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.

Phew! For a while back there I thought 40k was going to get good again. Wallet safe!

Maelstrom808 wrote: You are essentially telling me that, no we shouldn't talk about these things and just do the circle jerk because little timmy got his hopes crushed when he finds out that yes, his army sucks just as much in 6th as it does in 5th, because he failed to read and understand what was being talked about. If we are scared of that, why have any discussion of rumors at all?

For the second time (in the same page, even?), that is not what I said. I didn't say anything about "not talking about them". Talking about news and rumors in "News and Rumors" is good.

But, I digress. We obviously have two different ways of thinking about this and, I'd wager that one of us likes the leak and one of us doesn't. I just hope in the near future, if the real 6th Ed. doesn't resemble this at all, we won't hear whining for the next few years. I suspect we might though, with the general backlash negative comments receive about this sacrosanct .pdf.


Edit:

Maybe if I close with an example, it will better illustrate my frustration. If you go onto MSNBC.com and they're reporting that there is word that Joe Paterno has died, there is a responsibility for them to vet that information. Whether it is true or not, there are those that will take that information and run with it, texting their friends, loved ones, Penn State fans, etc. Then, days later, MSNBC.com might come on and say, "I'm sorry, that was inaccurate. He has lung cancer." I think it is a bit naive to say that, to gather that information is purely upon the shoulders of the reader and that those spreading the information are completely immune. This was a real example, but you could imagine other examples where it is even more blown out of proportion.

When rumors start getting fleshed out into rules conversations (the likes of YMDC) and batreps, then they are moving away from being rumors and into being News. And people listen to News, whether it is based in fact or not.

puma713 wrote:

Maelstrom808 wrote: You are essentially telling me that, no we shouldn't talk about these things and just do the circle jerk because little timmy got his hopes crushed when he finds out that yes, his army sucks just as much in 6th as it does in 5th, because he failed to read and understand what was being talked about. If we are scared of that, why have any discussion of rumors at all?

For the second time (in the same page, even?), that is not what I said. I didn't say anything about "not talking about them". Talking about news and rumors in "News and Rumors" is good.

But, I digress. We obviously have two different ways of thinking about this and, I'd wager that one of us likes the leak and one of us doesn't. I just hope in the near future, if the real 6th Ed. doesn't resemble this at all, we won't hear whining for the next few years. I suspect we might though, with the general backlash negative comments receive about this sacrosanct .pdf.

You are probably right in most of your points here. Best just to agree to disagree. There will be whining whatever is released. There would be whining if the PDF never existed. I hope that however it turns out, it is a ruleset that appeals to as many people as possible. At least until then I have something to hold my interest in the game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

puma713 wrote:Edit:

Maybe if I close with an example, it will better illustrate my frustration. If you go onto MSNBC.com and they're reporting that there is word that Joe Paterno has died, there is a responsibility for them to vet that information. Whether it is true or not, there are those that will take that information and run with it, texting their friends, loved ones, Penn State fans, etc. Then, days later, MSNBC.com might come on and say, "I'm sorry, that was inaccurate. He has lung cancer." I think it is a bit naive to say that, to gather that information is purely upon the shoulders of the reader and that those spreading the information are completely immune. This was a real example, but you could imagine other examples where it is even more blown out of proportion.

When rumors start getting fleshed out into rules conversations (the likes of YMDC) and batreps, then they are moving away from being rumors and into being News. And people listen to News, whether it is based in fact or not.

I do understand your frustration. I disagree with you on where the crossover point is between News and Rumors. You also have to understand this is also coming from a person who is skeptical of pretty much everything I read, watch, or hear. I believe that there are too many people that try to put their on spin on things, so I never take anything at face value. It's probably too much for me to expect others to do so as well. Anyway, as I've said before, we'll see what the real deal is later this year. Until then play what you like and have fun with it.

jamin p wrote:I don't see how people can't understand GWs approach to things.

GW believe everyone has limited resources and limited capacity for hype. If they say "In the next 6 months we have X,Y, and Z coming out" then people will get excited about X, Y, or Z and allocate funds accordingly. GW believes if they spring a 'surprise' release on you then you will have 2 things...

1) A neutral standing
2) Free cash

This in turn means your 'hype' is let loose around release, with cash and in turn will either give in and buy an army or at least impulsively buy one of the shiny new products that caught your eye. Hell i certainly have done it with pretty much all of the releases as of late.

If GW told you in advance would you realistically go out and buy something from the launch or X or Y if you knew you were saving for Z? It makes sense to them to get something from you for X and Y if they know you will probably spend on Z anyway.

Nope. I'd roll my eyes at yet ANOTHER release I don't give a squat's ass about and go play another system that appeals to me. Maybe one that talks about upcoming releases in their magazine. With glimpses of models, rules, or even batreps showing off the things I don't have in my grubby little mitts yet.

It has nothing to do with 'bad' hype. People talking about something, in any fashion is a good thing. It means there is emotional connection to the product and as such it will be more than likely people will buy the product. Sure you might say you won't buy 6th ed cause you don't like it but you will still buy the minis and who knows, after 3 months of playing the only other person that doesn't want to try out the new set for more than a handful of games you'll probably cave in and buy it.

If you are in this hobby and earn your own money then chances are you are in it for the long haul... It's kind of like a marriage in that sure, they do your head in and take all your money but it's better than the other option.

If GW believed that, they'd tell us what is coming out or show pics of it. GW certainly believes that talking badly about their product is to be avoided, so they give us nothing until it streets. Just so we can "Ooh!" and "Aaaah!" The "Surprise! It's amazing!" only works when it is in fact amazing. When the book matches the cover. Otherwise, you need to generate interest. Tell people who ask, "What is this thing?" exactly what "this thing" is. Thell them how cool it is. Tell them why they want it. Then tell them why they NEED it. Tell them why it's the best *%&$ing thing ever released. Until the NEXT thing. Make people want it so bad they'll clip Granny's toe nails just for the extra pocket money needed to have SHINY NEW THING!!! Otherwise, when a new army comes out, i don't know anything about it. I don't know how it plays, I don't know what the fluff is like, I don't know what sort of army list it uses... All this information that might appeal to me as a gamer. "It sucks in CC, but it has BIG EFFING GUNS and GIANT ROBOTS!!!" Sweet. Sign me up. "It can't shoot anything, but it's made up of giant muscly men, scantilly clad women, and they ride dinosaurs." Awesome! Gimme some! "They don't shoot or assault. They're all psykers. And they melt your BRAINS with their skills and magical prowess!" Well, that's kinda cool. Sure!

Armed with this information, I won't make a calm, informed, logical decision. I'll make an EMOTIONAL one. That's how you want people buying. On emotion. Right now the only emotion people are buying on is disgust, and that's not a recipe for long term survival.

Would someone enlighten me on how Tau would not benefit from playing with this ruleset? Is there something I missed since last week or so.

I mean.....I keep my own point of view ofcourse....but after reading this, I didnt really get it. It sounded more like this whole thread said, 'Oh, actually, the 6th Ed would NEVER have any new rules in it, and it will surely just be light changes for the game so as not to throw anybody off!', which really, sounds like a massive load of bs to me. As a person who has helped run a couple diffrent businesses, I know that no matter what, a company must come to the conclusion that they need to make changes to their base products after a few good years of running things. And Im sure the guys at GW arent slowed. A 6th Ed, '5.5' rulebook would probably just make the community slightly upset. I mean....who reallly wants to just drop their 5th Ed rule book, pay the money for the new '6th ed', just so you can realize they changed like 5 rules, added some new artwork, and really didnt do much else? 3rd, 4th, and 5th, all were pretty close. They all have clear changes from one to another, but its not like GW like really super changed up the rules between them. I mean....honestly. Maybe this is just craziness from my otherworldly mind, idk. But I hardly trust BoW in the first place. And since GW clearly needs to make some changes anywho, I think that this rumor is sorta BS. Not to say that the 'Heretics' rulebook is the definative version of things at all. But I definately think this rumour is crap.

People seem to forget that 3rd edition was a massive change from second edition 40K. I liked the "leaked rules" . My fear is that they do a very minor tweak to 5th Edition and we still end up playing with the newest codex FOTM army. The alleged loss of evasion is a major blow it forced players to consider do i want the fact of a being a harder target to hit by moving or staying still and being a sitting duck. Anyone who has ever tried to shot a moving target will know how hard that can be. A whacking great tank in front of you is a darn site easier to hit than a man sized target.

True, it was, but 3rd, 4th, and 5th arent much more than a skip and a hop from each other. But I do agree with you Bob, the evasion rules there were really cool. They added more tactical decision making into the game by making the run and make shooting more difficult, or stay and try to gun it out, a hard choice that could add some cool depth to the game. I also liked some of the new rules they threw in there just to change things up.

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:SALVATION!!!

I knew it was a fake, and I knew I'd be proven right. I feel slightly sorry for people who were looking forward to something unique, but meh, all is fair in love and war

Now, I'm expecting apologies from people who dismissed me as a naysayer and grumpy old man. I won't mention names, but you know who you are

Well done - you have a rumour which says the rumoured new rules are not the real ones. What makes this rumour more valid than the rumour that they are real?

Translation: The only time we will know for sure what the 6th Ed rules are is when people have copies of the 6th Ed book. Until then, there is no "proof" either way.