Percentages are happening but you must roll a D6 for each FOC slot and consult the percentages chart at the start of every game to determine what the maximum percentage for that slot is going to be.
This will help with forging the narrative by potentially making portions of the models you brought with you unusable. This is Great News!
ClockworkZion wrote: Seeing as % went over like an airplane made out of bricks for WFB due to the massive amounts of models people need to play a game anymore, I just can't see GW doing the same for 40k. I honestly expect WFB to go more FOC based instead.
There's your motivation to move to a % based game right there. It caused players to need a massive amount of models to play the game!
That's increased sales, brother.
That only makes sense to those at the top, because they have no idea that they've reached maximum market saturation levels and pricing potentials.
Edit: hasn't the FOC pretty much become an irrelevant joke anyway? Try explaining it to someone that hasn't been immersed in the game for years.
pizzaguardian wrote: But numbers, i love numbers and we need more numbers in 40k
We need more random rolls. You need to have 25% of your army in a block that can be swapped out with sideboards. You roll a D3 to find out which side board you take. This allows us to better forge a narrative and and gives the player more rolling. In addition each turn will have a D weapon rolling a double scatter of 3d6 (roll for scatter, the roll for scatter again) from the center of the board and always scatters. This is for the orbital bombardment, meteor strikes, or warp infused lightning hitting the battlefield of the grim dark future.
Idolator wrote: Edit: hasn't the FOC pretty much become an irrelevant joke anyway? Try explaining it to someone that hasn't been immersed in the game for years.
For certain armies more than others, but yes. Look at Tyranid armies. Minimal FoC choices and then full up on (Skyblight) formations.
Idolator wrote: Edit: hasn't the FOC pretty much become an irrelevant joke anyway? Try explaining it to someone that hasn't been immersed in the game for years.
For certain armies more than others, but yes. Look at Tyranid armies. Minimal FoC choices and then full up on (Skyblight) formations.
FOC is a joke no matter what army you want to bring.
Your FOC for your primary is the usual. But you now have allies. And formations (which are FOC free and can be the same army as your primary or ally, if you so desire). As well as dataslates for characters, which you can take for free. And Inquisition, Fire Support Cadres, second primary detachments at 2k+, fortifications, lords of war....
I hope you're right. Tracking spending on each unit type would be awful. Easy solution is to scale the FOC by points level, for elites/fast/heavy make it 0-1 for 0-1,000 points, 0-2 up to 2,000, 0-3 beyond that.
Eliminates spam at low points costs, maintains the function of FOC.
I just looked over on a different site (the one that will leave a ringing in your soul).
Right on their front page in a posted article was a certain rumor monger's predictions based on his mysterious source from Memphis. Land of the Delta Blues and magical knowledge of table top gaming.
Honestly, why is there no vetting? That clap trap didn't make it past two further posting in this exact thread!
Lords of War wrote:A new Realm of Battle board will be released with 7th edition. This board will have a "40k/City" theme and will be 6' x 4' with a travel bag like the current Realm of Battle Board.
Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh I could totally get in to that.
ClockworkZion wrote: Seeing as % went over like an airplane made out of bricks for WFB due to the massive amounts of models people need to play a game anymore, I just can't see GW doing the same for 40k. I honestly expect WFB to go more FOC based instead.
There's your motivation to move to a % based game right there. It caused players to need a massive amount of models to play the game!
That's increased sales, brother.
That only makes sense to those at the top, because they have no idea that they've reached maximum market saturation levels and pricing potentials.
Edit: hasn't the FOC pretty much become an irrelevant joke anyway? Try explaining it to someone that hasn't been immersed in the game for years.
In the long run it killed sales and WFB has lost a lot of players though.
ClockworkZion wrote: Seeing as % went over like an airplane made out of bricks for WFB due to the massive amounts of models people need to play a game anymore, I just can't see GW doing the same for 40k. I honestly expect WFB to go more FOC based instead.
There's your motivation to move to a % based game right there. It caused players to need a massive amount of models to play the game!
That's increased sales, brother.
That only makes sense to those at the top, because they have no idea that they've reached maximum market saturation levels and pricing potentials.
Edit: hasn't the FOC pretty much become an irrelevant joke anyway? Try explaining it to someone that hasn't been immersed in the game for years.
In the long run it killed sales and WFB has lost a lot of players though.
I've seen nothing since the last half year report that indicates that they care about long term.
Lords of War wrote:A new Realm of Battle board will be released with 7th edition. This board will have a "40k/City" theme and will be 6' x 4' with a travel bag like the current Realm of Battle Board.
Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh I could totally get in to that.
He didn't mention whether it is covered in skulls. It's obviously fake
Idolator wrote: I just looked over on a different site (the one that will leave a ringing in your soul).
Right on their front page in a posted article was a certain rumor monger's predictions based on his mysterious source from Memphis. Land of the Delta Blues and magical knowledge of table top gaming.
Honestly, why is there no vetting? That clap trap didn't make it past two further posting in this exact thread!
Because BoLS is in it for the clicks.
I shared the info I got about it being 6.5, not 7th in effect there but that never made the blog because it's not exciting enough I guess.
Lords of War wrote:A new Realm of Battle board will be released with 7th edition. This board will have a "40k/City" theme and will be 6' x 4' with a travel bag like the current Realm of Battle Board.
Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh I could totally get in to that.
He didn't mention whether it is covered in skulls. It's obviously fake
Lords of War wrote:A new Realm of Battle board will be released with 7th edition. This board will have a "40k/City" theme and will be 6' x 4' with a travel bag like the current Realm of Battle Board.
Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh I could totally get in to that.
He didn't mention whether it is covered in skulls. It's obviously fake
... and the roads are paved with dead Imperial Guardsmen... or dead Aqua Magnesium men or whatever they're called.
Lords of War wrote:A new Realm of Battle board will be released with 7th edition. This board will have a "40k/City" theme and will be 6' x 4' with a travel bag like the current Realm of Battle Board.
Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh I could totally get in to that.
He didn't mention whether it is covered in skulls. It's obviously fake
... and the roads are paved with dead Imperial Guardsmen... or dead Aqua Magnesium men or whatever they're called.
Nah. Dead Sisters. Closest to plastic models they'll get.
This just in! Larry Vela is probably just guessing. Also, the sun rises in the east tomorrow.
Wouldn't surprise me. Percentages didn't do well for WFB, I can't imagine the damage they'd do to 40k's player base.
I really don't think it'd do much damage. IMO, the majority of players would really embrace it if they gave it a chance. It wouldn't create balance, but it would be a touch of sanity. However, GW gamers tend to be a very conservative lot overall...they don't like trying something different until GW tells them they have to.
Besides, what went on with WFB involved a lot more than just army list percentages.
ClockworkZion wrote: Seeing as % went over like an airplane made out of bricks for WFB due to the massive amounts of models people need to play a game anymore, I just can't see GW doing the same for 40k. I honestly expect WFB to go more FOC based instead.
There's your motivation to move to a % based game right there. It caused players to need a massive amount of models to play the game!
That's increased sales, brother.
That only makes sense to those at the top, because they have no idea that they've reached maximum market saturation levels and pricing potentials.
Edit: hasn't the FOC pretty much become an irrelevant joke anyway? Try explaining it to someone that hasn't been immersed in the game for years.
In the long run it killed sales and WFB has lost a lot of players though.
In my group the % system was actully the most well recived part of the current edition of fantasey.
Thow it is true that GW has bassicly priced most people out of fantsey, and is rapidly starting to do so with 40k.
This just in! Larry Vela is probably just guessing. Also, the sun rises in the east tomorrow.
Wouldn't surprise me. Percentages didn't do well for WFB, I can't imagine the damage they'd do to 40k's player base.
I really don't think it'd do much damage. IMO, the majority of players would really embrace it if they gave it a chance. It wouldn't create balance, but it would be a touch of sanity. However, GW gamers tend to be a very conservative lot overall...they don't like trying something different until GW tells them they have to.
Besides, what went on with WFB involved a lot more than just army list percentages.
Players quitting because the price to play went way up and to field their cool models they needed a LOT of extra models to play even bigger games.
Oh and the startup cost went through the roof turning away new players.
40k Radio wrote:Ok, it seems a nasty rumor is making its way around the interwebs. Many forums are saying 40k 7th is switching over to % based lists. We are here to 100% confirm that is not happening.
We have always told you guys the truth about everything in the past 12 months. Our source has been spot on with everything from release schedules to what each army will have.
So please rest easy knowing that force org will still be in the game.
These are facts, not rumors from your trusted source for insider 40k news, not rumors.
This just in! Larry Vela is probably just guessing. Also, the sun rises in the east tomorrow.
Wouldn't surprise me. Percentages didn't do well for WFB, I can't imagine the damage they'd do to 40k's player base.
I really don't think it'd do much damage. IMO, the majority of players would really embrace it if they gave it a chance. It wouldn't create balance, but it would be a touch of sanity. However, GW gamers tend to be a very conservative lot overall...they don't like trying something different until GW tells them they have to.
Besides, what went on with WFB involved a lot more than just army list percentages.
Players quitting because the price to play went way up and to field their cool models they needed a LOT of extra models to play even bigger games.
Oh and the startup cost went through the roof turning away new players.
Fantsey has always been a high modle count game. When I started Fantsey in 7th, it was bleeding players. I never got to play as much 8th as I wanted, due to bassicly giveing up the ghost on the player base recovering.
No amount of rule changes are going to stop GW from priceing even more people out of this hobby. lol
40k Radio wrote:Ok, it seems a nasty rumor is making its way around the interwebs. Many forums are saying 40k 7th is switching over to % based lists. We are here to 100% confirm that is not happening.
We have always told you guys the truth about everything in the past 12 months. Our source has been spot on with everything from release schedules to what each army will have.
So please rest easy knowing that force org will still be in the game.
These are facts, not rumors from your trusted source for insider 40k news, not rumors.
Yeay everything will be exactly different yet be the same!
40k Radio wrote:Ok, it seems a nasty rumor is making its way around the interwebs. Many forums are saying 40k 7th is switching over to % based lists. We are here to 100% confirm that is not happening.
We have always told you guys the truth about everything in the past 12 months. Our source has been spot on with everything from release schedules to what each army will have.
So please rest easy knowing that force org will still be in the game.
These are facts, not rumors from your trusted source for insider 40k news, not rumors.
Good time to break radio silence. We can kill this % nonsense now, right?
40k Radio wrote:Ok, it seems a nasty rumor is making its way around the interwebs. Many forums are saying 40k 7th is switching over to % based lists. We are here to 100% confirm that is not happening.
We have always told you guys the truth about everything in the past 12 months. Our source has been spot on with everything from release schedules to what each army will have.
So please rest easy knowing that force org will still be in the game.
These are facts, not rumors from your trusted source for insider 40k news, not rumors.
Good time to break radio silence. We can kill this % nonsense now, right?
That's about as good as we can get to confirmed right now, slightly disappointed, but not surprised.
I disagree with you about it hurting Fantasy though, I think you're seeing a correlation without a causation there - WHFB has been the poor relative to 40K since forever, and I suspect that percentages failed to turn that around, rather than made it worse.
40k Radio wrote:Ok, it seems a nasty rumor is making its way around the interwebs. Many forums are saying 40k 7th is switching over to % based lists. We are here to 100% confirm that is not happening.
We have always told you guys the truth about everything in the past 12 months. Our source has been spot on with everything from release schedules to what each army will have.
So please rest easy knowing that force org will still be in the game.
These are facts, not rumors from your trusted source for insider 40k news, not rumors.
That's to bad. I had hope for a change that meant not haveing to spam the same unit to win.
azreal13 wrote: I disagree with you about it hurting Fantasy though, I think you're seeing a correlation without a causation there - WHFB has been the poor relative to 40K since forever, and I suspect that percentages failed to turn that around, rather than made it worse.
I recall a lot of unhappy people online when 8th dropped because of the percentage things and it going into a slow death after that. Maybe my conclusion is a wrong but I'm drawing from what limited data I have.
azreal13 wrote: I disagree with you about it hurting Fantasy though, I think you're seeing a correlation without a causation there - WHFB has been the poor relative to 40K since forever, and I suspect that percentages failed to turn that around, rather than made it worse.
I recall a lot of unhappy people online when 8th dropped because of the percentage things and it going into a slow death after that. Maybe my conclusion is a wrong but I'm drawing from what limited data I have.
The issue there, as you point out, is that Internet criticism to real life action ratios are likely very low. My own personal observation is that in the 90s, not every 40K player had a fantasy army, but many did, and most games played were 40K and FB was not rare, but was unusual enough to be mildly surprising. Fast forward a couple of decades and it looks very similar.
so if this % thing goes through should i give up on my army?
im planning on only using vendettas/valkyries, sentinals, veterans/stormtroopers, and heavy weapons teams.
i will not be using any transports except the valkyrie/vendetta, and will have no true heavy support in the form of tanks. Instead im going to rely on hwt, sentinels, and vendettas to give me my firepower while my infantry decimate their infantry.
since i will not have any heavy support and my "heavy support" is coming from fast attack choices am i screwed?
Stus67 wrote: Had a good laugh at people thinking 40K would go with percentages.
Did you?
How jolly.
Where's your post before 40K Radio's quote sayin as much, so it doesn't look like you're being some sort of Internet smart arse?
A post of me laughing? I don't usually make a habit of randomly interjecting on forums with lol's between debate. I heard of the rumor earlier today at my local GW because the tau kid was stuttering on about it. Speaking of though the manager sent back all of his copies of 6th Edition and showed us the poster they sent him.
Stus67 wrote: Had a good laugh at people thinking 40K would go with percentages.
Did you?
How jolly.
Where's your post before 40K Radio's quote sayin as much, so it doesn't look like you're being some sort of Internet smart arse?
A post of me laughing? I don't usually make a habit of randomly interjecting on forums with lol's between debate. I heard of the rumor earlier today at my local GW because the tau kid was stuttering on about it. Speaking of though the manager sent back all of his copies of 6th Edition and showed us the poster they sent him.
No, a post of your skepticism prior to the best thing we have to a confirmation before the event, so you don't look like my auntie, who claimed to be psychic, exclaiming "I knew that would happen, I had a feeling!" After stuff occurred, only with more Internet smug guy added.
Sledgehammer wrote: so if this % thing goes through should i give up on my army?
im planning on only using vendettas/valkyries, sentinals, veterans/stormtroopers, and heavy weapons teams.
i will not be using any transports except the valkyrie/vendetta, and will have no true heavy support in the form of tanks. Instead im going to rely on hwt, sentinels, and vendettas to give me my firepower while my infantry decimate their infantry.
since i will not have any heavy support and my "heavy support" is coming from fast attack choices am i screwed?
Your army would not be valid in any case if you take no Infantry Platoons, since they are the only way to have Heavy Weapons Teams.
FWIW one of Faeit212's "best sources for rumors" supposedly says that percentages IS a thing. Although I'd be more inclined to trust 40k radio given their track record, as this whole "sideboard" thing sounds like pure trolling.
via a must remain anonymous source on Faeit 212 FoC removed, percentages added.
Players have a "sideboard" of up to X number of selections (2-5, bracketed on points, so 1k or less games you have 2 sideboards, at 3k+ you have 5).
Sideboards can't be more than 25% of the total, or can be none at all.
They are referred to as "Secondary Detachments."
They are used for anything from allies to just additional things from your own codex.
If they are allies, then they require an HQ and a troop, and are still bound by the 25% of total.
Both players are expected to have sideboards.
Sideboarding is now a part of the game, done before deployment but in order of turn priority. So the person going first, picks their sideboard first after learning what race their opponent is playing, and seeing 75% of their army (and the available sideboards).
The person going second then picks their sideboard, after their opponent has selected, but before either side deploys. ---------------------------- Other tweeks include assaulting as a form of sweeping advance/consolidation.
The option to flee, in response to being charged (after overwatching) but there is the potential to be swept and the unit charging can (if they have the movement and sweep you) just hit a different unit provided it's in the same rough direction as the unit they swept.
The main thing I wanted to touch on is sideboards, % based army building, battle brothers being removed and units being able to lock themselves into combat to combat, but simultaneously enemy generals having another tool to avoid combat to counter act this.
Sledgehammer wrote: so if this % thing goes through should i give up on my army?
im planning on only using vendettas/valkyries, sentinals, veterans/stormtroopers, and heavy weapons teams.
i will not be using any transports except the valkyrie/vendetta, and will have no true heavy support in the form of tanks. Instead im going to rely on hwt, sentinels, and vendettas to give me my firepower while my infantry decimate their infantry.
since i will not have any heavy support and my "heavy support" is coming from fast attack choices am i screwed?
From the looks of things we just had a heavy hitter on the rumors front just take % out back and shoot it, so I wouldn't worry about % all that much.
Kanluwen wrote: Faeit212 is like BOLS...not worth really listening to.
Faeit is like advertising, about half of it is worth listening to, but nobody knows which half.
Agreed. BoLS is 90% click baiting and generic/vague "rumors". At least Natfka is willing to actual post stuff that is actually specific.
BOLS actually reminds me a lot of pro wrestling news sites back in like the late 90s early 2000s; you'd have one guy calling the hotlines and buying the dirtsheets to get the news, and everyone else would steal the news and pass it off as their own, if you were lucky they'd give credit. Plus you'd have the sites with fake rumors/news designed purposely to get you to click on their links to get ad hits. They even have the "ton of banner ads everywhere even when it messes up the design" thing going; all that's missing is the photo gallery with hot women.
Sledgehammer wrote: so if this % thing goes through should i give up on my army?
im planning on only using vendettas/valkyries, sentinals, veterans/stormtroopers, and heavy weapons teams.
i will not be using any transports except the valkyrie/vendetta, and will have no true heavy support in the form of tanks. Instead im going to rely on hwt, sentinels, and vendettas to give me my firepower while my infantry decimate their infantry.
since i will not have any heavy support and my "heavy support" is coming from fast attack choices am i screwed?
From the looks of things we just had a heavy hitter on the rumors front just take % out back and shoot it, so I wouldn't worry about % all that much.
Sigvatr wrote: If %-based slots are true, then brace yourselves for thousands of Annihilation Barges.
I don't have the nercon book, but at 2000 points, how many can you fit into 500 points?
I would also imagen they would have the "no more then 3 duplicated unit" rule from fantsey also.
I hope that there would be. In a regular game of 1850 points, you would be able to fit 5 Annihilation Barges in.
Actually you could fit in even more, due to ally shenanigans, I fit 4 in already at 1850. So at 1850 you could fit in five for the primary detachment and, depending on what percentage the allies, you could easily get two or three more.
Edit - Damn I wished I had read til the end of this thread before I posted -_-
I disagree with you about it hurting Fantasy though, I think you're seeing a correlation without a causation there - WHFB has been the poor relative to 40K since forever, and I suspect that percentages failed to turn that around, rather than made it worse.
As I see it, decline of WHFB began already in 7th edition and extreme unbalance of army balance (hugely overpowered Chaos Daemons etc). 8th ed just failed to turn things around.
In fact 40k 5th edition seems to have attracted FB players: I get the impression that many people dislike WHFB's complicated comp culture (at least over here) and moved to 40k where things are simpler - and despite everything, 40k meta was better balanced than WHFB.
I disagree with you about it hurting Fantasy though, I think you're seeing a correlation without a causation there - WHFB has been the poor relative to 40K since forever, and I suspect that percentages failed to turn that around, rather than made it worse.
As I see it, decline of WHFB began already in 7th edition and extreme unbalance of army balance (hugely overpowered Chaos Daemons etc). 8th ed just failed to turn things around.
In fact 40k 5th edition seems to have attracted FB players: I get the impression that many people dislike WHFB's complicated comp culture (at least over here) and moved to 40k where things are simpler - and despite everything, 40k meta was better balanced than WHFB.
Is 40k's meta better balanced largely because most armies are some variation of power armor though? Just wondering.
This is intriguing to me though- the thought of this new rulebook release being possibly lackluster has brought me into thinking about giving WHFB a try, but I'd hate to get into a system that is *still* hemorrhaging players.
Sigvatr wrote: If %-based slots are true, then brace yourselves for thousands of Annihilation Barges.
I don't have the nercon book, but at 2000 points, how many can you fit into 500 points?
I would also imagen they would have the "no more then 3 duplicated unit" rule from fantsey also.
I hope that there would be. In a regular game of 1850 points, you would be able to fit 5 Annihilation Barges in.
Actually you could fit in even more, due to ally shenanigans, I fit 4 in already at 1850. So at 1850 you could fit in five for the primary detachment and, depending on what percentage the allies, you could easily get two or three more.
That wasn't how the rumor for the detachment part worked.
allied heavy support, Fast attack, elite, ect also ate into the % cap for thows slots from the main army.
The idea for haveing a allied deathcment witht he same army was "side boarding", and being able to have a part of your army that can be swaped out for when super heavies show up, or when your faceing a green tide.
But dosen't matter much, now that 40kradio has said the rumor was un-true. I kinda figured any from the mere mentioned of a "side board" concept in 40k. It seemed like such a huge change of heart for a company that made a point of makeing a edition for the purpose of pissing off tournment players.
I disagree with you about it hurting Fantasy though, I think you're seeing a correlation without a causation there - WHFB has been the poor relative to 40K since forever, and I suspect that percentages failed to turn that around, rather than made it worse.
As I see it, decline of WHFB began already in 7th edition and extreme unbalance of army balance (hugely overpowered Chaos Daemons etc). 8th ed just failed to turn things around.
In fact 40k 5th edition seems to have attracted FB players: I get the impression that many people dislike WHFB's complicated comp culture (at least over here) and moved to 40k where things are simpler - and despite everything, 40k meta was better balanced than WHFB.
Is 40k's meta better balanced largely because most armies are some variation of power armor though? Just wondering.
This is intriguing to me though- the thought of this new rulebook release being possibly lackluster has brought me into thinking about giving WHFB a try, but I'd hate to get into a system that is *still* hemorrhaging players.
As a player that went from 40k to fantsey, I've found 8th ed fantsey the most fun of any fantsey edition. I also found it the easiest to teach people how to play.
THE PROBLEM with WHFB is the coast for a army/getting people started.
azreal13 wrote: I disagree with you about it hurting Fantasy though, I think you're seeing a correlation without a causation there - WHFB has been the poor relative to 40K since forever, and I suspect that percentages failed to turn that around, rather than made it worse.
I recall a lot of unhappy people online when 8th dropped because of the percentage things and it going into a slow death after that. Maybe my conclusion is a wrong but I'm drawing from what limited data I have.
My impression was that rules changes to the actual game, such as random charge length, steadfast, etc. were more of a factor for some of the disgruntlement among vets.
azreal13 wrote: I disagree with you about it hurting Fantasy though, I think you're seeing a correlation without a causation there - WHFB has been the poor relative to 40K since forever, and I suspect that percentages failed to turn that around, rather than made it worse.
I recall a lot of unhappy people online when 8th dropped because of the percentage things and it going into a slow death after that. Maybe my conclusion is a wrong but I'm drawing from what limited data I have.
My impression was that rules changes to the actual game, such as random charge length, steadfast, etc. were more of a factor for some of the disgruntlement among vets.
Their random charge lengths are buffed by movement values unlike the 40k version so it's not as bad, but Steadfast did hurt cav and skirmish armies.
Having armies become illegal and needing to go out and buy 2-3 more core boxes to make a legal list again was a big deal breaker from what I recall.
azreal13 wrote: I disagree with you about it hurting Fantasy though, I think you're seeing a correlation without a causation there - WHFB has been the poor relative to 40K since forever, and I suspect that percentages failed to turn that around, rather than made it worse.
I recall a lot of unhappy people online when 8th dropped because of the percentage things and it going into a slow death after that. Maybe my conclusion is a wrong but I'm drawing from what limited data I have.
My impression was that rules changes to the actual game, such as random charge length, steadfast, etc. were more of a factor for some of the disgruntlement among vets.
I too have alwys heard more vets complain more about that then the % system.
Calvery being nerfed was the other big one when 8th 1st came out, but you heare it less now that the newer books have lowered the price for calvery units to reflext this. But it's still a throne in some vet's side since calvery isn't the hard hitting elite unit it use to be.
Iwas doubtful about percentages and 40k Radio coming out against it makes it even more unlikely.
I was in doubt because if you look in the Tempestus book, formations now have thier own FOC symbol (for exampleL HQ is a skull, Troops are an arrow, etc). This says to me that formations will now be a slot on the FOC like fortifications or LOW in Horus Heresy.
40k Radio wrote:Ok, it seems a nasty rumor is making its way around the interwebs. Many forums are saying 40k 7th is switching over to % based lists. We are here to 100% confirm that is not happening.
We have always told you guys the truth about everything in the past 12 months. Our source has been spot on with everything from release schedules to what each army will have.
.
Not you have not, I'm still waiting for that commissar squad
Samurai_Eduh wrote: Iwas doubtful about percentages and 40k Radio coming out against it makes it even more unlikely.
I was in doubt because if you look in the Tempestus book, formations now have thier own FOC symbol (for exampleL HQ is a skull, Troops are an arrow, etc). This says to me that formations will now be a slot on the FOC like fortifications or LOW in Horus Heresy.
I wished 40k Lords of war worked like horus heresy ones.
WayneTheGame wrote: So wait all they're doing is consolidating around 3 books into one? No FAQs, no tweaks a la 3.5? Just "here's the same gak as before in a bigger book with a higher price tag that you likely don't need to buy if you already have the other books"?
I'm guessing that's GW's idea on this release.
No. That's Krazynadechukr's idea for this release. Someone with a 0% accuracy in the past.
Well, I guess that accuracy rating could be going up.
40k Radio wrote:Ok, it seems a nasty rumor is making its way around the interwebs. Many forums are saying 40k 7th is switching over to % based lists. We are here to 100% confirm that is not happening.
We have always told you guys the truth about everything in the past 12 months. Our source has been spot on with everything from release schedules to what each army will have.
.
Not you have not, I'm still waiting for that commissar squad
Even with their three misses and three partially trues, they have about 53/59, which is ridiculously good as rumor mongers go.
As far as GW is concerned it is. Escalation, allies, everything is geared towards putting every model you own on the table..
If that were the sole aim of allowing Allies, there would be no Allies Matrix, or levels of alliance.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Messy0 wrote: Dont people realise that % will not only lead to GW's best models selling less. i.e 2 basic riptides with an IA is more than 20% of an 1850 list and even more at 1750. Why would they put that cap on the sales of some of their most popular and expensive minitures?
Secondly if people cant spam elites and heavy etc they will just spam troops. If troops are 40%+ imagain the amout of nightscyths with 5 man necron warrior units you will be able to field while anti air units such as riptides with EWO, VT and HBC, quad guns, punisher squadrons etc will be limited to 1 or 2 per amy. %'s are stupid..
A percentage system doesn't necessarily mean selling fewer of the good models. We had a percentage system in 2nd ed. What generally happened was that people took the bare minimum percentage of basic units, and maxed out on the good stuff.
So pretty much exactly what happens with the FoC...
So I was in my local store today and the managers usually pretty straight with me and rumours.
He said there is a reason his store is open late.on the 17th May for pre orders. Then late the following saturday for delivery, nothing to do with 7th ed.
Also he showed me the next 'free' model from GW online if you got the ltd ed captain, very nice!
The Primary Army Formations section, though could be legit without contradicting anything in the logs. I hope it isn't the case, because blowing up Deamon Flying Circus while still allowing Tyranids to run 7-9 FMCs via skyblight at 1850 seems wrong.
I don't think that would be possible. I don't have my codex with me right now, but 230 of flyrant + 180 gargs + the 3 FMC should go over the allowed 925 in formations. Even if it doesn't if you put that and your 800 points of troops, that means no more points for other flyrants or any FMC. So at best they can fit 4 flyers.
You are right. 5 Flyers at 1850.
Wulfmar wrote: %s doesn't totally remove these daft OP power gamer builds.
2200 points allows for 3 Tau riptides with upgrades
1500 points allows for 2 Tau riptides with upgrades
Check your math. Base Riptide is 180 points.
20% of 1500 is 300 points. 300 < 2 x 180. 2 un-upgraded riptides fit in 1850.
20% of 2200 is 440 points. 440 < 3 x 180. 3 un-upgraded riptides fit in 2700
tag is right.
185 is 10% of 1850
Max 2 riptides with IA at 1850 max. No other upgrades. While at the same time people will be able to spam asmany Jetbikes, Noise marines, Nightscyths, Crisis suits (enclave), wave serpents! and other OP troop choices as they want.
Given the huge imbalance between troop choices in differnt armies this will just create a different flavor of spam one i think noone will like the taste of.
Mmm, it's not the math - I accidentally used 25% for the Riptide as I thought it was a Heavy Support rather than 20% for a Fast Attack choice - this is going to make checking the legitimacy of the other players list murder -.-
Mmm, it's not the math - I accidentally used 25% for the Riptide as I thought it was a Heavy Support rather than 20% for a Fast Attack choice - this is going to make checking the legitimacy of the other players list murder -.-
No it's not. Percents already got debunked by 40k Radio.
Mmm, it's not the math - I accidentally used 25% for the Riptide as I thought it was a Heavy Support rather than 20% for a Fast Attack choice - this is going to make checking the legitimacy of the other players list murder -.-
No it's not. Percents already got debunked by 40k Radio.
I love how if 40K Radio says no % then everyone jumps on that bandwagon. I get that they have a decent track record but the source that Natfka is claiming told him about % and sideboards is the one who told him about Codex Supplements and mini-dexes and was spot on about that long before anyone else was talking about it. I'm willing to give his rumors some credence since it's not just someone who's never dropped a rumor to Natfka before. I remain cautiously hopeful for a % based system for 40K.
Blah, I like the idea of percentages. Oh well, GW can keep not getting my money. Then again, it sounds like the vocal majority on here doesn't want percentages, so just based on Dakka they're making the right call. Just wish there was a way to make everyone happy.
Well, maybe this will be a better edition, since 1990 I've only enjoyed playing odd numbered editions of 40k! Still, I probably won't be getting sucked in this time. Fortunately, the 31st of May is when the 2nd edition of dystopian wars from Spartan Games is being released too. They have been using their fanbase to extensively playtest the new rules before release. That's where my hobby dollars will be going
Pox Apostle wrote: I love how if 40K Radio says no % then everyone jumps on that bandwagon. I get that they have a decent track record but the source that Natfka is claiming told him about % and sideboards is the one who told him about Codex Supplements and mini-dexes and was spot on about that long before anyone else was talking about it. I'm willing to give his rumors some credence since it's not just someone who's never dropped a rumor to Natfka before. I remain cautiously hopeful for a % based system for 40K.
The problem is that 40kradio as a source and aggregator is reliable.
Natfka is unreliable. He can say it is from God himself and it doesn't matter because it is still an anonymous source and that basically means that, for us at least, it might as well be Natfka himself.
Automatically Appended Next Post: For example, Natfka has like 20 separate rumors on various supplements and mini-dexes in the last 6-12 months. Most of them have been complete garbage. Which one is this source?
Pox Apostle wrote: I love how if 40K Radio says no % then everyone jumps on that bandwagon. I get that they have a decent track record but the source that Natfka is claiming told him about % and sideboards is the one who told him about Codex Supplements and mini-dexes and was spot on about that long before anyone else was talking about it. I'm willing to give his rumors some credence since it's not just someone who's never dropped a rumor to Natfka before. I remain cautiously hopeful for a % based system for 40K.
The problem is that 40kradio as a source and aggregator is reliable.
Natfka is unreliable. He can say it is from God himself and it doesn't matter because it is still an anonymous source and that basically means that, for us at least, it might as well be Natfka himself.
True, and I understand this. I guess I am just willing to give him the benefit of the doubt when he says this particular rumor is from the same guy who gave us a reliable rumor in the past, even if that source is anonymous. Mainly because, if Natfka does have an inside source that person would have to remain anonymous for obvious reasons. I know it's a Catch-22 but what the hell, I'll give his rumor credence for now, just like I will 40K Radio and personally I'll not write off either side entirely until we get some more corroborating evidence in either direction.
Pox Apostle wrote: True, and I understand this. I guess I am just willing to give him the benefit of the doubt when he says this particular rumor is from the same guy who gave us a reliable rumor in the past, even if that source is anonymous. Mainly because, if Natfka does have an inside source that person would have to remain anonymous for obvious reasons.
Of course, but the problem is that we can't tell between Anonymous Source A (the reliable one) and Anonymous Source B (the crappy one) since he treats them all the same.
Also, which supplement rumor is the one he is saying was the accurate one? He hasn't had a good track record for anything supplement related.
Pox Apostle wrote: I love how if 40K Radio says no % then everyone jumps on that bandwagon. I get that they have a decent track record but the source that Natfka is claiming told him about % and sideboards is the one who told him about Codex Supplements and mini-dexes and was spot on about that long before anyone else was talking about it. I'm willing to give his rumors some credence since it's not just someone who's never dropped a rumor to Natfka before. I remain cautiously hopeful for a % based system for 40K.
40k Radio is running just shy of 90%. That's only second to Harry and Hastings who don't do rumors anymore. If they say it, then it's usually right. So it's less "jumping" on a bandwagon and more taking the safest bet.
Also I remain highly skeptical of a percent system coming to 40k.
For example, Natfka has like 20 separate rumors on various supplements and mini-dexes in the last 6-12 months. Most of them have been complete garbage. Which one is this source?
That one I'll give you for sure. Though the non-skeptic in me will say that GW could be holding onto some supplements for later release and we just haven't gotten to those yet. While I understand your point, there were rumors for plastic Guard vets being done for years and only now have got that box and a supplement to go along with it. So it's possible that there are supplements and mini-dexes ready to go but being held off for reasons only GW know. Same with the rumors that 9th edition Fantasy is finished but was shelved in favor of 40K 7th. Sadly no one can really prove if that's true or not. If WHFB 9th comes out one year from now people who said Fantasy is done and ready for release now would have their rumors treated as unreliable even if their rumor monger had given them correct information and it was just GW who held off the release for reasons not given out to the public.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I will add that I too wish Natfka would just give his rumor mongers nicknames like he said we would do a while ago, that way we could track which ones give the good info and which the bad.
Went to my local gw today. Manager was telling me about all the old and "obsolete" stock I missed getting because he had to send it back to hq.
I looked over at the 40k rack, and asked "oh, I see the four 40k rulebooks, two Escalation books, and two Strongholds are gone too. Were those sent back too?" He was like, "Uh, no, no, those were all sold this weekend."
I said I needed to buy a copy of the rulebook, and he immediately was like "...I have restock coming in for the rulebook the end of May." I offered to order it on his computer so he'd get credit,, and he was again telling me don't bother, I will set one aside for you...
Went on computer anyway, and I was like "It's not even letting me order it!" All he said was "Odd."
Pox Apostle wrote: That one I'll give you for sure. Though the non-skeptic in me will say that GW could be holding onto some supplements for later release and we just haven't gotten to those yet. While I understand your point, there were rumors for plastic Guard vets being done for years and only now have got that box and a supplement to go along with it. So it's possible that there are supplements and mini-dexes ready to go but being held off for reasons only GW know. Same with the rumors that 9th edition Fantasy is finished but was shelved in favor of 40K 7th. Sadly no one can really prove if that's true or not. If WHFB 9th comes out one year from now people who said Fantasy is done and ready for release now would have their rumors treated as unreliable even if their rumor monger had given them correct information and it was just GW who held off the release for reasons not given out to the public.
And yet, some rumor mongers can consistently hit the mark even with all the moving around of schedules. Why is that?
If the mercurial nature of GW's schedules was really the cause for all these false rumors, wouldn't it hit everyone?
Also, I can't find any accurate rumors from Natfka about supplements other than the ones for Sigmar's Blood, Escalation / Stronghold. And those were accompanied by directly conflict info often the day after or before from Natfka, which completely invalidates it.
example, two Fortification Supplement rumors from Natfka:
Spoiler:
Supplement Rumors - Surprise December Release Schedule Rumors - Oct 2013 via an anonymous source on Faeit 212 There are going to be two new expansions for Warhammer 40k in December, both pointed directly at getting new options into your standard 40k games. New Fortifications and Super-Heavy options will become available to play without playing Apocalypse, focusing instead on regular games of 40k. TRUE
Stronghold Assault *40k expansion for regular games of 40kTRUE *Rules for 17 Fortifications like the Wall of Martyrs Imperial Defense Line and the Macro-Cannon Aquila Strongpoint TRUE *Some Contain Several Fortifications that can be Taken as a Group that take up one Fortification Slot TRUE *Upgrades for Fortifications and New Rules for Buildings TRUE
Escalation *40k expansion for regular games of 40kTRUE *Full Rules for 16 Lords of War in a 96page Hardback Release TRUE *Adds a new "Lord's of War" slot to every armies FocTRUE *Allows certain Super-Heavy units to be fielded in standard 40k games TRUE *Destroyer Weapons DUPLICATE *Some of the New Lords of War Tyranid Harridan TRUE Eldar Revenant Titan for Eldar and Dark Eldar TRUE Super Heavy Tanks for the Imperial Guard (several) TRUE Khorne Lord of Skulls TRUE Thunderhawk Gunship TRUE
via an anonymous source on Faeit 212 there's a supplement that's divided by race with new fortifications and also new racial upgrades to specific fortifications. FALSE
Currently it's being playtested as requiring a detachment of the race to upgrade the fortification, but that might change (everyone's been using imperial stuff for a long time now). FALSE
Just to be clear, the base of the fortification such as bastion, aegis, fortress, etc will all be the same, just the upgrades/guns that will be racially specific. FALSE
In so far as models, expect only imperial versions, and a modeling section on converting building racially inspired fortifications. FALSE
The book will have the rules for all the currently released fortifications plus a couple new ones (with models) and then as mentioned rules for racial upgrades. FALSE
Even if one of those was 'a good source' how the feth are we supposed to believe either if he gives us conflicting info?
krazynadechukr wrote: Went to my local gw today. Manager was telling me about all the old and "obsolete" stock I missed getting because he had to send it back to hq.
I looked over at the 40k rack, and asked "oh, I see the four 40k rulebooks, two Escalation books, and two Strongholds are gone too. Were those sent back too?" He was like, "Uh, no, no, those were all sold this weekend."
I said I needed to buy a copy of the rulebook, and he immediately was like "...I have restock coming in for the rulebook the end of May." I offered to order it on his computer so he'd get credit,, and he was again telling me don't bother, I will set one aside for you...
Went on computer anyway, and I was like "It's not even letting me order it!" All he said was "Odd."
krazynadechukr wrote: Went to my local gw today. Manager was telling me about all the old and "obsolete" stock I missed getting because he had to send it back to hq.
I looked over at the 40k rack, and asked "oh, I see the four 40k rulebooks, two Escalation books, and two Strongholds are gone too. Were those sent back too?" He was like, "Uh, no, no, those were all sold this weekend."
I said I needed to buy a copy of the rulebook, and he immediately was like "...I have restock coming in for the rulebook the end of May." I offered to order it on his computer so he'd get credit,, and he was again telling me don't bother, I will set one aside for you...
Went on computer anyway, and I was like "It's not even letting me order it!" All he said was "Odd."
gorgon wrote: For instance, what would be a better way to follow the 6.5/7.0/whatever release than with the long-awaited proper cultist kit and a new chosen/CSM kit?
What would a "proper" Cultist kit look like? The options they were given in the Chaos Codex are exactly what the models have in the DV box. They weren't given access to other weapon types, and their leader can't have anything but what the two leader models have. Their rules were made to support the new models, not the other way around. If they're even in the next Chaos Codex it will be a miracle.
H.B.M.C. wrote: What would a "proper" Cultist kit look like? The options they were given in the Chaos Codex are exactly what the models have in the DV box. They weren't given access to other weapon types, and their leader can't have anything but what the two leader models have. Their rules were made to support the new models, not the other way around. If they're even in the next Chaos Codex it will be a miracle.
Not having to buy a DV box for would be a good first step, or the 5-model box which doesn't allow you to add in weapons like a Heavy Stubber of Heavy Flamer would be another positive step. Offering a 10-man box that allowed you to make either auto gun or CCW/pistol cultists and a heavy weapon figure would be ideal. You know, a unit box that allowed you to make the unit.
H.B.M.C. wrote: What would a "proper" Cultist kit look like? The options they were given in the Chaos Codex are exactly what the models have in the DV box. They weren't given access to other weapon types, and their leader can't have anything but what the two leader models have. Their rules were made to support the new models, not the other way around. If they're even in the next Chaos Codex it will be a miracle.
Not having to buy a DV box for would be a good first step, or the 5-model box which doesn't allow you to add in weapons like a Heavy Stubber of Heavy Flamer would be another positive step. Offering a 10-man box that allowed you to make either auto gun or CCW/pistol cultists and a heavy weapon figure would be ideal. You know, a unit box that allowed you to make the unit.
Yeah that - a bonafide multipart kit. It was a pretty innocuous remark. Not sure where the attitude came from, or how it turned into a GW complaint.
Talking to my "source" (or whatever you want to call him) here's what I got:
-No known changes to psychic powers
-Assault changes where on the table at one point to try and make it more on par with shooting but it's unclear if they made it in or not right now
-Escalation and Stronghold Assault rules are in, but profiles are not (and they were added to try and balance the Riptide and Wraithknight, paticulalry for Imperial Armies who don't have a lot of tools to shut them down fast enough)
EDIT: -Just one book, not three.
-New Starter isn't Marines and Orks .
Anyone get this week's White Dwarf yet? My usual source refused to let me get it a day early, so I have a feeling something may be in there about upcoming releases. Oh so tight lipped.
Twitter is alive with rumors new 40K rules of course, Orks, and Space Wolves... Was hoping BA's but I'm new to Twitter so I'm not sure who to rely on, I'll just make a note of who said what then see what happens, and who was closest to being right.
Guess I'll hold my breath and wait...
The first boxed set was a big deal in the 90's... Hero Hammer...
The 2nd was a big deal for me, I didn't believe the rumors that the miniatures were better... Ended up being my favorite.
Kelly502 wrote: Anyone get this week's White Dwarf yet? My usual source refused to let me get it a day early, so I have a feeling something may be in there about upcoming releases. Oh so tight lipped.
Twitter is alive with rumors new 40K rules of course, Orks, and Space Wolves... Was hoping BA's but I'm new to Twitter so I'm not sure who to rely on, I'll just make a note of who said what then see what happens, and who was closest to being right.
Guess I'll hold my breath and wait...
The first boxed set was a big deal in the 90's... Hero Hammer...
The 2nd was a big deal for me, I didn't believe the rumors that the miniatures were better... Ended up being my favorite.
Space Wolves instead of Blood Angels now??. Wow. I'll be dead shocked if this was true.
ClockworkZion wrote: -Escalation and Stronghold Assault rules are in, but profiles are not (and they were added to try and balance the Riptide and Wraithknight, paticulalry for Imperial Armies who don't have a lot of tools to shut them down fast enough)
Sounds like GW, so I believe it. Instead of just fixing the unit that is broken, go the opposite way and change the entire game because of them.
Any more info on the sideboard thing? I'd love to see that rumor officially debunked, because otherwise I see a 40K version of the poison cup scene from "The Princess Bride" happening prior to every game:
Player 1: but it's so simple...all I have to to do is divine wether or not your the kind of person who would bring a tank sideboard or swarm the table with more models...I am not a fool, so I clearly know that someone who already brought an army of infantry is bringing tanks so I must choose my melta sideboard. But you know I am not a great fool, so you clearly brought more infantry and I must choose my anti-horde sideboard.
Player 2: you've made your decision then?
Player 1: not remotely, because your paint scheme is tzeentch, and tzeentch is the god of change and conspiracy so you don't trust anyone, and I cannot take my anti-horde sideboard
Player 2: truly you have a dizzying intellect
Player 1: wait til you see my dakkadakka posts! And you must have realized that I knew about tzeentch, and so you brought all infantry for yours!
Player 2: ehhh...just pick one. d6 it?
Player 1: you played in a hardboyz tourney, so you enjoy max firepower and are counting on your infantry to score, so I must prepare for tanks. But, you also won a painting contest, so you like small models and I should be prepared for lots of them.
Player 2: I'm not going to tell you dude.
Player 1: but you already basically did! I know exactly which one to take! Oh, look at that magic player over there! (Switches his carrying cases). Ok, let's pick.
Player 1 pulls out his Mixed sideboard : haha didn't see that coming! I am a 40K tactical genius!
Player 2 pulls out a screamer star. Player 1 chokes and dies.
ClockworkZion wrote: -Escalation and Stronghold Assault rules are in, but profiles are not (and they were added to try and balance the Riptide and Wraithknight, paticulalry for Imperial Armies who don't have a lot of tools to shut them down fast enough)
Sounds like GW, so I believe it. Instead of just fixing the unit that is broken, go the opposite way and change the entire game because of them.
Plus it let's them continue selling the Escalation and Stronghold books while giving people the profiles so they don't need them if they aren't playing with them (just against them) allowing GW to make you pay to use the stuff still.
Space Wolves instead of Blood Angels now??. Wow. I'll be dead shocked if this was true.
Just Twitter rumors, I'll do my best to keep track of who is correct once the releases happen. Not sure if it was worth mentioning, but pretty cool over all, I am excited, just hoping its a good set of rules... I mean really, you just never know. As far as miniature releases I would be bummed if it was Wolves but Orks is still good for me. What was it, a boxed set with BA's and Orks with terrain to be released? I think that was an original rumor. Even though I bought the newest rules mini-book I'm still not too miffed.
greyknight12 wrote: Any more info on the sideboard thing? I'd love to see that rumor officially debunked, because otherwise I see a 40K version of the poison cup scene from "The Princess Bride" happening prior to every game:
Player 1: but it's so simple...all I have to to do is divine wether or not your the kind of person who would bring a tank sideboard or swarm the table with more models...I am not a fool, so I clearly know that someone who already brought an army of infantry is bringing tanks so I must choose my melta sideboard. But you know I am not a great fool, so you clearly brought more infantry and I must choose my anti-horde sideboard.
Player 2: you've made your decision then?
Player 1: not remotely, because your paint scheme is tzeentch, and tzeentch is the god of change and conspiracy so you don't trust anyone, and I cannot take my anti-horde sideboard
Player 2: truly you have a dizzying intellect
Player 1: wait til you see my dakkadakka posts! And you must have realized that I knew about tzeentch, and so you brought all infantry for yours!
Player 2: ehhh...just pick one. d6 it?
Player 1: you played in a hardboyz tourney, so you enjoy max firepower and are counting on your infantry to score, so I must prepare for tanks. But, you also won a painting contest, so you like small models and I should be prepared for lots of them.
Player 2: I'm not going to tell you dude.
Player 1: but you already basically did! I know exactly which one to take! Oh, look at that magic player over there! (Switches his carrying cases). Ok, let's pick.
Player 1 pulls out his Mixed sideboard : haha didn't see that coming! I am a 40K tactical genius!
Player 2 pulls out a screamer star. Player 1 chokes and dies.
Hey, Greyknight? That post you made? You're my new best friend. Don't like it? Tough.
ClockworkZion wrote: Talking to my "source" (or whatever you want to call him) here's what I got:
-No known changes to psychic powers
-Assault changes where on the table at one point to try and make it more on par with shooting but it's unclear if they made it in or not right now
-Escalation and Stronghold Assault rules are in, but profiles are not (and they were added to try and balance the Riptide and Wraithknight, paticulalry for Imperial Armies who don't have a lot of tools to shut them down fast enough)
EDIT: -Just one book, not three.
-New Starter isn't Marines and Orks .
Interesting.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Link to the twitter rumors?
ClockworkZion wrote: Talking to my "source" (or whatever you want to call him) here's what I got:
-No known changes to psychic powers
-Assault changes where on the table at one point to try and make it more on par with shooting but it's unclear if they made it in or not right now
-Escalation and Stronghold Assault rules are in, but profiles are not (and they were added to try and balance the Riptide and Wraithknight, paticulalry for Imperial Armies who don't have a lot of tools to shut them down fast enough)
EDIT: -Just one book, not three.
-New Starter isn't Marines and Orks .
Interesting.
The first two are iffy because it's based on what was true at one point before the update was finalized. The rest I feel is fairly solid and is something actually useful since it's more definite.
greyknight12 wrote: Any more info on the sideboard thing? I'd love to see that rumor officially debunked, because otherwise I see a 40K version of the poison cup scene from "The Princess Bride" happening prior to every game:
Player 1: but it's so simple...all I have to to do is divine wether or not your the kind of person who would bring a tank sideboard or swarm the table with more models...I am not a fool, so I clearly know that someone who already brought an army of infantry is bringing tanks so I must choose my melta sideboard. But you know I am not a great fool, so you clearly brought more infantry and I must choose my anti-horde sideboard.
Player 2: you've made your decision then?
Player 1: not remotely, because your paint scheme is tzeentch, and tzeentch is the god of change and conspiracy so you don't trust anyone, and I cannot take my anti-horde sideboard
Player 2: truly you have a dizzying intellect
Player 1: wait til you see my dakkadakka posts! And you must have realized that I knew about tzeentch, and so you brought all infantry for yours!
Player 2: ehhh...just pick one. d6 it?
Player 1: you played in a hardboyz tourney, so you enjoy max firepower and are counting on your infantry to score, so I must prepare for tanks. But, you also won a painting contest, so you like small models and I should be prepared for lots of them.
Player 2: I'm not going to tell you dude.
Player 1: but you already basically did! I know exactly which one to take! Oh, look at that magic player over there! (Switches his carrying cases). Ok, let's pick.
Player 1 pulls out his Mixed sideboard : haha didn't see that coming! I am a 40K tactical genius!
Player 2 pulls out a screamer star. Player 1 chokes and dies.
Any news if Chaos is going to finalkly get some Chosen Squad sets similar to the Raptors with this new edition. The Faet rumors got me psyked... and then as usual completely let me down.
Hopefully, hopefully this new update isn't a complete catastrophe and is actually good. Maybe even finally get some Legion rules, because right now you're better suited using HH rules for Chaos.
ClockworkZion wrote: -Escalation and Stronghold Assault rules are in, but profiles are not (and they were added to try and balance the Riptide and Wraithknight, paticulalry for Imperial Armies who don't have a lot of tools to
That is a bunch of BS. If GW wanted to address the OP nature of Riptides and Wraith Knights, they would just FAQ them.
If they added Escalation and Stronghold Assault, it is to sell big expensive models, not to balance anything.
ClockworkZion wrote: -Escalation and Stronghold Assault rules are in, but profiles are not (and they were added to try and balance the Riptide and Wraithknight, paticulalry for Imperial Armies who don't have a lot of tools to
That is a bunch of BS. If GW wanted to address the OP nature of Riptides and Wraith Knights, they would just FAQ them.
If they added Escalation and Stronghold Assault, it is to sell big expensive models, not to balance anything.
Right, and when is the last time they nerfed something in a FAQ that wasn't just a poorly interpreted rule?
I don't remember anything since the edition started, do you?
gorgon wrote: Yeah that - a bonafide multipart kit. It was a pretty innocuous remark. Not sure where the attitude came from, or how it turned into a GW complaint.
It's not "attitude" (what is this? The 90's? ). It's a genuine concern. The idea that Cultists would get a multi-part kit doesn't make a lot of sense. They don't have any real options (Shotgun or CCW/Heavy Stubber or Flamer), and it would cost a bundle to make a whole new kit. At best they'd get a recut DV sprue so that they can do a box of 10, but I wouldn't expect any more than that. I wouldn't even expect that.
Well I couldn't find the exact strip, but Rat's philosophy suits our situation well.
Assume that the 7th edition is going to be absolutely terrible, disappointment is impossible as we expect it to be terrible. If it isn't, rejoice! We lose absolutely nothing in the process by not getting our hopes up.
I for one expect the only good thing to come from this is a possible model update for some factions.
ClockworkZion wrote: Talking to my "source" (or whatever you want to call him) here's what I got:
-No known changes to psychic powers
-Assault changes where on the table at one point to try and make it more on par with shooting but it's unclear if they made it in or not right now
-Escalation and Stronghold Assault rules are in, but profiles are not (and they were added to try and balance the Riptide and Wraithknight, paticulalry for Imperial Armies who don't have a lot of tools to shut them down fast enough)
EDIT: -Just one book, not three.
-New Starter isn't Marines and Orks .
Interesting.
The first two are iffy because it's based on what was true at one point before the update was finalized. The rest I feel is fairly solid and is something actually useful since it's more definite.
Is it too much of a stretch to possibly predict that the rumored starter set could possibly be Orks and IG (ahem, sorry, Astra Militarum)? Think about it...Commisar on the poster, that new Armageddon strategy game...GW could make a lot of money with an Armageddon starter set with plastic steel legion...
ClockworkZion wrote: Talking to my "source" (or whatever you want to call him) here's what I got:
-No known changes to psychic powers
-Assault changes where on the table at one point to try and make it more on par with shooting but it's unclear if they made it in or not right now
-Escalation and Stronghold Assault rules are in, but profiles are not (and they were added to try and balance the Riptide and Wraithknight, paticulalry for Imperial Armies who don't have a lot of tools to shut them down fast enough)
EDIT: -Just one book, not three.
-New Starter isn't Marines and Orks .
Interesting.
The first two are iffy because it's based on what was true at one point before the update was finalized. The rest I feel is fairly solid and is something actually useful since it's more definite.
Is it too much of a stretch to possibly predict that the rumored starter set could possibly be Orks and IG (ahem, sorry, Astra Militarum)? Think about it...Commisar on the poster, that new Armageddon strategy game...GW could make a lot of money with an Armageddon starter set with plastic steel legion...
While not impossible I really don't know. We can basically rule out Sisters and anything Chaos in the future because both just are too likely to set off the Soccer Moms and from what I understand there is a very solid desire by GW to push more into the toy store demographic again (like they did for LotR). I don't know how fast they plan to do this, but I assume they still want to avoid angering soccer moms who have nothing better to do with their time than be offended.
EDIT: Yes I know we just got Chaos but things change and apparently GW is finally looking at a wider market again from what I've heard so we're looking at them getting more PC about how they push themselves.
Plastic Steel Legion would be grand. The assault does need a redo...
The guys at a local GW store near where I used to live told me how they avoided offending the soccer moms when showing the rules and books, they just knew what sections to avoid in the large books. I would hate to have been there when the soccer mom rolls in hot about her child showing her the demons pictured in the books. I never heard of an incident though.
The newer boxed sets with the mini rules would be less offensive than the larger Chaos books. So I could see those going into general retail stores.
The offended thing can get nuts. I live in a part of the US that was swearing up and down that Harry Potter was teaching actual witchcraft. You know, because Latin (the same thing they speak in Catholic services and the like) somehow is magic.
I can't even claim to live in the South as an excuse either, people are just special.
W40K is too niche and unknown for anyone in America to call it out. The only bad press I can remember W40K getting from uber-right fundies was some Greek magazine writer. Otherwise there's been nothing.
Also, since GW is British, I don't think they'll care at all about American conservatives, if even know about their existence.
Wyzilla wrote: W40K is too niche and unknown for anyone in America to call it out. The only bad press I can remember W40K getting from uber-right fundies was some Greek magazine writer. Otherwise there's been nothing.
Also, since GW is British, I don't think they'll care at all about American conservatives, if even know about their existence.
Please don't conflate conservatives with those that think stuff is devil worship. It's like conflating Frat douches to all college students.
Edit: or the cast of "Jersey Shore" to all Italians.
Wyzilla wrote: W40K is too niche and unknown for anyone in America to call it out. The only bad press I can remember W40K getting from uber-right fundies was some Greek magazine writer. Otherwise there's been nothing.
Also, since GW is British, I don't think they'll care at all about American conservatives, if even know about their existence.
Please don't conflate conservatives with those that think stuff is devil worship. It's like conflating Frat douches to all college students.
Hence why I specified uber-right fundies. Rather than just normal conservative Americans.
ClockworkZion wrote: -Escalation and Stronghold Assault rules are in, but profiles are not (and they were added to try and balance the Riptide and Wraithknight, paticulalry for Imperial Armies who don't have a lot of tools to
That is a bunch of BS. If GW wanted to address the OP nature of Riptides and Wraith Knights, they would just FAQ them.
If they added Escalation and Stronghold Assault, it is to sell big expensive models, not to balance anything.
Right, and when is the last time they nerfed something in a FAQ that wasn't just a poorly interpreted rule?
I don't remember anything since the edition started, do you?
You are right. The last time they majorly nerfed something in a FAQ was when they released a new edition of the 40k Rulebook..... oh wait.
ClockworkZion wrote: -Escalation and Stronghold Assault rules are in, but profiles are not (and they were added to try and balance the Riptide and Wraithknight, paticulalry for Imperial Armies who don't have a lot of tools to
That is a bunch of BS. If GW wanted to address the OP nature of Riptides and Wraith Knights, they would just FAQ them.
If they added Escalation and Stronghold Assault, it is to sell big expensive models, not to balance anything.
Right, and when is the last time they nerfed something in a FAQ that wasn't just a poorly interpreted rule?
I don't remember anything since the edition started, do you?
You are right. The last time they majorly nerfed something in a FAQ was when they released a new edition of the 40k Rulebook..... oh wait.
If you're talking the Power Weapons that was a core rule being applied to the game not something being FAQ'd to fix balance issues. Actually you must be thinking of a different gaming company because I can't think of any real balance issues the company fixed by FAQ in 5th or 6th.
GW's only motivation seems to be making money. The rumor I provided has them basically doing that by pissing on "balance" and adjusting problems by pouring more stuff on top and hoping it all work out, something we've seen them do before actually. Thinking the company, as it is now, would nerf something in a FAQ is far to idealist and frankly silly.
Expect them to do things to take your money, not make players happy.
Hey, I just recently got back into 40k (I used to play 4th edition) and i've started following these rumors, as i need a ruelbook soon I've a question for you guys: It seems that many aren't really happy () with the rules.. so why don't you just houserule/create rules as a community? Is there anything (copyright or sth) that prevents you from writing + publishing rules online (non-commercia ofc)?
It's not like you're forced to play by the rules GW makes.. except for maybe tournaments, but a tournament organizer could have the same view anyways.
rasias wrote: Hey, I just recently got back into 40k (I used to play 4th edition) and i've started following these rumors, as i need a ruelbook soon I've a question for you guys: It seems that many aren't really happy () with the rules.. so why don't you just houserule/create rules as a community? Is there anything (copyright or sth) that prevents you from writing + publishing rules online (non-commercia ofc)?
It's not like you're forced to play by the rules GW makes.. except for maybe tournaments, but a tournament organizer could have the same view anyways.
A rabid legal team based in Nottingham and a company head that stated that they weren't afraid to use them to intimidate. In the investors annual report, no less.
rasias wrote: Hey, I just recently got back into 40k (I used to play 4th edition) and i've started following these rumors, as i need a ruelbook soon I've a question for you guys: It seems that many aren't really happy () with the rules.. so why don't you just houserule/create rules as a community? Is there anything (copyright or sth) that prevents you from writing + publishing rules online (non-commercia ofc)?
It's not like you're forced to play by the rules GW makes.. except for maybe tournaments, but a tournament organizer could have the same view anyways.
A rabid legal team based in Nottingham and a company head that stated that they weren't afraid to use them to intimidate. In the investors annual report, no less.
well.. then you wouldn't publish it online, but it wouldn't stop anyone of applying smaller rule changes that are discussed on forums anyways, does it?
I've been kinda mulling this one over because I'm more upset with GW's business model than the game itself.
I feel like the only "winning" situation GW can pull from this, for me, is a repackaged book with minor changes put into print for those that want them. Digital editions get free updates and a massive FAQ dump is engaged.
I will be happy with that, but not elated. It's been too long for FAQs and I won't simply forget what happened to get us there.
However, looking at the business context, Games Workshop has to be wanting to sell us something. The last month of their fiscal year, sales down, a poor midyear report... something big has to entice us. A new book with just FAQ style updates wouldn't make many folks go out and plop down $99 USDs.
So it's probably something a bit more "not in my cornbread" style of release, something we didn't really ask for. And at a higher price.
I'm just skimming and floating with the rules changes. I really don't care how they tell us to play the game, just as if their is a concise clarity to their design choices. As long as it's clearly in black and white on the page, then there can be little dispute over it. You may not like it, but there's a finality to a hard answer that's pleasing. I just don't want to pay for it after buying two rulebooks for 6E already.
ClockworkZion wrote: -Escalation and Stronghold Assault rules are in, but profiles are not (and they were added to try and balance the Riptide and Wraithknight, paticulalry for Imperial Armies who don't have a lot of tools to
That is a bunch of BS. If GW wanted to address the OP nature of Riptides and Wraith Knights, they would just FAQ them.
If they added Escalation and Stronghold Assault, it is to sell big expensive models, not to balance anything.
Please show me the last FAQ that nerfed an overpowered unit to the point that it was at best balanced.
rasias wrote: Hey, I just recently got back into 40k (I used to play 4th edition) and i've started following these rumors, as i need a ruelbook soon I've a question for you guys: It seems that many aren't really happy () with the rules.. so why don't you just houserule/create rules as a community? Is there anything (copyright or sth) that prevents you from writing + publishing rules online (non-commercia ofc)?
It's not like you're forced to play by the rules GW makes.. except for maybe tournaments, but a tournament organizer could have the same view anyways.
A rabid legal team based in Nottingham and a company head that stated that they weren't afraid to use them to intimidate. In the investors annual report, no less.
well.. then you wouldn't publish it online, but it wouldn't stop anyone of applying smaller rule changes that are discussed on forums anyways, does it?
Yeah, nothing stops that. Tourney guys do it all the time. For now! (cue ominous music)
rasias wrote: Hey, I just recently got back into 40k (I used to play 4th edition) and i've started following these rumors, as i need a ruelbook soon I've a question for you guys: It seems that many aren't really happy () with the rules.. so why don't you just houserule/create rules as a community? Is there anything (copyright or sth) that prevents you from writing + publishing rules online (non-commercia ofc)?
It's not like you're forced to play by the rules GW makes.. except for maybe tournaments, but a tournament organizer could have the same view anyways.
A rabid legal team based in Nottingham and a company head that stated that they weren't afraid to use them to intimidate. In the investors annual report, no less.
well.. then you wouldn't publish it online, but it wouldn't stop anyone of applying smaller rule changes that are discussed on forums anyways, does it?
Nothing at all, my group has been playing a version of 2nd edition that allows us to include the latest toys since 5th edition came out, and looking around the web that seems quite a common thing.
timetowaste85 wrote: Blah, I like the idea of percentages. Oh well, GW can keep not getting my money. Then again, it sounds like the vocal majority on here doesn't want percentages, so just based on Dakka they're making the right call. Just wish there was a way to make everyone happy.
If GW was a "proper" hobby company, they could release a small supplement showing how to use percentages to calculate a force organisation. It shouldn't be more than one page of A4, unless they decided to do different percentages for each codex, which I think is how it ought to be done. Then you could use it as an optional rule.
The opposition to percentages is not based on spiteful prejudice. A lot of it is based on well-founded fears that it would not work, due to a number of reasons including GW's incapacity.
Personally, I'm not in favor of percentages. From what I've seen, it won't really affect the majority of my lists all that much, but I just think the change would introduce more complexity into the list-building process without really doing anything to address the problems it's intended to fix.
ClockworkZion wrote: -Escalation and Stronghold Assault rules are in, but profiles are not (and they were added to try and balance the Riptide and Wraithknight, paticulalry for Imperial Armies who don't have a lot of tools to
That is a bunch of BS. If GW wanted to address the OP nature of Riptides and Wraith Knights, they would just FAQ them.
If they added Escalation and Stronghold Assault, it is to sell big expensive models, not to balance anything.
Please show me the last FAQthat nerfed an overpowered unit to the point that it was at best balanced.
Please.
... I'm waiting.
You could have just stopped at the underlined part, GW hasn't FAQ'd anything for ages.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jimsolo wrote: Personally, I'm not in favor of percentages. From what I've seen, it won't really affect the majority of my lists all that much, but I just think the change would introduce more complexity into the list-building process without really doing anything to address the problems it's intended to fix.
Yeah, coz maths is hard and stuff
40k is already one of the most convoluted sets of rules going around, adding percentages to the mix barely even registers on the "complexity" scale of 40k.
The main reason I want percentages isn't to limit existing armies but rather to allow more options for horde armies who have lots of cheap non-troops but can only take a few of them because we're limited to a number of selections rather than proportions of an army.
ClockworkZion wrote: While not impossible I really don't know. We can basically rule out Sisters and anything Chaos in the future because both just are too likely to set off the Soccer Moms and from what I understand there is a very solid desire by GW to push more into the toy store demographic again (like they did for LotR). I don't know how fast they plan to do this, but I assume they still want to avoid angering soccer moms who have nothing better to do with their time than be offended.
EDIT: Yes I know we just got Chaos but things change and apparently GW is finally looking at a wider market again from what I've heard so we're looking at them getting more PC about how they push themselves.
Okay, what the hell are you talking about? What are those “soccer moms”, why would they be offended by Sisters, and how could we get rid of them?
ClockworkZion wrote: While not impossible I really don't know. We can basically rule out Sisters and anything Chaos in the future because both just are too likely to set off the Soccer Moms and from what I understand there is a very solid desire by GW to push more into the toy store demographic again (like they did for LotR). I don't know how fast they plan to do this, but I assume they still want to avoid angering soccer moms who have nothing better to do with their time than be offended.
EDIT: Yes I know we just got Chaos but things change and apparently GW is finally looking at a wider market again from what I've heard so we're looking at them getting more PC about how they push themselves.
Okay, what the hell are you talking about? What are those “soccer moms”, why would they be offended by Sisters, and how could we get rid of them?
The very un-subtle religious motif, for one. Also, "old people" America still has a "thing" about chicks as soldiers, imo. Mainstream 'Murica doesn't like the idea of women getting ripped in half and blown up. It's cool when it happens to guys though.
40K is actually a simple set of rules, complicated mainly by the rampant growth of overlapping special rules. The core concepts, however, are simple, with a few bits of bad, counter-intuitive design to make them more difficult than they ought to be.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: I still have no idea what “soccer moms” means, and why they would be offended by Sisters. Also, would they be offended by goddam Joan of Arc too ?
Seems a pretty unpleasant bunch. Are they really so many that they would influence business decisions (from GW or any other company) ?
Also a bit confused as how those would want something with “There is only war” as a slogan.
Kilkrazy wrote: 40K is actually a simple set of rules, complicated mainly by the rampant growth of overlapping special rules. The core concepts, however, are simple, with a few bits of bad, counter-intuitive design to make them more difficult than they ought to be.
Can't agree more. I had to do a special sheet for all the various USRs that each unit I use has. It's awfull. I wonder, if it would just be possible to give them simple upgrades like +1 BS or whatever instead of some convoluted "when regrouping after retreating unit auto-hits with half of their shots on a successfull LD check when shooting infantry squads of up to twice the size of the unit"-horror.
-Escalation and Stronghold Assault rules are in, but profiles are not (and they were added to try and balance the Riptide and Wraithknight, paticulalry for Imperial Armies who don't have a lot of tools to shut them down fast enough) .
Wait, so apparently GW came up with escalation so imperials could deal with Riptides and Wraithknights but then gave Taudar the Revenant Titan???
Kilkrazy wrote: 40K is actually a simple set of rules, complicated mainly by the rampant growth of overlapping special rules. The core concepts, however, are simple, with a few bits of bad, counter-intuitive design to make them more difficult than they ought to be.
Can't agree more. I had to do a special sheet for all the various USRs that each unit I use has. It's awfull. I wonder, if it would just be possible to give them simple upgrades like +1 BS or whatever instead of some convoluted "when regrouping after retreating unit auto-hits with half of their shots on a successfull LD check when shooting infantry squads of up to twice the size of the unit"-horror.
Definitely, or special rules that reference other special rules that do something simple. Ability X gives troops the Y special rule, which just means an extra D6 on counterattack, instead of making the special rule "+1D6 on counterattack".
Or the various "Fleet of ____" rules, instead of just "Fleet".
I guess it's all about flavour, but when you need to make up cheat sheets then you've gone too far. I made cards up for all of my units with the stats and what the special rules meant, and I ran vanilla guard with a couple of characters, Orgyns and Ratlings; it must be hell if you've got something fancy.
I dunno, the whole 'lets take the worst aspect of fantasy' (core tax) and worst of 40k (strD OPness) and put them in one! I've been going off 40k 6E for a while now but this is putting the final nails in the coffin. if it turns out to be accurate it probably will be the final nail.
Definitely, or special rules that reference other special rules that do something simple. Ability X gives troops the Y special rule, which just means an extra D6 on counterattack, instead of making the special rule "+1D6 on counterattack".
Or the various "Fleet of ____" rules, instead of just "Fleet".
I guess it's all about flavour, but when you need to make up cheat sheets then you've gone too far. I made cards up for all of my units with the stats and what the special rules meant, and I ran vanilla guard with a couple of characters, Orgyns and Ratlings; it must be hell if you've got something fancy.
Just Khornate Deamons. But when literally every rule sounds along the lines of: Bloodlust, Rampage, Fury, Hatred, Rage, Wrath - and references other, similar sounding USRs - it becomes a huge pain. Add a halfdozen of random-roll tables (3x chaos boons, warp storm, 3xpsy disciplines [well, not for khornates but still], warlord traits and so on, and playing without any USRs on any unit suddenly becomes that much more inviting.
timetowaste85 wrote: Blah, I like the idea of percentages. Oh well, GW can keep not getting my money. Then again, it sounds like the vocal majority on here doesn't want percentages, so just based on Dakka they're making the right call. Just wish there was a way to make everyone happy.
Having worked in corporate process improvement for many years, I can tell you that vocal minorities complaining about things usually reflect unhappy or apathetic majorities also not happy about the same issues.
Complaints are free feedback, resolving them and implementing real process improvement from them leads to a healthier business. The one person who feels compelled and annoyed enough to complain often represents a multitude of people also not happy but not bothered to tell you, they are far more dangerous as they'll often just abandon ship without warning.
A smart company listens very closely to complaints, it runs trend analysis to identify the root causes of these complaints and it implements process improvement to fix those root causes.
If the 'vocal minority' are voicing on Dakka that they don't like something, it's highly likely the silent majority feels similarly about it. This can be said of most of the gripes about the gaming companies that you hear voiced by several different, unrelated customers on this forum.
Unfortunately how much of that demographic is kids and young adults in the process without a voice or the ability to intellectually articulate their concerns for the game?
40K is actually a simple set of rules, complicated mainly by the rampant growth of overlapping special rules.
Agreed. A consolidated rulebook (and maybe a few FAQ's) would help streamline it all under 6th.
with a few bits of bad, counter-intuitive design to make them more difficult than they ought to be.
I'm still getting used to 6th ed rules, can you elaborate on this?
For example, in most cases, like "to hit" you want a high stat and a high roll.
However if rolling for Leadership or scatter, you want a high stat and low roll. If rolling to save, you want a low stat (Sv) and a high roll. Your enemy wanted a high stat (BS and a low stat AP) in attacking you.
There you have three different and opposite mechanisms in the absolutely core dice rolling rules.
I won't go into LoS or allocating wounds, as I still don't fully understand them after playing for nearly 10 years.
These are fundamental parts of the rules, which get further modified by various special rules such as Markerlights, twin-linking, BS above 6, psychic powers, Interceptor, and so on.
Or you can just hire someone to visit GW stores for a year or so and write a report that you'll then ignore; that's much better than real market research.
via 40k Radio on Facebook
Ok, it seems a nasty rumor is making its way around the interwebs. Many forums are saying 40k 7th is switching over to % based lists. We are here to 100% confirm that is not happening.
We have always told you guys the truth about everything in the past 12 months. Our source has been spot on with everything from release schedules to what each army will have.
So please rest easy knowing that force org will still be in the game.
These are facts, not rumors from your trusted source for insider 40k news, not rumors.
I believe them over any other rumors now, they have been the most accurate
For example, in most cases, like "to hit" you want a high stat and a high roll.
However if rolling for Leadership or scatter, you want a high stat and low roll. If rolling to save, you want a low stat (Sv) and a high roll. Your enemy wanted a high stat (BS and a low stat AP) in attacking you.
There you have three different and opposite mechanisms in the absolutely core dice rolling rules.
I won't go into LoS or allocating wounds, as I still don't fully understand them after playing for nearly 10 years.
These are fundamental parts of the rules, which get further modified by various special rules such as Markerlights, twin-linking, BS above 6, psychic powers, Interceptor, and so on.
Some of these problems can be missed by those who've been playing GW game for any period of time, but trying to explain the mechanics to a [potentially] new player shines a bright light on them. From that perpective, that the core sequence of hitting, wounding, saving and testing morale all use different dice mechanics is utterly baffling.
When whispers of a new edition were first reported, I hoped that 6th would turn out to be a planned stopgap to allow the studio time to update all of the codexes. Once all the legacy books were gone 7th could be released to tighten everything up and everyone writing be happy. However, attributing that much forethought to the same studio responsible for all the hastily designed and written codexes and supplements released in the past couple years should be too Pollyanna for even the most ardent GW defenders.
Is it too much of a stretch to possibly predict that the rumored starter set could possibly be Orks and IG (ahem, sorry, Astra Militarum)? Think about it...Commisar on the poster, that new Armageddon strategy game...GW could make a lot of money with an Armageddon starter set with plastic steel legion...
Mmm, that would be a dream come true. However, I can't imagine a starter set with those two armies, it would take far too many models to be economical. The shear number of Guardsmen and Boys would have to be huge. On the other hand, I would totally buy it.
Is it too much of a stretch to possibly predict that the rumored starter set could possibly be Orks and IG (ahem, sorry, Astra Militarum)? Think about it...Commisar on the poster, that new Armageddon strategy game...GW could make a lot of money with an Armageddon starter set with plastic steel legion...
Mmm, that would be a dream come true. However, I can't imagine a starter set with those two armies, it would take far too many models to be economical. The shear number of Guardsmen and Boys would have to be huge. On the other hand, I would totally buy it.
Surely from GW's perspective it's better to give people lots of models with a low points value in the starter set? If you can make half an army with the starter set, you're cutting into your potential sales harder than you would if the starter set only had a quarter of an army?
I find the idea of a new plastic regiment in the starter set to be very unlikely though. They don't want to start people off with an army they can't complete by buying the plastic model kits they sell. A smarter move might be to have new catachan sculpts in the starter set.
Is it too much of a stretch to possibly predict that the rumored starter set could possibly be Orks and IG (ahem, sorry, Astra Militarum)? Think about it...Commisar on the poster, that new Armageddon strategy game...GW could make a lot of money with an Armageddon starter set with plastic steel legion...
Mmm, that would be a dream come true. However, I can't imagine a starter set with those two armies, it would take far too many models to be economical. The shear number of Guardsmen and Boys would have to be huge. On the other hand, I would totally buy it.
Surely from GW's perspective it's better to give people lots of models with a low points value in the starter set? If you can make half an army with the starter set, you're cutting into your potential sales harder than you would if the starter set only had a quarter of an army?
I find the idea of a new plastic regiment in the starter set to be very unlikely though. They don't want to start people off with an army they can't complete by buying the plastic model kits they sell. A smarter move might be to have new catachan sculpts in the starter set.
I heared something about a large Armageddon-themed expansion a couple of months ago. Since weekly updates are a thing now, maybe they actually manage to churn out some plastic steel legion..?
The % vs. FOC thing doesn't matter. They polluted one pool with digital releases, the % system probably wouldn't hold true either. And to beat that horse over there, it's not fixing the root cause which is unit point costs.
Like I said, the only expectation to have it a product that's looking to force some sort of sale, preferably of a large amount of the player base, and on an item with the largest margin... printed material it is. If it was any other company, I think we would be excited, but given the past 6~12 months...
I'm scared this could be a new paradigm; 2 year core rule update windows, FAQs for a full year after that, then another full year of wait for the next FAQ to ensure rule clarifications are in line with the next rule waves.
It's inconsistent and uncaring support for their product at best.
greyknight12 wrote: Any more info on the sideboard thing? I'd love to see that rumor officially debunked, because otherwise I see a 40K version of the poison cup scene from "The Princess Bride" happening prior to every game:
Player 1: but it's so simple...all I have to to do is divine wether or not your the kind of person who would bring a tank sideboard or swarm the table with more models...I am not a fool, so I clearly know that someone who already brought an army of infantry is bringing tanks so I must choose my melta sideboard. But you know I am not a great fool, so you clearly brought more infantry and I must choose my anti-horde sideboard.
Player 2: you've made your decision then?
Player 1: not remotely, because your paint scheme is tzeentch, and tzeentch is the god of change and conspiracy so you don't trust anyone, and I cannot take my anti-horde sideboard
Player 2: truly you have a dizzying intellect
Player 1: wait til you see my dakkadakka posts! And you must have realized that I knew about tzeentch, and so you brought all infantry for yours!
Player 2: ehhh...just pick one. d6 it?
Player 1: you played in a hardboyz tourney, so you enjoy max firepower and are counting on your infantry to score, so I must prepare for tanks. But, you also won a painting contest, so you like small models and I should be prepared for lots of them.
Player 2: I'm not going to tell you dude.
Player 1: but you already basically did! I know exactly which one to take! Oh, look at that magic player over there! (Switches his carrying cases). Ok, let's pick.
Player 1 pulls out his Mixed sideboard : haha didn't see that coming! I am a 40K tactical genius!
Player 2 pulls out a screamer star. Player 1 chokes and dies.
While I doubt that GW would release a starter set without their beloved SMs in it, an ork vs IG started would make sense. They could keep the model count down to like 25 on each side, so it would seem like a decent sized starter set. But because both armies have a lot of cheap troops they would be selling a smaller box set point-wise. So you would pick up a starter or two and wouls still have to buy a lot of models to make a decent sized army. And honestly, IG and Orks are two of the more expensive armies to field, so win win.
greyknight12 wrote: Any more info on the sideboard thing? I'd love to see that rumor officially debunked, because otherwise I see a 40K version of the poison cup scene from "The Princess Bride" happening prior to every game:
Player 1: but it's so simple...all I have to to do is divine wether or not your the kind of person who would bring a tank sideboard or swarm the table with more models...I am not a fool, so I clearly know that someone who already brought an army of infantry is bringing tanks so I must choose my melta sideboard. But you know I am not a great fool, so you clearly brought more infantry and I must choose my anti-horde sideboard.
Player 2: you've made your decision then?
Player 1: not remotely, because your paint scheme is tzeentch, and tzeentch is the god of change and conspiracy so you don't trust anyone, and I cannot take my anti-horde sideboard
Player 2: truly you have a dizzying intellect
Player 1: wait til you see my dakkadakka posts! And you must have realized that I knew about tzeentch, and so you brought all infantry for yours!
Player 2: ehhh...just pick one. d6 it?
Player 1: you played in a hardboyz tourney, so you enjoy max firepower and are counting on your infantry to score, so I must prepare for tanks. But, you also won a painting contest, so you like small models and I should be prepared for lots of them.
Player 2: I'm not going to tell you dude.
Player 1: but you already basically did! I know exactly which one to take! Oh, look at that magic player over there! (Switches his carrying cases). Ok, let's pick.
Player 1 pulls out his Mixed sideboard : haha didn't see that coming! I am a 40K tactical genius!
Player 2 pulls out a screamer star. Player 1 chokes and dies.
I'm pretty much gonna go with that post being the best thing to hit his forum since the "lady impregnated by squid" thread caused a guy to combine "call me maybe" with the Cthulhu chant. I assume Wallace Shawn is the Secilian? I read it in his and Innigo Montoya's voices.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I'm pretty much gonna go with that post being the best thing to hit his forum since the "lady impregnated by squid" thread caused a guy to combine "call me maybe" with the Cthulhu chant. I assume Wallace Shawn is the Secilian? I read it in his and Carey Elway's voices.
Sorry, double post due to trying to correct it mid-post to the right person and it fethed up.
So the Dread Pirate Roberts plays Screamerstar? No wonder he was so good.
I wonder what Fezzik plays. It's clear that Montoya plays Blood Angels (he feels no pain when stabbed, prefers melee combat, seems to suffer from the Back Rage for a while when he finds out that the Sicilian died)...
timetowaste85 wrote: Blah, I like the idea of percentages. Oh well, GW can keep not getting my money. Then again, it sounds like the vocal majority on here doesn't want percentages, so just based on Dakka they're making the right call. Just wish there was a way to make everyone happy.
If GW was a "proper" hobby company, they could release a small supplement showing how to use percentages to calculate a force organisation. It shouldn't be more than one page of A4, unless they decided to do different percentages for each codex, which I think is how it ought to be done. Then you could use it as an optional rule.
The opposition to percentages is not based on spiteful prejudice. A lot of it is based on well-founded fears that it would not work, due to a number of reasons including GW's incapacity.
Heck, take it a step further and borrow (cough) from Warmachine, listing out some sample point sizes, give then nicknames, and you're good to go. For instance:
500 points - Recon (1-125 pts HQ, at least 125 pts of Troops, no more than 125 pts on any other option.)
1000 points - Skirmish (1-250 pts HQ, at least 250 pts of Troops, no more than 250 pts on any other option.)
1500 points - Standard Battle (1-375 pts HQ, at least 375 pts of Troops, no more than 375 pts on any other option.)
2000 points - Major Battle (1-500 pts HQ, at least 500 pts of Troops, no more than 500 pts on any other option.)
3000 points - Epic Battle
It's a tiny bit of text, toss in a couple of examples, and you're good to go. Promote the Skirmish size in the main book and in batreps, to draw in new players, showcase Standard Battle on a regular basis, and throw in the bigger games once in a while to mix things up.
This ain't rocket science.
If you want to take it a step further, the two starter armiesin the main box each get an "army" section. Do it old school. One text page that talks about building an army in chunks, talking about the different size battles, and get the concept firm in people's minds. One page where the top half is army A's photo, with labels showing what each selection is, and then Army B's on the bottom half, similarly detailed. Have one more page for each where they detail how they expand to 1000 points in text on the top and a pic of the bigger force underneath (One page per army), then a full page picture for each force at 1500, again labeled. (I'd put in more text, but it's GW here, so I'm meeting them halfway.)
From there, fire up the website and put a "Starting an army" section in a similar way, with a walkthrough of the 500/1000/1500 pt armies on display by people who play 'em (Take from the studio if you want or accept submissions, whatever) ... you can even roll out "Expanding to Major Battles" as a whole new article down the road, bringing the starter armies up to where Superheavies start rolling in, and Epic even further down the road.
Along the way, you encourage people to collect the smaller armies and play with them, creating a bigger fanbase that gets turned off when they se ethat the only way to play is to invest upwards of $600, you show how you can expand forces, and you provide neat stories along the way ... humans are storytellers. We eat stories up. Humanize your forces and you create solid fans.
Worried about it taking up space in the rulebook? No big! Make an 8 page-ish booklet as an insert for the box set, since it's intended for new players anyway, and leave it out of the main rulebook. (Personally, I'd leave it in rather than have more photos, but hey.)
There's a reason the "Tale of Four Armies"-style articles are always popular. Heck, I'll write it for them if they want! I work cheap.
WarOne wrote: I'm scared this could be a new paradigm; 2 year core rule update windows, FAQs for a full year after that, then another full year of wait for the next FAQ to ensure rule clarifications are in line with the next rule waves.
It's inconsistent and uncaring support for their product at best.
Mind you, that would fit well with the idea that GW's business strategy is to churn 12 year olds over two or three years, get the max money out of them, then churn the next cohort.
Heck, I'll do you one better. Took a half hour out of my day, grabbed the Space Marine codex, and put together a 500 point generic force for this kind of article. It would have been bette rto go with more tacticals and less non-tacs at this level, but I'm building a GW-style force here that showcases several different models rather than maximize efficiency, so, you get a little of everything. Let's see, cut-n-paste...
****
Ultramarines at 500.
“Why Ultramarines?” I get that question a lot. The Space Wolves are the bad boys of 40K, the Dark Angels are dark and mysterious, while the White Scars are fast and furious. So why would I play a “dull and boring” force of core Marines? I'll sum it up for you in one word:
Stability.
Like the Romans they're based off of, whose roads withstood a thousand years of use, the Ultramarines are a rock-solid dependable force who can be expected to perform well game after game. I can out-fight shooty armies, out-shoot fighty armies, out-maneuver slow forces and root myself against fast forces. My game can adjust against anyone I play against and I always have a fair chance to win. They might not be as dramatic as the other Marine chapters, but at the end of the day, the Ultramarines will be left standing victorious.
So, for my Recon level army, I started with the options right out of the starter box, adding a little bit more to bring the numbers up. Let's have a look at the list, and then I'll talk more about each choice.
HQ 65 - Librarian
TROOPS
75 - Tactical Squad (5 models) Sergeant with Bolt Pistol and Chainsword, one model with Flamer
80 – Tactical Squad (5 models) One model with Heavy Bolter
ELITES
100 – Dreadnought
FAST ATTACK
85 – Assault Squad (5 models)
HEAVY SUPPORT
95 – Devastator Squad (5 models) with Missile Launcher and Multi-Melta
For my HQ, a basic Librarian gives me a Warlord with some serious offensive punch, his Force Weapon making him a danger to any target as it cuts through armor and drains life force, while his psychic powers allow me to augment my force or turn aside hostile psychic attacks. Since he's a character, he needs a name, and I choose Alexander, after the Library of Alexander. As the head of my force, Alexander will conquer in the name of the Emperor!
For troops, I knew I needed squads to take and hold objectives. Squad A is for taking objectives, kitted out with a flamer to drive foes out of cover and whose sergeant is kitted out for close combat, while Squad B is set for holding objectives, with a Heavy Bolter that can lay down a steady stream of fire to cut down opposing troops. Squad A is fully-effective while moving, but squad B needs to find a place to settle to get the most use out of their heavy weapon since it isn't very accurate when moving.
I knew Squad A would be vulnerable when advancing and I knew I needed some more firepower, so slotting a Dreadnought in as an elite choice was needed. A large model that blocks line of sight, it can advance in front of Squad A and absorb fire, dishing it out in return. It's also a deadly fighter in melee, making it a huge threat that the opposing general has to deal with. It can't hold objectives, but it can drive off the defenders, allowing Squad A to move in behind and take it!
The assault squad gives me more close combat punch, a small group that's extremely mobile, allowing me to move around the edge of the battle and tackle units that fear melee, like a heavy support choice. At only five men, they're not great at charging a large unit, being more of a scalpel than a hammer. In some missions, they can take objectives, but most of the time they're just used as disruptions.
Lastly the Devastator Squad rounds out my heavy firepower, with the multi-melta a threat against any tank and the versitile missile launcher being able to switch roles as needed. I'd have preferred a pair of missiles, but it would have put me at 505 points and you're not allowed to go over! Sometimes you have to make hard choices. On the plus side, if my opponent fields a vehicle, I'm confident that the multi-melta can take it down!
This is a basic, take on all-comers list that handles most scenarios well. You have psychic defenses, anti-armor, great anti-troop, some speed, solid armor, great morale … everything you need to deal with any threat you might encounter! There's plenty to do when we expand to a thousand points for Skirmishes, but for Recon, Alexander will happily lead you to victory. For the Emperor!
So just how accurate are the rumors from the lords of was rumor page? I would really like the rumor about the new starter set being orks vs wolves to not be true. I feel the blood angels dex needs an update far more than the wolves does.
th3maninblak wrote: So just how accurate are the rumors from the lords of was rumor page? I would really like the rumor about the new starter set being orks vs wolves to not be true. I feel the blood angels dex needs an update far more than the wolves does.
None of these rumors can be described as accurate. I'm sure most of it is wishlisting.
th3maninblak wrote: So just how accurate are the rumors from the lords of was rumor page? I would really like the rumor about the new starter set being orks vs wolves to not be true. I feel the blood angels dex needs an update far more than the wolves does.
No idea on the Lord of War Gaming, they aren't on the tracker yet.
It is the next one to be released, but I was not told about the release date. TRUE
The codex is not Ultramarines heavy. There will be a much broader spectrum of Chapters. TRUE
There will be supplements for the more famous chapters: Ultramarines, Imperial Fists and White Scars were the ones mentioned. White Scars are the first out the gate. FALSE
The cover of the new dex has apparently got Sicarius on the front, while the White Scar Codex has a bike squadron racing towards the enemy. FALSE
No clue on authors. Rumour is Ward, but hell, he's rumoured for all of them right? SPECULATION
No rules that I can give you, but you can expect to see loads of new weapons and squads. Possible inclusions are the Land Raider Terminus (I think that's what it's called - it's festooned with Lascannons), a bigger form of Terminator and a rather large Dreadnought that is similar to a Contemptor - only bigger. TRUE
Tau Rumors - March 2013
She said that there was a huge mech that resembled Saturn in a cabinet. TRUE
The Missile Launchers are where the Rail Cannons or Ion Cannons are sat, TRUE where as the arms have some enormous cannons mounted into the forearms, similar to the XV88 from Forge World. TRUE
Roughly the size of Dreadknight. TRUE
There were two loadouts that she saw. Could have been a three up though. TRUE
Puscifer wrote: Zion if my sources are the same as your sources, one of us is right.
All the chatter I've heard is saying Orks vs BA, but I've also heard Orks vs IG and Orks.
I got the IG rumour months ago though.
My most credible source is BA and Orks, so that's the one I'm going with.
I would like to see non marines though.
I don't think we have the same exact sources, but I'm sure the information is trickling from generally the same channels. Since my source is fairly new I'm not betting money on anything of course, just sharing what I heard.
Kidding, kidding. I did hear that was an internal memo saying it wasn't Marines and Orks though.
But does that mean the box doesn't contain either of them? Could it be Marines and Eldar, for example?
And what does 'Marines' mean in this context anyway? Could they have just meant that it isn't vanilla marines, but BA or SW instead?
It could contain either or neither. It was mentioned in regards to the BA thing, but that doesn't restrict it to just BA so you're guess is as good as mine. I'm just sharing what I've been told.
Wakshaani wrote: Heck, I'll do you one better. Took a half hour out of my day, grabbed the Space Marine codex, and put together a 500 point generic force for this kind of article. It would have been bette rto go with more tacticals and less non-tacs at this level, but I'm building a GW-style force here that showcases several different models rather than maximize efficiency, so, you get a little of everything. Let's see, cut-n-paste...
****
Ultramarines at 500.
Spoiler:
“Why Ultramarines?” I get that question a lot. The Space Wolves are the bad boys of 40K, the Dark Angels are dark and mysterious, while the White Scars are fast and furious. So why would I play a “dull and boring” force of core Marines? I'll sum it up for you in one word:
Stability.
Like the Romans they're based off of, whose roads withstood a thousand years of use, the Ultramarines are a rock-solid dependable force who can be expected to perform well game after game. I can out-fight shooty armies, out-shoot fighty armies, out-maneuver slow forces and root myself against fast forces. My game can adjust against anyone I play against and I always have a fair chance to win. They might not be as dramatic as the other Marine chapters, but at the end of the day, the Ultramarines will be left standing victorious.
So, for my Recon level army, I started with the options right out of the starter box, adding a little bit more to bring the numbers up. Let's have a look at the list, and then I'll talk more about each choice.
HQ 65 - Librarian
TROOPS
75 - Tactical Squad (5 models) Sergeant with Bolt Pistol and Chainsword, one model with Flamer
80 – Tactical Squad (5 models) One model with Heavy Bolter
ELITES
100 – Dreadnought
FAST ATTACK
85 – Assault Squad (5 models)
HEAVY SUPPORT
95 – Devastator Squad (5 models) with Missile Launcher and Multi-Melta
For my HQ, a basic Librarian gives me a Warlord with some serious offensive punch, his Force Weapon making him a danger to any target as it cuts through armor and drains life force, while his psychic powers allow me to augment my force or turn aside hostile psychic attacks. Since he's a character, he needs a name, and I choose Alexander, after the Library of Alexander. As the head of my force, Alexander will conquer in the name of the Emperor!
For troops, I knew I needed squads to take and hold objectives. Squad A is for taking objectives, kitted out with a flamer to drive foes out of cover and whose sergeant is kitted out for close combat, while Squad B is set for holding objectives, with a Heavy Bolter that can lay down a steady stream of fire to cut down opposing troops. Squad A is fully-effective while moving, but squad B needs to find a place to settle to get the most use out of their heavy weapon since it isn't very accurate when moving.
I knew Squad A would be vulnerable when advancing and I knew I needed some more firepower, so slotting a Dreadnought in as an elite choice was needed. A large model that blocks line of sight, it can advance in front of Squad A and absorb fire, dishing it out in return. It's also a deadly fighter in melee, making it a huge threat that the opposing general has to deal with. It can't hold objectives, but it can drive off the defenders, allowing Squad A to move in behind and take it!
The assault squad gives me more close combat punch, a small group that's extremely mobile, allowing me to move around the edge of the battle and tackle units that fear melee, like a heavy support choice. At only five men, they're not great at charging a large unit, being more of a scalpel than a hammer. In some missions, they can take objectives, but most of the time they're just used as disruptions.
Lastly the Devastator Squad rounds out my heavy firepower, with the multi-melta a threat against any tank and the versitile missile launcher being able to switch roles as needed. I'd have preferred a pair of missiles, but it would have put me at 505 points and you're not allowed to go over! Sometimes you have to make hard choices. On the plus side, if my opponent fields a vehicle, I'm confident that the multi-melta can take it down!
This is a basic, take on all-comers list that handles most scenarios well. You have psychic defenses, anti-armor, great anti-troop, some speed, solid armor, great morale … everything you need to deal with any threat you might encounter! There's plenty to do when we expand to a thousand points for Skirmishes, but for Recon, Alexander will happily lead you to victory. For the Emperor!
I like this a lot. Good job! I would like to see GW put out this kind of starter army for every codex.
Quick question on your rumor tracker for Puscifer... You have the thorax weapon rumor as false for Hive Tyrants? They can take thorax Weapons, is there a wording I missed as I skimmed it that made that rumor false?
greyknight12 wrote: Any more info on the sideboard thing? I'd love to see that rumor officially debunked, because otherwise I see a 40K version of the poison cup scene from "The Princess Bride" happening prior to every game:
Player 1: but it's so simple...all I have to to do is divine wether or not your the kind of person who would bring a tank sideboard or swarm the table with more models...I am not a fool, so I clearly know that someone who already brought an army of infantry is bringing tanks so I must choose my melta sideboard. But you know I am not a great fool, so you clearly brought more infantry and I must choose my anti-horde sideboard.
Player 2: you've made your decision then?
Player 1: not remotely, because your paint scheme is tzeentch, and tzeentch is the god of change and conspiracy so you don't trust anyone, and I cannot take my anti-horde sideboard
Player 2: truly you have a dizzying intellect
Player 1: wait til you see my dakkadakka posts! And you must have realized that I knew about tzeentch, and so you brought all infantry for yours!
Player 2: ehhh...just pick one. d6 it?
Player 1: you played in a hardboyz tourney, so you enjoy max firepower and are counting on your infantry to score, so I must prepare for tanks. But, you also won a painting contest, so you like small models and I should be prepared for lots of them.
Player 2: I'm not going to tell you dude.
Player 1: but you already basically did! I know exactly which one to take! Oh, look at that magic player over there! (Switches his carrying cases). Ok, let's pick.
Player 1 pulls out his Mixed sideboard : haha didn't see that coming! I am a 40K tactical genius!
Player 2 pulls out a screamer star. Player 1 chokes and dies.
I was bitching to my GW store manager today about the staticness of the Eldar bikers and he told me to wait for the 24th...
Anyone else anything about New Eldar models?
All the salt but not impossible.
It's about as close to impossible as it gets.
Heavily rumoured 7th Ed, supported by IG illustrated poster somehow translates into often rumoured, long completed (apparently) never released new Eldar Jetbikes?
I'm guessing the staff have been told "wait for the 24th" to essentially everything!
I was bitching to my GW store manager today about the staticness of the Eldar bikers and he told me to wait for the 24th...
Anyone else anything about New Eldar models?
All the salt but not impossible.
It's about as close to impossible as it gets.
Heavily rumoured 7th Ed, supported by IG illustrated poster somehow translates into often rumoured, long completed (apparently) never released new Eldar Jetbikes?
I'm guessing the staff have been told "wait for the 24th" to essentially everything!
I'd say it's less impossible than Sideboards.
IG vs Eldar popped up as a rumor before the poster did from what I saw at least.
I recall a rumor from earlier this week (pre-poster release as well) that mentioned Jetbikes. Maybe the Jetbikes aren't in a starter but are a second wave?
I don't know. I'm just trying to discern what the picture is while looking at a handful of puzzle pieces while sitting in the dark. As usual.
I was bitching to my GW store manager today about the staticness of the Eldar bikers and he told me to wait for the 24th...
Anyone else anything about New Eldar models?
All the salt but not impossible.
It's about as close to impossible as it gets.
Heavily rumoured 7th Ed, supported by IG illustrated poster somehow translates into often rumoured, long completed (apparently) never released new Eldar Jetbikes?
I'm guessing the staff have been told "wait for the 24th" to essentially everything!
I'd say it's less impossible than Sideboards.
IG vs Eldar popped up as a rumor before the poster did from what I saw at least.
I'm still of the opinion that there won't be a new starter, frankly.
But if you're rating new Jetbikes alongside Sideboards in terms of likeliness of happening, then we're probably thinking about the same!
TheKbob wrote: The % vs. FOC thing doesn't matter. They polluted one pool with digital releases, the % system probably wouldn't hold true either. And to beat that horse over there, it's not fixing the root cause which is unit point costs.
Unit points cost is a problem for us. However, I suspect that they know exactly what they are doing when they set the points cost of units.
The way we see it:
Spoiler:
Each model has capabilities and restrictions. The points cost of a unit should represent its capabilities and restrictions. That way many units are very viable options to use in the game, none are overpowered, and it is easy to play a fair game anyway with whatever codex or models you want.
The way they see it:
Spoiler:
Some kits are more profitable than others. We can set our margins higher on certain things (e.g Riptides) because our customers will still buy them, and we cannot get away with outrageous margins on other things (e.g. Ripper Swarms). Therefore we should set the abilities restrictions and points in such a way as to maximize our margins and thus our profit.
I think there is further dissonance when it comes to rules and balance.
The way we see it:
Spoiler:
Good rules, and balance, will lead to a game that I am happy to play and will make me encourage my friends to play it, which will grow the player base in the long run.
The way they see it:
Spoiler:
We are in an environment with incentives to business to grow very quickly, and then pay their executives insane salaries and bonuses, while paying out dividends to shareholders. The only thing important about rules and balance is how they effect our next quarter profits. Longer term growth is not important, because at any time the incentives could readjust, and gigantic salaries and excessive dividends could be taxed. We've got to cash out while we can. Every other business is doing the same thing, especially since cooperate bankruptcy is a joke, and there are no disincentives for fiscal mismanagement, and insider trading is safer and easier than ever. The only thing we know about the future is that the unsustainable policies that allow us to enrich ourselves without fear of tax or consequences will at some point end, and we must take advantage of all loop-holes that allow for self-enrichment while we can before the music stops, and we go back to having to making money commiserate with our skills and job performance, and at that point we can always sell the company and retire to spend more time with our money. In business school they teach you it would be unethical to think in any other way
I was bitching to my GW store manager today about the staticness of the Eldar bikers and he told me to wait for the 24th...
Anyone else anything about New Eldar models?
All the salt but not impossible.
It's about as close to impossible as it gets.
Heavily rumoured 7th Ed, supported by IG illustrated poster somehow translates into often rumoured, long completed (apparently) never released new Eldar Jetbikes?
I'm guessing the staff have been told "wait for the 24th" to essentially everything!
I'd say it's less impossible than Sideboards.
IG vs Eldar popped up as a rumor before the poster did from what I saw at least.
I'm still of the opinion that there won't be a new starter, frankly.
But if you're rating new Jetbikes alongside Sideboards in terms of likeliness of happening, then we're probably thinking about the same!
I'm not even sure if Eldar/IG are in a starter, but I do think that it's possible something is coming for them. Maybe new kits. I don't know, I'm just thinking aloud at this point.
Wasn't there rumors earlier this year about a wave release this summer? I thought csm were supposed to get cultists, Havocs, and a supplement. Perhaps the elder jet bikes are part of a bigger wave release to go with the 6.5/7th release?
We have to remember that we are now in the era of weekly waves, I find many people still think X is in Y month, but we have nothing, other than GW's desire to spread releases to allow their customers finances to recover, to prevent A,B and C in month Y.
Puscifer wrote: I'd put my neck on the block to say its Orks vs Blood Angels.
Just saying...
I'll get the ax!
Kidding, kidding. I did hear that was an internal memo saying it wasn't Marines and Orks though.
now in the 'mystery' organisation where the memo originated are Marines with their own independent codexi (BA/SW etc) referred to as Marines ?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Actually with the way everybody can ally with everything now what's the chances of a starter box with units/characters from a wide range of factions in it.. Or at least some subset of allied detatchments
Gives the new players a taste of the style of a whole lot of armies so they're more likely to find one they like,
Encourages them to think about allies etc right from the start so make them more likely to buy everything they can afford instead of holding of on stuff that doesn't fit their chosen army
Means veteran players don't end up buying boxes and boxes of the low profit starter to expand their collections (as it will e too 'bitty' to be attractive)
Reduces the number of mini rule books in circulation on ebay (from veterans buying the starters for the minis only) so they have to buy the big hardback
OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote: Actually with the way everybody can ally with everything now what's the chances of a starter box with units/characters from a wide range of factions in it.. Or at least some subset of allied detatchments
Unlikely. They did however have a 3rd edition Special Character box with HQs from a variety of armies but with most every blister going to direct along with lots of existing plastic kits I'd find a buffet style release unlikely from that perspective. I don't think ally rules have any bearing on it but YMMV.
It is the next one to be released, but I was not told about the release date. TRUE
The codex is not Ultramarines heavy. There will be a much broader spectrum of Chapters. TRUE
There will be supplements for the more famous chapters: Ultramarines, Imperial Fists and White Scars were the ones mentioned. White Scars are the first out the gate. FALSE
The cover of the new dex has apparently got Sicarius on the front, while the White Scar Codex has a bike squadron racing towards the enemy. FALSE
No clue on authors. Rumour is Ward, but hell, he's rumoured for all of them right? SPECULATION
No rules that I can give you, but you can expect to see loads of new weapons and squads. Possible inclusions are the Land Raider Terminus (I think that's what it's called - it's festooned with Lascannons), a bigger form of Terminator and a rather large Dreadnought that is similar to a Contemptor - only bigger. TRUE
Tau Rumors - March 2013
She said that there was a huge mech that resembled Saturn in a cabinet. TRUE
The Missile Launchers are where the Rail Cannons or Ion Cannons are sat, TRUE where as the arms have some enormous cannons mounted into the forearms, similar to the XV88 from Forge World. TRUE
Roughly the size of Dreadknight. TRUE
There were two loadouts that she saw. Could have been a three up though. TRUE
Woah!!!
I didn't know I was being tracked.
I got nothing against it. I'll give whatever rumours I get and filter them down to you.
If they are wrong, it's no problem of mine , just the sources I have.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I have no links. Most of mine come from word of mouth from someone in company.
I got nothing against it. I'll give whatever rumours I get and filter them down to you.
If they are wrong, it's no problem of mine , just the sources I have.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I have no links. Most of mine come from word of mouth from someone in company.
Anyone who posts rumors is tracked.
Oh, so you mean you knew about IG, but didn't post it. That's fine.
Yeah, spot on. I knew they were getting a codex release after I saw that new Quad Mortar tank, but I didn't believe they were getting the starter set treatment. That came from the least reliable of my sources.
ClockworkZion wrote: So now that I posted rumors Pretre will be watching me sleep at night?
Eh, there are worse trade offs I guess.
Yep, welcome to the club.
I never agreed to it, but you're the one who gets to be bored standing outside as I spend several hours painting models facing away from the window so you can't even watch.
I got nothing against it. I'll give whatever rumours I get and filter them down to you.
If they are wrong, it's no problem of mine , just the sources I have.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I have no links. Most of mine come from word of mouth from someone in company.
Anyone who posts rumors is tracked.
Oh, so you mean you knew about IG, but didn't post it. That's fine.
Shouldn't the "Hive Tyrants can take thorax weapons" be a partially true or something? I mean, they can't be fired along with 2 other weapons like the old thorax weapons, but they also don't take an arms slot and are essentially the old thorax weapons.
I was bitching to my GW store manager today about the staticness of the Eldar bikers and he told me to wait for the 24th...
Anyone else anything about New Eldar models?
All the salt but not impossible.
It's about as close to impossible as it gets.
Heavily rumoured 7th Ed, supported by IG illustrated poster somehow translates into often rumoured, long completed (apparently) never released new Eldar Jetbikes?
I'm guessing the staff have been told "wait for the 24th" to essentially everything!
I'd say it's less impossible than Sideboards.
IG vs Eldar popped up as a rumor before the poster did from what I saw at least.
The IG v Eldar starter set actually will only have Eldar, since they defeated the IG in the time it took you to open the box.
I just got an email from a friend of mine who has been a good source for me in the past. He loves dropping hints about stuff that is coming up and he asked me if I still had my collection of RT scenarios. I have no idea what he meant by this but it is soooooo out of left field that I thought i would share it here.
By the way if the % thing is real I don't see it as being more complicated or bad for play. when I started playing it was standard so all in all I think it's a good way to keep the allies under control.
Nothing significant in the new White dwarf, just the two page poster we've already seen, the back says 24 May 2014. I didn't buy it because it's just Wood elves, never trust an Elf...
I hope they have pre-orders up in a couple of weeks so WHEN the rules sell out I'll at least get a copy of the good or the bad... I'll sacrifice my cash and start reading it it as soon as I get it, first thing is army developement, then assault for me.
So anyone have plans if it sucks? Will it be the last straw?
If it's good will there be much rejoicing, will there be a 40K geek wide exclamation "FINALLY!"?
Kelly502 wrote: Nothing significant in the new White dwarf, just the two page poster we've already seen, the back says 24 May 2014. I didn't buy it because it's just Wood elves, never trust an Elf...
I hope they have pre-orders up in a couple of weeks so WHEN the rules sell out I'll at least get a copy of the good or the bad... I'll sacrifice my cash and start reading it it as soon as I get it, first thing is army developement, then assault for me.
So anyone have plans if it sucks? Will it be the last straw?
If it's good will there be much rejoicing, will there be a 40K geek wide exclamation "FINALLY!"?
What on earth makes you think the rules will sell out?
Didn't happen in 3rd, didn't happen in 6th (the two edition changes I've been actively playing for since 2nd) did it happen in others?
If it utterly sucks balls, I may have to consider playing something else for another 6 months til 7.5 drops, but if it is just as bad as 6th, I'll make do, as I don't hate the game, it just frustrates me that it could easily be much better.
Their books seem to be selling out lately, most likely lack of production numbers. Or perhaps to push the digital books? I bought a couple of those, and call me old school but I just like having a real book in my mitts.
I guess we may see something on the 9th. Wasn't the last time we got a new rules it was a 2 week pre-order? Maybe we will get another 2 week pre order.
Who knows, we can have a teaser on Monday or Tuesday to coincide with next weeks WD, if the latest rumour is true.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
azreal13 wrote: I think you're confusing an attempt to create artificial demand by limiting supply with popularity.
The standard, non limited, rulebook will be in plentiful supply come release day, I promise.
What, just like those force field thingies? A lot of people said they were not going to buy it, and still sold out. 1000 of them, gone. So while a lot of people claim they will not buy it, many more will.
And if GW under manufacture the BRB's, then it will cause more demand for it then.
azreal13 wrote: I think you're confusing an attempt to create artificial demand by limiting supply with popularity.
The standard, non limited, rulebook will be in plentiful supply come release day, I promise.
What, just like those force field thingies? A lot of people said they were not going to buy it, and still sold out. 1000 of them, gone. So while a lot of people claim they will not buy it, many more will.
And if GW under manufacture the BRB's, then it will cause more demand for it then.
They haven't got time to play the artificial demand game if the, quite reasonable, theory that the timing of this is to get some money in the till just before FYE to try and put some blusher on the sow that is this years sales figures.
You do get that 1000 of something is a tiny number for a global market right? That the VSG sold out is not in any way surprising, because if only 1 in 100 people were prepared to spend the money on that overpriced piece of gak, then they'd all go.
There's more than 100000 40K players in the world, I suspect.
Just out of curiosity how does this "everything must remain secretive" thing work in GW? What I mean by that is are they having employees signing some sort of confidentiality contract, or is it more of a casual sort of talk about it and your fired?
Almost certainly NDAs are part of their conditions of employment.
I've had to sign them for information much less sensitive, and much less critical to the 'marketing' technique than what I would consider GW thinks it's product release schedule would be, they're not difficult to impose, and relatively easy to enforce.
Is there any word on what's happening with psychic powers in this new book?
I had heard a rumor there will now be a psychic phase. Are the psychic powers themselves changing? I can't seem to find a deck of the psychic cards on the US site anymore.
Davor wrote: I guess we may see something on the 9th. Wasn't the last time we got a new rules it was a 2 week pre-order? Maybe we will get another 2 week pre order.
Who knows, we can have a teaser on Monday or Tuesday to coincide with next weeks WD, if the latest rumour is true.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
azreal13 wrote: I think you're confusing an attempt to create artificial demand by limiting supply with popularity.
The standard, non limited, rulebook will be in plentiful supply come release day, I promise.
What, just like those force field thingies? A lot of people said they were not going to buy it, and still sold out. 1000 of them, gone. So while a lot of people claim they will not buy it, many more will.
And if GW under manufacture the BRB's, then it will cause more demand for it then.
There will be no shortage of basic rule books. It's a long tail product and they can just warehouse the extras. stores will not have a limit on them. There is no way to compare it to a limited edition item that only had 1000 for sale worldwide. I was limited to 1 of that item per store. I could order in 100 rule books with no problem. Books are also much easier to manufacture than custom resin models.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jaceevoke wrote: Just out of curiosity how does this "everything must remain secretive" thing work in GW? What I mean by that is are they having employees signing some sort of confidentiality contract, or is it more of a casual sort of talk about it and your fired?
Nothing casual about it. Talk and your fired. They make sure you don't talk though, but not telling you anything. Retailers got nice terms of sale with some legalese telling us not to post rumors, pictures, etc.
The disimformation policy is heavily enforced. It's stupid as hell, counter productive, and killing sales. But they enforce it.
The disimformation policy is heavily enforced. It's stupid as hell, counter productive, and killing sales. But they enforce it.
Just curious, is there any other company that acts like this? I thought maybe Apple. (GW seems to follow what they do, high prices for what you get,) I am sure even Apple tells it's consumers what they plan on down the road.
The disimformation policy is heavily enforced. It's stupid as hell, counter productive, and killing sales. But they enforce it.
Just curious, is there any other company that acts like this? I thought maybe Apple. (GW seems to follow what they do, high prices for what you get,) I am sure even Apple tells it's consumers what they plan on down the road.
None that I know of. Well ehere in Israel maybe the Army industries that produce top-secret weaponry.
The disimformation policy is heavily enforced. It's stupid as hell, counter productive, and killing sales. But they enforce it.
Just curious, is there any other company that acts like this? I thought maybe Apple. (GW seems to follow what they do, high prices for what you get,) I am sure even Apple tells it's consumers what they plan on down the road.
The tech industry is a little different, because if you release specs for updated models or introduce revolutionary new product lines too soon, one of your large competitors has the capacity to change their own plans and release something a bit better speced the week before your planned launch. Even then, they aren't this secretive.
Wakshaani wrote: Heck, I'll do you one better. Took a half hour out of my day, grabbed the Space Marine codex, and put together a 500 point generic force for this kind of article. It would have been bette rto go with more tacticals and less non-tacs at this level, but I'm building a GW-style force here that showcases several different models rather than maximize efficiency, so, you get a little of everything. Let's see, cut-n-paste...
****
Ultramarines at 500.
(snip)
I like this a lot. Good job! I would like to see GW put out this kind of starter army for every codex.
Thank you! And I agree. Without going fo rthe "One of everything" approach, I'd personally replace the Dread with another Tac unit and the save points would upgrade the Devs to a second missile launcher, the assaults to get a flamer, and Tac Squad C would probably get a close-combat kit (sarge with pistol and CCW, one marine with flamer) as well. But I wanted it to look like a GW force, so, the dread went in.
I'd be happy to do more of these 500 point "Sample platters" for other forces if I thought that there was an interest. They're great to keep around for new players.
Heck, were I GW, I'd go so far as to sell this kind of "Starter army" at a decent cost (Say, 10% off buying it individually) and include a few sheets of paper with it ... how to build the models (obviously) but also point costs and some rules, like a micro-Codex. It'd be, like, one page, or maybe one page back and front, but it'd get the job done. The current battle boxes are often *close* to this, but usually lack an important art, like an HQ. Giving a small "chunk" of 500 points in a box, all legal and ready to go, can really help a company out. See also: Privateer Press starter boxes of Warcaster + Jacks.
Just for the record, even if it might be confusing preoder date with release date:
anonymous source on Faeit 212
anonymous source on faeit212 wrote:"There will be a new, re-tooled ruleset for 40K, which will be announced in next week's White Dwarf, and the new book will be in stores on May 24th."
Kroothawk wrote: Just for the record, even if it might be confusing preoder date with release date:
anonymous source on Faeit 212
anonymous source on faeit212 wrote:"There will be a new, re-tooled ruleset for 40K, which will be announced in next week's White Dwarf, and the new book will be in stores on May 24th."
Announced next week, preorder 17th, released 24th, Orks preorder 31st, released the following week?
I've read this before.
Trying to find the link for you, but it might have been removed.
Puscifer wrote: This is now making me think it's going to be IG vs Orks.
I hope not.
Every starter set has had marines in it. And it is that way for a reason.
new players buy it, but with marines in it , so do established players, just to get the models. Marines vastly outsell everything else in the game, that hasn't changed.
The box isnt likely to either, it will have marines in it. Unless they plan on having two concurrent boxes, by keeping the current marine heavy one as well, which also seems unlikely.
It would be interesting to find out who came out with the 'blanket silence' policy, and the reasons behind it. I always feel like I'm looking through some kind of logic-prism at some of GW's decisions, but maybe if I took enough mind-altering drugs and spent a year in a submarine under the polar ice caps then it might suddenly snap into place.
Really, I think anyone studying psychology would have an absolute field day going into the head office and seeing some of the personalities at work.
Puscifer wrote: After seeing that logo with the lettering, I fully expect seeing a new logo.
I wonder if it will be something copyrightable? The one now (the classic 40k symbol) is obviously just a variation of the Roman Aquila, I could see it being changed into something more distinctive and therefore easier to police.
Given GW's model of releasing codecies and then rules tweaks that allow codecies released for previous editions, are we expecting more of the same? Another new "edition" that is still technically compatible with a codex released in 1998 (if you wanted to use it)?
In order to maximise the number of marines in the new box it will be Ultramarines vs Alpha Legion.
Except the Ultramarines will be revealed to also be Alpha Legion, in disguise. This will be the start of a new strategy to replace all of the model ranges with space marines.
Pacific wrote: It would be interesting to find out who came out with the 'blanket silence' policy, and the reasons behind it. I always feel like I'm looking through some kind of logic-prism at some of GW's decisions, but maybe if I took enough mind-altering drugs and spent a year in a submarine under the polar ice caps then it might suddenly snap into place.
Really, I think anyone studying psychology would have an absolute field day going into the head office and seeing some of the personalities at work.
I recall the origins were in the LOTR NDAs, so they wouldn't leak any movie-related stuff before the movies came out. I guess they don't have a proper marketing/community director at GW, or at least no-one who is in touch with digital media and internet communities, so no-one has been questioning the decision when it comes to their own IP.
It's funny that FW does advert the WIP stuff, though - completely different style of advertising across the hallway
frozenwastes wrote: Given GW's model of releasing codecies and then rules tweaks that allow codecies released for previous editions, are we expecting more of the same? Another new "edition" that is still technically compatible with a codex released in 1998 (if you wanted to use it)?
Yes, that's exactly what I'm expecting.
Incidentally, I was reading through the 3rd edition ork codex the other day and not only are most of the rules usable, I think it actually wouldn't be all that uncompetitive. The boys are overpriced, but the sheer volume of rokkits and burnas you can get should make up for a lot.
Puscifer wrote: After seeing that logo with the lettering, I fully expect seeing a new logo.
I wonder if it will be something copyrightable? The one now (the classic 40k symbol) is obviously just a variation of the Roman Aquila, I could see it being changed into something more distinctive and therefore easier to police.
Maybe a bit tinfoil hat, but I wonder if this new edition isn't purely a trademark thing. It's coming hot off the heels of the "Astra Militarum" release, and we all know Space Marines are usually first up after a new edition comes out, so maybe the new edition is an attempt to try and come up with new, trademarked terms for things in the main rules, new symbols/logos and all that, with "Adeptus Astartes" coming out a few months after, and "Spehsuss Orkus" soon to follow, etc.
In any case I'm fairly certain they aren't doing it because 6th edition is unpopular, or otherwise for our benefit.
If you follow and believe what 40K Radio has said it is mainly a repackage. They sold a bunch of books for rules and the stronghold and escalation and now will repackage it so we can all buy new books. Simply another cash grab.
Incidentally, I was reading through the 3rd edition ork codex the other day and not only are most of the rules usable, I think it actually wouldn't be all that uncompetitive. The boys are overpriced, but the sheer volume of rokkits and burnas you can get should make up for a lot.
A friend of mine occasionally plays with his Eye of Terror LATD army. Works fine.
I think the trade mark thing may actually be what's going on. This relaunch could be where we see the entirety of GW's new army names all laid out in one place.
If GW stops using the term 'space marine', I'll consider the new edition worth it just for that. If they manage to change 'space wolves' into something even slightly dignified, I'll be overjoyed.
Perfect Organism wrote: If GW stops using the term 'space marine', I'll consider the new edition worth it just for that. If they manage to change 'space wolves' into something even slightly dignified, I'll be overjoyed.
Space Wolves, Space Sharks etc can all be easily explained away as Imperial Guard* slang for the actual legion/chapters, not what they call themselves. GW can introduce 'proper' Astartes names any time they like, Lupine Galacticus for example, or Shrouded Angelicus, or Blanched Scarified, or the Fisticus Metalicus.
*Sorry, I meant Astra Militarum slang...
As for dignified... giant space vikings don't deserve dignified.
Vlka Fenryka. The name you are all searching for is Vlka Fenryka, as of Prospero Burns that is what the Wolves call themselves while laughing at people who call them Space Wolves.
And personally I'd love to see Codex: Vlka Fenryka with lightning claws and talismans instead of wolf claws and wolf talismans and wolf this and wold that...
It would be so awesome if the Wolf in Space Wolf became more subtle, rarely ever actually using the word "wolf" in the entire codex, instead of bashing you over the head with Wolfy Wolf of Wolfness.
I don't really mind Grey Hunters, Blood Claws, Long Fangs and Wolf Guard, but Wolf Guard should be the only ones with "Wolf" in their name I think...
Astral Waelwulfas: Waelwulas is an old saxon term used for viking, commonly translated as Slaughter wolves
Imperial Amat or Amat Imperium for Imperial Fists,
Tractus Lupos for Space Wolves
Tenebrarum Angeli for Dark Angels
Sanguinem Angeli for Blood Angels
Salamandra for salamanders
Album Cicatrices for White Scars
Ultramarines for Ultramarines
Manibus Ferreis for Iron Hands
Custodi Corvus for Raven Guard,
Courtesy of google translator english to latin
We are going off-topic.
Any more word on what we may expect on or around the 24th May?
jonolikespie wrote: Vlka Fenryka. The name you are all searching for is Vlka Fenryka, as of Prospero Burns that is what the Wolves call themselves while laughing at people who call them Space Wolves.
And personally I'd love to see Codex: Vlka Fenryka with lightning claws and talismans instead of wolf claws and wolf talismans and wolf this and wold that...
I for one am looking forward to this new release. I stopped playing 40K as 6th hit and never bought into it, so while I can understand that people are upset that it's only been two years, it's really none of my concern. To me, new releases are almost always welcome.
I can't see myself starting playing again, but I'm dead excited to see the starter set Has there been any rumours other than Blood Angels vs Orks?
dantay_xv wrote: Yep too much change, and we all know how much GW hate change!
Except for profit
<- GW gave up on translating names and has their boxes "streamlined"...
A company that does not feel silly with a mixed blob of text seems ok with change for the sake of IP.
They also recycle the Commissar from the IG cover , so we may rejoyce at the absence of peace this Month.
Can't wait to ignore what they have in store.
fishy bob wrote: I can't see myself starting playing again, but I'm dead excited to see the starter set Has there been any rumours other than Blood Angels vs Orks?
There was discussion in this thread in the 40k general forum that there is no new box set.
I might play 7th, if it improves substantially on 6th... though a lot of what's wrong atm is due to codex balance, it's unlikely a new edition would fix that much.
I've just tried to visit my local GW to chase any news of this, to see the fabled Commissar poster:
"There is no time for peace"
... Which I found highly misleading, as there is plenty of time for peace: namely after 5 pm (when the shop closes for the day, notwithstanding it's a Saturday), and the two days a week when the shop is completely closed...
.. I'm taking my complaint to the local Trading Standards...
dantay_xv wrote: Yep too much change, and we all know how much GW hate change!
Except for profit
<- GW gave up on translating names and has their boxes "streamlined"...
A company that does not feel silly with a mixed blob of text seems ok with change for the sake of IP.
They also recycle the Commissar from the IG cover , so we may rejoyce at the absence of peace this Month.
Can't wait to ignore what they have in store.
Jeremiah 6:14. (Hm, J 6 14, before June 2014, there will be a revised 6th edition.... half of 14 is 7....7th edition... tinfoil hats, UNITE!)
Context
Israel's Rebellion (gamers?) and God's Wrath (Hm, notice GW in there?)
…13"For from the least of them even to the greatest of them, Everyone (gamers) is greedy for gain (unbroken rules & codexes), And from the prophet (or profit?) even to the priest (Rick Priestly?) Everyone (gamers) deals falsely (plays with broken rules). 14"They (GW) have healed the brokenness (new corrected version of 6th, or new 7th rulebook?) of My people (the gamers) superficially, Saying, 'Peace, peace,' (or rather, no more please, please, just the faqs, no new rulebook after 2 years) But there is no peace (GW wants money). 15"Were they (GW) ashamed because of the abomination they have done? (No) They (GW) were not even ashamed at all; They (GW) did not even know how to blush.
Perfect Organism wrote: If GW stops using the term 'space marine', I'll consider the new edition worth it just for that. If they manage to change 'space wolves' into something even slightly dignified, I'll be overjoyed.
I think Space Marine is the only english/real sounding term GW will keep. Even Warhammer 40,000 will eventually become Warcorkius fiefardom.
Why will they keep Space Marine? Stubbornness/spite. Spots the Space Marine embarrassed them and they're determined to "prove" they own the term Space Marine. They will never give it up. Maybe GW will sue the Tang Dynasty for using the term Imperial Guard and give the Guard their name back? Who knows.
Jeremiah 6:14. (Hm, J 6 14, before June 2014, there will be a revised 6th edition.... half of 14 is 7....7th edition... tinfoil hats, UNITE!)
Context
Israel's Rebellion (gamers?) and God's Wrath (Hm, notice GW in there?)
…13"For from the least of them even to the greatest of them, Everyone (gamers) is greedy for gain (unbroken rules & codexes), And from the prophet (or profit?) even to the priest (Rick Priestly?) Everyone (gamers) deals falsely (plays with broken rules). 14"They (GW) have healed the brokenness (new corrected version of 6th, or new 7th rulebook?) of My people (the gamers) superficially, Saying, 'Peace, peace,' (or rather, no more please, please, just the faqs, no new rulebook after 2 years) But there is no peace (GW wants money). 15"Were they (GW) ashamed because of the abomination they have done? (No) They (GW) were not even ashamed at all; They (GW) did not even know how to blush.
xD lol!
Its not as crazy as it first sounds when youve seen the 'Book of Mozilla'...
'And the beast shall come forth surrounded by a roiling cloud of vengeance. The house of the unbelievers shall be razed and they shall be scorched to the earth. Their tags shall blink until the end of days.
from The Book of Mozilla, 12:10'
This is a real thing that the mozila team insert into every version of netscape and firefox.
Knowing this, your comment is somewhat not so flying rodent gak crazy xD
If the new rulebook includes the rules for all of the new pieces of 40K fortifications, I might buy one. It's not a big deal for me since I never bought the 6th Edition BRB.
EDIT: *Facepalm* Oops, I spoke too soon. I did buy one of those rulebooks and I haven't used it yet.
Jeremiah 6:14. (Hm, J 6 14, before June 2014, there will be a revised 6th edition.... half of 14 is 7....7th edition... tinfoil hats, UNITE!)
Context
Israel's Rebellion (gamers?) and God's Wrath (Hm, notice GW in there?)
…13"For from the least of them even to the greatest of them, Everyone (gamers) is greedy for gain (unbroken rules & codexes), And from the prophet (or profit?) even to the priest (Rick Priestly?) Everyone (gamers) deals falsely (plays with broken rules). 14"They (GW) have healed the brokenness (new corrected version of 6th, or new 7th rulebook?) of My people (the gamers) superficially, Saying, 'Peace, peace,' (or rather, no more please, please, just the faqs, no new rulebook after 2 years) But there is no peace (GW wants money). 15"Were they (GW) ashamed because of the abomination they have done? (No) They (GW) were not even ashamed at all; They (GW) did not even know how to blush.
I'm sorry, but I'm finding joking about a situation where people are actually dying, when we have a Ukranian community here on Dakka, in relation to the release of a game to be in pretty bad taste.
azreal13 wrote: I'm sorry, but I'm finding joking about a situation where people are actually dying, when we have a Ukranian community here on Dakka, in relation to the release of a game to be in pretty bad taste.
Perhaps its a German thing....
Yeah, apparently it's far less offensive than orks dressed as Germans from WW2, which seemed to generate no end of complaint from... hmm, one poster...
azreal13 wrote: I'm sorry, but I'm finding joking about a situation where people are actually dying, when we have a Ukranian community here on Dakka, in relation to the release of a game to be in pretty bad taste.
Hey, it's GW that find's it appropriate to plaster Europe with "There is no time for peace" posters, when Europe is close to war. I was just pointing it out, while waiting for German hostages to be let free (which they now are). Making the poster in WW2 propaganda style doesn't help.
Kroothawk wrote: Hey, it's GW that find's it appropriate to plaster Europe with "There is no time for peace" posters, when Europe is close to war. I was just pointing it out, while waiting for German hostages to be let free (which they now are). Making the poster in WW2 propaganda style doesn't help.
So now it's GW's fault you cannot separate reality from fiction?
Bad taste, yes, but that type of humour pretty much always is.
I see it for what it is, but just like I wouldn't make a joke about a dead celebrity in front of their family, I wouldn't make this sort of comment in an open forum when there are active Ukrainian and Russian members, and I certainly wouldn't try and justify it or abdicate responsibility for it onto a third party when I was called on it.
.. I was wondering when you would show up Zweischneid.. Dakka's 'Moth Man', drawn to areas of suffering, but no-one knows if it is the catalyst of those events, or just there to nourish itself on the conflict
"There is no time for peace"
Makes me think of the latest Spiderman remake - they were consciously trying hard not to use the same script/phrases from the previous film.
Although, pretty sure that is a line from the original text blurb in Rogue Trader? I will have to check..
1) they're are part of Europe, not "Europe." The last time "Europe" were at war, well, I'm sure you're familiar.
2) and... There's posturing on both sides, what's that got to do with anything, happens all the time, look at N Korea.
3) I wasn't debating that there were German hostages, I was criticising you for using it as a somewhat ham fisted way of trying to deflect perfectly justified criticism of your tone by trying to illicit some sort of national sympathy because some people you likely have never met or even heard of had been taken hostage.
Wow, that went from hilarious Tinfoil-Hat-Party, to political bs with just a single post. Can't we all just unite in a shared hatred of GW? My Nids are doing fantastic as of 6th, so I'd be more keen to see a great trademark caper run-around instead of them adding, subtracting, or dicking the rules as they are now.
Has there been any rumours other than Blood Angels vs Orks?
