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.

The gathering storm and malign portents both heralded a new edition of the game, and PA seems to be cut from the same cloth. I'm not sure what GWs angle is on splat book series before edition change, but it is a pattern. Maybe they do it to subsidize the edition change, which tend to be expensive. GW doesn't carry debt, so there is a certain logic to it, since right before release is when the holding cost would be greatest.

There is certainly a need as well, alot of the rules in 8th ed were untested going into the edition, and while a lot of them have worked out, many of them haven't. With three years of experience with the new system under their belt, I'm sure GW has a lot of things they would like to change.

There is still plenty of things that could do with fixing(cough playtesting) in 8th edition beta 21 before they jump to a 9th edition.

Hopefully they have listened to people and don't go making sweeping changes or mess with the balance of the game too much requiring wholesale new codex's.

While their is the obvious issues of just GW can't write technical language to save themselves.

There is also a number of other aspects that could really do with some play testing like functional terrain rules, and jusy before someone's a smart ass No cities of death isn't functional it's just as balance breaking just in a different way.

Also CP system still could be better, with them slowly handing out mono faction bonuses it's getting better but we'll see where we end up at the end of Psychic Awakening.

Martel732 wrote:
Oh, there won't be. It's GW. They had no idea tripointing existed when they wrote fall back. They've just declined to faq it.

Looks like they learned about tripointing recently.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/04/17/charging-and-how-to-do-itgw-homepage-post-3fw-homepage-post-3/




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ice_can wrote:
There is still plenty of things that could do with fixing(cough playtesting) in 8th edition beta 21 before they jump to a 9th edition.

Agreed.

Yeah, people claim it was playtested, but I 100% don't believe them.

Martel732 wrote:
Yeah, people claim it was playtested, but I 100% don't believe them.

I read an ex GW design studio guy say that testing often has very little impact on how the rules end up finalised in a codex or CA.

Unfortunately just because something is tested, doesn't mean decision makers appropriately use the data.

I like a lot of the underpinnings of 8th, but there are some pretty serious holes in it.

Karol wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Yeah, people claim it was playtested, but I 100% don't believe them.

I read an ex GW design studio guy say that testing often has very little impact on how the rules end up finalised in a codex or CA.

That sounds about right for GW.

Martel732 wrote:

Karol wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Yeah, people claim it was playtested, but I 100% don't believe them.

I read an ex GW design studio guy say that testing often has very little impact on how the rules end up finalised in a codex or CA.

That sounds about right for GW.

Unless it was that guy who made the post in like 2013 about Eldar Knights.

 Sim-Life wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Karol wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Yeah, people claim it was playtested, but I 100% don't believe them.

I read an ex GW design studio guy say that testing often has very little impact on how the rules end up finalised in a codex or CA.

That sounds about right for GW.

Unless it was that guy who made the post in like 2013 about Eldar Knights.

LOL like they've actually changed. Remember how long it took then to finally fix Castellans despite the constant reminders that it was broken?
2013 is the same as 2020 except with friendly PR

Pandemic must be over - you've all returned to squealing for your rules updates & quibbling about what should be in it/why.

ccs wrote:
Pandemic must be over - you've all returned to squealing for your rules updates & quibbling about what should be in it/why.

People are getting restless, duh.

ccs wrote:
Pandemic must be over - you've all returned to squealing for your rules updates & quibbling about what should be in it/why.

Maybe in places where people play at homes. In places where the majority happened at stores, the end of pandemic won't change. Our store closed and won't open.

ccs wrote:
Pandemic must be over - you've all returned to squealing for your rules updates & quibbling about what should be in it/why.

I mean, if people are stuck at home, complaining on the internet isn't exactly an unknown activity, especially when everything's closed

ccs wrote:
Pandemic must be over - you've all returned to squealing for your rules updates & quibbling about what should be in it/why.

To be fair, GW made a big song and dance about their FAQ schedule early in 8th's lifespan. Getting a WHC post with an update as to what's going on with the Spring FAQ wouldn't hurt anyone, even if it basically said "sorry, due to what's going on we're not releasing one".

 Dysartes wrote:

ccs wrote:
Pandemic must be over - you've all returned to squealing for your rules updates & quibbling about what should be in it/why.

To be fair, GW made a big song and dance about their FAQ schedule early in 8th's lifespan. Getting a WHC post with an update as to what's going on with the Spring FAQ wouldn't hurt anyone, even if it basically said "sorry, due to what's going on we're not releasing one".

Equally, it’s hardly anyone’s number one priority right now, as I’m sure you realise. We’ll all be fine without an FAQ for a bit longer.

It should be easier not harder to produce a FAQ in the current environment unless GW does not allow employees to work from home. No communication combined and how much energy GW has put into 8th PR amplifies the silence.

7th and 8th took us into directions best left out of future editions. I am hoping they just turn 6th upside down into a 9 and make a few adjustments to update those rules. Not going to happen but can't a Necron dream? Actually, I am not sure about that...

 Tokhuah wrote:
It should be easier not harder to produce a FAQ in the current environment unless GW does not allow employees to work from home. No communication combined and how much energy GW has put into 8th PR amplifies the silence.

7th and 8th took us into directions best left out of future editions. I am hoping they just turn 6th upside down into a 9 and make a few adjustments to update those rules. Not going to happen but can't a Necron dream? Actually, I am not sure about that...

Ew. 6th gave us Hull Points. No thanks.

If they're going to go back, I'd rather go back to 5th. But 8th is pretty good.



Anyway, it's hard to produce an FAQ in lockdown since an FAQ requires data to make changes. IIRC they openly stated one time that their FAQ followed and was based on Adepticon experiences, so I would guess that given that a number of major tournaments didn't happen this year, there's just no information to show if anything is wrong.

The tournaments that usually precede these FAQs didn't happen.

Only a portion of the FAQs are from tournaments. Also, there were tournaments between the last FAQ and the cancellation of Adepticon.

5th gave us the abomination of TLOS. 4th please, but with some alteration.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
5th gave us the abomination of TLOS. 4th please, but with some alteration.

TLOS is fine, it's entirely binary. I want 5th with Wound Pool abuse removed (and maybe Grey Knights removed too )

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
5th gave us the abomination of TLOS. 4th please, but with some alteration.

TLOS is fine, it's entirely binary. I want 5th with Wound Pool abuse removed (and maybe Grey Knights removed too )

I dislike TLOS for ruining all the woods in the game. "Here is my woodland board!" *might as well be planet bowling ball, at least if you're playing with enough space to actually put down minis*

Abstracted woods were the best. TLOS is cancer.

Martel732 wrote:
Abstracted woods were the best. TLOS is cancer.

oh feth I agree with martel on something

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Abstracted woods were the best. TLOS is cancer.

oh feth I agree with martel on something

Its true though, 4th Ed woods were great.

 alextroy wrote:
Only a portion of the FAQs are from tournaments. Also, there were tournaments between the last FAQ and the cancellation of Adepticon.

Sure there were, but Adepticon is one of the Big Ones--and GW's staff are present at said event and taking 'in person feedback' from the tournament players.

People want to make it sound like Big Tournaments are all that matter when it comes to writing lists, etc--then are shocked when GW doesn't provide FAQs based off that feedback from the people actually present.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Abstracted woods were the best. TLOS is cancer.

oh feth I agree with martel on something

I'm sure we agree on more than one thing. I'm just abrasive when I disagree.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
5th gave us the abomination of TLOS. 4th please, but with some alteration.

Rogue Trader gave us TLOS, and it's been in every version of the game since. 4th edition just changed how area terrain worked, which has been different in pretty much every edition.

Having said that, I would agree that 4th edition's take on area terrain was better than 5th... but it was written in a way that confused an awful lot of people.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:


But 8th is pretty good.

Through my eyes this sentiment pretty much invalidates any opinion you have on the matter.

To each their own. And to be real, 6th for a Necron still means the 5th Edition Codex so my perception may be a bit warped in this regard. Currently there are so many great miniatures games and bootlegs like Grimdark are a more streamlined version of Kill Team so I pretty much buy a few GW models but do not pay for or play any of their content. This is sort of like treating GW as a model company but not a game company. If GW decides to work on a game worth my time I will consider it but not if 9th is 8th v2.0 because I am not bound to play a game just because I own the models.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Equally, it’s hardly anyone’s number one priority right now, as I’m sure you realise. We’ll all be fine without an FAQ for a bit longer.

But at the same time, why not have one ready? It's not as if working from home stops you from doing an FAQ.