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.

Nurglitch

Still, don't let all that reality interfere with whatever 'jacks you off bad'.

My reality or yours mate?

You seem to be gaining a lot of popularity with the idea that GW owes us nothing, the loyal fan-base that has helped grow thier business.

I agree, you should write your own rules, and play with yourself, I think.

akira5665 wrote:My reality or yours mate?

Everyone shares reality.

akira5665 wrote:You seem to be gaining a lot of popularity with the idea that GW owes us nothing, the loyal fan-base that has helped grow thier business.

Loyal fan-base? What, you mean the customers that bought their product? They gave you the books and models you paid for. The next time you find "Eternal Gratitude" on your receipt in addition to the entries for the actual products you bought please give me a call so I can head down to my local retailer and get some.

akira5665 wrote:I agree, you should write your own rules, and play with yourself, I think.

Sorry, too busy using GW when I play with my friends. Still, nice flame, I appreciate it.

Nurglitch:

Loyal fan-base? What, you mean the customers that bought their product? They gave you the books and models you paid for. The next time you find "Eternal Gratitude" on your receipt in addition to the entries for the actual products you bought please give me a call so I can head down to my local retailer and get some.

No, but it did say 'Thank you' at the bottom, lol.
Must have been a typo.

Nurglitch wrote:

akira5665 wrote:My reality or yours mate?

Everyone shares reality.

Any proof to back that up?

As far as I can tell, reality is subjective. It's impossible for me to get inside your head and tell if we experience things in the same way. Indeed, doubt you could prove to me that other consciousnesses exist beyond my own.

I suppose you could argue that as a manifestation of consciousness you share my reality, but that would mean that the 'everyone' part of your statement becomes meaningless and it's just a tautology.

YOU'RE a tautology.

I'm telling my Mom on you..................

On topic:

Without having had time to have a good look at the rumoured changes to the rule set (and no ... the rumor threads don't cut it ... they just don't contain any "substance") it's hard to say if I like the changes or not.

I do like the sound of some of the changes. Vehicles getting saving throws for example. IMO vehicles aren't quite tough enough as it is.

I don't like the idea of limiting scoring units back to one FOC slot. Hell ... a tank will do a hell of a lot better job holding an objective than a handful of grunts.

Off Topic: It's absolutley disguisting that GW hasn't updated their codexes before moving from one edition to the next. Updating 1/3 or 1/2 of your army rules before updating the next rule edition is exactly why we have sloppy rules and the stupid RAW arguments.

If GW supported every army the same way they do the marines they would find that they didn't have to hammer space marines so much in order to make money. If they just bothered to do the comercially sensible thing of making sure that your game is fully up to date before releasing the next edition (or dropping the parts that they have no intention of updating) they wouldn't be in in the financial trouble the find themselves in now (and the fan base - the ones off whom they make all their money would actually be happier; therefore buying more minatures and making GW more money without the need to put the prices up on their kits)

The main reasons that SM are so popular is because they ALWAYS have an upto date rule system, they get all the best toys, and all the attention from GW in the forms of advertising, new minis etc.

akira5665 wrote:You seem to be gaining a lot of popularity with the idea that GW owes us nothing, the loyal fan-base that has helped grow thier business.

quote=Nurglitch
Loyal fan-base? What, you mean the customers that bought their product? They gave you the books and models you paid for. The next time you find "Eternal Gratitude" on your receipt in addition to the entries for the actual products you bought please give me a call so I can head down to my local retailer and get some.

Man i like the way you think Nurglitch, finally some body who ctually realises GW owes us nothing. Its just deluded gamers who think GW owes them something. What they owed was mini and paints and a game system. they delivered those. If anybody feels it was not upto thier expectations (you all know what coming next) they should stop playing instead of complaining about it

Well mech eldar being nerfed into the ground sux pretty hard (my three falcons and two serpents wont see much play anymore...), the meatshield block LOS is pretty stupid. LOL try and shoot ur way thru my 100 grotz to get mah orkz (which i may be actually saying soon...) Speaking of which, orks (and everyone else) now move as fast as stealers if you dont count scuttle. It also makes long range things that sit in the backfield much more difficult to use. How are my lootas going to shoot through my own wall of 100 orks? Of course through careful set up ect. they will probably do fine.

On the other hand, phoenix lords not being force weaponed may mean i might start fielding maugan ra. The new outflank will probably let me use my scorpions. Reapers and wraithlords will definitely see more play, and war walkers might make an appearance. As for orks, I wouldn't start building all those shootas quite yet. Nor would I bank on filling your elites with 45 lootas, it will be hard to get all those to be able to see. I think tank bustas will be better than everyone thought, you can pull back the grot screen when you want to shoot a juicy target, or use a screen to prevent you from having to shoot tanks. Also you can give squad a nob with PK, making them a help in combat when you close in. Stormboyz are retardedly fast. 12+2d6" if you can't assault on the first turn. You sure as hell will be set up for the 2nd turn though. Ramshackle isn't as good as everyone thought compared to other transports, but o'well. Since you can meatshield units, nob squads will be usable as you will probably be able to prevent them from being shot.

Overall...skimmer nerf sux for eldar, and the meatshield is REALLY REALLY stupid. I can just imagine how pissed my friends will be when they have to shoot through 60 grotz with 5+ KFF cover to shoot anything of value.

I would rather think of myself as a 'good customer', rather than a 'deluded gamer', and be treated accordingly.

Meep357 wrote:On topic:


The main reasons that SM are so popular is because they ALWAYS have an upto date rule system, they get all the best toys, and all the attention from GW in the forms of advertising, new minis etc.

No i think you will find that they are popular as most kids want the superhuman tough guys over insects, aliens and crappy IG. stop paintng the SM as GW poster boys. boo hoo GW spends to much time on the marines and not on my crappy DE or other equally carp xenos. SM are GW's classic icon, GET OVER IT; people need to stop having this attitude that they are elite and better players cos they dont play marines

@ Akira5665, well to be a good customer you just need to keep spending money and NOT complaining. to be a deluded customer you just have to keep complaining thinking GW will actually listen to you.

beef wrote:stop paintng the SM as GW poster boys. boo hoo GW spends to much time on the marines and not on my crappy DE or other equally carp xenos. SM are GW's classic icon, GET OVER IT

I think you'll find, when attempting to make an argument, it works better when you don't contradict yourself right at the beginning.

people need to stop having this attitude that they are elite and better players cos they dont play marines

Please attempt to point out a single example of that in this thread.

That's pretty funny, beef.

beef wrote:
@ Akira5665, well to be a good customer you just need to keep spending money and NOT complaining. to be a deluded customer you just have to keep complaining thinking GW will actually listen to you.

If you want to see deluded customers just go over to YMTC. There are a whole bunch of people there (and all over 40k forums) that push their ideas thinking that GW will listen to them & think that because GW has done something similar to what they suggested that it's because they came up with the idea.

beef wrote:
No i think you will find that they are popular as most kids want the superhuman tough guys over insects, aliens and crappy IG. stop paintng the SM as GW poster boys. boo hoo GW spends to much time on the marines and not on my crappy DE or other equally carp xenos. SM are GW's classic icon, GET OVER IT; people need to stop having this attitude that they are elite and better players cos they dont play marines

As for the anti-marine jibe ..... well it's obvious from your comments that you must play marines and feel insecure about the fact that you do play them (esp as you need to put down anyone who doesn't want to play them).

Beef-
@ Akira5665, well to be a good customer you just need to keep spending money and NOT complaining. to be a deluded customer you just have to keep complaining thinking GW will actually listen to you.

Being subtle is part of your charm Beef, lol.

I agree, the filthy Xenos should build a bridge and get over it, as I am a pure 'Humie' Loyalist.

All our joking aside-GW get with the program! Make every 3rd Ed Codex 4th ed before you make a 5th ed ruleset!!! Does that make sense to anyone else but me?

Nurglitch wrote:bejustofbedead: I mean people playing Warhammer 40k with armies that have codicies dating back to the 3rd edition of the game don't have to play the game if they don't want to. That goes for everyone playing Warhammer 40k: they choose to do it and GW doesn't owe them jack squat.

I nominate this post for "Fanboy Moron Of The Month".

It makes sense to me, but that rarely comes into it with GW. Smelly gits that they are. I'm just happy orks got a 4th and a half ed 'dex, even if it means we went the whole way through 4th with that crappy assed old excuse for a book. Now I suppose we'll have to wait for the tail end of 5th to get our new book. Messed up. Dark Eldar, Necrons and Gaurd really need updating. TBH I can live without the inquisition stuff (I don't think the game needed Witchhunters or Daemonhunters) but it would be nice if the got some sort of look in.
Why can't the do a re-set like in 3rd? That would be the sensible option. They need to hire more developers or something because it seems like the current crew are snowed under. Bah.

Beef: You've heard it before, we've heard it before. We're not going to stop complaining until the situation improves, you're not going to stop telling us to stop complaining and quit until we do. We get it. Jesus.

Da Boss: Maybe the orks will survive 5th edition
intact. If the ork codex and 5th were developed
near the same time, any possible nerf will be
pre-planned.

Ok, that's not as comforting a thought as I
thought it would be.

Malfred-If the ork codex and 5th were developed
near the same time, any possible nerf will be
pre-planned.

That would indicate foresight and cunning strategy.

Joining to sig now..............

Meep357 wrote:[

As for the anti-marine jibe ..... well it's obvious from your comments that you must play marines and feel insecure about the fact that you do play them (esp as you need to put down anyone who doesn't want to play them).

Yes i play marines. SW to be exact. I have always played them. since 2nd edition. Why would i be insecure about that?? I am not putting down peope who play other armies just the ones who think they are better by not playing marines. the ones who winge constantly about how hard done they are by GW, boo hoo, find another freakin hobby you cry babies.

mughi3 wrote:measureing range from the weapons barrels on vehicles

Yeah, this is wierd - I expected them to go back to bases / hulls for all distances. Oh, well...

screening

Meh, For the most part, it makes sense, as most troops will shoot at what they can see.

direct fire shooting causing wounds to models out of LOS or around the corner, hiding behind a tank etc..

Models aren't static - they're running about.

making all vehicles pillboxes again

Vehicles will be mobile Transports, semi-mobile Ordnance / single-gunners, or static Ordnance Barrage / multi-gun platforms. Ordnance Barrage has been move-or-fire since 3rd Edition, so no loss there.

Predators simply become the AV13 version of the move-or-fire Devastators they replace. As a nice side-effect, the all-Lascannon Annihilator vs Autocannon/HBs Destructor are far more comparable in overall battlefield utility.

Land Raider Crusader's Hurricane Bolters are more useful.

Yeah, Chimeras lose a bit of firepower, but no biggie - they're not MBTs - they're IFVs. The default config of Multi-Laser & HB is more sensible, as they don't compete with each other as much on the move.

I think they're better this way. As non-Scoring units, I'd rather pay less for lower-capability Tanks that are more clearly support. Plus, it's not like Predators moved that much in last edition, anyways.

.the vehicle nerf-

Huh? Overall, vehicles are more survivable than ever with only 2/6 Destroyed on Pen and 0/6 Destroyed on Glance.

run/fleet/march

Be thankful we don't have WFB's wheeling and reforming...

.no blocking LOS from area terrain

You know, you can agree on whether area terrain blocks LOS prior to the start of the game. Essentially "flat" things like water / mud / ice / lava needn't block LOS while still being difficult / dangerous.

.only troop choices count as scoring while we weaken all your other choices accordingly? if they want a bigger core to the army list they could have simple made the mandatory troop rquirement 3 or 4 instead of 2.

Ahh, but then armies with only 2 Troops would be invalidated, as opposed to non-competitive. There's a big difference.

And besides, this only applies 2/3 of the scenarios, and if the thing is a draw, things return to VPs. So no biggie.

.melta weapon nerf-get a little bump on the damage chart-loose the AP-1 auto pen ability...so it counts as an equivalent minus one given the new chart.

At short range, a Melta has a minimum AP of 10, and an average of 15. As it nearly always Penetrates, the +1 on the chart is more valuable.

akira5665 wrote:I think it is disgraceful there are players out there who have to use 3rd Ed Codecies for a soon to be released 5th Ed rules. Awful.

Should GW simply put them out of their misery and Squat them?

Because, that's the alternative.

bejustorbedead wrote:they are, in fact, stuck using a woefully outdated book for so long as they continue to have an interest in playing.

That presumes that they choose to only play with their outdated army. If they're don't buy new armies, are they still GW's customers?

Given that, like any business, GW likes money, one would think keeping codices up to date for everyone's armies and giving them each time in the spotlight would be a rather obvious way to ensure continued interest, and thus, continued forking over of cash.

That presumes that all Codices contribute to GW's bottom line. However, as we know, only Space Marines make real money for GW, so the slow sellers should be lucky they're not cancelled.

Like any business, GW has products that become obsolete and lose support. If the Dark Eldar actually were embraced and supported (financially) by the community (like the Black Templars and Tau), then they would have gotten a Codex update. In the mean time, GW should be commended for continuing to retain sufficient compatibility with new versions to allowing the DE to continue playing their army as-is.

IntoTheRain wrote:
Forced March. Be cause 6 point Ork boys aren't broken enough.

Basically, I forsee the game becoming 100 shooty troops trying to stop 100 assaulty troops before they reach CC.

Run - forgoe shooting to move extra d6 inches, but CAN NOT assault that turn

Only troops count as scoring. Oh fun, so to be competitive you now have to run nothing but troops. Truely, this is a masterful idea. Has anyone ever actually watched mass troop fights? It is possibly one of the most boring, dice driven, uninspiring sights you will ever see.

Some people cry cheese when an opponent skimps on troop choices.
Now there is actually an incentive to take troop choices.

You HAVE to take 2 Troop choices already.
Holding objectives with them, or taking more troops to hold objectives adds to the strategy of the game.

Da Boss wrote:Why can't the do a re-set like in 3rd? That would be the sensible option.

Not really. If GW did that, 40k would grind to a halt. They'd have to pull all of the current Codices, as the rulebook list would invalidate everything. Then they'd have to re-release everything. Remember how long it took to release the original Codices? It'd be a couple years, even if GW released a Codex every other month.

Remember how nerfed everything was when we only had the rulebook lists (NO Special Characters, NO Special Rules)? The complaints of nerfage would be insane. Right now, everybody gets to use their current Codex, so it's not so bad.

The only real reason to reset would be to kill the slow-sellers off, and after seeing the whining from the LatD, killing an actual Codex army like Dark Eldar would be much worse. This is why GW stopped with the army list expansion.

JohnHwangDD -That presumes that they choose to only play with their outdated army. If they're don't buy new armies, are they still GW's customers?

So nobody buys DE figs any more? As for new players, I was actually thinking of a 400pt DE list for Kill teams, even though the Codex is out of date, so to speak.

Should I (Or can I) only get a Talos on E-bay? Or until 6-8 months ago, Orks?

JohnHwangDD -The only real reason to reset would be to kill the slow-sellers off, and after seeing the whining from the LatD, killing an actual Codex army like Dark Eldar would be much worse. This is why GW stopped with the army list expansion.

I would not assume so neccessarily,as sometimes streamlining rules with codices is more important to me, the player, as opposed to a business owner.
If I was involved in some of the decisions over there I could tell you for sure. As for $$$ you are probably right though. *sigh*

I'm a fan to be honest.

It makes many "dumb" styled armies go away, and a few things change.

Vehicles slow down some, but get much more survivable, but don't "score" so they're the support instead of "the army" (Eldar).

They also fixed the problem where the player who goes second can just "run up and nab" an objective on the last turn without fear of reprisal. Instead of actually "fighting" they just zoom and capture the objective because their units that can move 24" or more hid most of the game and will just go "score" now that they're free from reprisal.

People complain about area terrain not blocking LOS. They say in the book to go through the game and say what blocks LOS and what doesn't and classify everything before you start to play. This is not hard. And just because all the "area terrain" that we play with now doesn't block LOS, nothing stops you from classifying different pieces of terrain as "Blocking LOS".

To even think that people will setup tables, especially for competitive play, that have no blocking LOS terrain because of the changes in 5th Ed is ridiculous.

Things will change and generally they'll be for the better IMO.

akira5665 wrote:

JohnHwangDD -That presumes that they choose to only play with their outdated army. If they're don't buy new armies, are they still GW's customers?

So nobody buys DE figs any more?

God, I hope not, for the player's sake. I mean, when GW said they're de-supported "Classic / Collectors" in the first "big" Annual / Catalog (2005?), that should be ample warning that it's a dead army. If you know of any player foolish or naive enough to buy DE minis and expect full support, please let me know - I've got a couple bridges I'd like to sell.

JohnHwangDD -The only real reason to reset would be to kill the slow-sellers off, and after seeing the whining from the LatD, killing an actual Codex army like Dark Eldar would be much worse. This is why GW stopped with the army list expansion.

I would not assume so neccessarily,

I would, at least, based on GW history.

If you look at the 40k2 - 40k3 "reset", what happened to the Squats?

If you look at the WFB5 - WFB6 "reset", what happened to the Chaos Dwarves?

Both armies, deader than a doornail after the reset.

As for $$$ you are probably right though. *sigh*

I'm just glad I flushed away my Dark Eldar and Kroot Mercenaries early rather than late.

JohnHwangDD wrote:The only real reason to reset would be to kill the slow-sellers off, and after seeing the whining from the LatD, killing an actual Codex army like Dark Eldar would be much worse. This is why GW stopped with the army list expansion.

What stop? The next codex out is codex Daemons, a new codex!

I agree that GW owe 'us' nothing, however what if this new rulebook isn't up to scratch and my (our?) current models and armies aren't supported? Then it cuts both ways and I owe them nothing. The critical point is that I'm not the one with the shrinking turnover and share price.

"If you know of any player foolish or naive enough to buy DE minis and expect full support, please let me know - I've got a couple bridges I'd like to sell."

Considering they were in the intro boxed set (when most DE players I know started the army)?

I think most players would expect them to be expected at least as well as Space Marines - the other army in that boxed set.

GW has already said that they're releasing DE again though and have committed to redesigning the range. If someone likes the current models well enough, it makes sense to have a force painted and ready to go for when the new book comes out.

With an updated army list and models that aren't ass, I expect Dark Eldar to be reasonably popular. They won't be as popular as Marines, Eldar, Necrons or Tau - but they'll hold their own with Orks, DA, BT, Tyranids, and the other secondary armies. Dark Elves have never had any trouble selling to Fantasy players. They just need sleek scary looking jetbikes, better posed characters, sexy Wych Elves and a completely reimagined design for their warriors. I expect all of those things will be out by the end of 2009.

"If you look at the WFB5 - WFB6 "reset", what happened to the Chaos Dwarves? "

They got a 'Ravening Hordes' army list and are still a fully tournament legal army?

GW learned from the Squat's disaster that saw thousands of players quit the game in disgust. Hence when they decided to drop Chaos Dwarves they left them with a token army list and some vague hope for the future. This resulted in a lot less acrimony and people quitting. I expect GW will follow a similar approach with other armies that they decide aren't worth the bother.

Kroot Mercenaries weren't an army anyway. They were a Tau sublist. So far GW hasn't run into much opposition in getting rid of them, the Chaos Legion lists, the various sublists in Fantasy (e.g. Lahmian Counts, Nuln, Snotling Hordes). It would have been nice for Tau Empire to have included a Kroot Shaper HQ option, but only a few people complained.

On the other hand, GW is adding Daemon armies to both core games, so I'd expect Ork and Dark Eldar length waits before they come around to Sisters of Battle or Wood Elves again.