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

reds8n wrote:

His Master's Voice wrote:Isn't it the first time GW acknowledges the existence of rumors and leaks outside of legal dept action?

No.

For example whilst it was incredibly vague and generally unhelpful the stores received a missive concerning changes to part of the GW sales range around the end of March.

We should be careful of covering things with broad strokes yes ?

Not really getting the last part, but I get GW reacts to Internet gossip.

reds8n wrote: I really don't think that GW would willing kneecap a very profitable part of their business in the way that this book would.

YMMV of course.

It does, as I cannot see how this set of rules could potentially hurt FW, instead of helping them to sell more.

Pacific wrote:
I'm not in a position to say what I know about this but... I wish, really, really, to the people already re-working your army lists, spending so much time doing so and trying to work the lists out - please spend that time doing something else.

Just leave it at the fun speculation.

Pacific's got it! This was an intentional leak by GW to get people to buy miniatures. Then, they'll release the actual 6th edition, where all the models bought previously off of the speculation will do bugger all, forcing players to buy even more miniatures!

Also, the moon landing was done with Citadel Miniatures, and Tom Kirby shot JFK from the grassy knoll.

pretre wrote:I'm sorry, am I discussing News and Rumors in the News and Rumors forum? My bad.

Yes, your bad. You're being purposefully argumentative for your own enjoyment and derailing the thread.

How GW reacts basically tells us nothing. Any response by them could be a genuine one or a damage control misdirection. How large companies react to leaks has a lot of layers to it and is not actually indicative one way or the other.

lord_blackfang wrote:

pretre wrote:I'm sorry, am I discussing News and Rumors in the News and Rumors forum? My bad.

Yes, your bad. You're being purposefully argumentative for your own enjoyment and derailing the thread.

What were we talking about again?

Rented Tritium wrote:How GW reacts basically tells us nothing. Any response by them could be a genuine one or a damage control misdirection. How large companies react to leaks has a lot of layers to it and is not actually indicative one way or the other.

I agree. GW coming down on this 'leak' isn't indicative of their authenticity. Actually, it may be the exact opposite - GW's current and actual iteration of 6th could be radically different from these rules. So any attempt to get rid of them could be actual damage control.

After reds8n's post in this thread and DCM, I'm 90-10 in favour of this being fake.

I'd only give a slim 10% chance GW would bother sending out a hoax 'its not us' email to their UK stores.

It'll be a real shame as these rules seemed interesting and fresh, and I will hold a little hope of being surprised in July, but in general I think 5.5 is looking more likely than this overhaul.

infinite_array wrote:Pacific's got it! This was an intentional leak by GW to get people to buy miniatures. Then, they'll release the actual 6th edition, where all the models bought previously off of the speculation will do bugger all, forcing players to buy even more miniatures!

Now that's the most evil speculation yet, that the ruleset is the opposite of what will actually be coming to throw us as far off as possible. So it would be not only fake but also from GW, making all of us wrong. muhahaha

pretre wrote:
Now that's the most evil speculation yet, that the ruleset is the opposite of what will actually be coming to throw us as far off as possible. So it would be not only fake but also from GW, making all of us wrong. muhahaha

I call it 'Infinite Array's Razor'. The most probable solution is the one that is the most improbable.

infinite_array wrote:

Pacific wrote:
I'm not in a position to say what I know about this but... I wish, really, really, to the people already re-working your army lists, spending so much time doing so and trying to work the lists out - please spend that time doing something else.

Just leave it at the fun speculation.

Pacific's got it! This was an intentional leak by GW to get people to buy miniatures. Then, they'll release the actual 6th edition, where all the models bought previously off of the speculation will do bugger all, forcing players to buy even more miniatures!

Also, the moon landing was done with Citadel Miniatures, and Tom Kirby shot JFK from the grassy knoll.

Haha yes, well the old Citadel logo is actually the design of rocket that travelled to the moon (crewed by vampires).

(Seriously though, I'm not joking!)

Pacific wrote:
I'm not in a position to say what I know about this but... I wish, really, really, to the people already re-working your army lists, spending so much time doing so and trying to work the lists out - please spend that time doing something else.

Just leave it at the fun speculation.

But... making army lists is one of my favourite parts of 40k...

lord_blackfang wrote:

pretre wrote:I'm sorry, am I discussing News and Rumors in the News and Rumors forum? My bad.

Yes, your bad. You're being purposefully argumentative for your own enjoyment and derailing the thread.

But he's not. He's engaging Dakka to examine this document with a fine-toothed comb in a very rational and logical manner, so as to gain as much evidence both for and against the validity of this document. And that is exactly what should be happening in this thread, as it is a New & Rumours board. There is already a dedicated Rules Discussions thread elsewhere. Not one thing has Pretre (spelled it right this time) posted that makes me think he's trolling.

Pacific wrote:

I'm not in a position to say what I know about this but... I wish, really, really, to the people already re-working your army lists, spending so much time doing so and trying to work the lists out - please spend that time doing something else.

Just leave it at the fun speculation.

Posts like this don't add anything to the discussion - I don't mean to be rude, but if you know something then spill some beans.

reds8n wrote:.. given the fact that these rules would largely render much of FW's work irrelevant and OOD , and given how successful this arm of GW is, I wouod be inclined to write this off as the proverbial storm in a teacup.

How does it render FW's work irrelevant? I would assume that the new edition would require FW to publish some sort of FAQs in any case unless it more or less incorporates large parts of it.

reds8n wrote:Stores in the UK have received/are about to get an email stating thiat these rules are not genuine and are not anything to do with GW.

.. given the fact that these rules would largely render much of FW's work irrelevant and OOD , and given how successful this arm of GW is, I wouod be inclined to write this off as the proverbial storm in a teacup.

The lack of action from GW legal persuades me of this further.

Will be great to see the e-mail when/if it turns up. As somebody already stated - the possibility that this is fake has been there from page 1, but I had to register in order to comment because seriously, some of the posts on here are basically at the tinfoil hat level in regards to this. If people have information to the contrary, then post it and stop being vague.

reds8ns post above is the closest so far to debunking this, and pertaining the content of above mentioned letter it may turn out to be:

A) Genuine, but GW will claim otherwise
B) A draft
C) Fake

Pretty much which was established at page 1-2 of this thread already...

This might be pre-6th edition, it might be a fandex, it might be a crazy elaborate troll, it might be a scrapped pre-6th edition thanks to authors getting fired.

I'm gonna place guessing which aside.

Instead, I shall state that this rule set works quite a few wonders for my sisters of battle, and I think I would enjoy playing it in place of the current edition rules. It seems as though a number of people agree with me in that they'd like to be able to play with these listed rules as well. If they turn out to be official, then we don't have to be playing unofficial games to use these rules.

I want to ask the question however: What if these rules are not real?
If these turn out to be anything besides a test version of true 6th edition, what does that mean for when 6th edition comes out? Will we all look at 6th edition and see it as 5.5, wishing instead GW had hired the fake-dex guys? Will we feel distraught over the fact that some of us had gotten our hopes up over a fake, and the real thing isn't quite as "good" (good being subjective to the view of the individual player)

In the current rules, I was quite bummed over some of the changes to my sisters. But one I loved was the inclusion of bolt pistols, allowing me to get a mild round of shooty against close enemies before assaulting them. (typically done, if rarely, so that I could prevent their furious assault next turn) Although not an amazing benefit, but it was quite a nice one considering it along with 6++ and grenades cost me 1 point per model. These new rules make the pistols a whole different beast, being fired in CC, but essentially do the same thing if I were to assault an enemy. Instead of a round of shooty with pistols and flamers, I assault with flamers and my CC is my round of shooty.

When 6th hits, if I find out this rather awesome sounding change to the way combat is done is not part of it, will I feel as though it's taking a step back? It's quite possible, but then again, I was quite happy to just have my pistols.

This leak is well written enough that we get to see what could have been. If it is true, then there's the normal amount of yay and nay going around for the changes. But if it's not, some of us may feel like we're missing out on something that could have been great.

It's almost as if we had a choice of two prizes. Prize number one is a boat, Prize number two is the mystery box. It very well might be a F-15 fighter, a sherman tank, or a boat. But it's going to suck, and suck hard, if it's two tickets to a comedy club and GW decided on Prize number two for us. Especially since it doesn't matter where the boat was made, since many of us like it.


Also... They didn't make mention of the old or new SoB inferno pistols. Infernus, but not Inferno.

His Master's Voice wrote:

reds8n wrote:

His Master's Voice wrote:Isn't it the first time GW acknowledges the existence of rumors and leaks outside of legal dept action?

No.

For example whilst it was incredibly vague and generally unhelpful the stores received a missive concerning changes to part of the GW sales range around the end of March.

We should be careful of covering things with broad strokes yes ?

Not really getting the last part, but I get GW reacts to Internet gossip.
.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/421259.page

otakutaylor wrote:
I want to ask the question however: What if these rules are not real?
If these turn out to be anything besides a test version of true 6th edition, what does that mean for when 6th edition comes out? Will we all look at 6th edition and see it as 5.5, wishing instead GW had hired the fake-dex guys? Will we feel distraught over the fact that some of us had gotten our hopes up over a fake, and the real thing isn't quite as "good" (good being subjective to the view of the individual player)

This is why I think we'll be seeing that email go out to GW stores. If it's not real - especially if it's not real - GW doesn't want this ruleset getting out.

I think we can agree that the rules have, so far, been met with a positive response, right? Now, what happens when 6th edition is actually released, and the first few people to get it reveal that it's actually just a 'refinement' of 5th edition, and that the fabled 6th edition that people have been dreaming of is shattered?

Sales of the new rules - something that GW relies on for a cash injection every 2-3 years - plummet.

It is not genuine, if that's what you're saying. Even Games Workshop would get their Heck Armour sorted out before releasing something like this.

It might be a draft. Various things point to this being the case, such as length, style, and conformity to rumours posted months ago by well known rumours posters.

It may also be a fake. Reasons that support this would be the cluttered and disorganized formatting, with very little method to the madness in terms of special rules, etc. Very much a stream-of-consciousness text, where the rules could be written as the author thought them up, and not really shuffled around very much afterwards.


Go ahead and pick!

If it's real, GW would probably deny it.

If it's not real, but it's better than what they have, GW might deny it.

If it's not real and GW is nervous about it for some reason, GW might deny it.

If it's not real and GW feels like being helpful about it, GW would deny it


So basically the denial isn't especially helpful information.

It's the 40k 25 year anniversary. If this is not 6e, GW had better release a 6e that is just as groundbreaking, or else it will be a pretty boring 25th.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Yeah it means Marines hit Firewarriors on 2's, but really who cares - it's not like you were going to beat them in the first place. This just makes the inevitable a bit quicker.

Death in general will be much quicker in this version of the rules, both from shooting and in close combat. As someone else said, you and your opponent are likely to be pulling piles of minis off the table each turn.

azazel the cat wrote:
Wanna know the general theme here? A large community of generally cynical people are almost unanimously in favour of these changes. That's rare.. like, the-Grinch's-heart-growing-three-sizes rare to make most of Dakka welcome these changes. So I'd say that this isn't change for the sake of change; I would say it's change for the sake of getting the old guard to rediscover their love for the game (and thus re-ignite the passion of some jaded customers)

Bingo!

Background/Disclaimer: I published 18 issues of Inquisitor magazine with three different editions of Titan, superheavy and other vehicle rules and started Armorcast to be able to continue the large vehicle/Titan License. Our gaming group (all started with Rogue Trader) played 5-6 games of 3rd edition before dropping 40K permanently because 3rd edition sucked so bad. I have played 5th edition a grand total of three times, soon after it came out (in a 6 player tournament against regular tournament players, which I won using Land Raider and Land Speeder spam). That got me painting my Tyranids again after many years of not painting. 5th edition was a huge improvement over 3rd edition, but these rules (assuming they are real) will kick my interest back into high gear. They do a very good job of dealing with MANY of the problems with 5th edition.

Am really looking forward to 6th edition. I am, however, very glad I already have Tyranid, Dark Angel (black of course), Eldar, Imperial Guard, Ork and (unbuilt) Nurgle, Sisters and AdMech armies. Most of the armies need to be updated and the Orks are getting sold, but still I'm looking good for armies.

Tim DuPertuis

Rafi wrote:

Darkseid wrote:

ColdSadHungry wrote:At least Tau have a use for the ethereal now - suicide him and gain preferred enemy which works in shooting now. AND the Tau don't run off the board when he dies, the failed morale test just 'shakes' them.

That would be a very notorious tactic; quite amusing one though.

I can see an ethereal wandering the battlefield a la Connor MacLeod at the beginning of Highlander. 'Why will no one fight me?'

LOL, yeah, he'd be the ONLY enemy in the game that people try to avoid killing. Stick him on an objective and dare your opponent to go move him off it. Personally, I'd just charge him into CC with the meanest unit I could find, even if I had to alpha strike him giving him and his honour guard I10, how good can he be? Surely he'd get wiped - I'd make sure of it by turn 2.

Oh, and about the ethereal: you can always assault with him, you know. Just plunk him at the very front of your lines and have him charge in to the enemy. If your enemy is close combat oriented, they'll have to run a 12" ring around him to get to you, which is certainly a good thing, and if they're shooting oriented, they won't be able to run away as fast. Certainly he'll be dead by turn two.

ColdSadHungry wrote:

Rafi wrote:

Darkseid wrote:

ColdSadHungry wrote:At least Tau have a use for the ethereal now - suicide him and gain preferred enemy which works in shooting now. AND the Tau don't run off the board when he dies, the failed morale test just 'shakes' them.

That would be a very notorious tactic; quite amusing one though.

I can see an ethereal wandering the battlefield a la Connor MacLeod at the beginning of Highlander. 'Why will no one fight me?'

LOL, yeah, he'd be the ONLY enemy in the game that people try to avoid killing. Stick him on an objective and dare your opponent to go move him off it. Personally, I'd just charge him into CC with the meanest unit I could find, even if I had to alpha strike him giving him and his honour guard I10, how good can he be? Surely he'd get wiped - I'd make sure of it by turn 2.

That's brilliant. Attach him to a scoring unit and let him sit on an objective. "Heh, go head and TL the Tau. Let's see how that works for ya. "

Have the Etheral be an intervening model to some of your other stuff and have him jump at any shot coming his way.

timd wrote:
Background/Disclaimer: I published 18 issues of Inquisitor magazine with three different editions of Titan, superheavy and other vehicle rules and started Armorcast to be able to continue the large vehicle/Titan License.

Your exocrine model actually got me into this game.. so hi

The "everything dies fast" thing is kind of disheartening, I mean we all know armies are going to get bigger and bigger so GW can sell more and more mini's to smaller and smaller playerbase for the same profits every year.
I think that the swarmy armies like orcs and guard have pretty much reached saturation, I cant put more than 150 men on the table without it getting stupid and confusing for my opponent, I cant imagine if guardsmen get cheaper and I field more how the logistics of spreading out and playing properly will work.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:Have the Etheral be an intervening model to some of your other stuff and have him jump at any shot coming his way.

And that just goes to show, there are always new and exciting ways to play the game.

So my roommate and I are gonna try out a game with these rules today. 1500 points of eldar vrs chaos. Will let you know how it goes.

I am very excited to see what happens. Gonna run my normal 1500 without changing anything and see what happens.

reds8n wrote:Stores in the UK have received/are about to get an email stating thiat these rules are not genuine and are not anything to do with GW.

Don't suppose it would be possible to get a copy of one of those e-mails?

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Oh I don't know...

Spoiler:

My God, he's perfect!

I'll believe it is real when GW releases it in a bound format & it is on their website for sale & in stores. (June/July 2012).

In the meantime, I'll try it out with fellow gamers as "house rules."

Regardless, it'll make for some fun times.

ColdSadHungry wrote:At least Tau have a use for the ethereal now - suicide him and gain preferred enemy which works in shooting now. AND the Tau don't run off the board when he dies, the failed morale test just 'shakes' them.

Time to buy an Ethereal then. 50 points for a boss, army-wide USR? I think that's legit...

I only hope we can give him a razorblade or suicide-bomber vest as wargear.

So... fake then. I'm kind of relieved. Those rules actually made my head hurt.

Managed reserves would have been good though