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.

 Platuan4th wrote:


Two Wars. The 3rd War never officially ended.

Touche.

Hats off to you sir.

 BorderCountess wrote:
Maybe you can just use circular terrain?

Or Circular Logic?

I do find the people celebrating the death of "standing in circles" kind of hilarious.

I mean, if we end up standing next to power generators, barbicans, ammo caches, Pavlov's House, etc that's going to feel better than controlling arbitrary spots in the open.

For a second I thought they might go with 40mm objectives (so dioramas) you had to be B2B to score.

My question is: will there be standard terrain that is declared an objective? Or will players place terrain as objectives, kind of like placing fortifications now?

Dudeface wrote:

 kodos wrote:
Nothing stops you from putting terrain on saud circle
Just that nobody is doing it because it makes the already complicated gameplay more complicated than it need to be

But everyone who really cares about immersion could to that already for the past 30 years.
There is literally no change at all except that the Base is now rectangular instead of round, so everyone must get new bases for their objective markers

Exactly this.

Like with strats: In 9th, everyone had 30- 40 to choose from, and everyone was like "Oh my gosh, so complicated, so much mental load!"
Then 10th drops and you get only 6 per detachment, and everyone's like "Awesome, streamlined!"

But since everyone has 4-7 detachments, you still have 30-40 strats. Nobody thinks about how they were free in 9th to pick their favourite 6 before the game and use only those six. Problem solved without GW forcing us to solve the problem instead of letting us choose to solve it ourselves.

THAT's the difference between circles and terrain: one option gives you the choice to solve the problem yourself or do nothing about it except bitch about it on the internet. The other option takes the choice away and forces everyone to do what people who like solving problems instead of bitching about them were already doing.

And honestly? The difference is actually huge.

 cuda1179 wrote:
My question is: will there be standard terrain that is declared an objective? Or will players place terrain as objectives, kind of like placing fortifications now?

This is the last big questions really, will GW try and force a box of standard terrain at people.

The_Real_Chris wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Dudeface wrote:


What you're saying is they were jackasses and should mobilise the entire population to fight the mere estimated 40 million orks with ease? It was 100-500 billion on the world before the 3rd war, they note "billions" lost and it was one of the single largest losses of human life in the imperium history.

But on the flip side they only committed a tiny force to combat a tiny force in comparison and seemingly all is well. So who knows.

Yeah, I think people forget that when Ghaz showed up for his rematch, part of what he did was FLATTEN a large number of cities to break the defensive fortifications of the Imperium and weaken their civilian reserves. It really ruined Armageddon's ability to replenish their troops directly.

As someone has pointed out the numbers in 40k make little sense. But yes, they can loose 99% of the human population of 500 billion and still raise armies of tens of millions with a 1% mobilisation rate.

That's because 40k runs on narrative causality, not actual cause and effect as we understand it. That said, the Steel Legion being on the back foot and in numbers that strain to keep up with their attrition rate makes a better story than them being completely fine and not struggling.

I just really enjoyed the new Marmlneus Calgar model they previewed at Adepticon:

Trigger Warning (Terrbile Humor, Photoshop Abuse)

Bobby's Moving Castle.

SamusDrake wrote:
Bobby's Moving Castle.

And for the non believers out there, you can now print your own calgar cogfort. https://www.instagram.com/reel/DWfGieTgeV3/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link

I am still laughing at that picture. That is ****ing hilarious!

The thing that wrinkles my brain about GW talking about no longer having to stand in circles and showing a template is that 40k doesn't have official circle props, they just have objective markers.

The templates were a player creation that made the game state instantly more transparent. GW clearly agreed that it was a good idea because they implemented it in AoS Spearhead.

So making it a "cheer" moment in their presentation and then showing a Spearhead set later with circles to stand in was a bit of head scratcher.

I think they are just going to be shaped cardboard templates because GW isn't going require tournament organisers to buy a hundred £130 Dilapidated Suberbann Howsss minisets to run a large tournament.

The key thing to realise with a GW rules update is that its not about improvement nor refinement, its about change for the sake of change.

With 3 year cycles and with each edition being a decent rework they go looking for things to change. Even if the problems are only surface level complaints or don't even really have any - there's potential for them to change things for a whole list of reasons.

It isn't change for the sake of change, they just want to make it the Best Edition Ever! Until they do it again in a few years.

It is literally just an excuse to sell rulebooks.

The objectives certainly appear to be card templates in the Your Questions Answered video. Typically Imperial architectuire vibes but I'm sure they could knock out some faction specific stuff it's just printed card stock.

Billicus wrote:
It isn't change for the sake of change, they just want to make it the Best Edition Ever! Until they do it again in a few years.

It is literally just an excuse to sell rulebooks.

I would not be surprised that the combined sales numbers of books, cards and Codex is vastly higher than certain non marine armies.

Eh. Books aren’t the profit makers.

Rules shake ups change how your army works. Your pre-existing army. And here’s a shiny new toy, which opens up a new set of worthwhile unit combos.

And from there, the shape of the game changes. Because when you’ve got new toys and new ways to use them? Your opponent will have to adapt. And ideally buy a new unit or three to enable those adaptations.

That’s where the money comes in, the rulebooks are just a tool toward that end.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Eh. Books aren’t the profit makers.

Rules shake ups change how your army works. Your pre-existing army. And here’s a shiny new toy, which opens up a new set of worthwhile unit combos.

And from there, the shape of the game changes. Because when you’ve got new toys and new ways to use them? Your opponent will have to adapt. And ideally buy a new unit or three to enable those adaptations.

That’s where the money comes in, the rulebooks are just a tool toward that end.

But they will sell gladly sell you dead trees with a short shelf life.

Personally, the rules/codex churn makes me hesitant to expand into new armies. Do I want to get a small force knowing I’ll need to shell out for a book every 3 years if I want to keep playing it?

The rule designers are our enemies, yes, but behind them I suspect...is the CEO.

Even if rulebooks only make them 10% of their income that'd be enough to lock them in to edition churn to sell rulebooks. Just because it isn't the headline doesn't mean it isn't meaningful. Yes, some editions make for example tanks better so they sell more tanks for a while, but they're also hooked on that rulebook money, that's why they still sell them instead of making all the rules free in the app to sell models. If it was all about driving model sales and rulebooks were some sort of loss leader they'd stop selling them.

Weirdly enough GW still don't understand why the average shelf life of a hobbyist is getting shorter though.

honestly the three year cycle has killed any desire I have to play the game. I keep up with the rules and army composition but I just collect and convert now. By the time I'd get around to collecting and painting an army I'm happy with there's only a little while left before sweeping changes come in. So I have a somewhat academic interest in the new edition and how it changes things but I'm not actually going to play it

Im really... Not that certain that books combined sales do not sell more than say Votanns or other smaller forces...

1 rulebook at least 1 Codex for every 40k gamer? Card packs? Thats going to be some serious bit of money combined. One Dex and rules alone are £80.50.

Besides I doubt GW would churn so many so fast, even the campaign ones, or rules for kill teams or necromunda etc if they were not getting some serious money back.

Charax wrote:
honestly the three year cycle has killed any desire I have to play the game. I keep up with the rules and army composition but I just collect and convert now. By the time I'd get around to collecting and painting an army I'm happy with there's only a little while left before sweeping changes come in. So I have a somewhat academic interest in the new edition and how it changes things but I'm not actually going to play it

Me too. I've been a 40k player since I bought first edition the day it was released. What finally broke me was 9th edition coming out in the middle of the covid lockdown. I'm a carer for a relative who was shielding, so I basically didn't go out for over 2 years. I bought lots of 9e codexes and started an Admech army, and then 10th came out before I'd even got a game in and invalidated all my books. I thought they might at least make 9th last a bit longer given people couldn't meet up to play for half its lifespan. I just noped out at that point.

HidaO-Win wrote:
The thing that wrinkles my brain about GW talking about no longer having to stand in circles and showing a template is that 40k doesn't have official circle props, they just have objective markers.

Yes they do. Granted, they were late to the party on them but they absolutely do.

I always hated them personally, good riddance.

Charax wrote:
honestly the three year cycle has killed any desire I have to play the game. I keep up with the rules and army composition but I just collect and convert now. By the time I'd get around to collecting and painting an army I'm happy with there's only a little while left before sweeping changes come in. So I have a somewhat academic interest in the new edition and how it changes things but I'm not actually going to play it

Yeah, the pace of rules changes is way too fast. I think it is more tolerable with this sort of update editions than total overhauls that invalidate all the previous codices though.

I don’t want to get excited with Middle-Earth because I always get disappointed.

Such a shame that GW has not cared enough in years.

Charax wrote:
honestly the three year cycle has killed any desire I have to play the game. I keep up with the rules and army composition but I just collect and convert now. By the time I'd get around to collecting and painting an army I'm happy with there's only a little while left before sweeping changes come in. So I have a somewhat academic interest in the new edition and how it changes things but I'm not actually going to play it

Yeah, it's why I stopped playing. Still buy the models when they do a nice discount bundle but that's all.

 NAVARRO wrote:
1 rulebook at least 1 Codex for every 40k gamer? Card packs? Thats going to be some serious bit of money combined. One Dex and rules alone are £80.50.

Besides I doubt GW would churn so many so fast, even the campaign ones, or rules for kill teams or necromunda etc if they were not getting some serious money back.

Oh the books will make some profit alright, but the real money for GW is in selling new models inspired from the rules churn.

With the increased pace of changes and options like new recruit & wahapedia, lots of people will skip any printed material these days. I know I haven't bought any codex since 9E despite playing several factions.