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.

Well... I have to say so far i like 3rd edition rules. However you need time and patience to unlearn and then relearn everything. Lots of patience. I like it more than 2nd.

 YodhrinsForge wrote:

JWBS wrote:
Looks like Wayland have sold through, saving me from myself and the intrusive thoughts telling me to buy another one.

They sold 950 units since yesterday? And Darksphere's page for it is just gone. Seems more like shenanigans to me.

EDIT: GW probably figure the vast quantities of Disintegrator sprues on ebay for 5-8 quid shipped will be enough to satisfy the demand from the portion of the audience that cares enough about value to look for discounts.

It seems like GW may have extended the offer of a refund to stores (or even encouraged one, since according to the Wayland owner earlier in the thread he wouldn't have asked for one even if they'd been available).

The 35% discount on a brand new set was a bad look, and having that deep-discount stock sitting around in stores for a year+ would've been an even worse look. GW could not have been happy about that. Better to tractor-beam all the unwanted inventory back into the controlled GW system (where people cannot look at availability numbers) and accelerate to the point in time where stores would've been stocking 1-2 shelf boxes for walk-ins anyway.

I saw 4 boxes of the Starter set sell today at the local Warhammer store. I was there from 11am to 2pm.

I'm sure the rest will be gone next week when you get a wooden box and a special coin for spending 300 bucks.

(Also they are sold out on all the libers and rule books).

Glumy wrote:
Well... I have to say so far i like 3rd edition rules. However you need time and patience to unlearn and then relearn everything. Lots of patience. I like it more than 2nd.

Yeah, after all the whining online, it turns out the actual rules are well put together and even explicitly address some situations that used to be FAQ type stuff like “what happens to a hit that auto-wounds if it also has rules that trigger on a specific wound roll” right in the rules text. Not that there are no questions to answer of course.
The layout of having the basic principles and types before the actual play rules is a bit unusual but I also get the logic; if you read it through from the start, you generally already learned the specific details the order-of-play is talking about rather than learning it then and there.
The key differences are that morale/pinning etc. actually do things now (e.g. charging a pinned unit no longer auto-cancels all the work you put into getting them that way). Someone seems to have gone ahead and separated unit types and subtypes in a way that actually makes sense, too; hope that continues as they add new stuff.
On the other hand the fundamentals aren’t that different; You move your M value in inches, BS5 still hits on a 2+, equal WS still hits on a 4+ and equal S/T wounds on a 4+ and so on. Just a few tweaks here and there like the WS table not being symmetrical, and very high BS getting critical hits rather than re-rolls.

Tactical Status effects also promise to give new design space for weapon rules.

Even if it offers no modifier for a test, any weapon which now comes with a Tactical Status effect has a new layer of attraction.

Consider the humble, and potentially plentiful Rotor Cannon. Sure, the individual shots are nothing much to write home about. But a squad of 10 gets so many, you’re all but statistically guaranteed to trigger that Supressive (1).

Against relatively basic Marines? That means they’re testing on Cool 6 - and so are more likely to fail than pass the test. Which means Supression, and so only Snap Shots until they rally. And for having any Tactical Status? Can only make Disordered Charges, strike at I1 in combat, and can’t hold or contest Objectives.

Heavy Weapons are also quite radically different. Sure, anything Heavy (D) I think I’d want to keep fairly static. But otherwise you’ve a decent freedom of movement now. Which doesn’t just mean fighting withdrawals if the enemy get too close. Oh no. Now you can stuff say, a Landraider with an Autocannon squad, and have them pile out to great effect.

So there are a decent amount of new options and new considerations to be explored.

the whining for the most part wasn't about the rules themselves being bad or not offering new ways to play
but that a new game replacing the existing one wasn't necessary in addition to pure writing/formatting

also everything being slightly different with hard to read rules doesn't go down well for casual gamers which most of the HH players are
and if you need 2 years to get used to the new rules because you don't play that often, looking forward to learn another new game in 3 years isn't something people are happy about (so rather keep 2nd Edition for another 3 years and start learning the new game with 4th and keep that one for 6 years again)

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Tactical Status effects also promise to give new design space for weapon rules.

Even if it offers no modifier for a test, any weapon which now comes with a Tactical Status effect has a new layer of attraction.

Consider the humble, and potentially plentiful Rotor Cannon. Sure, the individual shots are nothing much to write home about. But a squad of 10 gets so many, you’re all but statistically guaranteed to trigger that Supressive (1).

Against relatively basic Marines? That means they’re testing on Cool 6 - and so are more likely to fail than pass the test. Which means Supression, and so only Snap Shots until they rally. And for having any Tactical Status? Can only make Disordered Charges, strike at I1 in combat, and can’t hold or contest Objectives.

I agree with this, its just that Rotor Cannon, as an example, already had "pinning" with the same effect in last edition, and the choise of having Rotor Cannon sqd was always tactical.
However, in general I would say the statuses give more tactical flavour, especially for the legions that dont focus on brute force -potentially.

Rotor cannons were just fine in 2.0. I always included several in my Terror Squads. They rocked.

grouch666 wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Got me Dread weapons ordered. Bit disappointed they’re Direct Only, but nowt else to do.

I did watch youtuber say this is retaliation for selling the pre-order at 35%, allowing people to order what they need rather than having to split the box.

Does appear to be the case as you mention its GW only.

Youtuber makes up controversy to feed algorithm, news at 11.

Yea individual weapon sprues have always been Direct Only

I love how even when GW categorically hump a release to a degree that seems almost comically implausible for a FTSE100 company and in the process pretty objectively piddle in a lot of people's cereal, you can still rely on the usual suspects to frame anyone pointing out their failings and the consequences of them to regular gamers as "whining".

 YodhrinsForge wrote:
I love how even when GW categorically hump a release to a degree that seems almost comically implausible for a FTSE100 company and in the process pretty objectively piddle in a lot of people's cereal, you can still rely on the usual suspects to frame anyone pointing out their failings and the consequences of them to regular gamers as "whining".

Who knows, I've been on the wrong side of this release with my opinions regardless of what they were. Most people have in here and honestly, that's to be expected. It's not a hive mind and some love what others hate and some have higher or lower thresholds for dealing with some stuff.

So I suppose what I'm trying to say is that you're dropping statements like objectively, when in reality they might actually be subjective. Maybe some people actually don't care about the failings or whether other people are upset in the event that they are even objective.

But that's all OK and to those people, yes it is whining when they just want to talk about the cool new stuff.

I think people are being too hyperliteral about the language people use and using it as an excuse to bite back.

A non-native English speaker called HH3 "garbage like 40k" in a social medial group I'm in and a whole slew of people, including a group admin, took it as a personal attack and ignored the fact the guy was asking if people could help them find Great Crusade fan rules from HH1.

The pervading idea that you aren't allowed to criticise HH3 unless you've played it is still really grinding my gears as well. I don't like that every single rule has been rewritten regardless of if it worked or not, but I according to a worrying amount of people, I shouldn't voice that opinion because I haven't played the game so how could I possibly know.

Just my two pennies on current affairs. Others may feel the same, others may not.

Gert, you absolutely must play the game, it's the only way to unlock "wait for the first supplement before complaining"

Just telling someone to play the game to see if they like how it plays, is ridiculous. Same thing the pusher man tells the kids on 110th st..

I already know the game, its called 2.0 and I didn't feel the need for it to change just for CHANGE's sake.

There are much better things to do with my time than re-learning a game that I was completely happy with.

Since the new game offers zero REASON for me to even WANT to try it, why should I?

 Gert wrote:
A non-native English speaker called HH3 "garbage like 40k" in a social medial group I'm in and a whole slew of people, including a group admin, took it as a personal attack and ignored the fact the guy was asking if people could help them find Great Crusade fan rules from HH1.

Why would calling a game garbage by a native speaker somehow not have received the same reaction? That doesn't remotely sound like a translation issue with people overreacting. Is there a language where the word for refuse is considered a compliment, or positive descriptor? If one is asking for help how does talking gak about something else assist in that venture? Of course it would derail the conversation.

The whole issue was picked because people decided that a turn of phrase was a personal attack on them and they only picked on the language used.

It just got my goat that people would rather jump someone for a single word than help.
Starting arguments for arguments sake seems to be the main goal in the group at the moment.

Right.

But there’s a difference between

A) Not wanting to change editions
B) Trying a new edition and then switching back
C) Calling a new edition junk whilst refusing to even try it,

Likewise, there have been folk in thread doing the ol’ Doom And Gloom who, rather conspicuously, have never posted in the main Heresy board. Ever. And they’re often the ones desperate, for reasons best known to themselves, to paint 3rd Ed as dead on arrival.

The sort to present anything in the worst possible light, and have a go at anyone pointing out “that’s not the only conclusion”. Not addressing the argument, merely parroting them back and making ad hominem attacks,

Given they’ve never posted to discuss general Heresy stuff, you’ve got to ask whether they’ve a genuine concern about the health of a game system, or if they’re just pot stirrers with nothing better to do than dislike a company.

Or maybe they are gamers who thought an edition change is a good time to jump into a system (you don't have to learn the FAQ and all the hidden meta rules like not spamming Contemptors, for one) and then saw GW with its pants down squatting over an empty plate in the classic Space Marine Taking a Poop pose while a horde of sycophants screamed "how do you know it's gak, it's not even out yet"

There really are weirdly many 500 subscriber channels talking how bad Heresy is. But all the usual channels are... as positive as they need to be to keep their viewership and to keep getting GW product ahead of release. Not sure where hordes of dakkanauts were supposed to get negative information, other than seeing it for themselves.

Yet they didn’t pop up until it was time to remind everyone They Don’t Like A Thing.

And is it gak? Don’t get me wrong, if you’ve read the rules and don’t like it? Fair enough. But from what I’ve read, it’s a very different game, with real potential to be more movement based, and with genuine options to hobble opposing units beyond blasting them off the board.

But these aren’t folks who were excited for a jumping off point. They’re people that literally Just Moan And Remind People They Don’t Like A Thing.

Dudeface wrote:

 YodhrinsForge wrote:
I love how even when GW categorically hump a release to a degree that seems almost comically implausible for a FTSE100 company and in the process pretty objectively piddle in a lot of people's cereal, you can still rely on the usual suspects to frame anyone pointing out their failings and the consequences of them to regular gamers as "whining".

Who knows, I've been on the wrong side of this release with my opinions regardless of what they were. Most people have in here and honestly, that's to be expected. It's not a hive mind and some love what others hate and some have higher or lower thresholds for dealing with some stuff.

So I suppose what I'm trying to say is that you're dropping statements like objectively, when in reality they might actually be subjective. Maybe some people actually don't care about the failings or whether other people are upset in the event that they are even objective.

But that's all OK and to those people, yes it is whining when they just want to talk about the cool new stuff.

When I talk about objectively, I mean things that are verifiably true not so much opinions about the game; their marketing and comms management has been awful, there have obviously been serious failings in terms of properly projecting demand, the optics of big discounts during preorders, the general quality of the books themselves in terms of typos & image errors, the fact large numbers of the people who did buy a box have found their models damaged while still on-sprue becasue apparently nobody at HQ considered it might be a bad idea to pack the big heavy rulebook *on top* of the plastic sprues, etc etc, and it's undeniable that the release had a larger than typical - even for modern GW - level of invalidating people's existing collections in whole or in part and that even now we don't know how much of that will be rectified.

People can argue whether they like 3.0 as a ruleset from subjective preference, but the manner in which 3.0 has arrived was an objective flub. And frankly, why do "those people" get to ignore Rule 1 so brazenly?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Yet they didn’t pop up until it was time to remind everyone They Don’t Like A Thing.

And is it gak? Don’t get me wrong, if you’ve read the rules and don’t like it? Fair enough. But from what I’ve read, it’s a very different game, with real potential to be more movement based, and with genuine options to hobble opposing units beyond blasting them off the board.

But these aren’t folks who were excited for a jumping off point. They’re people that literally Just Moan And Remind People They Don’t Like A Thing.

Really, so we're down to "show models or your opinions are worthless" now? And of course there's no possibility that the Toxic Positivity from some quarters could be motivated by sunk cost fallacy...

without the leaks, you would need a 100€ to try it and make up your own opinion
but to be honest, the previews I saw on warcom were enough for me to be sure I am not going to pay what they are asking for something that poorly written

if the charge premium prices I want a premium book and not an Appendix that should be free to download

I don't need to play it to know that I won't ever read the full rules as written in that book
this is just an exhausting read like a technical manual and not something I would like to do in my free time as a hobby
and without reading the rules I am not gonna play it anyway

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

But these aren’t folks who were excited for a jumping off point. They’re people that literally Just Moan And Remind People They Don’t Like A Thing.

Oh, if you suspect someone in particular, you can click "Filter Thread" under their avatar to see all their posts in a thread. I haven't found any who came in here post-leaks just to dump on HH3 with no prior engagement, but I've only tried a couple from the last page.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Likewise, there have been folk in thread doing the ol’ Doom And Gloom who, rather conspicuously, have never posted in the main Heresy board. Ever.

Garbage opinion, honestly. I've been on Dakka since before Yakface owned it and the store was still open. I've maybe once stepped foot in the main Heresy section. I have other places to discuss it and I very rarely go anywhere else on Dakka past N&R these days. The idea that someone has to interact with certain sections of this one community to have an opinion in a thread is ludicrous.

It’s still suggestive of certain folks only here to tell people they don’t like a thing. The sort that when challenged on a conclusion, just go to ad hominem.

At no point have I said anyone with a negative opinion on the game is wrong. There’s no point in that. And frankly, I don’t care enough whether the next person does or doesn’t enjoy a thing I enjoy.

If 3rd Ed does choke? I’ve still my complete (I think? May not have nabbed the Militias book) set of 2nd Ed books, and will have no problem getting further mileage from those purchases.

And in that scenario, I feel confident the wider community will adopt a set of extra rules for the all new units. And so all I’m out, at most, is the price of the 3rd Ed books I’ve bought. And even then, I dare say it’ll still be possible to get a game in.

But those who are just here to tell us they don’t like a thing? They don’t care about the game. They don’t care about the wider community and who might or might not adopt what. They seem solely intent on just trying to paint GW as incompetent, again for reasons best known to themselves. And they are tiresome in doing so.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Gert wrote:
A non-native English speaker called HH3 "garbage like 40k" in a social medial group I'm in and a whole slew of people, including a group admin, took it as a personal attack and ignored the fact the guy was asking if people could help them find Great Crusade fan rules from HH1.

Why would calling a game garbage by a native speaker somehow not have received the same reaction? That doesn't remotely sound like a translation issue with people overreacting. Is there a language where the word for refuse is considered a compliment, or positive descriptor? If one is asking for help how does talking gak about something else assist in that venture? Of course it would derail the conversation.

Nuance, I would expect. A lot of times it really depends on the speaker's (or writer's) cultural background and how coloquially they're talking.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Yet they didn’t pop up until it was time to remind everyone They Don’t Like A Thing.

And is it gak? Don’t get me wrong, if you’ve read the rules and don’t like it? Fair enough. But from what I’ve read, it’s a very different game, with real potential to be more movement based, and with genuine options to hobble opposing units beyond blasting them off the board.

But these aren’t folks who were excited for a jumping off point. They’re people that literally Just Moan And Remind People They Don’t Like A Thing.

I get were you're coming from, but... if the previews have people reeling back enough that they don't want to even test the game out? (which, incidentally, costs a lot of money to do, and money does not grow on tress, lately even less so) I would say that's on GW, not the people. They clearly have not done their best job selling them on the game.

It's not really like they can try it out for free legally, after all. And that's without even taking into account the fact that a lot of adults, fans of the game, can't really play that often, and having to keep up with the edition change churn is... discouraging.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
It’s still suggestive of certain folks only here to tell people they don’t like a thing. The sort that when challenged on a conclusion, just go to ad hominem.

At no point have I said anyone with a negative opinion on the game is wrong. There’s no point in that. And frankly, I don’t care enough whether the next person does or doesn’t enjoy a thing I enjoy.

If 3rd Ed does choke? I’ve still my complete (I think? May not have nabbed the Militias book) set of 2nd Ed books, and will have no problem getting further mileage from those purchases.

And in that scenario, I feel confident the wider community will adopt a set of extra rules for the all new units. And so all I’m out, at most, is the price of the 3rd Ed books I’ve bought. And even then, I dare say it’ll still be possible to get a game in.

But those who are just here to tell us they don’t like a thing? They don’t care about the game. They don’t care about the wider community and who might or might not adopt what. They seem solely intent on just trying to paint GW as incompetent, again for reasons best known to themselves. And they are tiresome in doing so.

A lot of people find it easier to speak up when complaining, being uncomfortable complimenting. And if one agrees with a thing, it can be seen as there being no need to speak up, whereas putting in an objection is not going to happen without input.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
It’s still suggestive of certain folks only here to tell people they don’t like a thing. The sort that when challenged on a conclusion, just go to ad hominem.

At no point have I said anyone with a negative opinion on the game is wrong. There’s no point in that. And frankly, I don’t care enough whether the next person does or doesn’t enjoy a thing I enjoy.

If 3rd Ed does choke? I’ve still my complete (I think? May not have nabbed the Militias book) set of 2nd Ed books, and will have no problem getting further mileage from those purchases.

And in that scenario, I feel confident the wider community will adopt a set of extra rules for the all new units. And so all I’m out, at most, is the price of the 3rd Ed books I’ve bought. And even then, I dare say it’ll still be possible to get a game in.

But those who are just here to tell us they don’t like a thing? They don’t care about the game. They don’t care about the wider community and who might or might not adopt what. They seem solely intent on just trying to paint GW as incompetent, again for reasons best known to themselves. And they are tiresome in doing so.

Militia was a PDF, not a book .

And GW absolutely flubbed this release, and I'm not even going to talk about the rules, but the plastic.

There were a few that wanted Saturnine Terminators, I'll admit that. But I've never seen a request for a dreadnought in similar styling. Or a request for a heretofore unheard of gun emplacement. Or for disintegrator weapons to be moved from a "rarity even during the days of the Great Crusade" to squad level weapons.

To be clear: people were asking for things like Destroyer Squads, Ogryns, and Myrmidons in plastic. Not what we got. So, regardless of the rules, which, as you correctly say, are subjective, they still flubbed this, spectacularly. Giving us things that no one asked for, instead of what was actually asked for.

 Shakalooloo wrote:
A lot of people find it easier to speak up when complaining, being uncomfortable complimenting.

That is an excellent point.

How has the reception been by new players, not current, in your area? We had a Learn to Play 30K day this afternoon, a good turnout. Four new, some former, and a few that had been on the fence between the two.