2.0 rumor is true it's both good and bad. Good in that everyone will get rules equivalent to space marines 2.0.Bad in that everyone will get rules equivalent to space marines 2.0.

I just hope they don't stretch out the releases like they did the sm supplements. That would mean throwing balance all over the place for months while everyone waits for their updated codex.

This is GW - so of course it is going to be stretched out over months, if not years.

Gadzilla666 wrote:
If the Custodes 2.0 rumor is true it's both good and bad. Good in that everyone will get rules equivalent to space marines 2.0.Bad in that everyone will get rules equivalent to space marines 2.0.

I just hope they don't stretch out the releases like they did the sm supplements. That would mean throwing balance all over the place for months while everyone waits for their updated codex.

It's just a reprint.

 NurglesR0T wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
A lot of us are hesitant to buy 40K cards because we're afraid at how quickly they'll be invalidated.

IMO the cards should be included in the codex

Why sell something as one item, when you can split it up and sell it as separate stuff? I am seriously wondering why GW doesn't sell separate unit rules, and by separate I mean like a box, that can be build in two ways, comes with a separate booklet with rules for the two units.

Gadzilla666 wrote:
If the Custodes 2.0 rumor is true it's both good and bad. Good in that everyone will get rules equivalent to space marines 2.0.Bad in that everyone will get rules equivalent to space marines 2.0.

I just hope they don't stretch out the releases like they did the sm supplements. That would mean throwing balance all over the place for months while everyone waits for their updated codex.

If everyone is Space Marines 2.0 then no one is.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
If the Custodes 2.0 rumor is true it's both good and bad. Good in that everyone will get rules equivalent to space marines 2.0.Bad in that everyone will get rules equivalent to space marines 2.0.

I just hope they don't stretch out the releases like they did the sm supplements. That would mean throwing balance all over the place for months while everyone waits for their updated codex.

It's just a reprint.

Yeah I heard.

Move along folks! Nothing to see here! The space marines are perfectly safe!

Karol wrote:

 NurglesR0T wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
A lot of us are hesitant to buy 40K cards because we're afraid at how quickly they'll be invalidated.

IMO the cards should be included in the codex

Why sell something as one item, when you can split it up and sell it as separate stuff? I am seriously wondering why GW doesn't sell separate unit rules, and by separate I mean like a box, that can be build in two ways, comes with a separate booklet with rules for the two units.

Because they've learnt that people still buy them even if things that really should be bundled can be sold separately. Just because they can, doesn't mean they should

This won't change any time soon sadly though. GW market are like Apple fans, complain about the price but still line up at the door to buy the same thing over and over

 NurglesR0T wrote:

Karol wrote:

 NurglesR0T wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
A lot of us are hesitant to buy 40K cards because we're afraid at how quickly they'll be invalidated.

IMO the cards should be included in the codex

Why sell something as one item, when you can split it up and sell it as separate stuff? I am seriously wondering why GW doesn't sell separate unit rules, and by separate I mean like a box, that can be build in two ways, comes with a separate booklet with rules for the two units.

Because they've learnt that people still buy them even if things that really should be bundled can be sold separately. Just because they can, doesn't mean they should

This won't change any time soon sadly though. GW market are like Apple fans, complain about the price but still line up at the door to buy the same thing over and over

Not really. We pirate stuff a lot harder than they do.

IDK about a new edition, but maybe a re-release of all the 8th edition codices to help update and consolidate some rules might be in order. Book creep is definitely real.

DudleyGrim wrote:
IDK about a new edition, but maybe a re-release of all the 8th edition codices to help update and consolidate some rules might be in order. Book creep is definitely real.

They're redoing the FW indexes. A new edition isn't coming other than a consolidation for sure.

DudleyGrim wrote:
IDK about a new edition, but maybe a re-release of all the 8th edition codices to help update and consolidate some rules might be in order. Book creep is definitely real.

Well they just announced that we're getting new forge world Indexes so I'd say that might be a possibility.

Gadzilla666 wrote:

DudleyGrim wrote:
IDK about a new edition, but maybe a re-release of all the 8th edition codices to help update and consolidate some rules might be in order. Book creep is definitely real.

Well they just announced that we're getting new forge world Indexes so I'd say that might be a possibility.

Haha. Ninja'd!

 Daedalus81 wrote:

DudleyGrim wrote:
IDK about a new edition, but maybe a re-release of all the 8th edition codices to help update and consolidate some rules might be in order. Book creep is definitely real.

They're redoing the FW indexes. A new edition isn't coming other than a consolidation for sure.

Damn slow fingers got me again.

It's gonna be more like AoS 2nd edition where you can still use all the previous books and such.

So like almost every edition change so far. There's been 4 edition changes total between 40k 2-8 and FB 4-9(AOS).

Nobody really could expect total invalidation of codexes rather than usual cycle of new versions that's the case almost every edition. Instant dump is exception rather than norm

tneva82 wrote:
So like almost every edition change so far. There's been 4 edition changes total between 40k 2-8 and FB 4-9(AOS).

Nobody really could expect total invalidation of codexes rather than usual cycle of new versions that's the case almost every edition. Instant dump is exception rather than norm

Yes, but everyone has their pants in a twist, because "PA is like how they ended the Old World".

 Daedalus81 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
So like almost every edition change so far. There's been 4 edition changes total between 40k 2-8 and FB 4-9(AOS).

Nobody really could expect total invalidation of codexes rather than usual cycle of new versions that's the case almost every edition. Instant dump is exception rather than norm

Yes, but everyone has their pants in a twist, because "PA is like how they ended the Old World".

I'd say that it's a lot more similar to errrrr… was it called Malign Portents? Between AoS 1 and 2?

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Yes, but everyone has their pants in a twist, because "PA is like how they ended the Old World".

Everyone? I've not seen a single person suggest such a thing.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Yes, but everyone has their pants in a twist, because "PA is like how they ended the Old World".

Everyone? I've not seen a single person suggest such a thing.

Certainly an exaggeration to say everyone, but it is there and not infrequently.

Nah...

7th ed. W40K's Gathering Storm = WFB's End Times

PA is just a gimmick to sell books. GW could have simply updated the codexes, but instead chose to publish an intermediary book that will be completely invalidated once new codexes arrive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The PA books are GW's way of taking advantage of players basic desire to win games with rules gimmicks.

tneva82 wrote:
So like almost every edition change so far. There's been 4 edition changes total between 40k 2-8 and FB 4-9(AOS).

Nobody really could expect total invalidation of codexes rather than usual cycle of new versions that's the case almost every edition. Instant dump is exception rather than norm

I think that's what everyone expects something like 4th to 5th rather than a flip the table over change like 2-3 or 7-8.

We could just use the codex rules with Apocalypse core rules. How well would that work?

4th to 5th was a pretty significant change.

I would assume we would see something more like the change from 6th to 7th. Where it's a gentile massaging of the rules.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
We could just use the codex rules with Apocalypse core rules. How well would that work?

Or you could just play apoc which works and is a better game than 40k.

 Lance845 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
We could just use the codex rules with Apocalypse core rules. How well would that work?

Or you could just play apoc which works and is a better game than 40k.

People here like the more in depth Faction rules. That's why I bring it up. From what I've researched it looks a lot more balanced than basic 40k though.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
We could just use the codex rules with Apocalypse core rules. How well would that work?

Or you could just play apoc which works and is a better game than 40k.

People here like the more in depth Faction rules. That's why I bring it up. From what I've researched it looks a lot more balanced than basic 40k though.

I’ve played it. It is.

But, uhh, it’s definitely streamlined as far as unique abilities and quirky consistent effects are concerned.

 oni wrote:
4th to 5th was a pretty significant change.

Not compared to the complete reset that 2nd to 3rd or 7th to 8th was. You could still use a 4th Ed Codex in 5th. Same can't be said for 2nd/3rd and 7th/8th.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
If the Custodes 2.0 rumor is true it's both good and bad. Good in that everyone will get rules equivalent to space marines 2.0.Bad in that everyone will get rules equivalent to space marines 2.0.

I just hope they don't stretch out the releases like they did the sm supplements. That would mean throwing balance all over the place for months while everyone waits for their updated codex.

It's just a reprint.

A reprint is intreasting in and of itself, if 9th edition was "inevitable" one would wonder why they'd reprint a 8th edition codex and not just roll out a new custodes codex for it

to make money?

GW would re-print anything if they are sure it sells out, no matter if a new edition is released in year or one week.

It might not be called 9th edition, it might be called 8.5 or 8-Revised or 8-Ultimate Perfected Edition but the point remains, that'll by another couple 100 dollars for the main rule book and your updated codexes.

Lol I don't think GW call the current edition 8th do they? Isn't that what we call it? They call it 'the ultimate 40k edition' or some gak.

Anyways the primary reason people believe this is possible if not likely, has nothing to do with PA particularly (no one cares/thinks its like how they ended the old world) and everything to do with the amount of rules bloat in the game right now. It's more that people want a new edition because they are sick of having to reference their codex, its FAQ, Vigilus, its FAQ, PA, its FAQ, CA (and its FAQ soon?), and any other generic FAQs to play the game. For some factions it's much worse than the above. For few a little better.

The other primary reason is simply pattern recognition. GW tend to release a new/updated/different edition every so often in a cyclical pattern. We are reaching the release of a new edition again according to patterns seen in GW previously. They might break this pattern, but it would be unusual.

8th came out in 2017? Used to be 4 year cycles but IIRC 7th had only 2 years.

Lol I don't think GW call the current edition 8th do they? Isn't that what we call it? They call it 'the ultimate 40k edition' or some gak.

GW stopped naming Editions long time ago.
We have Rogue Trader, 2nd Edition, 3rd Edition and since than it is just 40.000

with 4th/5th/6th can be just kept apart by the Copyright date (2004/2008/2012) while nothing else indicates which one is older

with 7th, it was named Warhammer 40.000 The Rules

People just name the different Editions to keep them apart, GW never has done that at all

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
8th came out in 2017? Used to be 4 year cycles but IIRC 7th had only 2 years.

Because 7th was just a Hotfix for 6th

if 7th was a hotfix, lootboxes are kinder eggs.

ask GW why they decided instead of releasing an Errata or something like CA as soon as 6th showed the flaws but rather invested into releasing a new Edition instead.

I've got it on good authority that playtesters are working on "9th". I say that in quotes because we're supposed to be in a living rules set edition. Also keep in mind, they work a year or more in advance.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
8th came out in 2017? Used to be 4 year cycles but IIRC 7th had only 2 years.

(from wikipedia)
5 Rulebook editions
5.1 First edition (Warhammer 40,000: Rogue Trader) (1987) 6 years
5.2 Second edition (1993) 5 years
5.3 Third edition (1998) 6 years
5.4 Fourth edition (2004) 4 years
5.5 Fifth edition (2008) 4 years
5.6 Sixth edition (2012) 2 years
5.7 Seventh edition (2014) 3 years
5.8 Eighth edition (2017) 3 years this summer

(Edited for a better format)

6th was the short one that broke me fron buying supplements and play aids. Before that the assumption was you were going to get ~4 years out of a product. Divide the cost by years of use, things didn’t seem so bad.

 Yarium wrote:
There are a few signs of 9th edition coming:

#1 - Psychic Awakening should end at that point, which leaves a big 'ol "what's next?" hanging over everything. A new edition would make sense.

#2 - The Psychic Awakening books have been similar to previous series of campaign books that culminated in a new edition, having been the case with both Warhammer Fantasy transitioning into Age of Sigmar, and 7th transition transitioning into 8th edition.

#3 - There's supposedly a big release in the summer that the employees aren't allowed to take time off for. Usually these are just done for massive releases like new editions.


So that all seems to make sense, yeah? Well, who the heck really knows, because I've been hearing "New Daemon Primarch soon!" for ages now, and nothing's happened. But there do seem to be things that suggest a new edition. New edition would likely be like the move from 3rd ed to 4th, 4th to 5th, 5th to 6th, or 6th to 7th - which were all pretty minor and backwards compatible.

Also Sisters are a pretty good hint


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 chimeara wrote:
I've got it on good authority that playtesters are working on "9th". I say that in quotes because we're supposed to be in a living rules set edition. Also keep in mind, they work a year or more in advance.

GW has proven and Reece has confirmed they don;t actually have playtesters....

Then what do the guys at my LGS do on Wednesdays? Why do they get advance copies of rules to test? Why do they get trips to GW Headquarters? I'm confused, if they're not playtesters. Then what are they?

 chimeara wrote:
I've got it on good authority that playtesters are working on "9th". I say that in quotes because we're supposed to be in a living rules set edition. Also keep in mind, they work a year or more in advance.

And my girlfriend tells me 9th edition isn't coming anytime soon. You wouldn't know her, though. She plays at a different FLGS . . . in Canada.

 chimeara wrote:
Then what do the guys at my LGS do on Wednesdays? Why do they get advance copies of rules to test? Why do they get trips to GW Headquarters? I'm confused, if they're not playtesters. Then what are they?

do they have full rules of 9th with updated faction rules?
if yes, they are play testers
if no, they are not (could call them Alpha Testers or Concept Testers, but not play testers as therefore you need a finished game to test)

 kodos wrote:

 chimeara wrote:
Then what do the guys at my LGS do on Wednesdays? Why do they get advance copies of rules to test? Why do they get trips to GW Headquarters? I'm confused, if they're not playtesters. Then what are they?

do they have full rules of 9th with updated faction rules?
if yes, they are play testers
if no, they are not (could call them Alpha Testers or Concept Testers, but not play testers as therefore you need a finished game to test)

That's a valid point. That's hard for me to answer, since I'm not even supposed to know what I know. Based on the kernals of knowledge I have on the situation, I'd days beta testers.

 chimeara wrote:

 kodos wrote:

 chimeara wrote:
Then what do the guys at my LGS do on Wednesdays? Why do they get advance copies of rules to test? Why do they get trips to GW Headquarters? I'm confused, if they're not playtesters. Then what are they?

do they have full rules of 9th with updated faction rules?
if yes, they are play testers
if no, they are not (could call them Alpha Testers or Concept Testers, but not play testers as therefore you need a finished game to test)

That's a valid point. That's hard for me to answer, since I'm not even supposed to know what I know. Based on the kernals of knowledge I have on the situation, I'd days beta testers.

No it's not. Play testers don't test finished games. They test everything and anything to provide feedback, bug reports, and whatever else the developers want testing for. Play testers can test alpha builds, individual mechanics, concepts, whatever. This weird ass distinction kodos is making in a title is bizarre at best and meaningless pretty much all the time.

 Lance845 wrote:
Play testers don't test finished games. They test everything and anything to provide feedback, bug reports, and whatever else the developers want testing for. Play testers can test alpha builds, individual mechanics, concepts, whatever. This weird ass distinction kodos is making in a title is bizarre at best and meaningless pretty much all the time.

Than it is more of a language thing, as you won't call someone who is just testing individual mechanics, concepts or an Alpha build a Play Tester (but those who test the final product)

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
GW has proven and Reece has confirmed they don;t actually have playtesters....

Yeah, but given his statements on how strong the original 8th ed Grey Knights were going to be, let alone the Stompa, Reece has proven to have all the reliability of a chocolate fireguard infront of an active blast furnace...

 kodos wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Play testers don't test finished games. They test everything and anything to provide feedback, bug reports, and whatever else the developers want testing for. Play testers can test alpha builds, individual mechanics, concepts, whatever. This weird ass distinction kodos is making in a title is bizarre at best and meaningless pretty much all the time.

Than it is more of a language thing, as you won't call someone who is just testing individual mechanics, concepts or an Alpha build a Play Tester (but those who test the final product)

Why not? The purpose of a play tester is to test the game in whatever capacity that means. A finished game no longer needs to be tested. It's being sent to the printers. Their job is done. Play Testers are often given builds with instructions to test specific criteria.

"In this build we introduced a new psychic power system. Test in matches at 500-1000-1500-2000 points with a minimum of 1-2-3-4 psykers in the army and report on imbalances, loop holes, and general feedback on the core mechanics of the psychic phase. Don't worry about balance of powers. They are not finalized."


Everyone who plays that build is a play tester.

 Lance845 wrote:

Why not?

Kind of because the separation between Alpha Testers, Beta Testers and Play Tester is stronger and you search for different people for each task
an Alpha Tester need to find different problems than a Beta Tester than a Play Tester and usually the Alpha group is the smallest group selected on experience while Play Testers can or sometimes should be people who are not familiar with the game at all.

"In this build we introduced a new psychic power system. Test in matches at 500-1000-1500-2000 points with a minimum of 1-2-3-4 psykers in the army and report on imbalances, loop holes, and general feedback on the core mechanics of the psychic phase. Don't worry about balance of powers. They are not finalized."

Depending on if this are the only changes, or if is one of several systems that are teste, you would call it Alpha or Beta Testers

It would be uncommon that someone searching for Play Testers want people to test the Alpha built or a general concept, they would search for Alpha Testers and people would know what to expect from the game.

 chimeara wrote:
I've got it on good authority that playtesters are working on "9th". I say that in quotes because we're supposed to be in a living rules set edition. Also keep in mind, they work a year or more in advance.

Well, even if they change the entire content of the battle primer, that's less rules changed than CA or Codex: Space Marines. If they just apply some changes to the areas that aren't working well, this might very well still be in the confines of a living ruleset.

If they do a new release, all I can say is I hope it comes with an app for live rules updates and coupled with a list builder. That and rewarding and re-roll ability from “hits” to “a hit” etc. The re-roll meta needs to shuffle off.

 chimeara wrote:

 kodos wrote:

 chimeara wrote:
Then what do the guys at my LGS do on Wednesdays? Why do they get advance copies of rules to test? Why do they get trips to GW Headquarters? I'm confused, if they're not playtesters. Then what are they?

do they have full rules of 9th with updated faction rules?
if yes, they are play testers
if no, they are not (could call them Alpha Testers or Concept Testers, but not play testers as therefore you need a finished game to test)

That's a valid point. That's hard for me to answer, since I'm not even supposed to know what I know. Based on the kernals of knowledge I have on the situation, I'd days beta testers.

Well you just got them fired. If GW has playtesters or beta testers or whatever you want to call them, they don't have verymany of them, definitely not in Ohio (the only people I know of who get to experience development builds of GW rulesets are all in the UK) and it sounds like you just let slip that they're in violation of their NDA.

just stop. "I met some guys who claimed they were testing 9th"

"I know more than I should"

"I a 11Beta xRay Delta Force Combat knife thrower and took out bin Laden"

Your claims to be in the know (Wink) are all very extraordinary, and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Hitchens

We can even do it too!

"I was talking to a guy in my hobby store that told me in 9th Niids will be given an extra psychic phase and Space Marines only get 4 dhotd from Storm Bolters. Iron hands now get plus 1 to damag in melee. He was super in the know, and told me he was on the writing team. I told him his writers all suck and need to be fired.

 kodos wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

Why not?

Kind of because the separation between Alpha Testers, Beta Testers and Play Tester is stronger and you search for different people for each task
an Alpha Tester need to find different problems than a Beta Tester than a Play Tester and usually the Alpha group is the smallest group selected on experience while Play Testers can or sometimes should be people who are not familiar with the game at all.

"In this build we introduced a new psychic power system. Test in matches at 500-1000-1500-2000 points with a minimum of 1-2-3-4 psykers in the army and report on imbalances, loop holes, and general feedback on the core mechanics of the psychic phase. Don't worry about balance of powers. They are not finalized."

Depending on if this are the only changes, or if is one of several systems that are teste, you would call it Alpha or Beta Testers

It would be uncommon that someone searching for Play Testers want people to test the Alpha built or a general concept, they would search for Alpha Testers and people would know what to expect from the game.

I'm not sure where you're getting your super-specific terminology from, but it isn't universal.

I'm not sure if "I do playtesting" is damning enough to violate an NDA.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I'm not sure if "I do playtesting" is damning enough to violate an NDA.

depends, reporting that GW is actively testing a new edition may well be.

 Dysartes wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
GW has proven and Reece has confirmed they don;t actually have playtesters....

Yeah, but given his statements on how strong the original 8th ed Grey Knights were going to be, let alone the Stompa, Reece has proven to have all the reliability of a chocolate fireguard infront of an active blast furnace...

Anything Reece or FLG has to say should never be taken with more than a grain of salt.

BrianDavion wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I'm not sure if "I do playtesting" is damning enough to violate an NDA.

depends, reporting that GW is actively testing a new edition may well be.

If GW were truly publishing a new edition this Summer, especially with a big box of miniatures as well as the rulebook, which have a lead time of 1-2 years as seen from the Soul Wars box, the box / book went to print long before the Marines Codex hit the shelves and any playtesting would‘ve been done during the days of Castellans and Ynnari at the very least.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I'm not sure if "I do playtesting" is damning enough to violate an NDA.

depends, reporting that GW is actively testing a new edition may well be.

If GW were truly publishing a new edition this Summer, especially with a big box of miniatures as well as the rulebook, which have a lead time of 1-2 years as seen from the Soul Wars box, the box / book went to print long before the Marines Codex hit the shelves and any playtesting would‘ve been done during the days of Castellans and Ynnari at the very least.

right so if people are testing ideas for a 9ith edition NOW....

we're proably looking at another year or 2 (maybe even 3) of 8th edition. which by about then we'll be ready for 9th

BrianDavion wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I'm not sure if "I do playtesting" is damning enough to violate an NDA.

depends, reporting that GW is actively testing a new edition may well be.

If GW were truly publishing a new edition this Summer, especially with a big box of miniatures as well as the rulebook, which have a lead time of 1-2 years as seen from the Soul Wars box, the box / book went to print long before the Marines Codex hit the shelves and any playtesting would‘ve been done during the days of Castellans and Ynnari at the very least.

right so if people are testing ideas for a 9ith edition NOW....

we're proably looking at another year or 2 (maybe even 3) of 8th edition. which by about then we'll be ready for 9th

Yes because by then the collection of books required to play a csm army will resemble the Encyclopedia Britanica.

Gadzilla666 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I'm not sure if "I do playtesting" is damning enough to violate an NDA.

depends, reporting that GW is actively testing a new edition may well be.

If GW were truly publishing a new edition this Summer, especially with a big box of miniatures as well as the rulebook, which have a lead time of 1-2 years as seen from the Soul Wars box, the box / book went to print long before the Marines Codex hit the shelves and any playtesting would‘ve been done during the days of Castellans and Ynnari at the very least.

right so if people are testing ideas for a 9ith edition NOW....

we're proably looking at another year or 2 (maybe even 3) of 8th edition. which by about then we'll be ready for 9th

Yes because by then the collection of books required to play a csm army will resemble the Encyclopedia Britanica.

pfft! I play black legion, I only need 2!

BrianDavion wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I'm not sure if "I do playtesting" is damning enough to violate an NDA.

depends, reporting that GW is actively testing a new edition may well be.

If GW were truly publishing a new edition this Summer, especially with a big box of miniatures as well as the rulebook, which have a lead time of 1-2 years as seen from the Soul Wars box, the box / book went to print long before the Marines Codex hit the shelves and any playtesting would‘ve been done during the days of Castellans and Ynnari at the very least.

right so if people are testing ideas for a 9ith edition NOW....

we're proably looking at another year or 2 (maybe even 3) of 8th edition. which by about then we'll be ready for 9th

Yes because by then the collection of books required to play a csm army will resemble the Encyclopedia Britanica.

pfft! I play black legion, I only need 2!

*Yawn* Ultramarines with spikes. REAL traitors Ride the Lightning.

My horror scenario is GW trying to cash in on a new psychic abilities systen.
"psychic awakening" and the rules it provide has suspiciously little to do with psychic powers.
Suppose they still want all these rules to be used in 9th but has a new fancy magic setup with loads of cards and spellmarkers and "endless spells" for every faction.
If they do magic dice pool again I will set fire to my armies on you tube.

 Fayric wrote:
My horror scenario is GW trying to cash in on a new psychic abilities systen.
"psychic awakening" and the rules it provide has suspiciously little to do with psychic powers.
Suppose they still want all these rules to be used in 9th but has a new fancy magic setup with loads of cards and spellmarkers and "endless spells" for every faction.
If they do magic dice pool again I will set fire to my armies on you tube.

Please don't.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Fayric wrote:
My horror scenario is GW trying to cash in on a new psychic abilities systen.
"psychic awakening" and the rules it provide has suspiciously little to do with psychic powers.
Suppose they still want all these rules to be used in 9th but has a new fancy magic setup with loads of cards and spellmarkers and "endless spells" for every faction.
If they do magic dice pool again I will set fire to my armies on you tube.

Please don't.

Or if you do please make sure to do so in a well-ventilated and nonflammable area. Spite and bile are all well and good but do pay attention to fire safety.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Fayric wrote:
My horror scenario is GW trying to cash in on a new psychic abilities systen.
"psychic awakening" and the rules it provide has suspiciously little to do with psychic powers.
Suppose they still want all these rules to be used in 9th but has a new fancy magic setup with loads of cards and spellmarkers and "endless spells" for every faction.
If they do magic dice pool again I will set fire to my armies on you tube.

Please don't.

Yeah, sorry, forgot to put up some laughing and winking orks to show you I was just fooling around.

Do not fool me again swede it i Set over and personally Make sure that thou Shall not Burn plastic

An Actual Englishman wrote:Lol I don't think GW call the current edition 8th do they? Isn't that what we call it? They call it 'the ultimate 40k edition' or some gak.

kodos wrote:GW stopped naming Editions long time ago.
We have Rogue Trader, 2nd Edition, 3rd Edition and since than it is just 40.000

with 4th/5th/6th can be just kept apart by the Copyright date (2004/2008/2012) while nothing else indicates which one is older

with 7th, it was named Warhammer 40.000 The Rules

People just name the different Editions to keep them apart, GW never has done that at all

Sure I've heard on the offical podcasts people refer to the different editions including calling the current one 8th, so it might not have the edition printed in the rule book or on the website, but GW use those terms internally I'm sure

 Shooter wrote:

An Actual Englishman wrote:Lol I don't think GW call the current edition 8th do they? Isn't that what we call it? They call it 'the ultimate 40k edition' or some gak.

kodos wrote:GW stopped naming Editions long time ago.
We have Rogue Trader, 2nd Edition, 3rd Edition and since than it is just 40.000

with 4th/5th/6th can be just kept apart by the Copyright date (2004/2008/2012) while nothing else indicates which one is older

with 7th, it was named Warhammer 40.000 The Rules

People just name the different Editions to keep them apart, GW never has done that at all

Sure I've heard on the offical podcasts people refer to the different editions including calling the current one 8th, so it might not have the edition printed in the rule book or on the website, but GW use those terms internally I'm sure

GW as a company never officially refer to an edition by it's number, it's just the "Curent Edition". That doesn't stop individuals from doing so though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kodos wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

Why not?

Kind of because the separation between Alpha Testers, Beta Testers and Play Tester is stronger and you search for different people for each task
an Alpha Tester need to find different problems than a Beta Tester than a Play Tester and usually the Alpha group is the smallest group selected on experience while Play Testers can or sometimes should be people who are not familiar with the game at all.

"In this build we introduced a new psychic power system. Test in matches at 500-1000-1500-2000 points with a minimum of 1-2-3-4 psykers in the army and report on imbalances, loop holes, and general feedback on the core mechanics of the psychic phase. Don't worry about balance of powers. They are not finalized."

Depending on if this are the only changes, or if is one of several systems that are teste, you would call it Alpha or Beta Testers

It would be uncommon that someone searching for Play Testers want people to test the Alpha built or a general concept, they would search for Alpha Testers and people would know what to expect from the game.

You do know this isn't a computer game right? All these terms that have specific meaning for developing computer games are meaningless for a table top game.

 Imateria wrote:
You do know this isn't a computer game right? All these terms that have specific meaning for developing computer games are meaningless for a table top game.

The actual mistake is to assume that a tabletop game is anything but a very simple computer game.

 Imateria wrote:

You do know this isn't a computer game right? All these terms that have specific meaning for developing computer games are meaningless for a table top game.

It is the same for boardgames
but I don't know how heavy the influence of old PC programming terms is for current boardgame or tabletop designers

Alpha/beta/ etc builds is just a naming convention to organize the structure of implemental phases of developement. Anythings first pass is its alpha even if you call it something else. Testers are testers regardless of what they are testing. Maybe they only get hired on for a "alpha phase" and so their official job title is "alpha tester" but they are just play testing a build regardless.

 Lance845 wrote:
Alpha/beta/ etc builds is just a naming convention to organize the structure of implemental phases of developement. Anythings first pass is its alpha even if you call it something else. Testers are testers regardless of what they are testing. Maybe they only get hired on for a "alpha phase" and so their official job title is "alpha tester" but they are just play testing a build regardless.

Hum, not really. During the alpha stage of a game, concepts aren't finished yet, the game usually is not fully playable and lots of stuff is just patchwork. During the beta stage there should be a finished game that is checked for flaws.

In general, the kind of people you need for alpha testing should be closer connected to the design process and need to provide much more technical and detailed feedback.

It's fairly safe to assume that any alpha testing for 40k is done by the studio itself, while beta-testing is done by the ITC guys and others, who play with already finished codices and rules and try to find rule and balance issues.

You are just arguing semantics based around "usually"s and "probably"s. You can call any build by any name and it means the same thing. What qualifies a person for build x is based on what you want out of your tests for build x.

But if we would accept that, then GW doesn't do any beta testing at all. They just give people pre build units or armies, without points or the ability to tinker and adjust to existing lists. And after that, if we were to trust some of the people that claim to test the GW stuff or work for GW, GW does what ever it wants anyway. They have EA level of testing of their games.

Karol wrote:
But if we would accept that, then GW doesn't do any beta testing at all. They just give people pre build units or armies, without points or the ability to tinker and adjust to existing lists. And after that, if we were to trust some of the people that claim to test the GW stuff or work for GW, GW does what ever it wants anyway. They have EA level of testing of their games.

Shock and awe. GW doesn't handle testing well. Its almost like they dont proof read or edit their books either and every release they have ever put out has required at least 1 faq errata to fix their mistakes. (When they decide to fix them at all).

But that cant be right?

Right?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also EAs games basically work on release of each product. GW wishes it had EAs testing standards.

 Lance845 wrote:
You are just arguing semantics based around "usually"s and "probably"s. You can call any build by any name and it means the same thing. What qualifies a person for build x is based on what you want out of your tests for build x.

If you want to go software terms, the difference is unit/integration testing and end-user/acceptance testing. Which are completely different things done by completely different people. If your company/project has the same people doing both, you're doing it wrong.

 Lance845 wrote:

Shock and awe. GW doesn't handle testing well. Its almost like they dont proof read or edit their books either and every release they have ever put out has required at least 1 faq errata to fix their mistakes. (When they decide to fix them at all).

But that cant be right?

Right?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also EAs games basically work on release of each product. GW wishes it had EAs testing standards.

well some errors can always happen. I was thinking more about rules or even whole factions that are writen for w40k, but maybe not for this edition. Necrons for example. Their rules feel as if someone was thking about something else then 8th ed, when he wrote and tested them. It is not even the case of GK, where the codex was writen in a way to work with the core book rules, only to stop working when the core rules were changed. And it is strange, because it is the same people doing all the books. It is not like there is some evil or bad sub studio in London that writes all the bad rules and bad codex, and a good studio writing the rules at the GW HQ.

I is just hard for me to imagine how the same group of a few people can write a codex sm and csm back to back, and think both are okey to be played in the same edition. Or in the case of necrons for them to be played in a specific 8th ed. Errors can happen, strange rule interactions or FW stuff can mess up the game, specialy if the testing is done without them, but I can't find an explanation to not errors, but big ball drop books which then people have to use for the next few years.

Even their changes are strange. Point drops don't change the game as much as GW thinks, when everyone is getting them for example.

Having rules stacking from multiple books seems to be the rage in 8th ed. I wonder if they plant o keep the same practics in 9th. I like the PA book for my dudes, because at worst it gives me new stuff to play with, and that is huge for the worse option. But being forced in to buying a book every few months feels very seson pass to me.

If you want to go software terms, the difference is unit/integration testing and end-user/acceptance testing. Which are completely different things done by completely different people. If your company/project has the same people doing both, you're doing it wrong.

Is the difference between them a bit like between normal daily training fights, and specific preping for a specific event in sports?