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.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Out of Legends, I’m mostly interested in the Mortifactor and Forge Lord.

Those are fairly easy conversion jobs. And being single character models? I wouldn’t feel terrible if they are later dropped.

I’m definitely dubious about anything else Legends.

But, we’ve presumably a bunch of supplements to come, and we’re told some stuff will be coming out of Legends into Proper. What and how much? Only time will tell. But I’d generally suspect Nothing Legion Specific.

Also, a thought and no more on the current 3 year cycle? Prior to 3rd Ed Heresy, that was 40K and AoS. With a “layover year” where we got some other fancy new game. If the layover is to remain, maybe we’ll see a four year cycle again?

I mean, at the root of it is KPI and Month for Month growth. You do a BIg Old Release in July this year? July next year is probably gonna need A Big Old Release for the KPI’s.

Or of course we’ll sadly see the end of “layover” years and odd big box stuff.

This is where the discussion of HH v3's launch success comes in though. This is clearly GW trying out their "main core game" strategy with a specialist one, or a sign of trying to upgrade it.

If they've been burnt by the process, they might back of on the dates for future editions as it won't provide the finance shot in the arm they need for a July drop.

Well, who knows?

SG isn’t doing Heresy anymore it seems. LI? Yes. But Horus Heresy is definitely mainline. Look at the investment in kits, including the ongoing plasticification of the range.

I wouldn’t mind a longer window between editions. Whether we’ll get that is solely speculative, and will be for what, another year or two?

I guess it depends when any change to it first kicked. Could’ve been last year with AoS, could be this year. I know Valrak is already presenting rumours of the next 40K Edition, and that it’s expected next year. Which could be the last of the three year cycle.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I’ve seen the claim they were forced into this…but where is that coming from?

I am one of those who believe this.

GW's big release was getting roasted right before the preorders started; the feeling of being lied to was palpable- everyone was super mad at what they saw in the leaks. It was like dropping the wedding cake right in front of the bride/groom at the wedding.

That was going to affect sales.

So, they put a lot of things that were going to be in the journals as IRL DLC into the PDF and released the title list as damage control. I believe this because of the timing. If this had happened after they'd locked in sales, it wouldn't have had the same influence.

Can I prove any of it? No. But it makes sense to me that a profit motivated company would do what it could to protect an investment, and the fix was extremely cheap.

As a Blood Angels player I'm very glad that most of my missing options were in the pdf. I had power fist wielding Crimson Paladins and assault cannon Angel's Tears that took a lot of converting to do. The only things missing out of my old list are Destroyer chemical flamers and jump pack apothecaries. I can live with that. I look forward to my first game of 3.0... after I finish chewing through these rules. :T

chaos0xomega wrote:
Shouldnt it go to 5 year cycles then?

Surprised not to see this mentioned in the other thread, but the recent GW annual report described TOW as one of four main game systems alongside 40K, AOS, HH.
Given the way TOW surpassed sales expectations this paves the way for a move to a four-year release cycle.
Next year will obviously be a big 40k release, but given how the recent three-year headline releases for AOS & HH seem to have under-performed I'm real curious how GW proceeds beyond 2026.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Well, who knows?

SG isn’t doing Heresy anymore it seems. LI? Yes. But Horus Heresy is definitely mainline. Look at the investment in kits, including the ongoing plasticification of the range.

Mainline doesn't mean it moves to another studio / team.

The Specialist Design Studio (SDS) is still responsible for HH + LI (plus TOW). These games have had access to majority plastic releases for some time, with some smaller volume kits still in FW resin unlike the main design studio. It's also clear that HH model design work is done in parallel for both scales to things consistent, even if they're not always released for both HH & LI.

I’m gonna lean toward no more layover years :(

But, TOW may very well still mean a 4 year cycle again. And it may have been the trigger product if so?

Lets face it either GW starts doing two new editions for major games in a single year or the 3 year cycle has to end because they've more than 3 games. I think if they try to stick to the 3 year for every game they are going to burn customers out and probably also burn themselves out.

So yes I think we should start to see longer cycles. The real question is if it will be the specialist studio only adapting and 40K and AoS remain on 3 year or if they all shift.

I think I’d feel better with a four year cycle.

Mostly because that’s how it was for what felt like a long time. Well. More or less.

And I wouldn’t mind Current Structure games going through a couple of refinements before we get a whole new Structure. Like 3rd to…..I wanna say 6th Ed 40K? I always get the edition changes wrong though.

I mean I'd welcome GW actually taking a sane approach to their games and having slower cycles with each cycle being more of a refinement than a re-write; but I think that's honestly something that requires one of at least two things

1) A major management change at the top end of GW

2) A major competitor to rise up in the market with stable/sane/good rules being a major selling point



Lets not forget we only saw GW make some improvements to rules when PP were on the big rise during their MK2 edition. Granted there were other things that went on too around that time; but basically unless GW really sees pressure to change they won't change. And like it or not their current rules approach WORKS.

HH has had a brutal blow of "no models no rules" policy from the top down whcih has hit the game super hard because they bloated the rules with a LOT of options that they didn't have models for for a considerable length of time. They also did it all in one go and without a big influx of new models. When 40K did it you mostly saw it happening codex by codex and alongside a model addition. Tyranids, for example, lost some major staples like the hive tyrant with twinlinked devourers and wings - a staple model in armies since we first had the option for it years back; they also lost all their warrior close combat weapon variety.

However at the same time you got a bunch of new shiny toys to dull that blow.


HH got some new toys, but they were wildcard additions that weren't in the rules before so they didn't dull that blow of suddenly losing a lot of game options. It's certainly dulled this editions launch no doubt- but its also likely a one-time thing and now its done its over. It's like popping a blister - its nasty, messy and painful but once its done its done and then there's a sore period and then healing.

Is it done tho? Stuff is back through Legacies, so we can have the same drama again in 4.0

If nothing else, the expectation stuff in Legends Right Now won’t be seen again is a tempering of expectations.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gonna do a spin off in General Wargames about the possible change to the three year cycle.

And here it is https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/817124.page#11769328

I think I’ve done a reasonable potted version.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Out of Legends, I’m mostly interested in the Mortifactor and Forge Lord.

Those are fairly easy conversion jobs. And being single character models? I wouldn’t feel terrible if they are later dropped.

I’m definitely dubious about anything else Legends.

Stuff that are Legacies now and have had history in 2.0 and 1.0 feel like reasonably safe investments. They have a bigger shot of making it into 4.0 as well by virtue of momentum, and if worst comes to worst, you can play old editions with them without any extra headache than "let's play 2e" - no need to fiddle with house rules like panoptica.

What I am wary of is the stuff that is all new to this PDF, like the Tartaros Siege Squad. It was made up on the spot (has no previous lore or gameplay mentions), was introduced without the normal context (no Cataphractii siege squad, even though honestly that would make way more sense to pick if you were to go for just one or the other) and, if my feelings are right, it was made up on the spot solely to fill the space that was going to be held by "Tartaros except they can take fists again", a spot that was left vacant after the Liber errata.

If GW had intended to actually introduced a whole new mass-heavy-weapon model kit for Tartaros, then introducing it via legacies rules first would be... not really GW's MO, would it?

It's a cool unit, to be sure, and I have absolutely built units for coolness' sake before without regard for them being even remotely close to legal. I have a kitbashed honour guard squad in 40k whose loadout I do not think remotely resembles any Space Marine unit that has ever been in an actual codex. But if that is the standard I am going for I don't need GW's permission to tell me that the Siege Squad is now a Thing™. I'll just do it, and then house rule it from there. If I am building a unit with the premise of matching a legal datasheet on purpose, then that is part of the value proposition and then I am going to be circumspect.

Sorry if this comes across as a ramble. Just thought I'd elaborate on my stance WRT the 3.0 Legacies units. Veteran HSS look really cool but if I built them I'd not do so for the rules because I suspect they will be ephemeral as daylilies.

I printed out about 4-6 pages of Solar Auxilia Legends stuff.

The Navigator, Medic Section, Davinite Priest(If I fancy trying out Traitor Allegiance) and Tarantula weapons platform.

The overwhelming majority of the other stuff looks to be mostly resin, which I'm actively avoiding. Maybe in the future I'll pull the trigger on a Baneblade or one of its chassis variants, which seems odd to designate into Legends as its a current plastic kit in 40K. Guess its a victim of keeping 40K stuff in 40K.

 nels1031 wrote:
I printed out about 4-6 pages of Solar Auxilia Legends stuff.

The Navigator, Medic Section, Davinite Priest(If I fancy trying out Traitor Allegiance) and Tarantula weapons platform.

The overwhelming majority of the other stuff looks to be mostly resin, which I'm actively avoiding. Maybe in the future I'll pull the trigger on a Baneblade or one of its chassis variants, which seems odd to designate into Legends as its a current plastic kit in 40K. Guess its a victim of keeping 40K stuff in 40K.

There will likely be a Solar Aux Baneblade hull kit released later, as it exists in LI scale and full size renders. When it does, rules will shift from Expanded to Core.

Yeah, it is very likely that Baneblade -family and Stormhammer are going to be their own kits in the future.

Besides other stuff.

If they do a plastic Stormhammer?

I’m getting one. It’s been my favourite Super Heavy since I knew what a Super Heavy was.

I noticed the Legends pdf left out all the unique Imperial Fist units. Shame.

 kodos wrote:

the problem with a 4 or 5 year cycle for now is that the rules quality isn't there

You know that rules quality has nothing to do with wether or not you're getting a new edition.

ccs wrote:

 kodos wrote:

the problem with a 4 or 5 year cycle for now is that the rules quality isn't there

You know that rules quality has nothing to do with wether or not you're getting a new edition.

no, but the rules quality has something to do with people being happy about getting a new edition, like the better the rules the more upset people are if it only lasts 3 years
yet the worse the rules are, the more upset people are if it takes longer
there was a reason why 6th Edition only lasted 2 years and if the rules are not well received keeping it for longer isn't really an option no matter what cycle they are on

going with mediocre rules works because they only last 3 years anyway

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
If they do a plastic Stormhammer?

I’m getting one. It’s been my favourite Super Heavy since I knew what a Super Heavy was.

Makes me wonder if they think there’s enough space in the lineup for a complete Solar Aux styled line of super-heavies.
We think we’ve seen a plastic Falchion, so they clearly think that’s viable.

Honestly? I think for Solar Auxilia it’s an investment that goes both ways.

There’ll be existing Solar Auxilia players that either can’t justify the current kit’s price tag, or like me, would much prefer not to work in resin at the best of times, and a plastic/resin hybrid kit not at all.

And there’ll be people where investing in a Super Heavy, whilst not exactly cheap might be the tipping point to start a Solar Auxilia collection.

Not to mention lots of tread heads who’d buy one or five, just because It’s A Honking Great Tank With Loadsa Guns.

Certainly I can’t foresee it being a slow seller.

 Mr_Rose wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
If they do a plastic Stormhammer?

I’m getting one. It’s been my favourite Super Heavy since I knew what a Super Heavy was.

Makes me wonder if they think there’s enough space in the lineup for a complete Solar Aux styled line of super-heavies.
We think we’ve seen a plastic Falchion, so they clearly think that’s viable.

The 40K baneblade kit is already quite modular in variants, and the resin Stormhammer is based on it fairly easily. A core kit for a Baneblade and other turreted variants, or a Shadowsword and casemate variants would be a counterpoint to the Fellblade kit, and then doing alternate versions is just a marginal increase in effort. And while officially separate armies, a Solar Aux baneblade would work easily in an Imperial Guard army, just like how Deimos hulls can fit in 40K space marine forces.

It's also a centerpiece model for Solar Aux, since they dont have Primarchs or other big display pieces right now

If they did do that though, I hope it has smaller rivets, matching the leman russ. The giant rivets on the current one actually make it look smaller imho. Kinda like it’s on a different scale system.

 Sotahullu wrote:
Yeah, it is very likely that Baneblade -family and Stormhammer are going to be their own kits in the future.

Besides other stuff.

I feel like we have been seeing these images for a year and a half at this point. This is not a LA scale baneblade/shadowsword. Idk how we are getting a Fellblade before this kit but hopefully they release the damn thing soon.

We are getting the Fellblade first because Marines are the bigger seller.