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.

You can still post the PDF can't you?

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:You can still post the PDF can't you?

It just says the contents of the starter box as he already posted I imagine; if it could have been made by anyone, it probably wouldn't have pictures of sprues and models and junk.

Unless it looks like a pretty reasonable invoice/inventory type PDF it would seem strange that a warehouse has a PDF with content floating around.

Oh, no pictures?

I'm shocked.

Really.

d-usa wrote:Unless it looks like a pretty reasonable invoice/inventory type PDF it would seem strange that a warehouse has a PDF with content floating around.

That's my issue right their. It makes no sence for them to have something like that.
O.o

I'm sure DarthSpader means well, but I'm starting to get a feeling that this friend of his is Yanking his chain. No offence to you and your friend DarthSpader of course. That's just the impression I'm getting ATM.

Brometheus wrote:Oh, no pictures?

I'm shocked.

Really.

This. I'm shocked that there's no pictures at all. Totally. I'm amazed there are no functional pictures to counter the info we're getting from other, fairly reputable sources.

DarthSpader, your friend is trolling you.

Cerebrium wrote:

Brometheus wrote:Oh, no pictures?

I'm shocked.

Really.

This. I'm shocked that there's no pictures at all. Totally. I'm amazed there are no functional pictures to counter the info we're getting from other, fairly reputable sources.

DarthSpader, your friend is trolling you.

Have we seen any pictures of the supposed Chaos or Dark Angels? No? Then these other sources are just as much hearsay as DarthSpaders friend, with no actual evidence to back them up.

People are assuming the rumours to be accurate because they have been repeated a lot over quite a long time frame.

And because harry (and i believe hastings as well) have confirmed them. Don't get me wrong, I'd love cheap immortals but I'm rather sceptical as to the veracity of these rumours.
Sure, he means well but I have a little more faith in rumourmongers with a confirmed reputation for accuracy spanning several years.
Again, I'd like this to be true but, well...

There were pictures of the unit list in Chinese early in this thread. Although I must admit that they could have been anything- I'm not fluent in any of the Chinese languages.

Gitzbitah wrote:There were pictures of the unit list in Chinese early in this thread. Although I must admit that they could have been anything- I'm not fluent in any of the Chinese languages.

Yes, but last I checked there weren't any Necron units with 3s across the board and a 6+ save, which were obviously the Chaos cultists.

An excellent point! So there is pictoral evidence of the chaos vs DA set. Your move, anonymous warehouse guy.

Gitzbitah wrote:An excellent point! So there is pictoral evidence of the chaos vs DA set. Your move, anonymous warehouse guy.

So the actual evidence for the DA vs Chaos set is a photo of a page of units and their stats in a language which most of us here cannot read? How is that any different to, or more reliable than, the PDF which DarthSpaders source saw?

If one could have been made by anybody then the other could also.

A Town Called Malus wrote:So the actual evidence for the DA vs Chaos set is a photo of a page of units and their stats in a language which most of us here cannot read? How is that any different to, or more reliable than, the PDF which DarthSpaders source saw?

If one could have been made by anybody then the other could also.

I am all for playing the devil's advocate but aren't you just being willfully obtuse at this point?

Blue Corner:
-Multiple respected "Rumour Mongers" agreeing that DA vs Chaos would be in the cards.
-Possible Leaked Army Lists with reasonable builds.

Red Corner:
-Some guy who got an unseen PDF from a friend.

While both are possible, my money is on the Blue corner.

75hastings69 wrote:The 6th ed Starter Set will be Dark Angels vs Chaos

This is all the proof anyone should need.

Added DarthSpader to the Ongoing Rumor Accuracy Thread.

Vain wrote:

A Town Called Malus wrote:So the actual evidence for the DA vs Chaos set is a photo of a page of units and their stats in a language which most of us here cannot read? How is that any different to, or more reliable than, the PDF which DarthSpaders source saw?

If one could have been made by anybody then the other could also.

I am all for playing the devil's advocate but aren't you just being willfully obtuse at this point?

Blue Corner:
-Multiple respected "Rumour Mongers" agreeing that DA vs Chaos would be in the cards.
-Possible Leaked Army Lists with reasonable builds.

Red Corner:
-Some guy who got an unseen PDF from a friend.

While both are possible, my money is on the Blue corner.

Not being obtuse, I'm saying that you should apply the same standards to a rumour no matter who it is from. Just because someone was right before does not mean they are right now.

Mate, we are applying standards.

Harry and Hastings have delivered consistent ACCURATE rumours for years.

Some friend of DarthSpader's who we don't even know about until now?

Well, it's kind of like trusting the 1 rumour that goes against the other 10.

Please note that the rulebook cover has DA vs. Chaos on it.

2nd ed. had BA vs. Orks (box was Orks and SM - painted by GW as BA)
3rd ed. had BT on the cover. (box was SM painted by GW as BT and DE)

This is the first book in a while to have actual art on the cover. And the Cover has Faction X vs. Faction Y - going by past history we can assume X and Y is what we will get.

Going for Faction W is pretty far out in the field.

DarkStarSabre wrote:Mate, we are applying standards.

Harry and Hastings have delivered consistent ACCURATE rumours for years.

Some friend of DarthSpader's who we don't even know about until now?

Well, it's kind of like trusting the 1 rumour that goes against the other 10.

Please note that the rulebook cover has DA vs. Chaos on it.

2nd ed. had BA vs. Orks (box was Orks and SM - painted by GW as BA)
3rd ed. had BT on the cover. (box was SM painted by GW as BT and DE)

This is the first book in a while to have actual art on the cover. And the Cover has Faction X vs. Faction Y - going by past history we can assume X and Y is what we will get.

Going for Faction W is pretty far out in the field.

Re-read my post. You are applying different standards to different people, based entirely on their history rather than the actual evidence they present in their rumours. One of these "respected" rumour mongers says it will be X, without any actual evidence to prove it and you accept that.

An unknown says it will be Y and puts forth some attempt at evidence and you just disregard it due to the fact that it disagrees with the previous rumour and you haven't heard of the person before.

Both rumours should be considered equal until more evidence surfaces to disprove one or the other.

The thing is though? Their history is what people will trust.

Someone with 90/100 rumours correct will have a bit more clout than someone with 1/10 or someone who's just reporting a rumour from nowhere.

The fact that several of the older and more accurate rumour folks as well as a number of the middle range ones have all said 'DA vs. Chaos' puts a lot of weight behind that.

A Town Called Malus wrote:
Re-read my post. You are applying different standards to different people, based entirely on their history rather than the actual evidence they present in their rumours. One of these "respected" rumour mongers says it will be X, without any actual evidence to prove it and you accept that.

No, the standard is the same and it goes like this: "Has this person posted accurate information in the past? If yes, believe him."

An unknown says it will be Y and puts forth some attempt at evidence and you just disregard it due to the fact that it disagrees with the previous rumour and you haven't heard of the person before.

No evidence has been put forth. Claiming to have evidence is not evidence.

Both rumours should be considered equal until more evidence surfaces to disprove one or the other.

Absolutely ridiculous. Okay, here's a new rumour for you. The starter box will contain 3 and a half dead kittens. I have put forth exactly the same amount of evidence as the other guys and past history doesn't matter, so you should consider my rumour every bit as valid as the rest.

Just going to point out. If a were house got a PFD invoice for the starter set, wouldn't it just read:

"x Starter Sets on pallet y"?

Or at best a part list of what comes in a starter box?
-Packaging/Box.
-Starter set sprue 1
-Starter set sprue 2
-Dice baggy
-Whippy sticks
-mini Rule Book
ect, ect, ect.

Why would the invoice list what snap fit models are on the starer set sprue? Thows modles aren't even individual components that COULD be listed in a invoice at best. They are literately just 2 large plastic sprues after all.

This has nothing to do with who's telling the rumour. It's the fact that the story of how this friend got the info doesn't seem to follow any logical sense. =/

lord_blackfang wrote:

A Town Called Malus wrote:
Re-read my post. You are applying different standards to different people, based entirely on their history rather than the actual evidence they present in their rumours. One of these "respected" rumour mongers says it will be X, without any actual evidence to prove it and you accept that.

No, the standard is the same and it goes like this: "Has this person posted accurate information in the past? If yes, believe him."

Whether someone was right in the past has no impact on whether they are right now. The two rumours are separate events which have no impact on the outcome of the other. It'd be like rolling a dice 6 times, the first 5 times you get 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 so you assume that the last one must be 6 when in reality each time you roll the dice the previous outcomes have no relation to what the outcome of this roll will be.

An unknown says it will be Y and puts forth some attempt at evidence and you just disregard it due to the fact that it disagrees with the previous rumour and you haven't heard of the person before.

No evidence has been put forth. Claiming to have evidence is not evidence.

They claimed to have a PDF listing the units. DarthSpader has seen this PDF. It would be nice if he could share it with the rest of us.

Both rumours should be considered equal until more evidence surfaces to disprove one or the other.

Absolutely ridiculous. Okay, here's a new rumour for you. The starter box will contain 3 and a half dead kittens. I have put forth exactly the same amount of evidence as the other guys and past history doesn't matter, so you should consider my rumour every bit as valid as the rest.

Your rumour is just as valid if it weren't for the fact that the transportation and sale of dead kittens is likely to be a biological hazard and therefore illegal. Unless they were stuffed in which case I don't think they'd fit in the box unless they were very tiny kittens.

OK, I have a PDF here that says the starter set will be Squats vs Zoats.

Just as credible as DarthSpader.

lord_blackfang wrote: The starter box will contain 3 and a half dead kittens.

Pre-ordered over the phone, minutes ago.

Oddly enough, they hung up on me before I had the chance to provide them with my card information.

A Town Called Malus wrote:
Whether someone was right in the past has no impact on whether they are right now. The two rumours are separate events which have no impact on the outcome of the other. It'd be like rolling a dice 6 times, the first 5 times you get 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 so you assume that the last one must be 6 when in reality each time you roll the dice the previous outcomes have no relation to what the outcome of this roll will be.

People aren't dice and rumour accuracy isn't random unless the person is guessing.

When a rumour monger consistently posts accurate information it likely means that he has some way of getting real info and that future information is likely to be equally accurate. I'm going to put you on my Ignore list now since there's no point in trying to reason with you. Ta ta.

lord_blackfang wrote:

A Town Called Malus wrote:
Whether someone was right in the past has no impact on whether they are right now. The two rumours are separate events which have no impact on the outcome of the other. It'd be like rolling a dice 6 times, the first 5 times you get 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 so you assume that the last one must be 6 when in reality each time you roll the dice the previous outcomes have no relation to what the outcome of this roll will be.

People aren't dice and rumour accuracy isn't random unless the person is guessing.

When a rumour monger consistently posts accurate information it likely means that he has some way of getting real info and that future information is likely to be equally accurate. I'm going to put you on my Ignore list now since there's no point in trying to reason with you. Ta ta.

You do not know that they are getting their information from the same sources every time, since they do not list their sources.

*Sigh* Try to get people to approach something from a purely objective and evidence based viewpoint and not instantly dismiss a new possibility because it is not what has been presented before and get put on the ignore list. Your whole argument is "He was right before so he's right this time", mine is "There's no overwhelming evidence for either side so both should be considered a possibility." That isn't an unreasonable standpoint.

A Town Called Malus wrote:

Re-read my post. You are applying different standards to different people, based entirely on their history.

Yes. Yes I am. Thank you for noticing. I'm not seeing the problem here.

Back to the original topic before you fethers get it locked: I can't wait to get my hands on some fething plastic cultist kits!

A Town Called Malus wrote:
*Sigh* Try to get people to approach something from a purely objective and evidence based viewpoint and not instantly dismiss a new possibility because it is not what has been presented before and get put on the ignore list. Your whole argument is "He was right before so he's right this time", mine is "There's no overwhelming evidence for either side so both should be considered a possibility." That isn't an unreasonable standpoint.

Problem is your not approaching the subject from a "purely objective and evidence based viewpoint".

What we know:
-Claims Friend works in were house.
-Friend has a alleged PDF that lists what comes in the starter boxes.

Question: Why would a were house need a list of what models the box set can make? All they would need is "What's on the pallet and how much?" to do their job. Agien, even a part list wouldn't really say what's in the box.

The story does not add up. Their for the rumour is in doubt. That discrepancy alone should be red flags...


Also rumours aren't in a Vacuum. Track records are good indicators of how reliable someone's source is.

lord_blackfang wrote:
Absolutely ridiculous. Okay, here's a new rumour for you. The starter box will contain 3 and a half dead kittens. I have put forth exactly the same amount of evidence as the other guys and past history doesn't matter, so you should consider my rumour every bit as valid as the rest.

That's actually more reliable. A friend of mine who works in a warehouse took some pictures that won't load, and has a pdf that I can't show you. They say that there will be kittens in the starter box.

Malus, the chain presented for the Necron rumor is more tenuous than the Chaos one. I'm sure there are many reasons, but I will present 3 objective ones-
Many rumor spreaders have claimed it will be Chaos. One has claimed it will be Necron.
There is a pdf visible of a starter set- although it is in Chinese, the statline is consistent with the Chaos rumors. There is no visual evidence for the Necron rumor.
Well known individuals with a history of correct rumors say it will be Chaos. As far as I know, this is the first rumor this guy has leaked.

I will always trust someone who has shown accuracy in the past over someone with no track record.
I will always believe a rumor with scans over a conflicting rumor without scans.
If I hear it from 3 sources, I will always consider it more reliable than something that is conflicting that I heard from 1 source.

no im pretty sure the guy is either confused about what a "starter set" is, or otherwise inept. especially since his email was "check out new starter box - pics inc!"

the pics turned out to be useless garbage, and i told him as much. - i also posted again indicating such. i never claimed to have "inside info". just that i heard something diffirent then whats been said.

i also generally dont do the rumor thing. i dislike hearsay almost as much as i dislike politics... only reason i posted it, was it seemed like interesting news.

that said, i will also point out that while the necron rumor is probally my being trolled, there is nothing other then "guessing and wishlisting" for chaos. and the fact a guy whgo dosent play the game is telling me game specfic stuff (even though his idea of "pics" is lacking) a single foreign document could have been shopped, or made by anyone, and there have been "credible" rumor leakers in the past who have admitted to making stuff up or just guessing.

- my advise: wait untill sept-oct when the starter box is / should be released before assuming or betting on anything. GW may mix things up entirley and give us a IG/DA alliance vrs a cron/chaos alliance. or it could be tau vrs sisters... who the heck knows?