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.

Yeah. Only in GW realm rumour sources are "everything must be told regardless of what! I don't need to do any actual WORK to do some basic checks for the cash!"

It's just cash for not doing any real work. Worse than beggars on street.

As is there's zero reason to believe every "anonymous source" they report is actually anonymous source and not just them making up clickbait titles for profit.

So…don’t watch him. He’s under no obligation to produce his show with you in mind.

Rumours are….rumours. Tidbits and whispering without initial substantiation. If he came with LVO type proof it wouldn’t be a rumour, would it. It’d be news.

He’s on a real roll with rumour accuracy. And now it seems we’re almost certainly getting The Lion soon.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
So…don’t watch him. He’s under no obligation to produce his show with you in mind.

Ah yes, the classic "if you don't like it stop talking about it". That's definitely a valid defense for something and not an attempt to silence criticism.

Rumours are….rumours. Tidbits and whispering without initial substantiation. If he came with LVO type proof it wouldn’t be a rumour, would it. It’d be news.

You know there's a middle ground, right? Leaks of information where the person reporting it knows that it is fact but can't reveal their source yet. For example, we get lots of leaks from playtesters where it is very likely that the person reporting them has seen the actual playtest material and the absence of official comment from GW doesn't make it any less credible. But just reporting on the stuff that is credible doesn't generate enough clicks and re-tweets and such, and so the people who are more concerned with monetization strategies than quality content are incentivized to repeat every piece of nonsense they find.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:
Yeah. Only in GW realm rumour sources are "everything must be told regardless of what! I don't need to do any actual WORK to do some basic checks for the cash!"

It's just cash for not doing any real work. Worse than beggars on street.

As is there's zero reason to believe every "anonymous source" they report is actually anonymous source and not just them making up clickbait titles for profit.

You know, I bet with the way AI is going recently you could make an AI rumor channel that aggregates every random "rumor" post and re-posts them, along with making up filler "rumors" to make sure its posts per day quota is maintained. Valrak and BOLS better cash in now before the AI replaces them!

Valrak is an aggregator. He’s passed info. If he thinks it’s credible, he passes it on to us.

Nowhere in his chosen role here is an obligation to make his shows palatable to you specifically.

I also note you’ve not addressed the now fact that Valrak has been accurate of late. Nope, no siree Bob. Can’t acknowledge that, because then you’re odd complaint about him not vetting anything and that rumours should be news looks….really rather silly and baseless.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
If he thinks it’s credible, he passes it on to us.

Valrak passes on the credible rumors but he also passes on the trash to fill posts per week quotas and keep his engagement metrics up.

Also, a “good journalist” protects his sources.

Many years ago, as we headed into 4th, I was a rumour monger for a short period. Because I had illicit access to play test copies of rules. I blew up, as I believe the cool kids say these day, Portent (might’ve been Warseer) with new the Assault Cannon was getting rending.

I had a full copy of the rulebook first, explaining the Kill Team type rules from right up the back. And some nerk was saying I was wrong, that stuff didn’t exist, and how the Assault Cannon had “Reaping”, not Rending.

Swift PM with a photo of me, book in hand, face redacted, flipping the bird soon put paid to that goon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Aecus Decimus wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
If he thinks it’s credible, he passes it on to us.

Valrak passes on the credible rumors but he also passes on the trash to fill posts per week quotas and keep his engagement metrics up.

Example if you please.

Everytime Valrak has said "this rumour is coming from a source I absolutely trust", it has been 100% true.

The ones that he's said "This got sent to me and I'm passing it on" have a more mixed track record.

He makes it very easy to determine how much weight to put on things.

 Asmodai wrote:
Everytime Valrak has said "this rumour is coming from a source I absolutely trust", it has been 100% true.

The ones that he's said "This got sent to me and I'm passing it on" have a more mixed track record.

He makes it very easy to determine how much weight to put on things.

At this point it seems reasonable to assume that his trustworthy source is someone on the photography or magazine/social media production side of things, who gets to see stuff a couple of months in advance due to the necessities of the production workflow. It's practically the only way someone could be right so many times and in many cases down to the posing of individual miniatures etc.

What I find funny is that so far people seem to hate Valrak simply because he makes a lot of videos with sometimes shady rumors. I am not a fan of his and do not watch his videos, but I have yet to see a reason why people hate the man so much.

I thought that this was supposed to be a thread about the possible upcoming 10th edition. I have no idea who Valrak is nor do I care. If you don't like the source for whatever reason then ignore it.

How about discussing the rumor(s) and not the presenter. Reliability of the presenter is perfectly in bounds as a measure of belief but his presentation should be irrelevant to the discussion itself.

 Eldarsif wrote:
What I find funny is that so far people seem to hate Valrak simply because he makes a lot of videos with sometimes shady rumors. I am not a fan of his and do not watch his videos, but I have yet to see a reason why people hate the man so much.

I don't hate him (way too strong a feeling). I just can't listen to his video's as I personally find his delivery to be flat and difficult to listen to (not sure if it's his real voice or a filter, but I lose interest quickly while listening to him).

It’s his real voice. Just got an accent.

But I share the bafflement at those who don’t like him not figuring out just….don’t watch him then.

It’s so Mary Whitehouse, a “TV morality” campaigner. A weird old women who never figured out nobody at all is forcing you to watch telly or films you don’t want to watch, or that your preference extends solely to yourself, and your family if you’ve young’uns. The worst sort of Pearl clutching, hand wringing moral minority fusspot intent on projecting their moral standards on others.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
It’s his real voice. Just got an accent.

But I share the bafflement at those who don’t like him not figuring out just….don’t watch him then.

It’s so Mary Whitehouse, a “TV morality” campaigner. A weird old women who never figured out nobody at all is forcing you to watch telly or films you don’t want to watch, or that your preference extends solely to yourself, and your family if you’ve young’uns. The worst sort of Pearl clutching, hand wringing moral minority fusspot intent on projecting their moral standards on others.

I do neither like his voice nor his presentation, but i like his reliable rumours very much. I can stand his presentation for the ~5 minutes every other day it takes to watch them just fine, and will continue to summarize relevant stuff into this thread, so that people do not have to watch him if they don't want to It's kind of the reason why i made this thread - i limited it to 10th edition and related rumours because i don't want it to be overrun with the pointless and repeated 'Lion' stuff.

@mad doc

I think you're generalising and escalating things in a strange way that are only projections of your mind.

I dont hate or love, I just dislike his "content" and said so. So I dont watch/support or give credit to what he does. Not sure what is so hard to comprehend here... After that is just people not understanding diversity and obviously gakking on different opinions.

Could care less if you or other people give him money. I dont and thats all im saying.

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
They're going to need to shift on those older Terminator sculpts somehow... Lumping them in a box is one way.

So they're opening existing boxes of Deathwing terminators just to put them in a different box?

 NAVARRO wrote:
@mad doc

I think you're generalising and escalating things in a strange way that are only projections of your mind.

I dont hate or love, I just dislike his "content" and said so. So I dont watch/support or give credit to what he does. Not sure what is so hard to comprehend here... After that is just people not understanding diversity and obviously gakking on different opinions.

Could care less if you or other people give him money. I dont and thats all im saying.

Which is fine. Don’t like and don’t watch? Zero problemo duder. But it’s those who proclaim to dislike him, but seem to still watch his shows are utterly baffling. Like those complaining about the new Velma series.

Just….I mean….if you don’t wanna watch it? Don’t bloody watch it. There are dozens if not hundreds of shows and YouTube channels not to my taste, so I, y’know…just don’t watch them. I try to expend as little energy as I can in that regard.

tneva82 wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Aecus Decimus wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Of course I can see the difference, my issue is that fact you expect that on a news and rumour platform you want only to receive facts being presented to you as rumours, for reasons that you've not really expanded on. Is your time and mental capacity too valuable to have conversations about rumours and hypotheticals?

Shockingly yes, I do want a better signal to noise ratio where only credible leaks are presented and not random nonsense, even if it means the news guy's youtube engagement metrics are a bit lower. What exactly does it add to the conversation when I can make a reddit post about "my source tells me Tau are getting squatted in 10th" and 15 minutes later the rumor sites will all have it posted as YOU WONT BELIEVE WHAT GW IS DOING IN 10TH CLICK HERE TO SEE?

You're critiquing their presentation rather than the content. As a rumour aggregator they can choose to present any and/or all rumours they find at their discretion. The part you seem to be struggling with is that a rumour doesn't need to be verified, sourced reliably nor held back for validity checks.

The click bait title is purely algorithms and presentation, you don't personally have to watch it, if someone reposts it like here.

It's a rumour. It's not a fact. None of it is. If you don't enjoy a hobby discussion about things that aren't factually accurate, I suggest you dont invest time in a rumour thread.

The thing is they aren't using discretion. They are putting out 100%. Clicks for cash. They don't care about sharing rumours. Just making $$$$$$$.

Give them rumour that space marines gets removed from game in 10th and they will put up video about it. What does that do?

They don't actually contribute to the community. They are leeching off from it

No matter how you feel about it they aren't going to stop/change. Their $$$ > your opinion.
Meanwhile your ranting about it here just annoys the rest of us. And doesn't add anything of value to the conversations.
So why don't you just give it a rest?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 NAVARRO wrote:
@mad doc

I think you're generalising and escalating things in a strange way that are only projections of your mind.

I dont hate or love, I just dislike his "content" and said so. So I dont watch/support or give credit to what he does. Not sure what is so hard to comprehend here... After that is just people not understanding diversity and obviously gakking on different opinions.

Could care less if you or other people give him money. I dont and thats all im saying.

Which is fine. Don’t like and don’t watch? Zero problemo duder. But it’s those who proclaim to dislike him, but seem to still watch his shows are utterly baffling. Like those complaining about the new Velma series.

Just….I mean….if you don’t wanna watch it? Don’t bloody watch it. There are dozens if not hundreds of shows and YouTube channels not to my taste, so I, y’know…just don’t watch them. I try to expend as little energy as I can in that regard.

I don't have enough hours in my life to watch the things I like, so it's easy for me to ignore the channels I dislike. Then again everyone is free to do what they want with their time.
Regarding the content I think it would be more tolerable ( maybe not XD) if he had a sniper approach to rumours more than the avalanche of shotgun shots he thrives for...

Aecus Decimus wrote:

It's absolutely his fault. It's his deliberate choice to pursue maximizing his monetization ability over providing reliable information to the community. It's an understandable choice, of course, but let's not pretend that it is somehow not a choice.

Sort of. But the thing is, if he did that, if he put out five-minute videos with just reliable rumours every couple of weeks, we wouldn't be linking his stuff here, because no-one would know who he was, as no-one would be watching his videos. Because the algorithm wouldn't be serving up those videos.

He has a choice, but the choice is to basically not exist. Someone putting out accurate rumours which are well-vetted isn't useful to the community if no-one has heard of them.

deano2099 wrote:

Aecus Decimus wrote:

It's absolutely his fault. It's his deliberate choice to pursue maximizing his monetization ability over providing reliable information to the community. It's an understandable choice, of course, but let's not pretend that it is somehow not a choice.

Sort of. But the thing is, if he did that, if he put out five-minute videos with just reliable rumours every couple of weeks, we wouldn't be linking his stuff here, because no-one would know who he was, as no-one would be watching his videos. Because the algorithm wouldn't be serving up those videos.

He has a choice, but the choice is to basically not exist. Someone putting out accurate rumours which are well-vetted isn't useful to the community if no-one has heard of them.

The reliable rumourmonger nobody has heard of sooner or later becomes a source for someone who is willing to do the obnoxious marketing spiel, it's just a function of how the algorithmic selection works. The stuff you see is the stuff that conforms best to the algorithm, there's no practical way around it.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Which is fine. Don’t like and don’t watch? Zero problemo duder. But it’s those who proclaim to dislike him, but seem to still watch his shows are utterly baffling. Like those complaining about the new Velma series.

I have zero opinions of the dude himself because I avoid 40K Youtube content. Part of the issue is when people start a rumor thread with just the video or a link to one of his videos instead of just putting the rumors. And before someone just says "well, just don't be lazy and watch the video", not all of use want to watch a damn video for the rumors, that's why we come to Dakka and not Youtube. It gets annoying that people push his content when most of us just want the rumors and not some internet personality.

Again, no problem there at all. I likewise has a distaste for a thread which is no more than a video.

By all means share the vid, but also pot the content for casual readers.

Valrak though seems to get a lot of vindictive flak from certain posters, where even when a rumour he presented bears out, they insist it doesn’t count. It’s like that relative that when playing Trivial Pursuit refuses your right answer, because you didn’t verbalise the punctuation marks on the card, and you have to go by what the card says because that’s the rule so you didn’t actually answer it right because you didn’t verbalise the punctuation shown on the card. And then when you do, it’s “well I suppose I’ll have to let you have it then” said in a huffy and petulant manner.

It just boggles the mind that folk can be that obstinate. If you don’t like the guy, you don’t like the guy. Not my or anyone else as business. But when it’s just more aimless, baseless, fact devoid moaning, it wears very thing very quickly.

Please keep this discussion to the 10th edition rumours and not peoples opinions of the rumourmonger (or rumourmongers in general).

I hope these rumors are true because this world desperately needs new lictors, genestealers and terminators. Getting rid of the Primaris keyword would also be much appreciated.

Tsagualsa wrote:

 Shadow Walker wrote:

 Snord wrote:
Unlike some others, I do not like the merging of firstborn and Primaris Marines. I think they need to bite the bullet and phase out the firstborn. It's clearly where this is all headed, and having the 2 together in the same army has always been weird.

This! They should use the Arks stories to tell some bla bla bla how Firstborn were decimated while valiantly defending something/somewhere/everywhere etc. etc. The result will be that the remaining few survivors will play no role in the galaxy wide wars and therefore only Primaris will be representing SM on the table.

That's more or less what they did with Shield of Baal iirc - Blood Angels and their successors won a phyrric victory against the Tyranids and were decimated in the process, but then Cawls Primaris reinforcements showed up and bolstered them back up to about the strength they were at before.

If Valraks rumour about the 10th starter box being BAs versus Tyranids is true, that's basically the justification for a box of just Primaris right there.

All the starter sets are Primaris only now.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
They're going to need to shift on those older Terminator sculpts somehow... Lumping them in a box is one way.

So they're opening existing boxes of Deathwing terminators just to put them in a different box?

Unlikely. They probably increased the quantity on the last production run of Deathwing Terminators knowing they were going to need X copies for all the boxes worldwide.

I've had a think (dangerous and painful), the marine half must include troops, it's a starter box and always contains a troops choice. So unless terminators are moving to troops, which seems unlikely we have a couple of logical conclusions:

- more easy built intercessors
- unlikely to reuse infiltrators again
- unlikely to reuse assault intercessors
- jump intercessors are troops?
- assault intercessors get jump packs but same entry

IF these rumors prove to be true.. looking at the Dark Vengeance box, the Marine side had 5 termies, 10 tacticals, 3 bikes and several characters.

Don't/didn't the BA (rumored to be the posterboys for this box) have some rule that they could take assault squads as troops ? If so, 5 new termies +
10 assault troops (be they assault intercessors or some new jump pack-equipped unit) + HQ would fit the bill (with possibly some room to spare).

Personally, I don't care if the Firstborn/Primaris distinction will go away, I'm just hoping for some decent new minis (upscaled Indomitus-pattern Terminators and "old-school" (with the ribbed back) Purestrains).

If the rumors are true AND they are planning to include a troops choice then it could be scouts. If we're going to have brand new primaris terminators why not brand new primaris scouts also? GW made a Terminators and Tyranids box set for Advanced Space Crusade back in the day, RTB16 if you're keeping score. You can see it here:

http://www.solegends.com/citrt2/rtb16tyranidsterms/index.htm

I actually think I have this somewhere. Looks a lot like a starter box contents to me and we all know GW has been keeping an eye on it's past self lately.

 Zhrukal wrote:
If the rumors are true AND they are planning to include a troops choice then it could be scouts. If we're going to have brand new primaris terminators why not brand new primaris scouts also? GW made a Terminators and Tyranids box set for Advanced Space Crusade back in the day, RTB16 if you're keeping score. You can see it here:

http://www.solegends.com/citrt2/rtb16tyranidsterms/index.htm

I actually think I have this somewhere. Looks a lot like a starter box contents to me and we all know GW has been keeping an eye on it's past self lately.

There will almost certainly be a troops or two per army, it wouldn't be much of a launch/beginner product otherwise. Unless they scrap force orgs as we know them ofc.