Warhammer 40k - 8th Edition already in 2017?

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.

**kodos**

Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
kodos wrote:
Hellfury wrote:
Simple thing could really improve the game would be interleaved turn structures.

This concept is not so foreign to GW as some of their game utlize it already.

You move, I move.
You shoot, I shoot.
You assault I assault.
You cast magic/psychic ppwers, then I do the same.

It would be a vast improvement over taking lunch while someone else takes their turn. As it is, it seems like a game of two player solitaire many times.

UGOIGO is flawed for this format and its outdated use doesn't fit contemporary design.

Which is not so simple as you think.
Switching from IGYG to alternate phases goes much deeper. It also removes all kind of reactions from the game, otherwise it would make it worse. So no more Overwatch, Intercept, banning psi powers, striking back in close combat etc

If you want a more dynamic gameplay it would be better to improve the current reaction system.

You don't play many other games, do you.

I play most games that are out there but at the moment going to focus on X-Wing, Kings of War and A Fantastic SAGA.

And you can never just throw some new stuff into a system that is not clearly designed for it. You need to re-write it from scratch to add new stuff.
That is one reason why the 7th core rules are a mess, instead of a clean written new Edition they just change stuff and put new rules in while keeping everything else unchanged (leading to strange problems with RAW because some sentence left from 4th edition is interfering with a new 7th edition wording)

**Crablezworth**

kodos wrote:
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
kodos wrote:
Hellfury wrote:
Simple thing could really improve the game would be interleaved turn structures.

This concept is not so foreign to GW as some of their game utlize it already.

You move, I move.
You shoot, I shoot.
You assault I assault.
You cast magic/psychic ppwers, then I do the same.

It would be a vast improvement over taking lunch while someone else takes their turn. As it is, it seems like a game of two player solitaire many times.

UGOIGO is flawed for this format and its outdated use doesn't fit contemporary design.

Which is not so simple as you think.
Switching from IGYG to alternate phases goes much deeper. It also removes all kind of reactions from the game, otherwise it would make it worse. So no more Overwatch, Intercept, banning psi powers, striking back in close combat etc

If you want a more dynamic gameplay it would be better to improve the current reaction system.

You don't play many other games, do you.

I play most games that are out there but at the moment going to focus on X-Wing, Kings of War and A Fantastic SAGA.

And you can never just throw some new stuff into a system that is not clearly designed for it. You need to re-write it from scratch to add new stuff.
That is one reason why the 7th core rules are a mess, instead of a clean written new Edition they just change stuff and put new rules in while keeping everything else unchanged (leading to strange problems with RAW because some sentence left from 4th edition is interfering with a new 7th edition wording)

It's also worth mentioning that with the new faq it's become incredibly obvious GW has a broken physics engine for the game. The release of 7th was the first indication with the removal of a lot of the terrain rules. 7th basically removed the unlimited ceiling for vertical movement (jump, jet, jetbike, skimmers) only to have it put back in faq form. Walls being permeable was always up to players back when ruins had, like, rules.

**lord_blackfang**

H.B.M.C. wrote:

The fact of the matter is, Kan, that you called people wishing for points "garbage players". Your black and white nonsense, as MGS so rightly put it, isn't doing you any favours here.

You mean his black and white knight nonsense, surely?

**tneva82**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
Or when did Fenris's bombing get mentioned before?

When did the Centurions get mentioned before? Or the new Marine flyer?

You're confusing "retcon" with "advancement".

So you call the bombing of Fenris retcon?

Oookay so guess Return of the King was retcon of Fellowship of the ring then.

**tilarium**

Hopefully the narrative involves the rotting corpse getting removed from the Golden Throne so the Emperor can be reborn. Would love to see it happen where Chaos tears rifts across the galaxy and the Emperor returns to lead a second Crusade to reclaim it. Ever sense Age of Sigmar, I've been expecting we'd see a similar shakeup in 40k.

**Fayric**

If they remove multiple FoC and tactical objective cards I will probably not bother with a new edition. 7th is the most fun edition so far for me (started with 5th).

A few "grand alliance" books to neatly collect the WD/campaign/codex formations would get some of the problems back on track.
Also, scrap the whole warp charge system they got going for psychers.

Thanks in advace.

**General Kroll**

nurgle86 wrote:
They are a company under new management that has clearly seen the additional revenue that campaign books, supplements and codices bring them. A company that previously operated on a more or less 4 yr release schedule for rules editions did a new rule set in 2 years and a re-release of almost every codex.

It is entirely possible that in the foreseeable future they could switch to a 2 yr rules release schedule. The only thing that might stop that is people voting with their wallets and not purchasing it in droves.

I hope this isn't the case but if it is I will probably buy it anyway. I thin kits more likely that they will release a streamlined set of rules for casual play with a proper rule set inbound in the future. A "shake up" does not necessarily mean a new edition. Even death from the skies is a shake up.

Precisely. A shake up could mean almost anything, and I've got a feeling that the original rumour was confusing the whole battle for vedros thing with a new edition.

As for the release schedule of rules, as long as they are good rules, and we see a progression that's worth doing, I've no problem in shelling out for rules on a bi annual basis. Especially if it means more player engagement and FAQs etc. What I wouldn't be happy with is just releases for release sake akin to the way the big video game studios churn out edition after edition of Call of Duty/FIFA/Assasins Creed.

**labmouse42**

Crimson Devil wrote:
Yes, things are far from predictable now. Will I play against that White Scars' Gladius painted as Ultramarines or that other White Scars' Gladius painted as Raven Guard?

Dude, do you even go to tourneys?
Here is the list of the last 9 armies I've played at tourneys
- Renegades w/daemons gun line
- Gladius DA list
- Eldar/Corsair gunline
- Eldar Warp Spider Spam
- Tau Riptides (7 of them)
- Eldar/Tau gunline
- Nids
- Corsair/Tau gunline

I'll be the first to say there are a lot of Eldar, but it sure beats the days of 5th when every other table was the exact same GK build. At least we are seeing varieties in builds!

**Silent Puffin?**

40k needs to be split into 2 games. A game full of flyers and warmachnes far to large for the table and an actual skirmish game like 40k used to be.
Until this happens the chances of me playing 40k again are remote to say the least.

**Sinful Hero**

tneva82 wrote:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
Or when did Fenris's bombing get mentioned before?

When did the Centurions get mentioned before? Or the new Marine flyer?

You're confusing "retcon" with "advancement".

So you call the bombing of Fenris retcon?

Oookay so guess Return of the King was retcon of Fellowship of the ring then.

His point is that the clock never moves past 999.M41. Did the bombing of Fenris take place after that, or was it retconned into the current timeline?

**RazorEdge**

Warzone Fenris plays in the past.

Fenris itself was not bombed, is was another Planet from the same System.

**Crablezworth**

Silent Puffin? wrote:
40k needs to be split into 2 games. A game full of flyers and warmachnes far to large for the table and an actual skirmish game like 40k used to be.
Until this happens the chances of me playing 40k again are remote to say the least.

EXALTED

We need the line back between normal 40k and apoc.

**Gaz Taylor**

Illumini wrote:
With the recent more positive moves from GW, this could be great news. A smooth, fast and easy playing 40k ruleset might actually get me gaming 40k again.

The current bloated slowplaying unbalanced mess can`t get worse, so big thumbs up for new rules!

Pretty much this. After playing Age of Sigmar, I've found it's a refreshing game which is simple to pick up and easily customisable for however you want to play. I like the current rules for 40K but I agree with what has been mentioned several times in this thread - It's bloated.

Also I've been thinking GW may reboot 40K since hearing about the Death from the Skies supplement. If you look back at all recent releases for 40K (well since Tau update), it's all the bear minimum to support the new models. I think they are gearing up for a reboot and I welcome it, especially if it's like Age of Sigmar. I don't need to play complicated games, I just want something fun

**Talizvar**

Crablezworth wrote:
Silent Puffin? wrote:
40k needs to be split into 2 games. A game full of flyers and warmachnes far to large for the table and an actual skirmish game like 40k used to be.
Until this happens the chances of me playing 40k again are remote to say the least.

EXALTED
We need the line back between normal 40k and apoc.

I agree with getting back to the "normal" 40k of skirmish / squad based.
Apocalypse was fun and all but was clunky then as an add-on for 40k.
What was all that wrong with Epic?
Or at least make some rules to streamline the horde of models an "epic" battle represents on a 28mm scale rather than 5mm.

For smaller battles we like all that detail, it makes heroes more heroic etc.
For big battles, it is less heroic roleplay and more top view tactics on a large scale.

**RazorEdge**

Silent Puffin? wrote:
A game full of flyers and warmachnes far to large for the table and an actual skirmish game like 40k used to be.

EPIC

**Albino Squirrel**

Lockark wrote:
adamsouza wrote:
I love the formations, for the special rules they bring. When you play with only FOC things are predictable. Formations allow for much greater diversity in army building and their special rules can make otherwise suboptimal units enjoyable to field.

I'm taking these 8th edition in 2017 tumors with a 5lb bag of salt. It seems like the same people who speculated about 40K being on a 2 years cycle when 7th edition dropped are the same ones calling 8th edition in 2017, with no new evidence.

Fritz on Youtube is confident about 8th edition simply because someone he asked refused to answer about it.

8th edition rumors are just great click bait.

WTF would they even bother with the FAQ they are currently working on if it's invalidated in less than 6 months ?

Now honesntly, I could see a (7.5?) rulebook with the FAQ changes incorporated, and updated fortifications section. Maybe even a new starter set, with armies less aweful than Dark Angels and CSM

I felt the same way about these rumors untill sad panda just dropped his rumour bomb. When Sad Panda says something is happening, you take note.

OT, but I realy need to say. The formations are the number one thing breaking 40k right now. Mechanicus War Convocation is insane to the point, that their is no reason NOT to use it if your playing the army.

What "rumor bomb" are you talking about? All Sad Panda said was that a new edition of 40K would not come in 2016, which I think would be anyone's normal assumption, but that a new edition is being worked on, which I'm sure we all would have assumed to be the case.

**Janthkin**

I think we're done here for now, as there's no real news.