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.
Aren73 wrote: Except that bothers me. Us wargamers are usually an opinionated lot and no one is 100% happy with any codex. Given half a chance any of us would tweak something even if just a little bit.
Yet it looks like the playtesters were given the playtest version of the codex, essentially said: "Hey, this is so cool everything is fine Games Workshop change NOTHING about this codex PLEASE" and then GW immediately sent it to print.
Not saying the codex is bad, but I refuse to believe the playtesters didn't change anything about the playtest version of the book. Isn't that what testing is for?
Why do people have so much tunnel vision on this, there's so many different ways it can go.
For instance, the play testers could have said something really needs to be changed and GW can just say no.
It’s also possible that this wasn’t an early beta, but a proof-check beta version of the codex. You know the stage where you find all those irritating typos and errors (like lithguard/deathmarks being troops) before printing. I figured it was, since it was fully laid out with all the artwork, etc.
EnTyme wrote: Sweet! Whip Coils are now a direct upgrade. Now I don't feel so dumb for building my Wraiths with them.
But now Wraiths get a severe pt upgrade (55 pts, +17).
I'm not the best judge of points efficiency, but Wraiths were generally considered to be pretty close to their value in points, so a buff would necessitate a points bump.
Duskland wrote:It’s also possible that this wasn’t an early beta, but a proof-check beta version of the codex. You know the stage where you find all those irritating typos and errors (like lithguard/deathmarks being troops) before printing. I figured it was, since it was fully laid out with all the artwork, etc.
Oh, the irony.
2000 Khorne Bloodbound (Skullfiend Tribe- Aqshy)
1000 Tzeentch Arcanites (Pyrofane Cult - Hysh) in progress 2000 Slaves to Darkness (Ravagers)
Aren73 wrote: Except that bothers me. Us wargamers are usually an opinionated lot and no one is 100% happy with any codex. Given half a chance any of us would tweak something even if just a little bit.
Yet it looks like the playtesters were given the playtest version of the codex, essentially said: "Hey, this is so cool everything is fine Games Workshop change NOTHING about this codex PLEASE" and then GW immediately sent it to print.
Not saying the codex is bad, but I refuse to believe the playtesters didn't change anything about the playtest version of the book. Isn't that what testing is for?
I don't really understand why someone would think the codex being nearly identical to this beta leak would be evidence that playtesters aren't doing anything or even that GW isn't responding to them. Surely you'd expect the final codex to be very similar to a beta version.
Like, I'm not GW and I have zero experience with game design, but here's what seems to me to be a reasonable way to put together a final set of rules:
1. I put together a first draft, and send it out to playtesters. They give feedback and I make changes.
2. I put together a second draft, and send it out to playtesters. They give feedback and I make changes.
...
X. Eventually everyone is pretty happy with the rules, so I take the last beta version and release it basically as-is.
Likewise if I'm a playtester and I'm going to leak a beta version, I leak the most recent one. It's the most recent one because the consensus was that it was pretty close to what the final version should be.
Do we have reason to believe that they only do one round of sending playtest rules out or something? As Duskland points out, this looks like a pretty final version of the codex. I would have expected an early beta to basically be a Word document. They've got everything laid out and named and formatted. Surely this is pretty late in the process, right?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/03/21 18:16:07
Yet it looks like the playtesters were given the playtest version of the codex, essentially said: "Hey, this is so cool everything is fine Games Workshop change NOTHING about this codex PLEASE" and then GW immediately sent it to print.
Not saying the codex is bad, but I refuse to believe the playtesters didn't change anything about the playtest version of the book. Isn't that what testing is for?
why do you think there was only one revision cycle?
Well from a practical Standpoint, do we think its realistic that they did another revision cycle after October 2017 and got that + printing and shipping done until now?
I always thought printing + shipping was a really long process?
Aren73 wrote: Except that bothers me. Us wargamers are usually an opinionated lot and no one is 100% happy with any codex. Given half a chance any of us would tweak something even if just a little bit.
Yet it looks like the playtesters were given the playtest version of the codex, essentially said: "Hey, this is so cool everything is fine Games Workshop change NOTHING about this codex PLEASE" and then GW immediately sent it to print.
Not saying the codex is bad, but I refuse to believe the playtesters didn't change anything about the playtest version of the book. Isn't that what testing is for?
I don't really understand why someone would think the codex being nearly identical to this beta leak would be evidence that playtesters aren't doing anything or even that GW isn't responding to them. Surely you'd expect the final codex to be very similar to a beta version.
Like, I'm not GW and I have zero experience with game design, but here's what seems to me to be a reasonable way to put together a final set of rules:
1. I put together a first draft, and send it out to playtesters. They give feedback and I make changes.
2. I put together a second draft, and send it out to playtesters. They give feedback and I make changes.
...
X. Eventually everyone is pretty happy with the rules, so I take the last beta version and release it basically as-is.
Likewise if I'm a playtester and I'm going to leak a beta version, I leak the most recent one. It's the most recent one because the consensus was that it was pretty close to what the final version should be.
Do we have reason to believe that they only do one round of sending playtest rules out or something? As Duskland points out, this looks like a pretty final version of the codex. I would have expected an early beta to basically be a Word document. They've got everything laid out and named and formatted. Surely this is pretty late in the process, right?
Yet it looks like the playtesters were given the playtest version of the codex, essentially said: "Hey, this is so cool everything is fine Games Workshop change NOTHING about this codex PLEASE" and then GW immediately sent it to print.
Not saying the codex is bad, but I refuse to believe the playtesters didn't change anything about the playtest version of the book. Isn't that what testing is for?
why do you think there was only one revision cycle?
Fair enough I think you might be correct here, it does indeed look pretty late in the testing process and is reasonable to say that this beta was right before final proofreading and printing.
Do we have any idication that they work with playtesters throughout the codex development stages? I would very much like it if they worked through 10 different versions of this codex updating the playtesters each time with a new one. However it could also be the opposite, where they develop the codex in house with their in house alpha testers, then only give the playtesters the single beta copy we have seen and unless the reaction is drastic they print that.
Do we have any idea which of those two the GW method is closest to? Not arguing for/against anything, just speculating btw.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/03/21 21:53:56
changemod wrote: I believe the YouTube video leak said in the description that the points might not be finalised?
I'm expecting a minor scattershot of small differences when we see the points page, not really expecting much other change though.
I'm also expecting the same thing. If anything, there will probably be a few minor points tweaks to a couple units/wargear but the bulk of the wording will remain the same
"Courage and Honour. I hear you murmur these words in the mist, in their wake I hear your hearts beat harder with false conviction seeking to convince yourselves that a brave death has meaning.
There is no courage to be found here my nephews, no honour to be had. Your souls will join the trillion others in the mist shrieking uselessly to eternity, weeping for the empire you could not save.
To the unfaithful, I bring holy plagues ripe with enlightenment. To the devout, I bring the blessing of immortality through the kiss of sacred rot.
And to you, new-born sons of Gulliman, to you flesh crafted puppets of a failing Imperium I bring the holiest gift of all.... Silence."
- Mortarion, The Death Lord, The Reaper of Men, Daemon Primarch of Nurgle
For the points costs of Lychguard / Dispersion Shields the 3++ and bounce a MW on a 6 should have been included in the data sheet (going off Beta points, I'm still holding onto the hope that Lychguard are cheaper in the codex)
CP's are going to be a premium with Necrons.
"Courage and Honour. I hear you murmur these words in the mist, in their wake I hear your hearts beat harder with false conviction seeking to convince yourselves that a brave death has meaning.
There is no courage to be found here my nephews, no honour to be had. Your souls will join the trillion others in the mist shrieking uselessly to eternity, weeping for the empire you could not save.
To the unfaithful, I bring holy plagues ripe with enlightenment. To the devout, I bring the blessing of immortality through the kiss of sacred rot.
And to you, new-born sons of Gulliman, to you flesh crafted puppets of a failing Imperium I bring the holiest gift of all.... Silence."
- Mortarion, The Death Lord, The Reaper of Men, Daemon Primarch of Nurgle
v0iddrgn wrote: Another confirmation day. No need for buying the Dex when we all have it downloaded on our devices already LOL
I think you'll be in for a surprise, the doom scythe is in tomorrow's preview, and it was untouched in the leaks. Somehow I doubt they would show a completely unchanged unit in a preview. I suppose they could be just showing off the new stratagem, but it honestly isn't that good.
Constantly being negative doesn't make you seem erudite, it just makes you look like a curmudgeon.
v0iddrgn wrote: Another confirmation day. No need for buying the Dex when we all have it downloaded on our devices already LOL
I think you'll be in for a surprise, the doom scythe is in tomorrow's preview, and it was untouched in the leaks. Somehow I doubt they would show a completely unchanged unit in a preview. I suppose they could be just showing off the new stratagem, but it honestly isn't that good.
Same could be said for the Lychguard "preview" today. Showed nothing different apart from 2 stratagems which can combo well with them.
Wish they gave the Doom Scythe the old beam profile that it had previously - everything under the line takes D3 hits. They've shown they are willing to do it with Mortarion having a similar weapon with Lantern.
"Courage and Honour. I hear you murmur these words in the mist, in their wake I hear your hearts beat harder with false conviction seeking to convince yourselves that a brave death has meaning.
There is no courage to be found here my nephews, no honour to be had. Your souls will join the trillion others in the mist shrieking uselessly to eternity, weeping for the empire you could not save.
To the unfaithful, I bring holy plagues ripe with enlightenment. To the devout, I bring the blessing of immortality through the kiss of sacred rot.
And to you, new-born sons of Gulliman, to you flesh crafted puppets of a failing Imperium I bring the holiest gift of all.... Silence."
- Mortarion, The Death Lord, The Reaper of Men, Daemon Primarch of Nurgle
I wish I could get excited about this, but I know damn well there is only going to be a single new model: the plastic clampack Cryptek that was released for Forgebane.
Kind of lame that in terms of model support from GWS, Necrons have gotten a single new model from 2011-2018 (the plastic Overlord), will now get a second one, and presumably that's it until 9th edition - so functionally 2 single character models over nearly a decade.
Certainly not holding my breath for FW to fill in any gaps since the only models they released for IA12 were low-effort retreads of existing models you'd expect from a hobbyist with some extra bits. There is 30k Marine stuff to make, after all!
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/03/23 02:49:14
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
v0iddrgn wrote: Another confirmation day. No need for buying the Dex when we all have it downloaded on our devices already LOL
I think you'll be in for a surprise, the doom scythe is in tomorrow's preview, and it was untouched in the leaks. Somehow I doubt they would show a completely unchanged unit in a preview. I suppose they could be just showing off the new stratagem, but it honestly isn't that good.
Same could be said for the Lychguard "preview" today. Showed nothing different apart from 2 stratagems which can combo well with them.
Wish they gave the Doom Scythe the old beam profile that it had previously - everything under the line takes D3 hits. They've shown they are willing to do it with Mortarion having a similar weapon with Lantern.
Honestly I wish the Doomscythes had something similar to the Fireprisms linked shots in terms of destructive potential.
Ouze wrote: I wish I could get excited about this, but I know damn well there is only going to be a single new model: the plastic clampack Cryptek that was released for Forgebane.
Kind of lame that in terms of model support from GWS, Necrons have gotten a single new model from 2011-2018 (the plastic Overlord), will now get a second one, and presumably that's it until 9th edition - so functionally 2 single character models over nearly a decade.
Certainly not holding my breath for FW to fill in any gaps since the only models they released for IA12 were low-effort retreads of existing models you'd expect from a hobbyist with some extra bits. There is 30k Marine stuff to make, after all!
Ouze,
I can certainly sympathize with this view. They didn't even release the character models from IA12! That being said, I am very grateful that nearly all of our range is in plastic. We could have ended up like Eldar, but instead ended up like the Nids.
I would really like to see some heavy weapon Necrons, and some more Canoptek units though!
v0iddrgn wrote: It looks to me like the "beta" codex is probably THE codex. No changes whatsoever based on official reveals.
There were several changes from the Forgebane rules to the Beta Codex, which indicates many of the rules may be the same, but the final point costs may not. There is some discrepancy however, so the beta does not look 100% accurate at this time.
The nature of forgebanes contents mean it most likely had to be finished well before the Necron codex. 10 to 1 the beta was the final version and the stuff in forgerbane is whats incorrect. Just because the Beta was leaked prior to the official release of FB doesn't somehow mean it was also sent to printers before FB.
I will take that bet. 50$ wager that Forgebane rules will match the final rulebook.
Someone is out 50 bones.
Does PayPal work for you?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
changemod wrote: I believe the YouTube video leak said in the description that the points might not be finalised?
I'm expecting a minor scattershot of small differences when we see the points page, not really expecting much other change though.
Points page is the MOST likely to be altered, we know they miss placed lych guard and deathmarks into the troops section.
BTW thank god they started putting points into slots at the back rather then an alphabetical mess. No idea what they were thinking originally lol.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/03/23 14:25:26
v0iddrgn wrote: It looks to me like the "beta" codex is probably THE codex. No changes whatsoever based on official reveals.
There were several changes from the Forgebane rules to the Beta Codex, which indicates many of the rules may be the same, but the final point costs may not. There is some discrepancy however, so the beta does not look 100% accurate at this time.
The nature of forgebanes contents mean it most likely had to be finished well before the Necron codex. 10 to 1 the beta was the final version and the stuff in forgerbane is whats incorrect. Just because the Beta was leaked prior to the official release of FB doesn't somehow mean it was also sent to printers before FB.
I will take that bet. 50$ wager that Forgebane rules will match the final rulebook.
Someone is out 50 bones.
Does PayPal work for you?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
changemod wrote: I believe the YouTube video leak said in the description that the points might not be finalised?
I'm expecting a minor scattershot of small differences when we see the points page, not really expecting much other change though.
Points page is the MOST likely to be altered, we know they miss placed lych guard and deathmarks into the troops section.
BTW thank god they started putting points into slots at the back rather then an alphabetical mess. No idea what they were thinking originally lol.
v0iddrgn wrote: It looks to me like the "beta" codex is probably THE codex. No changes whatsoever based on official reveals.
There were several changes from the Forgebane rules to the Beta Codex, which indicates many of the rules may be the same, but the final point costs may not. There is some discrepancy however, so the beta does not look 100% accurate at this time.
The nature of forgebanes contents mean it most likely had to be finished well before the Necron codex. 10 to 1 the beta was the final version and the stuff in forgerbane is whats incorrect. Just because the Beta was leaked prior to the official release of FB doesn't somehow mean it was also sent to printers before FB.
I will take that bet. 50$ wager that Forgebane rules will match the final rulebook.
Someone is out 50 bones.
Does PayPal work for you?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
changemod wrote: I believe the YouTube video leak said in the description that the points might not be finalised?
I'm expecting a minor scattershot of small differences when we see the points page, not really expecting much other change though.
Points page is the MOST likely to be altered, we know they miss placed lych guard and deathmarks into the troops section.
BTW thank god they started putting points into slots at the back rather then an alphabetical mess. No idea what they were thinking originally lol.
Enjoy your two years of DCM Membership!
Ha ha, you don't really have to mate, I was just playing
Sasori wrote: That being said, I am very grateful that nearly all of our range is in plastic. We could have ended up like Eldar, but instead ended up like the Nids.
I would really like to see some heavy weapon Necrons, and some more Canoptek units though!
Yeah, I know that while I am complaining, some definitely have it worse. DE sure were in the wilderness a long time there, and then you have SoB.
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
I'm still wondering why the UKGW site has all the air units for Necron missing at present - not just out of stock but discontinued and removed pages from the website.
We know they aren't removed nor changed to new sculpt as the preview articles include both (including links to the defunct pages).
So I wonder if its just repackaging (not sure what there is specifically in those to repackage that's special over the rest of the range) or if they might even be putting them into a combined kit of some kind. That or they could be releasing them in new boxed sets with new numbers (although honestly I'd have thought they'd do that with destroyers).
Ouze wrote: I wish I could get excited about this, but I know damn well there is only going to be a single new model: the plastic clampack Cryptek that was released for Forgebane.
Kind of lame that in terms of model support from GWS, Necrons have gotten a single new model from 2011-2018 (the plastic Overlord), will now get a second one, and presumably that's it until 9th edition - so functionally 2 single character models over nearly a decade.
Certainly not holding my breath for FW to fill in any gaps since the only models they released for IA12 were low-effort retreads of existing models you'd expect from a hobbyist with some extra bits. There is 30k Marine stuff to make, after all!
You forgot the vault which came in 2013. That said I get the point. I am surprised they didn't take the chance to do plastic flayed ones, an alternative build adding a completely new unit to the range would have changed the conversation considerably.
To save you the trouble of watching an entire 3 hour video, it would seem that everything is identical to the leaked codex, including the troops error with Lychguard and Deathmarks.
Arachnofiend wrote: To save you the trouble of watching an entire 3 hour video, it would seem that everything is identical to the leaked codex,
Yeah, I skipped about a bit and found the two key things I wanted to know: Destroyers/heavy destroyers still have the good points costs of the beta, and monoliths didn't get their needed (I mean, they aren't quite so overpriced you can't take one because you like the model, but they aren't good for cost- and I doubt anyone would want to field multiples) point cut.
including the troops error with Lychguard and Deathmarks.
2000 Khorne Bloodbound (Skullfiend Tribe- Aqshy)
1000 Tzeentch Arcanites (Pyrofane Cult - Hysh) in progress
2000 Slaves to Darkness (Ravagers)
5300 | 
2800 | 
3600 | 
1600 | 
4000+
Someone is out 50 bones.
