W40k : rumor of 7th edition for 2014 summer ! How on Earth ?!? * news p.45*

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.

**Cruentus**

azreal13 wrote:

...Traditionally, wargames haven't has that same sort of life cycle, and, in GW's recent history especially, those players wishing to stay near the top of the competition curve generally need to make a further investment in more stuff. If that life cycle, and associated expenditure suddenly accelerates, you can expect people to have a problem with it.

If I were wearing my tinfoil hat, I might think that GW was purposefully doing this to drive the competitive gamers further away. But that would be crazy talk, and way too organized for GW.

Back in reality land, we continue to froth and foam about a RUMOR that is incredibly unlikely based on GWs track record. With only two years in, and books just having been printed, why would they consolidate them at this point, UNLESS they were just pulling the rulebook, escalation, and stronghold into a "collector's edition" of 40k, and charging a premium. Now that I can envision.

**Cruentus**

insaniak wrote:
I have no issue with the inclusion of allies, super heavies or flyers in the regular game... It's the implementation of them that I don't like.

Battle Brothers should have not made it past playtesting. Including units from more than one army is fine, but they should be distinct components on the table, not sharing each other's rules.

And if you're going to include super heavy models, or models that can only be harmed by certain types of weaponry, then every army needs ready access to options that can successfully counter such things, without having to specifically tailor a list to them. Skyfire should have been added as an optional weapon mode for all missile launchers, pintle weapons and skimmers, and something akin to the old 'lucky shot' rules from the 3rd(? maybe 4th) ed Armoured Company rules is needed to balance out big vehicles for those armies that struggle against armour.

The implementation has always been the problem and thats because of the way GW playtests. They don't spam units, they don't use 'broken' combos, and they wonder, amazed, when people actually do in the game. Its the old 'the way GW intended' the game to be played, versus how people 'actually' play.

GW has never listened to that feedback, or if they do you see the wild swings and roundabouts as things go from useful to useless to useful (rhino rush, min/max squads, assault - 3rd, TAR, now, etc).

For myself, I don't like the use of Lords of War and superheavies in 40k. They don't look right on the table, tend to use up a lot of table space, and suspend my disbelief in the game (such as I'm able to maintain). Couple that with being unable to keep up with the releases - I went from buying every codex and supplement to barely buying the codexes for the armies I do play.

**Cruentus**

AtoMaki wrote:
gorgon wrote:

You have far more control regarding your matchup in a casual game than in a tournament, so I'm not sure your point makes sense. If it's a friend, you tell him not to bring the seerstar if you're not bringing a similar beatstick.

And what if your opponent tells you to bring something that can beat his beatstick? it isn't like you have more right to tell people what to bring than anyone else. And remember, the "Please don't play this powerful unit because my army sucks even though it can be better." line is dangerously close to the so-called "victim card" that is easily one of the most d*ckish things you can have in an argument.

Then you either bring the counter to his beatstick, renegotiate, or don't play. All gaming is a social contract, even tournaments where you agree to play by the TOs house rules.

6th edition just requires more of that negotiation at the LGS 'pick up' level, and more work at the tournament level than there has been in the past.