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.

No. A "great" set of rules should take a while to produce. So it wouldn't be able to come out right away.

 Shredder wrote:
If GW were to be bought out by another company who decided to try and 'fix' the 40k rules, assuming they did a good job and wrote a great set of rules, would you want them to bring out an 8th edition as soon as they could so as to have a great set of rules or would that cause more upset as 7th has only just been released?

Would you rather they released an errata and FAQ to the existing rule book and codex to tie us over? Or to abandon current rules completely and come out with the next edition completely re-written?

I'd want them to take their time with the rules and make a completely new edition. No rushing. FAQ's to tide people over in the meantime. And I'd want a public beta with a long (6+ months) test time that allows the kinks to be worked out.

Basically what I'm saying is let FFG do it.

I don't think there's enough room on the average table top for all of the tokens that would come with an FF version of 40k...

"...would you want them to bring out an 8th edition as soon as they could..."

No.

If a new company bought 40k from GW then the very first thing they should do is playtest the crap out of it.

THEN, and only then, should they release a FAQ/Errata document to fix the most glaring issues to keep gamers going.

NEXT they should approach the community (polls are a great way of doing this) to find out what it is we actually want.

After that, they should do a bit of critical thinking to see if those results are actually in line with producing a solid gaming experience.

Assuming they have good data on how things are actually going, and great ideas on how to move forward, THEN they can FINALLY produce and release a new edition. Of course, the production of this ought to go through a beta test period where anyone that wants to try and contribute can download the rules and have a go. Once those rules are solid THEN print and release the books.

----

Numerous releases over the past few years by GW appear to be rushed and not thought out. (exa: SA, Escalation followed by 7th edition invalidating a good portion of those books while still requiring them). I wouldn't want a new IP owner to start off making the exact same mistakes.

The only other thing to add here is that the new owners would need to actually support the release. FAQs / Errata for the codexes should be released at the exact same time as the book to keep them inline. Then I'd expect all codexes to be updated within 6 months.

I think that a hypothetical "new management" of 40K should bring out a new ruleset as soon as they can, allowing for enough time to do it well. There's no point in sitting on the current crap rules for any length of time beyond what it would take to completely rewrite the rules into a quality product.

I have no fear that we'd get a bad quality product in this sort of scenario, though. The only way 40K gets saved from the scrap heap of history is through an "angel investor" with both the funds and the passion for the IP to make a buyout possible. Such an individual, if he or she even exists, would have far too much personal investment in the games to turn out a crap game (at least, not intentionally). None of GW's products have the widespread appeal to recoup investment in the sort of cheap clix/prepaint game that a corporate suit would dream up.

 monders wrote:
I don't think there's enough room on the average table top for all of the tokens that would come with an FF version of 40k...

I don't think there are enough trees in the world to make the tokens that would come in an FFG version of 40K.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 monders wrote:
I don't think there's enough room on the average table top for all of the tokens that would come with an FF version of 40k...

I don't think there are enough trees in the world to make the tokens that would come in an FFG version of 40K.

I don't think I could afford the $14.99 per prepainted Space Marine that would come with a FFG version of 40K

 adamsouza wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 monders wrote:
I don't think there's enough room on the average table top for all of the tokens that would come with an FF version of 40k...

I don't think there are enough trees in the world to make the tokens that would come in an FFG version of 40K.

I don't think I could afford the $14.99 per prepainted Space Marine that would come with a FFG version of 40K

I'd love to be able to get a $20 space marine librarian model, but then I guess that's just AU pricing for ya.

I would hope it's themed like Candy Land, with lollipops and flowers and maybe bacon, because we're adults.

 adamsouza wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 monders wrote:
I don't think there's enough room on the average table top for all of the tokens that would come with an FF version of 40k...

I don't think there are enough trees in the world to make the tokens that would come in an FFG version of 40K.

I don't think I could afford the $14.99 per prepainted Space Marine that would come with a FFG version of 40K

Hey, it comes with upgrade and mission cards. Therefore it's worth it as a gaming piece.

And oh my god FFG and their fething tokens. I swear half the set up time for X-wing is finding all of the tokens you need.

As for a real answer for this thread, no. I want them to develop and extensively playtest their game. I want them to develop a specific vision for what 40k should be. I want them to get the cheese list players, the WAAC guys, the TFG gamers, the MinMaxers and the Rules Lawyers and have them try to break their game. By observing their patterns and choices they can make a good guess of the problems with their ruleset.