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.

So solid rumours point at major chaos releases in December followed a sisters release and 8th edition shortly thereafter. Most of the major tournaments have GW attending and supporting them.

I can only assume after 8th edition release we will see a steady stream of 8th edition codices. I know there is a lot of hope toward a solid 8th release. But I'm calling it now 2017 is the year of 40k. Seems like to many positives moving forward.

Only if they actually fix the game and balance armies, which is doubtful. It's another year of smoke and mirrors, likely.

Have any reliable sources said "yes, there is going to be an 8th edition release shortly?"

Most of what i have seen seems like assumption.

It would be a shame to see chaos as the last release before a new edition.

-

AncientSkarbrand wrote:
Have any reliable sources said "yes, there is going to be an 8th edition release shortly?"

Most of what i have seen seems like assumption.

It would be a shame to see chaos as the last release before a new edition.

Depends if you mean reliable as In GW making a public statement no. But several near 100% reliable rumor mongers said yes.

Furthermore it depends what you mean by balanced to the person who posted above you? Diss it mean every army codex is eldar quality unlikely. Does it mean every army can create at least one decently competitive army list with allies etc that's my hope. The good thing is there are only a handful of old and poor codexs and we already know chaos space marines are getting a lot of support and sisters are being redone. Now we just need ork, tyranid, imperial guard, blood Angels, etc.. Honestly all we need is a solid clean ruleset and some old codexs redone well and if seems that's what we are getting.
My point is it's already shaping up to be a good year for 40k by the looks of things but of course a lot depends on the quality of the 8th Ed ruleset.

Done with 40k. Horus heresy and AOS have my full attention, 40k is just a mess of trump cards and broken formations. And now that they have almost every army updated, they're gonna start a new edition and all 25+ books will be outdated. Nope, Ill stick to my free rules and balanced 30k.

What year isn't the year of Warhammer 40k?

I think I'll have to grab some GSC and SoB's if that's a thing next quarter!

Well 8th will make or break GW if they don't actually produce a decent edition people have plenty of options these days.

Personally I've little faith in their current dev team.

They would really have to do some amazing rewriting of 40K to keep my interest. I've fleshed out my armies to the size I like and I have no desire to rebuy a few hundred dollars worth of rulebooks (really shouldn't have invested in the 7E book and just kept my 6E stuff, it feels like).

Wayniac wrote:
Only if they actually fix the game and balance armies, which is doubtful. It's another year of smoke and mirrors, likely.

eeeeehhhh, don't be so certain on that
If I'm going to start playing 40K more often a Tzeentch or Slannesh codex would be ace. And we already know what's coming soon...

It just shaping to be a good year, the release of all the specialist games (im stoked for the middle earth rebranding and new rules)

 VeteranNoob wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
Only if they actually fix the game and balance armies, which is doubtful. It's another year of smoke and mirrors, likely.

eeeeehhhh, don't be so certain on that
If I'm going to start playing 40K more often a Tzeentch or Slannesh codex would be ace. And we already know what's coming soon...

I really can't say anything anyways, I've spent more the past couple of months than in 15 years, but I feel that GW needs to do more to get the game back on track. They still seem to just want to ride "Look cool models!" and expect everything else to fall into place around it, regardless of the game itself, and it's sad but true that for a lot of people that seems to be enough.

I thought this year was the year of 40K? Seems like the game has had plenty of releases.

It's doubtful that GW can get a sound release of the 8th ed.
So far, GW often changed the rules back and forth without making progress to obtain a decent rule set.
Therefore I'm not really looking forward to a new ed.

No I don't think it will be the "Year of 40K". GW will not let Age of Sigmar take the back burner and let it slide. If anything GW should be doing beginning of the month either 40K/AoS and then the end of the month be AoS/40K. This way there is no one left behind like how it was this year. For times of 2016, in the beginning it was like all AoS, then it seems like now it's all 40K. It needs to be more balanced. I don't think it will happen but it won't just be 40K. That would kill AoS and Mr Roundtree worked to hard to get that going to where it is to have it fall of. That said, this is GW so they might just do that.

Wayniac wrote:Only if they actually fix the game and balance armies, which is doubtful. It's another year of smoke and mirrors, likely.

Ah someone else who thinks like me that it's all smoke and mirrors.

Bottle wrote:2017 is gonna be the year of 40k for me. I am hoping to get my GSC on the table :-)

Really looking forward to a new edition too. Hopefully with a lower rules cost barrier. GW have been knocking it out the park recently.

I wouldn't say they are hitting it out of the park lately. If that was the case 40K would have solid, clear consice rules but GW is still putting out the same crap. Also prices are just as insane as always when you want to buy something that is not included in "starter set". That said I would say GW using your terminology Bottle GW is hitting them out steadly. They got one Home Run with The Generals Hand Book but now GW has only been hitting steady first bases with a few doubles and triples.

We will see if GW hits the Grandslam in 2017. For that to happen though AoS will not have to falter and that is why I don't think this will be the "Year of 40K".


UNLESS the original poster means this is the "Year that 40K becomes great again to play" and brings back people that they have lost and not this will be the "The year of 40K" where it's just mostly 40K product being released as I thought he/she ment the first time I read his post.

It's going to be the year of salt. GW will put out some new really cool stuff and people on the forums will complain about everything.

Not sure what would happen to all the supplement books, aka formations, when a new rule comes out.
I guess that they will all be obsolete.

 jreilly89 wrote:
It's going to be the year of salt. GW will put out some new really cool stuff and people on the forums will complain about everything.

Well to be fair GW does deserve all the complaints that they get.

The upcoming 8th edition of Warhammer 40k will do a great deal to determine if 40k will continue as it has been (as an increasingly niche game among other numerous other popular games) or if it will start to retake some of the marketshare it has lost over the last ten years.

I anticipate that the game will be simplified notably, which will draw in many customers who've been discouraged by the complexity of the game coupled with the high cost of rules. However, I don't necessarily expect GW to balance the game too much: there's a lot of focus on getting every unit into the game (the induction of 30k units like the Sisters of Silence points to this trend) so people can always "play with their toys."

So it'll depend on how much investment in 40k is required in this new era. If the rules are still expensive and the game continues to bloat without much added value (i.e. does having room for another predator tank in your new list actually enhance the experience?), 40k will probably remain as it has without much growth. And GW might adjust to this by being more lean as far as production goes, whose to say. But if they can work to lower the cost of start-up/upkeep, I believe 40k will become more popular regardless of effective balancing. And of course if they can actually do some play testing and get units balanced a bit more, then the game should become much more popular.

I hope not.

I don't have the time or the money to buy and paint all of the sweet ass gak they've come out with this year. Next year, ugh.

Might need a second mortgage!

If you prefer modeling over gaming then yeah it's been a decent year. The game is a total mess tho and I'm also sticking with 30k.

That's interesting how story with Necrons will go next...

Davor wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:
It's going to be the year of salt. GW will put out some new really cool stuff and people on the forums will complain about everything.

Well to be fair GW does deserve all the complaints that they get.

To you, maybe. GW's profits would seem to disagree, as would all the people buying their stuff.

As someone who prefers modeling over gaming, I'm pretty excited. The only potential pitfall is likely to be GW's insane pricing policy.

The year of 40k is pretty much the wargaming equivalent of the Summer of George from Seinfeld. GW have done ALOT better in coming out with fairly priced and long awaited products for the past year to year and a half but I don't have faith that they'll be willing to make the drastic 3rd edition level of changes to sweep away the scale creep and imbalance that 7th edition army building crammed into the game (i.e. throw everything away just like they did in 1998 and start from scratch). They tried to do a perverted version of that with AOS and got spanked for it because their impetus for doing so was pure greed and not actually a desire for a better game.

People complain about rules expense however I fully expect (as in they are already starting it) that all dataslates will be available online from 8th edition forward. However I expect all formations and detschments including rules to still exclusively be found in books and supplements. However if if the generals handbook is any indication those basic rulebook a will also be fairly priced. My only real complaint regarding rules after that is the fact formations and detschments specific to armies are all over the freakin place and GW needs to start releasing a compendium of these army formations or if they are smart include this detachment compendium in the new 8th Ed army codex.

This means I can buy or borrow a $30 rulebook and use whatever generic detschments are included in the rulebook with the free online dataslates and play 40k out of the box or I can buy a $30 army codex and specialize my army lists with multiple formations.
This doesn't mean every individual army codex and every single unit is going to be perfectly balanced. You're a fool if you think otherwise. This means if gw takes a mediocrum of effort to redo the older less competitive army codexs that with whatever allies matrix they design most army codexs should at least be somewhat competitve. What 6th/7th Ed did well was release new codexs so fast into the current format (and let's be honest 6th and 7th was basically the same) that most armies codexs could build at least one competitve army list. This was good right up to the eldar release last year right when Sean won the LVO with tyranids. After that a bunch of codexs just fell behind hard when GW moved onto the multi formation detschments and many codexs were still using 2 year old codexs without access to this change in army building design.

However if GW tackles these ~5 older codexs first in 8th edition everything should be close enough to build decent army lists for tournaments... This is completely seperate from any discussion on narrative games which the open format of formations and allies and splash army releases has done worlds more for than GW has done since after third edition and GW invalidating many army lists thereafter.

I've been getting the impression that they have been trying new rules/methods of play with the releases of all the contained boxsets lately,which I think points to a radically different 40k ruleset. Using these sets to find out what people like/don't like?
Let's face it;40k can't get any worse.
Can it?

Slipstream wrote:
I've been getting the impression that they have been trying new rules/methods of play with the releases of all the contained boxsets lately,which I think points to a radically different 40k ruleset. Using these sets to find out what people like/don't like?
Let's face it;40k can't get any worse.
Can it?

AoS pre-general's handbook. Nuff said.

jreilly89 wrote:

Davor wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:
It's going to be the year of salt. GW will put out some new really cool stuff and people on the forums will complain about everything.

Well to be fair GW does deserve all the complaints that they get.

To you, maybe. GW's profits would seem to disagree, as would all the people buying their stuff.

Did you just play the "profits" card to support your argument? How does that apply to what I have said? Have you quoted me by accident? If it was no accident and you did quote me, how does this apply? I am not sure what you are trying to say or what your point is.

 jreilly89 wrote:

Davor wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:
It's going to be the year of salt. GW will put out some new really cool stuff and people on the forums will complain about everything.

Well to be fair GW does deserve all the complaints that they get.

To you, maybe. GW's profits would seem to disagree, as would all the people buying their stuff.

Profits were still down this year and sales dropped the only thing reducing the damage was the 4 million bump from selling their IP to anyone who could afford it, remove that and they would of been down more than the 0.9% they did.

Sales on minis are still in decline.